Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 2523 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: 

Responses: 18. 

Burden Hours: 360. 

Abstract: The Department is 

requesting authorization to annually 

collect performance report data for the 

new Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities (HBCU) Masters Degree 

Program. This information is being 

collected to comply with the 

Government Performance and Results 

Act (GPRA) of 1993, Section 4 (1115), 

and the Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 

34 CFR 75.253. EDGAR states that 

recipients of multi-year discretionary 

grants must submit an APR 

demonstrating that substantial progress 

has been made towards meeting the 

approved objectives of the project. 

Further, the APR lends itself to the 

collection of quantifiable data needed to 

respond to the requirements of OMB’s 

Program Assessment Rating Tool 

process. In addition, grantees will be 

required to report on their progress 

towards meeting the performance 

measures established for the HBCU 

Master’s Degree Program. 

Requests for copies of the proposed 

information collection request may be 

accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, 

by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on link 

number 4155. When you access the 

information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537. 

Requests may also be electronically 

mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed 

to 202–401–0920. Please specify the 

complete title of the information 

collection when making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 

1–800–877–8339. 

[FR Doc. 2010–749 Filed 1–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Innovation and Improvement; 

Overview Information; Arts in 

Education Model Development and 

Dissemination Program; Notice 

Inviting Applications for New Awards 

for Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.351D. 

Dates: 

Applications Available: January 15, 

2010. 

Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: 

February 16, 2010. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: March 16, 2010. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: May 17, 2010. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The Arts in 

Education Model Development and 

Dissemination (AEMDD) Program 

supports the enhancement, expansion, 

documentation, evaluation, and 

dissemination of innovative, cohesive 

models that are based on research and 

have demonstrated that they 

effectively—(1) Integrate standardsbased arts education into the core 

elementary and middle school 

curriculum; (2) strengthen standardsbased arts instruction in these grades; 

and (3) improve students’ academic 

performance, including their skills in 

creating, performing, and responding to 

the arts. Projects funded through the 

AEMDD Program are intended to 

increase the amount of nationally 

available information on effective 

models for arts education that integrate 

the arts with standards-based education 

programs. 

Priorities: This competition includes 

one absolute priority, one competitive 

preference priority, and five invitational 

priorities. 

Absolute Priority: This priority is from 

the notice of final priority, 

requirements, and definitions for this 

program, published in the Federal 

Register on March 30, 2005 (70 FR 

16234). For FY 2010 and any 

subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition, this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

This priority supports projects that 

enhance, expand, document, evaluate, 

and disseminate innovative, cohesive 

models that are based on research and 

have demonstrated their effectiveness in 

(1) Integrating standards-based arts 

education into the core elementary or 

middle school curriculum, (2) 

strengthening standards-based arts 

instruction in the elementary or middle 

school grades, and (3) improving the 

academic performance of students in 

elementary or middle school grades, 

including their skills in creating, 

performing, and responding to the arts. 

In order to meet this priority, an 

applicant must demonstrate that the 

model project for which it seeks funding 

(1) serves only elementary school or 

middle school grades, or both, and (2) 

is linked to State and national standards 

intended to enable all students to meet 

challenging expectations and to improve 

student and school performance. 

Note: National standards refer to the arts 

standards developed by the Consortium of 

National Arts Education Association. The 

standards outline what students should know 

and be able to do in the arts. These are not 

Department standards. 

Competitive Preference Priority: This 

priority is from the notice of final 

priority for Scientifically Based 

Evaluation Methods published in the 

Federal Register on January 25, 2005 

(70 FR 3586). For FY 2010 and any 

subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition, this 

priority is a competitive preference 

priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) 

we award up to an additional 20 points 

to an application, depending on how 

well the application meets this 

competitive preference priority. These 

points are in addition to any points the 

application earns under the selection 

criteria. 

When using the priority to give 

competitive preference to an 

application, we will review the 

applications using a two-stage review 

process. In the first stage, we will 

review the applications without taking 

the competitive preference priority into 

account. In the second stage of the 

process, we will review the applications 

rated highest in the first stage of the 

process to determine whether they will 

receive the competitive preference 

points. We will consider awarding 

additional (competitive preference) 

points only to those applicants with topranked scores based on the selection 

criteria. We expect that approximately 

50 applicants will receive these 

additional competitive preference 

points. 

This priority is: 

The Secretary establishes a priority 

for projects proposing an evaluation 

plan that is based on rigorous 

scientifically based research methods to 

assess the effectiveness of a particular 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
2524 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 

intervention. The Secretary intends that 

this priority will allow program 

participants and the Department to 

determine whether the project produces 

meaningful effects on student 

achievement or teacher performance. 

Evaluation methods using an 

experimental design are best for 

determining project effectiveness. Thus, 

when feasible, the project must use an 

experimental design under which 

participants—e.g., students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools—are randomly 

assigned to participate in the project 

activities being evaluated or to a control 

group that does not participate in the 

project activities being evaluated. 

If random assignment is not feasible, 

the project may use a quasiexperimental design with carefully 

matched comparison conditions. This 

alternative design attempts to 

approximate a randomly assigned 

control group by matching 

participants—e.g., students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools—with nonparticipants having similar pre-program 

characteristics. 

In cases where random assignment is 

not possible and participation in the 

intervention is determined by a 

specified cut-off point on a quantified 

continuum of scores, regression 

discontinuity designs may be employed. 

For projects that are focused on 

special populations in which sufficient 

numbers of participants are not 

available to support random assignment 

or matched comparison group designs, 

single-subject designs such as multiple 

baseline or treatment-reversal or 

interrupted time series that are capable 

of demonstrating causal relationships 

can be employed. 

Proposed evaluation strategies that 

use neither experimental designs with 

random assignment nor quasiexperimental designs using a matched 

comparison group nor regression 

discontinuity designs will not be 

considered responsive to the priority 

when sufficient numbers of participants 

are available to support these designs. 

Evaluation strategies that involve too 

small a number of participants to 

support group designs must be capable 

of demonstrating the causal effects of an 

intervention or program on those 

participants. 

The proposed evaluation plan must 

describe how the project evaluator will 

collect—before the project intervention 

commences and after it ends—valid and 

reliable data that measure the impact of 

participation in the program or in the 

comparison group. 

Points awarded under this priority 

will be determined by the quality of the 

proposed evaluation method. In 

determining the quality of the 

evaluation method, we will consider the 

extent to which the applicant presents 

a feasible, credible plan that includes 

the following: 

(1) The type of design to be used (that 

is, random assignment or matched 

comparison). If matched comparison, 

include in the plan a discussion of why 

random assignment is not feasible. 

(2) Outcomes to be measured. 

(3) A discussion of how the applicant 

plans to assign students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools to the project and 

control group or match them for 

comparison with other students, 

teachers, classrooms, or schools. 

(4) A proposed evaluator, preferably 

independent, with the necessary 

background and technical expertise to 

carry out the proposed evaluation. An 

independent evaluator does not have 

any authority over the project and is not 

involved in its implementation. 

In general, depending on the 

implemented program or project, under 

a competitive preference priority, 

random assignment evaluation methods 

will receive more points than matched 

comparison evaluation methods. 

Invitational Priorities: For FY 2010 

and any subsequent year in which we 

make awards from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition, these 

priorities are invitational priorities. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not 

give an application that meets these 

invitational priorities a competitive or 

absolute preference over other 

applications. 

These priorities are: 

Invitational Priority 1. Applications 

that support activities to enable students 

to achieve proficiency or advanced 

proficiency in mathematics. 

Invitational Priority 2. Applications 

that support activities to enable students 

to achieve proficiency or advanced 

proficiency in reading. 

Invitational Priority 3. Applications 

that support activities to enable students 

attending schools in corrective action or 

restructuring under Title I of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) to 

achieve proficiency or advanced 

proficiency in reading and mathematics. 

Invitational Priority 4. Applications 

that focus on increasing access to arts 

education for students who attend rural 

schools, as defined by the National 

Center for Education Statistics. 

Invitational Priority 5. Applications 

that provide for the development and 

dissemination of grant products and 

results through Open Educational 

Resources (OER). OER are teaching, 

learning, and research resources that 

reside in the public domain or have 

been released under an intellectual 

property license that permits their free 

use or repurposing by others. This 

invitational priority encourages 

applications that describe how the 

applicants will make their AEMDD 

grant products and resources freely 

available online, in an effort to share 

arts content, proven teaching strategies, 

and lessons learned in implementing 

AEMDD projects with the wider 

community of educators. 

Note: Each applicant addressing this 

priority is encouraged to include plans for 

how the applicant will disseminate 

resources, for example through a Web site 

that is freely available to all users. Each of 

these applicants is also encouraged to 

include plans specifying how the project will 

identify quality resources, such as lesson 

plans, primary source activities, reading lists, 

teacher reflections, and video of quality arts 

education teaching and student learning in 

action, for presentation to the wider 

community. 

While we will not score applicants 

based on the invitational priorities, we 

encourage applicants to take advantage 

of the competitive preference priority if 

their model allows them to do so. 

Application Requirement 

To be eligible for AEMDD funds, 

applicants must propose to address the 

needs of low-income children by 

carrying out projects that serve at least 

one elementary or middle school in 

which 35 percent or more of the 

children enrolled are from low-income 

families (based on data used in meeting 

the poverty criteria in Title I, Section 

1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965, as 

amended by the No Child Left Behind 

Act of 2001 (ESEA)). 

Definitions 

As used in the absolute priority in 

this notice— 

Arts includes music, dance, theater, 

media arts, and visual arts, including 

folk arts. 

Integrating means (i) encouraging the 

use of high-quality arts instruction in 

other academic/content areas and (ii) 

strengthening the place of the arts as a 

core academic subject in the school 

curriculum. 

Based on research, when used with 

respect to an activity or a program, 

means that, to the extent possible, the 

activity or program is based on the most 

rigorous theory, research, and 

evaluation data available and is effective 

in improving student achievement and 

performance and other program 

objectives. 

As used in the competitive preference 

priority in this notice— 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 2525 

Scientifically based research (section 

9101(37) of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 

7801(37)): 

(A) Means research that involves the 

application of rigorous, systematic, and 

objective procedures to obtain reliable 

and valid knowledge relevant to 

education activities and programs; and 

(B) Includes research that— 

(i) Employs systematic, empirical 

methods that draw on observation or 

experiment; 

(ii) Involves rigorous data analyses 

that are adequate to test the stated 

hypotheses and justify the general 

conclusions drawn; 

(iii) Relies on measurements or 

observational methods that provide 

reliable and valid data across evaluators 

and observers, across multiple 

measurements and observations, and 

across studies by the same or different 

investigators; 

(iv) Is evaluated using experimental or 

quasi-experimental designs in which 

individuals, entities, programs, or 

activities are assigned to different 

conditions and with appropriate 

controls to evaluate the effects of the 

condition of interest, with a preference 

for random-assignment experiments, or 

other designs to the extent that those 

designs contain within-condition or 

across-condition controls; 

(v) Ensures that experimental studies 

are presented in sufficient detail and 

clarity to allow for replication or, at a 

minimum, offer the opportunity to build 

systematically on their findings; and 

(vi) Has been accepted by a peerreviewed journal or approved by a panel 

of independent experts through a 

comparably rigorous, objective, and 

scientific review. 

Random assignment or experimental 

design means random assignment of 

students, teachers, classrooms, or 

schools to participate in a project being 

evaluated (treatment group) or not 

participate in the project (control 

group). The effect of the project is the 

difference in outcomes between the 

treatment and control groups. 

Quasi-experimental designs include 

several designs that attempt to 

approximate a random assignment 

design. 

Carefully matched comparison groups 

design means a quasi-experimental 

design in which project participants are 

matched with non-participants based on 

key characteristics that are thought to be 

related to the outcome. 

Regression discontinuity design 

means a quasi-experimental design that 

closely approximates an experimental 

design. In a regression discontinuity 

design, participants are assigned to a 

treatment or control group based on a 

numerical rating or score of a variable 

unrelated to the treatment such as the 

rating of an application for funding. 

Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, 

or schools above a certain score (‘‘cut 

score’’) are assigned to the treatment 

group and those below the score are 

assigned to the control group. In the 

case of the scores of applicants’ 

proposals for funding, the ‘‘cut score’’ is 

established at the point where the 

program funds available are exhausted. 

Single subject design means a design 

that relies on the comparison of 

treatment effects on a single subject or 

group of single subjects. There is little 

confidence that findings based on this 

design would be the same for other 

members of the population. 

Treatment reversal design means a 

single subject design in which a pretreatment or baseline outcome 

measurement is compared with a posttreatment measure. Treatment would 

then be stopped for a period of time, a 

second baseline measure of the outcome 

would be taken, followed by a second 

application of the treatment or a 

different treatment. For example, this 

design might be used to evaluate a 

behavior modification program for 

disabled students with behavior 

disorders. 

Multiple baseline design means a 

single subject design to address 

concerns about the effects of normal 

development, timing of the treatment, 

and amount of the treatment with 

treatment-reversal designs by using a 

varying time schedule for introduction 

of the treatment and/or treatments of 

different lengths or intensity. 

Interrupted time series design means 

a quasi-experimental design in which 

the outcome of interest is measured 

multiple times before and after the 

treatment for program participants only. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7271. 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administration Regulations (EDGAR) in 

34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 

84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The notice 

of final priority, requirements, and 

definitions for this program, published 

in the Federal Register on March 30, 

2005 (70 FR 16234). (c) The notice of 

final priority for Scientifically Based 

Evaluation Methods, published in the 

Federal Register on January 25, 2005 

(70 FR 3586). 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 

apply to all applicants except Federally 

recognized Indian Tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 

apply to institutions of higher education 

only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. 

Estimated Available Funds: 

$7,700,000.00. 

Contingent upon the availability of 

funds and the quality of applications, 

we may make additional awards in FY 

2011 from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$250,000–$300,000 for the first year of 

the project. Funding for the second, 

third, and fourth years is subject to the 

availability of funds and the approval of 

continuation awards (see 34 CFR 

75.253). 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$275,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 28. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 48 months. 

Note: The first 12 months of the project 

period may be used to build capacity to 

effectively carry out the comprehensive 

activities involved in the evaluation plan 

described in the competitive preference 

priority. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants 

(1) One or more local educational 

agencies (LEAs), including charter 

schools that are considered LEAs under 

State law and regulations, that may 

work in partnership with one or more of 

the following: 

• A State or local non-profit or 

governmental arts organization. 

• A State educational agency (SEA) or 

regional educational service agency. 

• An institution of higher education. 

• A public or private agency, 

institution, or organization, such as a 

community- or faith-based organization; 

or 

(2) One or more State or local nonprofit or governmental arts 

organizations that must work in 

partnership with one or more LEAs and 

may partner with one or more of the 

following: 

• An SEA or regional educational 

service agency. 

• An institution of higher education. 

• A public or private agency, 

institution, or organization, such as a 

community- or faith-based organization. 

Note: If more than one LEA or arts 

organization wishes to form a consortium 

and jointly submit a single application, they 

must follow the procedures for group 

applications described in 34 CFR 75.127 

through 75.129 of EDGAR. 

2.a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This 

program does not require cost sharing or 

matching. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
2526 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 

b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This 

program involves supplement-notsupplant funding requirements. Under 

section 5551(f)(2) of the ESEA, the 

Secretary requires that assistance 

provided under this program be used 

only to supplement, and not to 

supplant, any other assistance or funds 

made available from non-Federal 

sources for the activities assisted under 

this program. This restriction also has 

the effect of allowing projects to recover 

indirect costs only on the basis of a 

restricted indirect cost rate, according to 

the requirements in 34 CFR 75.563 and 

34 CFR 76.564 through 76.569. As soon 

as they decide to apply, applicants are 

urged to contact the ED Indirect Cost 

Group at (202) 377–3840 for guidance 

about obtaining a restricted indirect cost 

rate to use on the Budget Information 

form (ED Form 524) included with the 

application package. 

3. Coordination Requirement: Under 

section 5551(f)(1) of the ESEA, the 

Secretary requires that each entity 

funded under this program coordinate, 

to the extent practicable, each project or 

program carried out with funds awarded 

under this program with appropriate 

activities of public or private cultural 

agencies, institutions, and 

organizations, including museums, arts 

education associations, libraries, and 

theaters. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Address To Request Application 

Package: You can obtain an application 

package via the Internet, from the 

Education Publications Center (ED 

Pubs), or from the program office. To 

obtain a copy via the Internet, use the 

following address: http://www.ed.gov/ 

fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. 

To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, 

fax, or call the following: Education 

Publications Center, P.O. Box 1398, 

Jessup, MD 20794–1398. Telephone, toll 

free: 1–877–433–7827. FAX: (301) 470– 

1244. If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), call, toll free: 

1–877–576–7734. 

You can contact ED Pubs at its Web 

site, also: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ 

edpubs.html or at its e-mail address: 

edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

If you request an application from ED 

Pubs, be sure to identify this program as 

follows: CFDA number 84.351D. 

To obtain a copy from the program 

office, contact: Diane Austin, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., Room 4W223, 

Washington, DC 20202–5950. 

Telephone: (202) 260–1280 or by e-mail: 

artsdemo@ed.gov. If you use a TDD, call 

the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain a copy of the application package 

in an accessible format (e.g., braille, 

large print, audiotape, or computer 

diskette) by contacting the program 

contact person listed in this section. 

2. Content and Form of Application 

Submission: Requirements concerning 

the content of an application, together 

with the forms you must submit, are in 

the application package for this 

program. 

Notice of Intent To Apply: The 

Department will be able to develop a 

more efficient process for reviewing 

grant applications if it has a better 

understanding of the number of entities 

that intend to apply for funding under 

this program. Therefore, the Secretary 

strongly encourages each potential 

applicant to notify the Department by 

sending a short e-mail message 

indicating the applicant’s intent to 

submit an application for funding. The 

e-mail need not include information 

regarding the content of the proposed 

application, only the applicant’s intent 

to submit it. This e-mail notification 

should be sent to Diane Austin at 

artsdemo@ed.gov. 

Applicants that fail to provide this email notification may still apply for 

funding. 

Page Limit: The application narrative 

is where you, the applicant, address the 

selection criteria that reviewers use to 

evaluate your application. Applicants 

are strongly encouraged to limit the 

application narrative (Part III) to the 

equivalent of no more than 40 singlesided pages, using the following 

standards: 

A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5′′ x 11′′, on one side 

only, with 1′′ margins at the top, bottom, 

and both sides. 

• Double space (no more than three 

lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application narrative, including titles, 

headings, footnotes, quotations, 

references, and captions, as well as all 

text in charts, tables, figures, and 

graphs. 

• Use a font that is either 12 point or 

larger or no smaller than 10 pitch 

(characters per inch). 

• Use one of the following fonts: 

Times New Roman, Courier, Courier 

New, or Arial. An application submitted 

in any other font (including Times 

Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be 

accepted. 

The page limit does not apply to Part 

I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget 

section, including the narrative budget 

justification; Part IV, the assurances and 

certifications; or the one-page abstract, 

the re ́sume ́s, the bibliography, or the 

letters of support. However, the page 

limit does apply to all of the application 

narrative section (Part III). 

3. Submission Dates and Times: 

Applications Available: January 15, 

2010. 

Deadline for Notice of Intent To 

Apply: February 16, 2010. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: March 16, 2010. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically using the Electronic Grant 

Application System (e-Application) 

accessible through the Department’s eGrants site. For information (including 

dates and times) about how to submit 

your application electronically, or in 

paper format by mail or hand delivery 

if you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, 

please refer to section IV. 6. Other 

Submission Requirements of this notice. 

We do not consider an application 

that does not comply with the deadline 

requirements. 

Individuals with disabilities who 

need an accommodation or auxiliary aid 

in connection with the application 

process should contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If 

the Department provides an 

accommodation or auxiliary aid to an 

individual with a disability in 

connection with the application 

process, the individual’s application 

remains subject to all other 

requirements and limitations in this 

notice. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: May 17, 2010. 

4. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

5. We reference regulations outlining 

funding restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

6. Other Submission Requirements. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically unless you qualify for an 

exception to this requirement in 

accordance with the instructions in this 

section. 

a. Electronic Submission of 

Applications 

Applications for grants under the Arts 

in Education Model Development and 

Dissemination Grant Program—CFDA 

Number 84.351D must be submitted 

electronically using e-Application, 

accessible through the Department’s eVerDate Nov<24>2008 17:34 Jan 14, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JAN1.SGM 15JAN1

jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 2527 

Grants Web site at: http://egrants.ed.gov. 

We will reject your application if you 

submit it in paper format unless, as 

described elsewhere in this section, you 

qualify for one of the exceptions to the 

electronic submission requirement and 

submit, no later than two weeks before 

the application deadline date, a written 

statement to the Department that you 

qualify for one of these exceptions. 

Further information regarding 

calculation of the date that is two weeks 

before the application deadline date is 

provided later in this section under 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement. 

While completing your electronic 

application, you will be entering data 

online that will be saved into a 

database. You may not e-mail an 

electronic copy of a grant application to 

us. 

Please note the following: 

• You must complete the electronic 

submission of your grant application by 

4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the application deadline date. EApplication will not accept an 

application for this program after 

4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the application deadline date. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend that 

you do not wait until the application 

deadline date to begin the application 

process. 

• The hours of operation of the eGrants Web site are 6:00 a.m. Monday 

until 7:00 p.m. Wednesday; and 6:00 

a.m. Thursday until 8:00 p.m. Sunday, 

Washington, DC time. Please note that, 

because of maintenance, the system is 

unavailable between 8:00 p.m. on 

Sundays and 6:00 a.m. on Mondays, and 

between 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and 

6:00 a.m. on Thursdays, Washington, 

DC time. Any modifications to these 

hours are posted on the e-Grants Web 

site. 

• You will not receive additional 

point value because you submit your 

application in electronic format, nor 

will we penalize you if you qualify for 

an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement, as described 

elsewhere in this section, and submit 

your application in paper format. 

• You must submit all documents 

electronically, including all information 

you typically provide on the following 

forms: the Application for Federal 

Assistance (SF 424), the Department of 

Education Supplemental Information for 

SF 424, Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED 524), and all 

necessary assurances and certifications. 

You must attach any narrative sections 

of your application as files in a .DOC 

(document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF 

(Portable Document) format. If you 

upload a file type other than the three 

file types specified in this paragraph or 

submit a password protected file, we 

will not review that material. 

• Your electronic application must 

comply with any page limit 

requirements described in this notice. 

• Prior to submitting your electronic 

application, you may wish to print a 

copy of it for your records. 

• After you electronically submit 

your application, you will receive an 

automatic acknowledgment that will 

include a PR/Award number (an 

identifying number unique to your 

application). 

• Within three working days after 

submitting your electronic application, 

fax a signed copy of the SF 424 to the 

Application Control Center after 

following these steps: 

(1) Print SF 424 from e-Application. 

(2) The applicant’s Authorizing 

Representative must sign this form. 

(3) Place the PR/Award number in the 

upper right hand corner of the hardcopy signature page of the SF 424. 

(4) Fax the signed SF 424 to the 

Application Control Center at (202) 

245–6272. 

• We may request that you provide us 

original signatures on other forms at a 

later date. 

Application Deadline Date Extension 

in Case of e-Application Unavailability: 

If you are prevented from electronically 

submitting your application on the 

application deadline date because eApplication is unavailable, we will 

grant you an extension of one business 

day to enable you to transmit your 

application electronically, by mail, or by 

hand delivery. We will grant this 

extension if— 

(1) You are a registered user of eApplication and you have initiated an 

electronic application for this 

competition; and 

(2)(a) E-Application is unavailable for 

60 minutes or more between the hours 

of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, on the application deadline 

date; or 

(b) E-Application is unavailable for 

any period of time between 3:30 p.m. 

and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, 

on the application deadline date. 

We must acknowledge and confirm 

these periods of unavailability before 

granting you an extension. To request 

this extension or to confirm our 

acknowledgment of any system 

unavailability, you may contact either 

(1) the person listed elsewhere in this 

notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT (see VII. Agency Contact) or (2) 

the e-Grants help desk at 1–888–336– 

8930. If e-Application is unavailable 

due to technical problems with the 

system and, therefore, the application 

deadline is extended, an e-mail will be 

sent to all registered users who have 

initiated an e-Application. Extensions 

referred to in this section apply only to 

the unavailability of e-Application. 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement: You qualify for an 

exception to the electronic submission 

requirement, and may submit your 

application in paper format, if you are 

unable to submit an application through 

e-Application because— 

• You do not have access to the 

Internet; or 

• You do not have the capacity to 

upload large documents to eApplication; and 

• No later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date (14 calendar 

days or, if the fourteenth calendar day 

before the application deadline date 

falls on a Federal holiday, the next 

business day following the Federal 

holiday), you mail or fax a written 

statement to the Department, explaining 

which of the two grounds for an 

exception prevents you from using the 

Internet to submit your application. If 

you mail your written statement to the 

Department, it must be postmarked no 

later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date. If you fax 

your written statement to the 

Department, we must receive the faxed 

statement no later than two weeks 

before the application deadline date. 

Address and mail or fax your 

statement to: Diane Austin, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., Room 4W223, 

Washington, DC 20202–5900. FAX: 

(202) 205–5630. 

Your paper application must be 

submitted in accordance with the mail 

or hand delivery instructions described 

in this notice. 

b. Submission of Paper Applications by 

Mail 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

may mail (through the U.S. Postal 

Service or a commercial carrier) your 

application to the Department. You 

must mail the original and two copies 

of your application, on or before the 

application deadline date, to the 

Department at the following address: 

U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

(CFDA Number 84.351D), LBJ Basement 

Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

You must show proof of mailing 

consisting of one of the following: 

(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service 

postmark. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
2528 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 

(2) A legible mail receipt with the 

date of mailing stamped by the U.S. 

Postal Service. 

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or 

receipt from a commercial carrier. 

(4) Any other proof of mailing 

acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. 

Department of Education. 

If you mail your application through 

the U.S. Postal Service, we do not 

accept either of the following as proof 

of mailing: 

(1) A private metered postmark. 

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by 

the U.S. Postal Service. 

If your application is postmarked after 

the application deadline date, we will 

not consider your application. 

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not 

uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before 

relying on this method, you should check 

with your local post office. 

c. Submission of Paper Applications by 

Hand Delivery 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

(or a courier service) may deliver your 

paper application to the Department by 

hand. You must deliver the original and 

two copies of your application, by hand, 

on or before the application deadline 

date, to the Department at the following 

address: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

(CFDA Number 84.351D), 550 12th 

Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center 

Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

The Application Control Center 

accepts hand deliveries daily between 

8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, 

and Federal holidays. 

Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper 

Applications: If you mail or hand deliver 

your application to the Department— 

(1) You must indicate on the envelope 

and—if not provided by the Department—in 

Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, 

including suffix letter, if any, of the 

competition under which you are submitting 

your application; and 

(2) The Application Control Center will 

mail to you a notification of receipt of your 

grant application. If you do not receive this 

grant notification within 15 business days 

from the application deadline date, you 

should call the U.S. Department of Education 

Application Control Center at (202) 245– 

6288. 

V. Application Review Information 

Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this competition are from 

section 34 CFR 75.210. The maximum 

score for all the selection criteria is 100 

points. The maximum score for each 

criterion is indicated in parentheses. 

Each criterion also includes the factors 

that the reviewers will consider in 

determining how well an application 

meets the criterion. The Note following 

selection criterion (6) is guidance to 

help applicants in preparing their 

applications and is not required by 

statute or regulations. The selection 

criteria are as follows: 

(1) Need for project (15 points). The 

Secretary considers the need for the 

proposed project by considering the 

following factors: 

(a) The extent to which the proposed 

project will provide services or 

otherwise address the needs of students 

at risk of educational failure. 

(b) The extent to which specific gaps 

or weaknesses in services, 

infrastructure, or opportunities have 

been identified and will be addressed by 

the proposed project, including the 

nature and magnitude of those gaps or 

weaknesses. 

(2) Significance (10 points). The 

Secretary considers the significance of 

the proposed project by considering the 

following factor: 

The likely utility of the products 

(such as information, materials, 

processes, or techniques) that will result 

from the proposed project, including the 

potential for their being used effectively 

in a variety of other settings. 

(3) Quality of the project design (25 

points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the design of the proposed 

project by considering the following 

factors: 

(a) The extent to which the design of 

the proposed project reflects up-to-date 

knowledge from research and effective 

practices. 

(b) The extent to which the proposed 

project is part of a comprehensive effort 

to improve teaching and learning and 

support rigorous academic standards for 

students. 

(c) The extent to which the proposed 

project is designed to build capacity and 

yield results that will extend beyond the 

period of Federal financial assistance. 

(4) Quality of project personnel (10 

points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the personnel who will carry 

out the proposed project. 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. 

In addition, the Secretary considers 

the following factor: 

The qualifications, including relevant 

training and experience, of key project 

personnel. 

(5) Quality of the management plan 

(20 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the management plan for the 

proposed project by considering the 

following factors: 

(a) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project 

tasks. 

(b) 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. 

(c) The adequacy of procedures for 

ensuring feedback and continuous 

improvement in the operation of the 

proposed project. 

(6) Quality of the project evaluation 

(20 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the evaluation to be 

conducted of the proposed project by 

considering the following factors: 

(a) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation include the use of 

objective performance measures that are 

clearly related to the intended outcomes 

of the project and will produce 

quantitative and qualitative data to the 

extent possible. 

(b) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment of progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes. 

Note: A strong evaluation plan should be 

included in the application narrative and 

should be used, as appropriate, to shape the 

development of the project from the 

beginning of the grant period. The evaluation 

plan should include benchmarks to monitor 

progress toward specific project objectives 

and also outcome measures to assess the 

impact on teaching and learning, or other 

important outcomes for project participants. 

More specifically, the plan should identify 

the individual or organization that has agreed 

to serve as evaluator for the project and 

describe the qualifications of that evaluator. 

The plan should describe the evaluation 

design, indicating: (1) What types of data will 

be collected; (2) when various types of data 

will be collected; (3) what methods will be 

used; (4) what instruments will be developed 

and when these instruments will be 

developed; (5) how the data will be analyzed; 

(6) when reports of results and outcomes will 

be available; and (7) how the applicant will 

use the information collected through the 

evaluation to monitor progress of the funded 

project and to provide accountability 

information both about success at the initial 

site and about effective strategies for 

replication in other settings. Applicants are 

encouraged to devote an appropriate level of 

resources to project evaluation. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2010 / Notices 2529 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notification 

(GAN). We may notify you informally, 

also. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Grant Administration: Applicants 

should budget for a three-day meeting 

for project directors to be held in 

Washington, DC. 

4. Reporting: At the end of your 

project period, you must submit a final 

performance report, including financial 

information, as directed by the 

Secretary. If you receive a multi-year 

award, you must submit an annual 

performance report that provides the 

most current performance and financial 

expenditure information as directed by 

the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The 

Secretary may also require more 

frequent performance reports under 34 

CFR 75.720(c). For specific 

requirements on reporting, please go to 

http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ 

appforms/appforms.html. 

5. Performance Measures: The 

Department has established the 

following Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) performance 

measures for the Arts in Education 

Model Development and Dissemination 

Grant Program: (1) The percentage of 

students participating in arts model 

projects funded through the AEMDD 

Program who demonstrate proficiency 

in mathematics compared to those in 

control or comparison groups and (2) 

the percentage of students participating 

in arts model projects who demonstrate 

proficiency in reading compared to 

those in control or comparison groups. 

These measures constitute the 

Department’s indicators of success for 

this program. Consequently, we advise 

an applicant for a grant under this 

program to give careful consideration to 

these measures in conceptualizing the 

approach and evaluation for its 

proposed project. Each grantee will be 

required to provide, in its annual 

performance and final reports, data 

about its progress in meeting these 

measures. 

VII. Agency Contact 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diane Austin, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

Room 4W223, Washington, DC 20202– 

5950. Telephone: (202) 260–1280 or by 

e-mail: artsdemo@ed.gov. 

If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll 

free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

VIII. Other Information 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document 

and a copy of the application package in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or computer diskette) 

on request to the program contact 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of 

this notice. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You can view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister. To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at this site. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: January 12, 2010. 

James H. Shelton, III, 

Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement. 

[FR Doc. 2010–702 Filed 1–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Public Hearing 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Education, 

National Assessment Governing Board. 

ACTION: Notice of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: The National Assessment 

Governing Board is announcing a public 

hearing on January 28, 2010 to obtain 

comment on the draft Technological 

Literacy Assessment Framework for the 

National Assessment of Educational 

Progress (NAEP). 

Public and private parties and 

organizations are invited to present 

written and/or oral testimony. The 

hearing will be held at the Washington 

Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20001 from 9:30 

a.m. to 2:00 p.m. EST. 

This notice sets forth the schedule 

and proposed agenda of a forthcoming 

public hearing of the National 

Assessment Governing Board. This 

notice also describes the functions of 

the Board. Notice of this meeting is 

required under Section 10 (a)(2) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act. This 

document is intended to notify members 

of the general public of their 

opportunity to provide comment. 

Individuals who will need special 

accommodations in order to attend the 

hearing (such as interpreting services, 

assistive listening devices, materials in 

alternative format) should notify Munira 

Mwalimu at 202–357–6938 or at 

Munira.Mwalimu@ed.gov no later than 

January 21, 2010. We will attempt to 

meet requests after this date, but cannot 

guarantee availability of the requested 

accommodation. The meeting site is 

accessible to individuals with 

disabilities. 

DATES: January 28, 2010. 

Location: Washington Court Hotel, 

525 New Jersey Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20001. 

Time: 9:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. EST 

Background: Under Public Law 107– 

279, the National Assessment Governing 

Board (NAGB) is responsible for 

determining the content and 

methodology of the National 

Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP). The assessment is required to 

provide a fair and accurate 

measurement of student academic 

achievement through a random 

sampling process that produces 

representative data for the nation, the 

states, and other participating 

jurisdictions. The Board’s 

responsibilities include selecting subject 

areas to be assessed, developing 

assessment specifications and 

frameworks, designing the methodology 

of the assessment, developing 

appropriate student achievement levels 

for each grade and subject tested, 

developing standards and procedures 

for interstate and national comparisons, 

developing guidelines for reporting and 

disseminating results, and releasing 

initial NAEP results to the public. 

In preparation for a new assessment 

in the area of Technological Literacy, 

the Governing Board has contracted 

with WestEd to convene broad-based 

panels of policymakers, business 

representatives, educators, engineers, 

information communication experts, 

and others to recommend student 

knowledge and skills at the 4th, 8th, and 

12th grades for a planned assessment of 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES