U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Postsecondary Education

Washington, DC 20202

Fiscal Year 2023 

APPLICATION FOR GRANTS 

UNDER THE

STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONS

PROGRAM 

ALN # 84.031A 

Form Approved

OMB No. 1840-0114, Expiration Date: 07/30/25

CLOSING DATE: 05/22/23
1 

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... i

Dear Applicant: ....................................................................................................................... 2

Competition Highlights ........................................................................................................... 4

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants .................................................. 9

Notice Inviting Applications ................................................................................................. 14

Application Transmittal Instructions ..................................................................................... 41

Authorizing Legislation ......................................................................................................... 42

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs ................................................................... 43

General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) Section 427 ...................................................... 44

Government Performance and Results Modernization Act (GPRAMA) .............................. 45

Instructions for Completing the Application ......................................................................... 47

Project Narrative Instructions ................................................................................................ 49

Instructions for Standard Forms ............................................................................................ 63

Supplemental Information and Instructions .......................................................................... 64

84.031A Strengthening Institutions Program Profile ............................................................ 65

Application Checklist ............................................................................................................ 67

Paperwork Burden Statement ................................................................................................ 68
2 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for your interest in applying for a new grant under the fiscal year (FY) 2023 

Title III Part A, Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) grant competition, Assistance 

Listing Number (ALN) 84.031A. This letter highlights specific requirements for the SIP 

competition. As you formulate your application, please review these requirements, and 

carefully and thoroughly read through the entire application package.

The purpose of SIP is to provide assistance to eligible institutions of higher education to improve 

their academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability in order to increase their 

self-sufficiency. In this year’s competition, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is 

especially interested in programs that will support student success. This year’s competition has 

one Competitive Preference Priority (CPP) that seeks to ensure success via institutional data 

collection and analysis, evidence-based initiatives in advising and career services, and in the 

creation of flexible learning opportunities. In addition, SIP has an Invitational Priority (IP) 

promoting the implementation of activities that will help those students whose educations were 

interrupted by the pandemic and other challenges. We encourage applicants to address both 

priorities, which promote student accomplishment. In addressing the CPP, applicants may 

receive up to six additional points depending on how well the application meets the priority. No 

additional points are assigned to the IP. 

Also, in FY 2023, the Department will award both Individual Development Grants and 

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants. 

Applications for FY 2023 grants under the SIP Program must be submitted electronically 

using Grants.gov at: http://www.grants.gov. Additional information about Grants.gov 

submission requirements can be found in the Competition Highlights, the Notice Inviting 

Applications (Notice) published in the Federal Register, and the transmittal instructions, 

which are included in this application package. 

The Notice published in the Federal Register is the official competition document. You 

should not rely upon any information that is inconsistent with the guidance contained 

within the official document. 
3 

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Nalini LambaNieves at nalini.lamba-nieves@ed.gov or at 202-453-7953. 

We appreciate your interest in the Strengthening Institutions Program and look 

forward to receiving your application. 

Sincerely,

/s/

Nasser Paydar, Ph.D.

Assistant Secretary

Office of Postsecondary Education 
4 

Competition Highlights

New in 2023: 

• One competition, 84.031A. 

• Both Individual Development Grants (Individual) and Cooperative Arrangement 

Development Grants (Coops) will be awarded in this competition. 

• Points for the selection criteria have been changed to better align with the increased

emphasis on grant implementation. 

• There is one Competitive Preference Priority (CPP) and one Invitational Priority. The 

CPP is: 

Increasing Postsecondary Education Access, Affordability, Completion, and Post-Enrollment 

Success (up to 6 points). 

The Invitational Priority is:

Projects that propose to implement activities that promote postsecondary completion for 

students who are no longer enrolled because of challenges they faced during the COVID–19 

pandemic or who stopped attending for other reasons. 

• Maximum total possible points: 106. 

• Double space all text in the application, excluding text in charts, tables, figures and graphs. 

• Application Submission Instructions are now in a separate Federal Register Notice, Common 

Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, which can be 

accessed here: www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554. 

• The deadline to submit applications in Grants.gov is now 11:59:59 pm, Eastern Time on the closing 

date. 

Grants.gov: 

1. Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) grant applications for FY 2023 must be submitted 

electronically through Grants.gov at: http://www.grants.gov. 

2. Please note that the Grants.gov site is different from the Department’s e-Application system 

used in past competitions. 

3. We urge you to consider the following three important administrative factors when applying 

for this grant program: 

i. Register at the Grants.gov website early. The registration procedures may require 

anywhere from one week to several weeks, since Grants.gov registration includes having 

a System for Award Management (SAM) registration. 
5 

ii. Consider submitting your application 2-3 days prior to the closing date. The time it takes 

to upload an application will vary depending on your application and the speed of your 

Internet connection. The application submission process must be complete prior to the 

deadline for transmittal of applications.

iii. Remember to provide the DUNS number that was used when your organization 

registered with SAM, formerly the Central Contractor Registry (CCR). Applicants who 

are unable to submit an application via Grants.gov by the application deadline, 

because their SAM registration is not active, will not be considered for funding.

4. Grants.gov does not allow applicants to “un-submit” or delete applications. Therefore, if you 

discover that changes or additions are needed once your application has been accepted and 

validated by the Department, you must “re-submit” the application. If the Department 

receives duplicate applications, we will accept and process the application with the latest 

“date/time received” validation.

5. Please note that you must submit your application by 11:59:59 p.m. (Washington, D.C. time) 

on or before the application deadline date. Late applications will not be accepted. We 

suggest that you submit your application several days before the deadline. The 

Department is required to enforce the established deadline to ensure fairness to all applicants. 

No changes or additions to an application will be accepted after the deadline date.

6. It is recommended that Grants.gov attachments be in PDF format. PDFs cannot be password 

protected. Word documents will be accepted; however, consider uploading PDFs, as opening 

Word documents in the Department’s G5 grant system may be difficult. 

Eligibility: 

1. Applicants who are not deemed eligible institutions will not have their applications reviewed. 

2. The Federal Register Notice announcing the opening of the eligibility and waiver request 

period was published January 17, 2023 and closed February 27, 2023. Applicants who 

requested waivers will be emailed with the waiver decision.

3. Your institution's application for a FY 2023 Title III, SIP grant must be in the same name that

appears in the FY 2023 EM or include the name that appears in the EM. This will minimize the 

chances that your institution is deemed ineligible. 

SIP, Other Title III, Part A Programs, and Title V: 

1. There is a statutory limitation that prohibits institutions from having simultaneous Title V 

and Title III Part A grants (Section 505 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended). 

If your institution has a 84.031S, Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program (HSI) or a 84.031M, 

Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans Program (PPOHA) Title 

V grant, it is not eligible to receive a Title III Part A grant. 

2. Similarly, if your institution has another Title III, Part A grant, it cannot receive a Title III, 

Part A SIP grant. Other Title III, Part A programs are: 

Alaska Native – Native Hawaiian Program

(ANNH)

84.031N & 84.031W
6 

Asian American Native American Pacific Islander-Serving 

Institutions Program 

(AANAPISI)

84.031L

Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institutions Program

(NASNTI)

84.031X

Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Program

(TCCU)

84.031T

Logic Models: 

1. Logic models are now a part of the SIP selection criteria. The point value of logic models 

has also been increased, to reflect the importance of having a visual map of the grant. 

2. Think of a logic model as a visual representation of the assumptions and theory of actions of 

your program. When logical relationships are built on theory and evidence, you can explore 

outputs, outcomes, and impact. These logical relationships are built into the program or 

service, and you can more effectively evaluate the program and assess the outcomes and 

impact.

3. You can find information on logic models at: The ELM Application (ed.gov). Other sources 

include: 

• Logic models: A tool for effective program planning, collaboration, and monitoring 

(ed.gov). 

• Logic models: A tool for designing and monitoring program evaluations (ed.gov). 

• and Logic models for program design, implementation, and evaluation: Workshop toolkit (ed.gov). 

• Additionally, you may also access: Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models 

(issuelab.org). 

Allowable Activities & Program Regulations: 

1. Authorized grant activities for SIP are listed in Title III, Part A, Section 311 of the Higher 

Education Act, as amended (HEA); however, Section 301 of the Higher Education 

Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA) modified the authorized grant activities for SIP. Please 

review the original grant activities and these modifications prior to preparing your SIP 

application. 

2. Applicants should also review the program regulations (34 CFR 607.10 and 607.30) for 

guidance on which activities and costs are allowable. For example, you may not use your 

grant funds to: 

• Recruit students; 

• Provide scholarships (or any kind of aid) for students; 

• Carry out activities that are operational rather than developmental;

• Carry out student activities such as entertainment, cultural or social enrichment programs, 

student publications, social clubs or associations; 

• Pay for organized fund raising; and 

• Cover indirect costs. 
7 

3. For further guidance, applicants should also review the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200—

Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal 

Awards). 

Page Limits & Points: 

Individual Development Grants:

Application Section Recommended 

max pages

Where to attach in 

Grants.gov

Maximum 

points

Selection Criteria (Individual) 50 Project Narrative 

Attachment Form 100 

Competitive Preference 

Priority 3 Project Narrative Attachment Form 6 

Invitational Priority 2 Project Narrative 

Attachment Form 0 

Recommended maximum 

pages:

55 Maximum possible 

points: 106 

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants:

Application Section Recommended 

max pages

Where to attach in 

Grants.gov

Maximum 

points

Selection Criteria (Coop) 65 Project Narrative 

Attachment Form 100 

Competitive Preference 

Priority 3 Project Narrative Attachment Form 6 

Invitational Priority 2 Project Narrative 

Attachment Form 0 

Recommended maximum 

pages:

70 Maximum possible 

points: 106 

1. Please do not include resumes, letters of support and/or any other items not specifically 

requested in the application. For key personnel, describe the experience and qualifications of 

the candidates in the narrative or in a table. 

Program Profile and Abstract: 

1. All applicants must submit a Program Profile Form, which contains the tie-breaker 

information. If you do not submit this form and there is a tie, your institution will not be 

considered in the tiebreaker. Tiebreaker situations are a regular occurrence in SIP. 

2. If you are requesting endowment funds, please carefully read question #4 on the Program 

Profile Form and check the box, certifying that they will comply with the statutory 

requirement and program assurances regarding endowments cited in the program regulations. 

3. All applicants must provide an abstract limited to one single-spaced page. The abstract 

should be uploaded as a PDF file. Complete instructions for submitting the abstract are 

included in the Instructions for Completing the Application Package. 

4. Information on SIP is accessible at the Department’s Web site at: 
8

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/iduestitle3a/index.html..
9 

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants 

 Revised 12/2022 

IMPORTANT – PLEASE READ FIRST

U.S. Department of Education 

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants

To facilitate your use of Grants.gov, this document includes important submission procedures 

you need to be aware of to ensure your application is received in a timely manner and accepted 

by the Department of Education. 

Browser Support

The latest versions of Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE), Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, and 

Apple Safari are supported for use with Grants.gov. However, these web browsers undergo 

frequent changes and updates, so we recommend you have the latest version when using 

Grants.gov. Legacy versions of these web browsers may be functional, but you may experience 

issues. Grants.gov no longer provides support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 or below.

For additional information or updates, please see the Grants.gov Browser information in the 

Applicant FAQs: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-faqs.html#browser

ATTENTION – Workspace, Adobe Forms and PDF Files 

Grants.gov applicants can apply online using Workspace. Workspace is a shared, online 

environment where members of a grant team may simultaneously access and edit different web 

forms within an application. For each funding opportunity announcement (FOA), you can create 

individual instances of a workspace. 

Below is an overview of applying on Grants.gov. For access to complete instructions on how to 

apply for opportunities, refer to: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspaceoverview.html

1) Create a Workspace: Creating a workspace allows you to complete it online and route it 

through your organization for review before submitting. 

2) Complete a Workspace: Add participants to the workspace to work on the application 

together, complete all the required forms online or by downloading PDF versions, and 

check for errors before submission. The Workspace progress bar will display the state of 

your application process as you apply. As you apply using Workspace, you may click the 

blue question mark icon near the upper-right corner of each page to access contextsensitive help. 
10

a. Adobe Reader: If you decide not to apply by filling out web forms you can 

download individual PDF forms in Workspace. The individual PDF forms can be 

downloaded and saved to your local device storage, network drive(s), or external 

drives, then accessed through Adobe Reader. 

NOTE: Visit the Adobe Software Compatibility page on Grants.gov to download 

the appropriate version of the software at: 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html 

b. Mandatory Fields in Forms: In the forms, you will note fields marked with an 

asterisk and a different background color. These fields are mandatory fields that 

must be completed to successfully submit your application. 

c. Complete SF-424 Fields First: The forms are designed to fill in common 

required fields across other forms, such as the applicant name, address, and 

Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) Number. Once it is completed, the information will 

transfer to the other forms.

3) Submit a Workspace: An application may be submitted through workspace by clicking 

the Sign and Submit button on the Manage Workspace page, under the Forms tab. 

Grants.gov recommends submitting your application package at least 24-48 hours prior to 

the close date to provide you with time to correct any potential technical issues that may 

disrupt the application submission. 

4) Track a Workspace Submission: After successfully submitting a workspace application, a 

Grants.gov Tracking Number (GRANTXXXXXXXX) is automatically assigned to the 

application. The number will be listed on the Confirmation page that is generated after 

submission. Using the tracking number, access the Track My Application page under the 

Applicants tab or the Details tab in the submitted workspace.

For additional training resources, including video tutorials, refer to 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-training.html.

Helpful Reminders

1) REGISTER EARLY – Grants.gov registration involves many steps including registration 

on SAM (www.sam.gov), which usually takes approximately 7 to 10 business days, but can

take longer depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data entered into the SAM 

database by an applicant. You may begin working on your application while completing the 

registration process, but you cannot submit an application until all of the Registration steps 

are complete. Please note that once your SAM registration is active, it will take 24-48 hours 

for the information to be available in Grants.gov, and before you can submit an application 

through Grants.gov. For detailed information on the Registration Steps, please go to: 

http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html. Please note that your organization will need 

to update its SAM registration annually. 

To register in SAM.gov, click on the “Get Started” link under the “Register Your Entity...” 

heading in SAM.gov. Grantees, and other entities wanting to do business with the U.S. 
11

Department of Education (e.g., entities applying for a grant), that are not already registered in 

SAM.gov must complete the “Register Entity” registration option and NOT the “Get a 

Unique Entity ID” option. The “Get a Unique Entity ID” option, which is not a full 

registration, is only available to entities for reporting purposes. Failing to complete the 

“Register Entity” option may result in loss of funding, loss of applicant eligibility, and/or 

delays in receiving a grant award. Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. 

To further assist you with registering in SAM or updating your existing SAM registration, 

see the Quick Start Guide for Grant Registrations and the Entity Registration Video at 

https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration. 

2) SUBMIT EARLY – We strongly recommend that you do not wait until the last day 

to submit your application. Grants.gov will put a date/time stamp on your 

application and then process it after it is fully uploaded. The time it takes to upload 

an application will vary depending on a number of factors including the size of the 

application and the speed of your Internet connection, and the time it takes Grants.gov to 

process the application will vary as well. If Grants.gov rejects your application (see step 

three below), you will need to resubmit successfully to Grants.gov before 11:59:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the deadline date. 

You must provide the UEI on your application that was used when you registered as an 

Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) on Grants.gov. This UEI is assigned to 

your organization in SAM at the time your organization registers in SAM. If you do not 

enter the UEI assigned by SAM on your application, Grants.gov will reject your 

application. 

3) VERIFY SUBMISSION IS OK – You will want to verify that Grants.gov received your 

application submission on time and that it was validated successfully. To see the 

date/time your application was received, login to Grants.gov and click on the Track My 

Application link. For a successful submission, the date/time received should be earlier 

than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on the deadline date, AND the application status should 

be: Validated, Received by Agency, or Agency Tracking Number Assigned. Once the 

Department of Education receives your application from Grants.gov, an Agency Tracking 

Number (PR/award number) will be assigned to your application and will be available for 

viewing on Grants.gov’s Track My Application link. 

If the date/time received is later than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on the deadline date, 

your application is late. If your application has a status of “Received” it is still awaiting 

validation by Grants.gov. Once validation is complete, the status will either change to 

“Validated” or “Rejected with Errors.” If the status is “Rejected with Errors,” your 

application has not been received successfully. Some of the reasons Grants.gov may 

reject an application can be found on the Grants.gov site: 

http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/encountering-error-messages.html. For 

more detailed information on troubleshooting Adobe errors, you can review the Adobe 

Reader Software Tip Sheet at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobesoftware-compatibility.html. If you discover your application is late or has been rejected, 

please see the instructions below. Note: You will receive a series of confirmations both 
12

online and via e-mail about the status of your application. Please do not rely solely on email to confirm whether your application has been received timely and validated 

successfully. 

Submission Problems – What should you do?

If you have problems submitting to Grants.gov before the closing date, please contact Grants.gov 

Customer Support at 1-800-518-4726 or email at: mailto:support@grants.gov or access the 

Grants.gov Self-Service Knowledge Base web portal at: https://grantsportal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Grants

We discourage paper applications, but if electronic submission is not possible ( e.g., you do not 

have access to the internet), (1) you must provide a prior written notification that you intend to 

submit a paper application and (2) your paper application must be postmarked by the application 

deadline date. If you submit your prior written notification by email, it must be received by the 

Department no later than 14 calendar days before the application deadline date. If you mail your 

notification to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than 14 calendar days before the 

application deadline date (See the 2022 Common Instructions for detailed instructions regarding 

this procedure). 

Helpful Hints When Working with Grants.gov

Please go to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html for help with Grants.gov. For 

additional tips related to submitting grant applications, please refer to the Grants.gov Applicant 

FAQs found at this Grants.gov link: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicantfaqs.html as well as additional information on Workspace at 

https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-faqs.html#workspace. 

Slow Internet Connections

When using a slow internet connection, such as a dial-up connection, to upload and submit your 

application, it can take significantly longer than when you are connected to the Internet with a 

high-speed connection, e.g., cable modem/DSL/T1. While times will vary depending upon the 

size of your application, it can take a few minutes to a few hours to complete your grant 

submission using a dial up connection. Failure to fully upload an application by the deadline date 

and time will result in your application being marked late in the G5 system. If you do not have 

access to a high-speed internet connection, you may want to consider following the 

instructions in the Federal Register notice to obtain an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement no later than 14 calendar days before the application deadline 

date. (See the Federal Register notice for detailed instructions and the 2022 Common 

Instructions.) 

Attaching Files – Additional Tips

Please note the following tips related to attaching files to your application:
13

• When you submit your application electronically, you must upload any narrative 

sections and all other attachments to your application as files in either Portable 

Document Format (PDF) or Microsoft Word. Although applicants have the option of 

uploading any narrative sections and all other attachments to their application in 

either PDF or Microsoft Word, we recommend applicants submit all documents as 

read-only flattened PDFs, meaning any fillable PDF files must be saved and 

submitted as non-fillable PDF files and not as interactive or fillable PDF files, to 

better ensure applications are processed in a more timely, accurate, and efficient 

manner. 

• Grants.gov cannot process an application that includes two or more files that have the 

same name within a grant submission. Therefore, each file uploaded to your 

application package should have a unique file name.

• When attaching files, applicants should follow the guidelines established by 

Grants.gov on the size and content of file names. Uploaded file names must be fewer 

than 50 characters, and, in general, applicants should not use any special characters. 

However, Grants.gov does allow for the following UTF-8 characters when naming 

your attachments: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore, hyphen, space, period, parenthesis, 

curly braces, square brackets, ampersand, tilde, exclamation point, comma, semi 

colon, apostrophe, at sign, number sign, dollar sign, percent sign, plus sign, and equal 

sign. Applications submitted that do not comply with the Grants.gov guidelines will 

be rejected at Grants.gov and not forwarded to the Department. 

• Applicants should limit the size of their file attachments. Documents submitted that 

contain graphics and/or scanned material often greatly increase the size of the file 

attachments and can result in difficulties opening the files. For reference, the average 

discretionary grant application package with all attachments is less than 5 MB. 

Therefore, you may want to check the total size of your package before submission.
14

Notice Inviting Applications

4000-01-U 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; Strengthening Institutions Program 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a 

notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 

2023 for the Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP), 

Assistance Listing Number 84.031A. This notice relates to the 

approved information collection under OMB control number 1840-

0114. 

DATES: 

Applications Available: March 23, 2023. 

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 22, 2023. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 21, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an 

application, please refer to our Common Instructions for 

Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant 

Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2022 

(87 FR 75045), and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-

26554. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the 

version published on December 27, 2021. 
15

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, room 2B116, 

Washington, DC 20202-4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7953. Email: 

Nalini.Lamba-Nieves@ed.gov.

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability 

and wish to access telecommunications relay services, please 

dial 7-1-1. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The SIP Program provides grants to eligible 

institutions of higher education (IHEs) to help them become 

self-sufficient and expand their capacity to serve low-income 

students by providing funds to improve and strengthen the 

institution’s academic quality, institutional management, and 

fiscal stability.

Priorities: This notice contains one competitive preference 

priority and one invitational priority. The competitive 

preference priority is from the Secretary’s Supplemental 

Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grants Programs, 

published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 

70612) (Supplemental Priorities). 

Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2023, and any 

subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of 
16

unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is a 

competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), 

we award up to an additional 6 points to an application, 

depending on how well the application meets the priority. 

This priority is:

Increasing Postsecondary Education Access, Affordability, 

Completion, and Post-Enrollment Success (up to 6 points).

Background: Academic disparities for low-income and minority 

students have been such a longstanding, serious problem that in 

the 2008 Higher Education Opportunity Act, Congress requested

the Department document these gaps in postsecondary education. 

Additional significant inequalities in financial, social, and 

other services for these minority and low-income populations 

were laid bare during the COVID-19 pandemic. These students, 

the institutions that serve them, and their communities are 

still recovering from pandemic disruptions. Data collection and 

analysis is important to this recovery process, to identify 

which service areas need strengthening, what services are now 

necessary and no longer optional, and where funds should be 

invested for maximum impact. To increase access to and success 

in higher education by low-income and minority students, and to 

hasten recovery efforts, the FY 2023 SIP priorities allow 

applicants to address this goal in any or all of three ways: by 

improving data gathering; implementing proven, evidence-based 
17

strategies and programs; and providing students with a variety 

of high-quality learning opportunities. The FY 2023 SIP 

priorities also offer continuity, as recent SIP competitions 

have included similar priorities. 

Priority: Projects that are designed to increase postsecondary 

access, affordability, completion, and post-enrollment success 

for underserved students by addressing one or more of the 

following priority areas: 

(a) Establishing a system of high-quality data collection 

and analysis, such as data on persistence, retention, 

completion, and post-college outcomes, for transparency, 

accountability, and institutional improvement. (up to 2 points)

(b) Supporting the development and implementation of 

student success programs that integrate multiple comprehensive 

and evidence-based services or initiatives, such as academic 

advising, structured/guided pathways, career services, creditbearing academic undergraduate courses focused on career, and 

access to technological devices. (up to 2 points) 

(c) Supporting the development and implementation of highquality and accessible learning opportunities, including 

learning opportunities that are accelerated or hybrid online; 

credit-bearing; work-based; and flexible for working students. 

(up to 2 points) 
18

Invitational Priority: For FY 2023, and any subsequent year in 

which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from 

this competition, this priority is an invitational priority. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not give an application that 

meets this invitational priority a competitive or absolute 

preference over other applications.

This priority is:

Projects that propose to implement activities that promote 

postsecondary completion for students who are no longer enrolled 

because of challenges they faced during the COVID–19 pandemic or 

who stopped attending for other reasons. Institutions may opt 

to supplement or expand evidence-based and data-driven 

activities to support retention and completion.

Definitions: The following definitions apply to the priorities 

for this competition. The definition of “underserved students” 

is from the Supplemental Priorities, and the remainder of the 

definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1. 

Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component 

included in the project's logic model is informed by research or 

evaluation findings that suggest the project component is likely 

to improve relevant outcomes.

Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a 

framework that identifies key project components of the proposed 

project (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to 
19

be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes 

the theoretical and operational relationships among the key 

project components and relevant outcomes.

Note: In developing logic models, applicants may want to use 

resources such as the Regional Educational Laboratory Program’s 

(REL Pacific) Education Logic Model Application User Guide, 

available at The ELM Application (ed.gov). 

Other sources include: Logic models: A tool for effective 

program planning, collaboration, and monitoring (ed.gov), Logic 

models: A tool for designing and monitoring program evaluations 

(ed.gov), and Logic models for program design, implementation, 

and evaluation: Workshop toolkit (ed.gov).

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, 

process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. 

Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a 

combination of project components (e.g., training teachers on 

instructional practices for English learners and follow-on 

coaching for these teachers).

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other 

outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, 

consistent with the specific goals of the program.

Underserved student means a student in one or more of the 

following subgroups: 
20

(a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools 

with high concentrations of students living in poverty.

(b) A student of color.

(c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian 

Tribe.

(d) An English learner.

(e) A child or student with a disability.

(f) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or 

questioning, or intersex (LGBTQI+) student.

(g) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.

(h) A student who is the first in their family to attend 

postsecondary education.

(i) A student enrolling in or seeking to enroll in 

postsecondary education for the first time at the age of 20 or 

older.

(j) A student who is working full-time while enrolled in 

postsecondary education.

(k) A student who is enrolled in or is seeking to enroll in 

postsecondary education who is eligible for a Pell Grant.

(l) An adult student in need of improving their basic skills or 

an adult student with limited English proficiency.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1057-1059g.

Note: In 2008, the Higher Education Act (HEA) was amended by 

the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA), Pub. L. 
21

110-315. Please note that the SIP regulations in 34 CFR part 

607 have not been updated to reflect these statutory changes. 

The statute supersedes all other applicable regulations.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner 

consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in 

Federal civil rights laws. 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 82, 84, 

86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget 

Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and 

amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. 

(c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, 

and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as 

adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 

607. (e) The Supplemental Priorities.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Five-year Individual 

Development Grants and Cooperative Arrangement Development 

Grants will be awarded in FY 2023.

Note: A cooperative arrangement is an arrangement to carry out 

allowable grant activities between an institution eligible to 

receive a grant under this competition and another eligible or 
22

ineligible IHE, under which the resources of the cooperating 

institutions are combined and shared to better achieve the 

purposes of this part and avoid costly duplication of effort.

Estimated Available Funds: $36,886,151.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of 

applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years 

from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Individual Development Grants: 

Estimated Range of Awards: $400,000-$450,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $425,000 per year. 

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $450,000 for 

a single 12-month budget period.

Estimated Number of Awards: 70.

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants: 

Estimated Range of Awards: $500,000-$550,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $525,000 per year. 

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $550,000 for 

a single 12-month budget period.

Estimated Number of Awards: 10.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this 

notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information
23

1. Eligible Applicants: This program is authorized by title 

III, part A, of the HEA. To qualify as an eligible institution 

under any title III, part A program, an institution must--

(a) Be accredited or pre-accredited by a nationally recognized 

accrediting agency or association that the Secretary has 

determined to be a reliable authority as to the quality of 

education or training offered; 

(b) Be legally authorized by the State in which it is 

located to be a junior or community college or to provide an 

educational program for which it awards a bachelor’s degree; and

(c) Be designated as an “eligible institution” by 

demonstrating that it: (1) has an enrollment of needy students 

as described in 34 CFR 607.3; and (2) has low average 

educational and general expenditures per full-time equivalent 

(FTE) undergraduate student as described in 34 CFR 607.4. 

Note: The notice announcing the FY 2023 process for designation 

of eligible institutions, and inviting applications for waiver 

of eligibility requirements, was published in the Federal 

Register on January 17, 2023 (88 FR 2611). Only institutions 

that the Department determines are eligible, or which are 

granted a waiver under the process described in the notice, may 

apply for a grant in this program.

An eligible IHE may only submit one Individual Development Grant 

application. However, an eligible IHE may submit one 
24

application for an Individual Development Grant and a 

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant. Both may be awarded 

in the same fiscal year. A grantee with an Individual 

Development Grant or a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant 

may be a partner in one or more Cooperative Development 

Arrangement Grants. The lead institution in a Cooperative 

Arrangement Development Grant must be an eligible institution. 

Partners are not required to be eligible institutions. Current 

program grantees who have Individual Development Grants may not 

apply for another Individual Development Grant in this 

competition.

Relationship between the Title III, Part A Programs and the 

Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI) Program

A grantee under the HSI program, which is authorized under title 

V of the HEA, may not receive a grant under any HEA, title III, 

part A program. 20 U.S.C. 1101d. The title III, part A 

programs are: SIP; the Tribally Controlled Colleges and 

Universities program; the Alaska Native and Native HawaiianServing Institutions program; the Asian American and Native 

American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions program; the 

Predominantly Black Institutions program; and the Native 

American-Serving Nontribal Institutions program. Furthermore, a 

current title III, Part A or title V program grantee may not 
25

give up its grant to receive a grant under SIP, as described in 

34 CFR 607.2(g)(1).

An eligible IHE that is not a current grantee under the abovecited programs may apply for a FY 2023 grant under all title 

III, part A programs for which it is eligible, as well as 

receive consideration for a grant under the HSI program. 

However, a successful applicant may receive only one grant, as 

described in 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1). 

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require 

cost sharing or matching unless the grantee uses a portion of 

its grant for establishing or improving an endowment fund. If a 

grantee uses a portion of its grant for endowment fund purposes, 

it must match those grant funds with non-Federal funds (20 

U.S.C. 1057(d)(1)-(2)).

b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This program involves 

supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. Grant funds must 

be used so that they supplement and, to the extent practical, 

increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the 

activities to be carried out under the grant and in no case 

supplant those funds (34 CFR 607.30(b)).

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not 

include any program-specific limitation on administrative 

expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and 
26

necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 

200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not 

award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project 

activities described in its application.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are 

required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to 

Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published 

in the Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045), and 

available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554, which contain 

requirements and information on how to submit an application. 

Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version 

published on December 27, 2021.

2. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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 program. 

3. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 

CFR 607.10(c). We reference additional regulations outlining 

funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice. 
27

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where 

you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that 

reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that 

you limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages for 

Individual Development Grants and no more than 65 pages for 

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants. If you are 

addressing the competitive preference priority, we recommend 

that you limit your response to no more than an additional five 

pages total, three additional pages for the competitive 

preference priority and two additional pages for the 

invitational priority. Please include a separate heading when 

responding to one or both priorities. We also recommend that 

you use 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, and no 

smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch). 

• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, 

Courier New, or Arial. 
28

The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; 

the budget section, including the narrative budget 

justification; the assurances and certifications; or the onepage abstract. However, the recommended page limit does apply 

to all of the application narrative. 

Note: The Budget Information-Non-Construction Programs Form (ED 

524) Sections A-C are not the same as the narrative response to 

the Budget section of the selection criteria. A detailed budget 

is required in the Budget selection criterion response.

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The following selection criteria 

for this competition are from 34 CFR 607.22(a) through (g) and 

34 CFR 75.210. Applicants should address each of the following 

selection criteria separately for each proposed activity. The 

selection criteria below are worth a total of 100 points; the 

maximum score for each criterion is noted in parentheses. An 

applicant that also chooses to address the competitive 

preference priority can earn up to 106 total points.

(a) Quality of the Applicant’s Comprehensive Development 

Plan. (Maximum 20 Points) The extent to which--

(1) The strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems of 

the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, 

and fiscal stability are clearly and comprehensively analyzed 
29

and result from a process that involved major constituencies of 

the institution;

(2) The goals for the institution’s academic programs, 

institutional management, and fiscal stability are realistic and 

based on comprehensive analysis;

(3) The objectives stated in the plan are measurable, related 

to institutional goals, and, if achieved, will contribute to the 

growth and self-sufficiency of the institution; and

(4) The plan clearly and comprehensively describes the methods 

and resources the institution will use to institutionalize 

practice and improvements developed under the proposed project, 

including, in particular, how operational costs for personnel, 

maintenance, and upgrades of equipment will be paid with 

institutional resources.

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (Maximum 15 Points) The 

Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed 

project. In determining the quality of the design of the 

proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which 

the proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 

this notice).

(c) Quality of Activity Objectives. (Maximum 16 Points) 

The extent to which the objectives for each activity are--

(1) Realistic and defined in terms of measurable results; 

and
30

(2) Directly related to the problems to be solved and to the 

goals of the comprehensive development plan.

(d) Quality of Implementation Strategy. (Maximum 15 

Points) The extent to which--

(1) The implementation strategy for each activity is 

comprehensive;

(2) The rationale for the implementation strategy for each 

activity is clearly described and is supported by the results of 

relevant studies or projects; and

(3) The timetable for each activity is realistic and likely to 

be attained.

(e) Quality of Key Personnel. (Maximum 8 Points) The 

extent to which--

(1) The past experience and training of key professional 

personnel are directly related to the stated activity 

objectives; and

(2) The time commitment of key personnel is realistic.

(f) Quality of Project Management Plan. (Maximum 10 

Points) The extent to which--

(1) Procedures for managing the project are likely to ensure 

efficient and effective project implementation; and

(2) The project coordinator and activity directors have 

sufficient authority to conduct the project effectively, 

including access to the president or chief executive officer.
31

(g) Quality of Evaluation Plan. (Maximum 10 Points)

The extent to which--

(1) The data elements and the data collection procedures are 

clearly described and appropriate to measure the attainment of 

activity objectives and to measure the success of the project in 

achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan; and

(2) The data analysis procedures are clearly described and are 

likely to produce formative and summative results on attaining 

activity objectives and measuring the success of the project on 

achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

(h) Budget. (Maximum 6 Points) The extent to which the 

proposed costs are necessary and reasonable in relation to the 

project’s objectives and scope.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential 

applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary 

grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 

75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying 

out a previous award, such as the applicant’s use of funds, 

achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant 

conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the 

applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or 

submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary 

requires various assurances, including those applicable to 
32

Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in 

programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance 

from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 

110.23).

A panel of three non-Federal reviewers will review and score 

each application in accordance with the selection criteria in 

this notice, as well as the competitive preference priority. A 

rank order funding slate will be made from this review. Awards 

will be made in rank order according to the average score 

received from the peer review. 

If a tie-breaker is necessary, under 34 CFR 607.23(b) we award 

additional points to applications that contain any of the 

following three elements. Specifically, we add 1 additional 

point for each of the following (up to 3 points total) to an 

application that: 

(1) Has an endowment fund of which the current market value, 

per FTE enrolled student, is less than the average current 

market value of the endowment funds, per FTE enrolled student, 

at similar type institutions;

(2) Has expenditures for library materials per FTE enrolled 

student that are less than the average expenditure for library 

materials per FTE enrolled student at similar type institutions; 

or
33

(3) Proposes to carry out one or more of the following 

activities--

 (i) Faculty development;

 (ii) Funds and administrative management;

(iii) Development and improvement of academic programs;

(iv) Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening 

management and academic programs;

 (v) Joint use of facilities; and

 (vi) Student services. 

For these funding considerations, we use 2020-2021 data. 

If a tie remains after applying the tie-breaker mechanism above, 

priority will be given to applicants that have the lowest 

endowment values per FTE enrolled student.

3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 

CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this program the 

Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. 

Under 2 CFR 200.208, the Secretary may impose specific 

conditions and, under 2 CFR 3474.10, in appropriate 

circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant 

or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of 

unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management 

system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, 

subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or 

is otherwise not responsible.
34

4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under 

this competition to receive an award that over the course of the 

project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold 

(currently $250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a 

judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of 

performance under Federal awards--that is, the risk posed by you 

as an applicant--before we make an award. In doing so, we must 

consider any information about you that is in the integrity and 

performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee 

Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), 

accessible through the System for Award Management. You may 

review and comment on any information about yourself that a 

Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in 

FAPIIS.

Please note that, if the total value of your currently 

active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts 

from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting 

requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to 

report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. 

Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, 

if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive 

exceed $10,000,000. 

5. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and 

Budget’s guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable 
35

Federal laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department 

will review and consider applications for funding pursuant to 

this notice inviting applications in accordance with--

 (a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in 

delivering results based on the program objectives through an 

objective process of evaluating Federal award applications (2 

CFR 200.205);

 (b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication 

and video surveillance services or equipment in alignment with 

section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 

(Pub. L. No. 115—232) (2 CFR 200.216);

 (c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by 

law, to maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced 

in the United States (2 CFR 200.322); and

 (d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the 

greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer 

effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 

200.340).

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); or we may send you an email 

containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. 

We may notify you informally, also.
36

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. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, 

if you are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be 

required to openly license to the public grant deliverables 

created in whole, or in part, with Department grant funds. When 

the deliverable consists of modifications to pre-existing works, 

the license extends only to those modifications that can be 

separately identified and only to the extent that open licensing 

is permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal 

restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. Additionally, a 

grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant funds 

must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. 

This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after 

your application has been reviewed and selected for funding. 
37

For additional information on the open licensing requirements 

please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this 

competition, you must ensure that you have in place the 

necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting 

requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under 

the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception 

under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

(b) 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 multiyear 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 

www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: For purposes of Department reporting 

under 34 CFR 75.110, the following performance measures will be 

used in assessing the effectiveness of SIP: 

(a) The percentage change, over the 5-year period, of the 

number of full-time degree-seeking undergraduates enrolled at 

SIP institutions. Note that this is a long-term measure that 

will be used to periodically gauge performance.
38

(b) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking 

undergraduate students at 4-year SIP institutions who were in 

their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous 

year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP 

institution.

(c) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking 

undergraduate students at 2-year SIP institutions who were in 

their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous 

year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP 

institution. 

(d) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking 

undergraduate students enrolled at 4-year SIP institutions 

graduating within 6 years of enrollment.

(e) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking 

undergraduate students enrolled at 2-year SIP institutions 

graduating within 3 years of enrollment.

 6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award 

under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other 

things: whether a grantee has made substantial progress in 

achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the 

grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with 

its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has 

established performance measurement requirements, whether the 
39

grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the 

performance targets in the grantee’s approved application. 

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers 

whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the 

assurances in its approved application, including those 

applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal 

financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 

106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

VII. 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 

compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of 

this document is the document published in the Federal Register. 

You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and 

the Code of Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this 

site you can view this document, as well as all other documents 

of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or 

Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site. 
40

You may also access documents of the Department published in the 

Federal Register by using the article search feature at 

www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced 

feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents 

published by the Department.

Dated:

____________________________ 

Nasser H. Paydar, 

Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
41

Application Transmittal Instructions

This program requires the electronic submission of applications; specific requirements and 

waiver instructions can be found in the Federal Register NIA. 

Applications Submitted Electronically:

You must submit your grant application through the Internet using the software provided 

on the Grants.gov Web site (http://www.grants.gov) by 11:59:59 p.m. (Washington, D.C. 

time) on or before the deadline date.

If you submit your application through the Internet via the Grants.gov Web site, you will receive 

an automatic acknowledgement when we receive your application.

For more information on using Grants.gov, please refer to the NIA that was published in the 

Federal Register or visit http://www.grants.gov. 

Other Submission Instructions: 

For detailed instructions on applications sent by mail or delivery, please review the Common 

Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs Notice, 

published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045), and available at: 

www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554. 

 

Late Applications 

If your application is late, we will notify you that we will not consider the application. 
42

Authorizing Legislation 

Legislation: 

• Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended; Strengthening Institutions; Title III, Part A, 

§1057-§1059b; CFDA 84.031A

• Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 §301-§302

Regulations: 

• 34 CFR Part 607.1-607.31

Government-wide Guidance: 

• Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for 

Federal Awards (2 CFR 200). 
43

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs 

Executive Order 12372

This program falls under the rubric of Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review of 

Federal Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive 

order is to strengthen federalism--or the distribution of responsibility between localities, States, 

and the Federal government--by fostering intergovernmental partnerships. This idea includes 

supporting processes that State or local governments have devised for coordinating and 

reviewing proposed Federal financial grant applications. 

The process for doing this requires grant applicants to contact State Single Points of Contact for 

information on how this works. Multi-state applicants should follow procedures specific to each 

state. Further information about the State Single Point of Contact process and a list of names by 

State can be found at: 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SPOC-4-13-20.pdf

For State specific State review programs, applicants may submit comments directly to the 

Department. All recommendations and comments must be mailed or hand-delivered by the date 

indicated in the actual application notice to the following address: The Secretary, EO 12372—

ALN #84.031A/F, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Room 7E200, 

Washington, DC 20202. 

Proof of mailing will be determined on the same basis as applications (see 34 CFR §75.102). 

Recommendations or comments may be hand-delivered until 4:30:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard 

Time) on the closing date indicated in this notice. 

Important note: The above address is not the same address as the one to which the applicant 

submits its completed applications. Do not send applications to the above address. 
44

General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) Section 427 

Section 427 of GEPA requires all applicants for new awards to include in their applications a 

description of the steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access to, and 

participation in, its federally assisted programs for students, teachers, and other program 

beneficiaries with special needs. The provision allows applicants discretion in developing the 

required description. The statute highlights six types of barriers that can impede equitable 

access or participation: gender, race, national origin, color, disability, or age. 

A general statement of an applicant’s nondiscriminatory hiring policy is not sufficient to 

meet this requirement. Applicants must identify potential barriers and explain steps they will 

take to overcome these barriers.

NOTE: Applicants for new awards must include information in their applications to 

address this provision in order to receive funding under this program.
45

Government Performance and Results Modernization Act 

(GPRAMA) 

What is GPRAMA? 

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) is a straightforward statute 

that requires all federal agencies to manage their activities with attention to the consequences 

of those activities. Reauthorized in 2010 by the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA), each 

agency is to clearly state what it intends to accomplish in measurable terms, identify the 

resources required, and periodically report their progress to the Congress. In so doing, it is 

expected that the GPRAMA will contribute to improvements in accountability for the 

expenditures of public funds, improve Congressional decision-making through more objective 

information on the effectiveness of federal programs, and promote a new government focus on 

results, service delivery, and customer satisfaction. 

How has the Department of Education Responded to the GPRAMA Requirements?

As required by GPRAMA, the Department of Education has prepared a strategic plan for 

2022-2026. This plan reflects the Department’s priorities and integrates them with its 

mission and program authorities and describes how the Department will work to improve 

education for all children and adults in the U.S. The Department’s goals, as listed in the 

plan, are:

Goal 1: Promote equity in student access to educational resources, opportunities, and 

inclusive environments. 

Goal 2: Support a diverse and talented educator workforce and professional growth to 

strengthen student learning. 

Goal 3: Meet students’ social, emotional, and academic needs. 

Goal 4: Increase postsecondary value by focusing on equity-conscious strategies to address 

access to high-quality institutions, affordability, completion, post-enrollment success, and 

support for inclusive institutions. 

Goal 5: Enhance the Department’s internal capacity to optimize the delivery of its mission.

What are the Performance Indicators for SIP?

1. The number of full-time degree-seeking undergraduates enrolled at SIP institutions. 

Note that this is a long-term measure, which will be used periodically to gauge performance, 

beginning in FY 2009. 

2. The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at 4-

year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous 

year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

3. The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at 2-

year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous 

year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

4. The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students 

enrolled at 4-year SIP institutions graduating within six years of enrollment. 
46

5. The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students 

enrolled at 2-year SIP institutions graduating within three years of enrollment. 

6. The cost per successful program outcome: federal cost per undergraduate and 

graduate degree at SIP institutions. 

How does the Department of Education determine whether performance goals have been 

met?

An applicant that receives a grant award will be required to submit annual progress reports and 

a final report as a condition of the award. The reports will document the extent to which project 

goals and objectives are met.

The most recent version of this program’s annual performance report can be viewed at 

https://hepis.ed.gov/ISAPR/. 
47

Instructions for Completing the Application

The SIP application consists of the following four parts. These parts are organized in the 

same manner that the submitted application should be organized. Remember to upload 

all forms and sections and follow carefully the Grants.gov application instructions. Note: 

All attachments should be PDF files. The parts are as follows: 

Part I: 424 Forms

• Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424) 

• Department of Education Supplemental Information form for SF 424 

Part II: U.S. Department of Education Budget Summary Forms

• ED 524 (Section A and Section B) 

The “U.S. Department of Education Budget Information for Non-Construction 

Programs” is where applicants provide budget information for Section A – Budget 

Summary U.S. Department of Education Funds and Section B – Budget Summary NonFederal Funds. Section C will NOT be available. Applicants should include costs for all 

project years under the Budget selection criterion. 

Part III: Department of Education Abstract Form 

o Include a one-page abstract as a PDF file. 

Project Narrative Attachment Form 

• Project Narrative Attachment Form 

 Individual Grants: Upload the 50-page response to the 

selection criteria (project narrative) 

 Cooperative Grants: Upload the 65-page response to the 

selection criteria (project narrative)

• Responses to Competitive Preference Priority (if addressed)

• Responses to Invitational Priority (if addressed)

• Program Profile

Part IV: Assurances and Certifications

• GEPA Section 427 requirement 

• Lobbying Form (ED Form 80.0013) 

• Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) Now OPTIONAL

ED Abstract Form: Attach your one-page project abstract that will provide an 

overview of the proposed project. 

Project Narrative Attachment Form: The project narrative should include the 

narrative responses to the selection criteria that will be used to evaluate your application 

submitted for this competition. Please include a Table of Contents as the first page of the 

application narrative. You should limit the application narrative to no more than 55 

pages for Individual Development Grants (if addressing both priorities) and 70 pages for 

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants (if addressing both priorities). The 

project narrative pages should be consecutively numbered. 
48

Program Profile: Included in this application is a SIP Program Profile. You must 

complete this profile and attach it to Part III, Project Narrative Attachment Form, in 

Grants.gov. 

NOTE: Please do not attach any narratives, supporting files, or application 

components to the Standard Form (SF 424). Although the form accepts attachments, 

the Department of Education will only review materials/files attached to the 

attachment forms listed above. All attachments should be in PDF format. 
49

Project Narrative Instructions 

The project narrative shall be attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in 

Grants.gov. 

Before preparing the Project Narrative, applicants should review the program statute, program 

regulations, Federal Register Notice, and Dear Applicant Letter for specific guidance and 

requirements. 

The Secretary evaluates an application according to the program specific criteria in 34 CFR 

607.22 and 34 CFR 75.210. The Project Narrative should provide in detail the responses to each 

selection criterion. The maximum possible score for each category of selection criterion is 

indicated in parenthesis. For ease of reading by the reviewers, applicants should follow the 

sequence of the criteria as provided below. Applications should be written in a concise and clear 

manner. You should limit the section of the narrative that addresses the selection criteria to no 

more than 50 pages for Individual Development Grants or 65 pages for Cooperative 

Arrangement Development Grants. 

Applicants should address each of the following SIP selection criteria:

Criterion Points Value

Quality of Comprehensive Development Plan 20

Quality of Project Design 15

Quality of Activity Objectives 16

Quality of Implementation Strategy 15

Quality of Key Personnel 8

Quality of Project Management Plan 10

Quality of Evaluation Plan 10

Quality of Budget 6

Total Maximum Criteria Points 100

Competitive Preference Priority Points Value

Increasing Postsecondary Education Access, Affordability, 

Completion, and Post-Enrollment Success.

6

Invitational Priority

Providing postsecondary completion activities for students 

who are no longer enrolled because of challenges they faced 

during the COVID–19 pandemic or who stopped attending 

for other reasons.

0

Total Maximum Priority Points 6

SIP grants are institutional grants. They are designed to strengthen the institution so it can better 

serve its students. Therefore, the activities you propose should achieve long-term change at the 

institution. This is why there is a selection criterion that specifically asks about how the 

particular implementation of the selected activities was chosen—whether based on existing 

literature or a successful project at a similar institution (Quality of Implementation Strategy). 
50

The Department has added a selection criterion whereby applicants submit a logic model. That 

logic model should be a visual depiction that displays the rationale for the chosen activities, 

including the expected objectives and outcomes. To create a logic model for a SIP grant, we 

recommend you examine the data regarding the strengths and weaknesses of your organization, 

in order to identify the problem to be solved. Once the problem(s) is (are) identified, the next 

step is to establish the desired outcome/outcomes—the long-term change that is expected to 

result. Knowing what is effective (strengths), what is less effective (weaknesses) and what you 

want to achieve (long term outcome), you can now determine what you will do 

(activity/activities) to reach your long-term outcome (after 5 years of SIP funding) and your 

yearly outcomes. Though there is no need to attach a study for the FY 2023 competition, the 

activity chosen should be validated by existing studies that have explored that particular method. 

The goal is the same, long-term outcomes to strengthen the institution, the difference is the 

method—an attached study is not required. 

The following guidance may assist you in addressing the questions that will be used to evaluate 

your responses to the selection criteria: 

(a) Quality of Comprehensive Development Plan (Maximum: 20 points) 

(1) The strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems of the institution’s academic 

programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are clearly and comprehensively 

analyzed and result from a process that involved major constituencies of the institution. 

Content: Separately describe and analyze your institution's strengths, weaknesses, and 

significant problems in the following three areas as they relate to each proposed activity: 

1. Academic programs,

2. Institutional management, and 

3. Fiscal stability.

We are considering “weaknesses” and “significant problems” to be one and the same. Use the 

grant funds to address some of these weaknesses and problems. Here are some guidelines for 

stating the problems: 

• Avoid problem statements that declare the problem as "the lack of " or "the need for" the 

very solution you are proposing for funding. Such as, “the problem with our academic programs 

is a lack of or need for student services outside the classroom. Thus, we propose an activity to 

establish those student services." This type of statement usually contains circular reasoning. 

• Provide summaries of or excerpts from recent data, reports, evaluations or studies that 

demonstrate that you have objectively and thoroughly analyzed your institution’s main problems. 

• Describe the process you used to formulate the above information. 

• Provide evidence of the extent and nature of the faculty, staff, students, community, industry, 

and other major constituents' involvement in this process. You may rely on previously written 

information, such as a self-study for accreditation, as long as your process for developing the 

information involved the major constituencies' representatives and reflects your institution's 

current situation. 

(2) The goals for the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal 

stability are realistic and based on comprehensive analysis. 
51

Content: Based on a comprehensive analysis of your institution's strengths, weaknesses, and 

significant problems, separately state the institutional goals as they relate to each proposed 

activity you plan to address using Title III, Part A Strengthening Institutions Program funds. 

These will be the overall goals you expect from the successful implementation of the 

activity/activities. These goals should include the performance measures established for SIP, 

which can be found on pages 46-47 of this booklet. Broadly, the SIP performance measures can 

be classified under enrollment, retention, graduation and program costs. 

(3) The objectives stated in the plan are measurable, related to institutional goals, and if 

achieved, will contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution.

Content: Note—though the sub-criterion speaks of objectives, as does criterion 3, in this 

instance we are referring to outcomes. Focusing on the overall (5-year or long-term), 

institutional outcomes that are specifically related to your proposed Title III, Part A 

Strengthening Institutions Program activities, separately provide measurable objectives for how 

you will reach each of the goals you discussed in sub-criterion #2. Achieving the outcomes 

outlined should contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution. For example, by 

revamping the curriculum (academic stability) to include technology and other pedagogical best 

practices, the goal is to increase the retention of first-year students by 40% by 9/30/20XX. These 

outcomes are directly related to the individual activity objectives, but they are not the same. 

These are the cumulative result of each activity’s objectives. To continue with the above 

example, yearly objectives will show shorter increases in retention of first-year students—5% in 

year one, 10% in year two, 20% in year three, 30% in year four and 40% in year five. 

Describe in measurable terms how objectives are related to the goals of the institution. The 

description should include details on the following:

Specific Tasks

Institutionalize personnel, programs, and services. 

Methods Involved 

Operational funding budgeted and allocated to sustain improvements. 

Tangible Results 

Program, services, and personnel fully institutionalized. 

(4) The plan clearly and comprehensively describes the methods and resources the 

institution will use to institutionalize practices and improvements developed under the 

proposed project, including, in particular, how operational costs for personnel, 

maintenance, and upgrades of equipment will be paid with institutional resources.

Content: In this section, separately describe the following for each proposed activity: 

The methods your institution will use to integrate practices and improvements developed into its 

operations and, if appropriate, continue them after the grant ends. For example, provide specifics 

on how your institution will obtain approval from appropriate internal and/or external 

governance authorities to conduct new or revised curricula and use new intervention strategies. 

What will the time period be for these actions?
52

Provide the resources you will need to institutionalize newly developed practices and 

improvements and, most importantly, how you will fund them. In particular, discuss how your 

institution will fund operational costs such as personnel, maintenance, and upgraded equipment. 

For example, one way to ensure that positions continue after the grant ends is for your institution 

to pay a percentage of the salary during the grant and increase that percentage during years two, 

three, four, and five. 

Your response should be clear, specific, and realistic. It is not realistic to solely depend on 

revenue from the expected increase in retention or enrollment (long-term outcome) to fund the 

institutionalization of the activity/activities. Should these increases not materialize, how will the 

institution continue to implement successful activities? 

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (Maximum 15 Points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a 

rationale (as defined in the Notice Inviting Applications).

Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in the project's logic model is 

informed by research or evaluation findings that suggest the project component is likely to 

improve relevant outcomes. 

Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project 

components of the proposed project (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be 

critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational 

relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes. 

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy 

included in a project. Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a 

combination of project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English 

learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers). 

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component 

is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program. 

Content: A logic model shows the reasoning of your project, what resources you have, how you 

will implement them and what you expect to change as a result of those actions. In your logic 

model, include the main institutional objectives that you outline in your CDP (increase retention, 

graduation, etc.), as part of your long-term outcomes. The connections between the resources, 

individual activities and outputs should show how they all “feed” into achieving the overall goals 

of the CDP (and the program—the performance measures on page 41). 

As defined above, the logic model is analogous to the theory of action/theory of change. Theory 

of change shows the ideas (activities) that are expected to lead to change (outcomes). Theory of 

action details how the theory of change is delivered/implemented. A logic model encompasses 

both. This means that your logic model and your Implementation Strategy are in direct 

relationship to each other. The goals and activities in the logic model should also be listed in 

the implementation strategy table and vice-versa. 

A logic model does not have to be only one page; it can be longer. We encourage applicants to 

provide a thorough and detailed logic model. Nevertheless, you may not be able to include every 

component of the inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes of your proposed project. These
53

complete, detailed steps needed for the thorough grant execution should be entirely represented

in your Implementation Strategy section of the application. 

When creating a logic model, it is usually best to start with your end in mind. What is your 

overall goal (outcomes = CDP and program performance goals)? Build your logic model by 

reverse engineering. How are you going to achieve these goals (activities)? What are the 

tangible measures that will indicate you are on the right path (outputs)? 

In general, 

 Inputs are fixed characteristics that serve as resources or barriers for organizational or student 

change.

 Activities are the intended development, implementation, or restructuring of projects, 

programs, and services. 

 Outputs are evidence that the intended activities are being implemented (participation rates or 

numbers served). 

 Outcomes are student or organizational changes in attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, skills, 

status, or levels of functioning. 

o Short-term outcomes reflect yearly/bi-yearly changes.

o Long-term outcomes are the changes you will see after 5 years of grant implementation. 

 Impacts are what you hope happens to your students or organization as a result of the longterm outcomes. These include changes you expect to see after institutionalizing the grant 

activities, which should include the program performance indicators. 

Do not just include a logic model. There should be a narrative section (can be a table) that 

details the logic model and its relationship to the implementation strategy. 

To develop your logic models, you may want to use resources such as the Pacific Education 

Laboratory’s Education Logic Model Application (The ELM Application (ed.gov)). The 

examples provided in the site all show the interrelationship between all the components of the 

logic model. 

We have also included a sample logic model below, to assist you as you develop your projectspecific logic model. 
54

Logic Model

Overall Outcome/Goal: To increase developmental education completion by 40%; student persistence by 5%; graduation by 5%; and transfer rates by 5% over the 

baseline.

Impacts: 

Inputs Activities Outputs

Outcomes

Short(S) Medium(M) Long(L)

Strengths:

• Technology, 

student services, 

faculty and 

business process 

subject matter 

experts

• Committed 

leadership support

• Existing 

technology

systems

• Range of learning and 

personal supports for 

student success

Weaknesses (also 

Inputs):

• Low rates of 

developmental 

transfer to degreecredit courses

• Insufficient advising 

resources 

• Lack of accessibility 

of information about 

student career and 

academic goals

•550 students total enroll in 15 

sections each of remedial Math 

and remedial English

•All receive intrusive advising

Targeted students:

•complete developmental courses at rate of 

10% over baseline (S) 

•enroll in and complete college-level courses 

at a rate of 5% over baseline (S)

•Co-requisite 

developmental education 

model designed to

accelerate remediation 

established

•Faculty trained to teach 

revised curriculum

•Build and deploy online 

individualized educational 

planning and service 

delivery tool integrated 

with college data systems 

(My Roadmap)

•Implement 

comprehensive, coherent 

advising and career 

services model, leveraging 

technology and data to 

provide proactive 

individualized services

•Provide robust advising

professional development 

for faculty

•Unified portal with student 

and advisor views centralizes 

key educational planning and

advising data for all students

•100% of students unsure of 

career goal or off-track of 

educational plan are identified 

and receive timely 

interventions

•400 students create My 

Roadmap

•100% of professional advisors 

receive Master Advising 

Certification, renewed yearly

•300 full-time faculty complete 

advising training

•85% of trained faculty 

provide advising within their 

programs congruent with 

model

•All students have assigned 

advisors

40% of new program students 

complete an educational plan 

in their first year in college (S)

Increase by 30% over baseline the yearly rate at 

which targeted student groups access career 

and/or advising services (S)

Rate at which targeted students are retained 

from their first year to their second increases 

5% over baseline (S)

Rate at which targeted students complete a 

credential or transfer within 3 years 

increases 5% over baseline (M)

▪ Increased enrollments and tuition revenue ▪ Sustainable IT infrastructure ▪ Institutionalized faculty advising ▪ More efficient use of advising resources

▪ Improved access and success for low-income and underrepresented students ▪ Transformed delivery of developmental education
55

Key Assumptions and Supporting Evidence

ASSUMPTION SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

An important factor contributing to poor completion and progression is 

the length of time needed to complete remedial sequences

Hodara & Jaggars, 2014 – Level of 

Evidence: Moderate evidence

Strategies that accelerate remediation lead to improved completion 

and progression to college-level courses

Weisburst et al, 2017; Hodara & 

Jaggars, 2014 – Moderate evidence

Students without defined education or career goals persist and complete 

credentials at lower rates

Karp, 2013 – Promising practice

Not following a coherent educational program or frequently changing 

programs leads to students paying for credits they can’t use and 

lengthens time to completion

Bailey et al, 2015; Wang, 2017 –

Emerging evidence

Intrusive, developmental advising is effective Karp et al, 2016 – Promising practice

Strategies that help students navigate complex college processes and 

program requirements lead to improved progression to degree and 

transfer

Karp et al, 2016 – Promising practice

Appropriately used technology can extend the reach and impact of 

college advising services

Kalamkarian & Karp, 2015 –

Emerging evidence
56

(c) Quality of Activity Objectives (Maximum: 16 Points) 

(1) The extent to which the objectives for each activity are realistic and defined in terms of 

measurable results.

Content: State your yearly objectives, separately for each individual activity, which are 

measurable and realistic (not too high, not too low). Connect each objective to the problem or 

weakness it should address, as you described in the CDP. In addition: 

o DO NOT create process objectives such as: "To establish a college-wide committee,” 

whose measurement is: "We formed a committee." Identify processes or tasks under 

the Implementation Strategy as discussed next. 

o DO NOT begin your objective with words such as "to provide," "to develop," or "to 

establish." This heightens the likelihood you may be describing a process or task rather 

than an outcome objective. 

o DO use words such as "to increase by" or "to decrease by" since you are more likely to 

be describing a genuine, outcome objective. However, please add a measurable target 

by which you will increase or decrease your proposed action and a date by which you 

expect the increase or decrease to be completed. 

o DO provide a realistic number of objectives and performance indicators for each

proposed activity and for each year you are requesting funds for that activity. 

For example: 

Objective: 

• By the end of year 2 (9/30/20XX) 30% of all at-risk incoming freshmen will have 

a college pathway plan established.

Some Possible Performance Indicators: 

o Train an additional 15 faculty members on advising methods by October 30, 

20XX. 

o By October 1st, schedule advising appointments for 60% of incoming 

freshmen. 

o Send electronic reminders to all scheduled students (60% of incoming 

freshmen) regarding their upcoming appointments. 

(2) The extent to which the objectives for each activity are directly related to the problems 

to be solved and to the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

Content: Separately describe how meeting the objectives of each proposed activity will address a 

problem identified in the CDP and affect your institution's ability to address its goals for its 

academic programs, institutional management, or fiscal stability.

If you need funds for more than one activity, you may propose different start and end dates and 

vary the duration of each. For example, you may need only three years to develop a new 

curriculum but five years to develop a new management information system. Any proposed 

activity should address a critical problem that the CDP describes as hindering institutional 

growth and self-sufficiency. 
57

Please note that there is a difference between the objectives mentioned in the CDP section 

and the objectives in this section. The word objective is equal to the word goals in the CDP 

section. The CDP objectives are the “grand” objectives, the ones that are linked to the 

GPRAMA Indicators such as to increase enrollment, retention, and strengthen fiscal stability. 

For example, you have a problem with retention and, realize that those dropping out are lowincome and/or minority students who need additional academic assistance. You design an 

activity to offer intensive advising, a first-year experience (FYE) program, etc. In this example, 

the CDP goals/objectives would be something like increase freshman retention by 5% at the end 

of the grant (current baseline 55%). 

Your activity objectives would be those tasks directly related to the activity you have decided to 

implement to address your retention issue. Those would perhaps include, by Y5, 100% of courses with 

high DFW rates across Departments (15) will have established learning communities (3 by Y2, 7 by Y3, 

etc.). Performance Indicators would be: By the end of Y1, instructors for all 3 gateway courses (6 

instructors) are trained in creating learning communities. 

If you are a visual learner, please see the table below. Note that the table has different examples, to 

provide more options. 

CDP Objective--

OUTCOMES

Activity Activity Objectives Performance 

Indicators--

OUTPUTS

By end of the grant, 

increase retention of 

FT degree-seeking 

students by 5% 

(current baseline 

55%). 

Create internal support 

systems via tutoring, 

mentoring, and learning 

communities. 

By Fall of Year 2, 25% 

of at-risk students will 

enroll in learning 

communities to 

increase a sense of 

belonging. (Year 3 

40%; Year 4 50%; 

Year 5 65%.) 

By the end of Year 1, 

identify courses and 

build block schedules 

for 20 learning 

communities (750 

students) to be 

implemented in Year 2. 

(Year 3: 18 new 

sections (1200 total 

students); Year 4 12 

new sections (2100 

total students); Year 5: 

12 sections (1800 

students).

By end of the grant, 

increase retention of 

FT degree-seeking 

students by 5% 

(current baseline: 

55%).

Create internal support 

systems via tutoring, 

mentoring, and learning 

communities. 

By Fall of Year 2, 25% 

of at-risk students will 

enroll in learning 

communities to 

increase sense of 

belonging. (Year 3: 

40%; Year 4: 50%; 

Year 5: 65%.) 

Sense of belonging 

survey designed and 

administered Year 1 

to establish baseline. 

Year 2 to 5, sense of 

belonging survey 

administered with the 

goal of 2.5% annual 

increase from prior 

year.

By the end of the 

grant, decrease the 

number of students in 

academic probation by 

Develop and scale 

recovery courses for 

students on academic 

probation. 

By the end of Year 1, 

the academic probation 

recovery course will be 

available to 50% of 

students on probation. 

By the end of Year 1, 

recruit and train 10 

additional UNIV 1101 

instructors for Fall 

202X courses. (Year 
58

50% (baseline: 1,250 

students). 

(Year 2: 60%; Year 3: 

70%; Year 4 75%; 

Year 5 100%)

2: 12 instructors; Year 

3: 12 instructors; Year 

4 12 instructors)

Lastly, if you propose to use up to 20% for endowment investing, you do not need to write a 

detailed activity narrative regarding this use of endowment investing. However, we do need to 

know which entity will manage the funds. For example, will a foundation be managing the 

endowment, or will it be an office at the institution? 

(d) Quality of Implementation Strategy (Maximum: 15 Points)

(1) The extent to which the implementation strategy for each activity is comprehensive. 

(2) The extent to which the rationale for the implementation strategy for each activity is 

clearly described and is supported by the results of relevant studies or projects.

Content: For each proposed activity, explain why you chose a specific method for implementing 

that activity. Indicate the relevant studies that you reviewed and experts that you consulted. In 

this section, expand on the selected study that guided your project and logic model. While 

you are not required to use a study cleared by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), as in 

recent years, keep in mind that a study is not an article in a magazine or newspaper. Studies are 

peer-reviewed and generally appear in journals or books. 

(3) The timetable for each activity is realistic and likely to be attained. 

• Chart an implementation strategy to meet your objectives for each year you are 

requesting funds and for each activity. Make sure the implementation strategy is 

detailed and expands on the submitted logic model. 

• Use time frames that are realistic for completing a task. Chart each of the five years 

using the budget period of October 1 to September 30. 

• Describe in a comprehensive, sequential and clear manner who will do what and how 

they will do it to meet the objectives of each activity.

• Identify, by title, the primary participants who will carry out the tasks to meet the 

objectives. Describe how the personnel will perform the tasks and the results you 

expect from them.

(e) Quality of Key Personnel (Maximum: 8 Points) 

(1) The extent to which the experience and training of key professional personnel are 

directly related to the stated activity objectives.

(2) The extent to which the time commitment of key personnel is realistic.

Content: For each proposed activity, list, by title and name (if available) which positions are 

being proposed to manage the Title III grant and describe the qualifications you require of that 

position and the amount of time each person will allot to the proposed activity. This 

information should be included for all staff that are key for the successful implementation 

of the grant, not only the project director or the activity director, regardless of whether 
59

they are paid by the grant or by the institution. For example, in a project that requires 

significant software and IT hardware updates, the institution’s IT manager’s experience and 

training are relevant and should be included. 

If you want to use a consultant, explain why a consultant is more advantageous than using the 

institution’s personnel. 

(f) Quality of Project Management Plan (Maximum: 10 Points)

(1) The extent to which procedures for managing the project are likely to ensure efficient 

and effective project implementation. 

(2) The extent to which project coordinator and activity directors have sufficient authority 

to conduct the project effectively, including access to the president or chief executive 

officer.

For the project director/coordinator, activity director and other key positions, provide the 

following: 

• Under “Quality of Key Personnel,” be sure to include the director’s/coordinator's 

required qualifications (education, experience, training) and the specific duties of the 

position. Directly relate the duties to the stated purposes and objectives of the 

project.

• Indicate how much time the Title III, Part A, director/coordinator and other key staff 

will commit to the project. Make the time commitment realistic, not too high nor too 

low, relative to the tasks the individual will perform. 

Note: Your Title III, Part A director’s/coordinator’s time commitment to a project may vary 

considerably from that in another project or another institution’s project. One project focused on 

developing a management information system, for example, may have a director/coordinator 

who is the director of technology in the ordinary hierarchy of the college. He or she may allot 10 

percent time to coordinate the project for which the college will pay. On the other hand, a new 

director/coordinator of a faculty development project may be an instructional developer with a 

50 percent time or 100 percent time commitment paid for with Title III, Part A, funds. Carefully 

think through the management structure and time commitment that will work best at your 

institution and specify the reasons for your choice. 

• Describe the procedures the project director/coordinator will use to manage and 

monitor the project's progress such as how information will be provided to key 

administrators so they can integrate project activities with related, on-going 

institutional activities.

• Describe the project director’s/coordinator's administrative authority over the activity 

director(s) who is normally responsible for accomplishing a specific activity's 

objectives. Also, describe the administrative authority of the activity director(s) over 

subordinates. 

• Chart the lines of authority of the project director/coordinator to key institutional 

decision makers, including the president. 

(g) Quality of Evaluation Plan (Maximum: 10 Points) 
60

(1) The extent to which the data elements and the data collection procedures are clearly 

described and appropriate to measure the attainment of activity objectives and to measure 

the success of the project in achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

Content: For each proposed activity, describe the data collection procedures the institution will 

use to identify the data elements, objectives, and goals identified in the CDP. Include measure 

attainment of each proposed activity. Include procedures for analyzing and using both formative 

and summative data. 

The overall impact indicator, the goals and the objectives in the implementation of this grant 

have been identified. How will they be measured? What elements need to be measured? How 

will information on those elements be collected? How often? Who’s going to do it? Will it be 

an internal evaluator (an institutional staff member) or an external one? What are the benefits of 

the chosen measures? When will the evaluator begin work? 

(2) The extent to which the data analysis procedures are clearly described and are likely to 

produce formative and summative results on attaining activity objectives and measuring 

the success of the project on achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan. 

Content: For each proposed activity, describe in detail the project's evaluation plan, including 

who, what, when and how. Define the baseline indicators of progress that you will use. Once 

the above data are established, how will they be analyzed to show what the yearly (formative) 

and the 5-year (summative) results are? Will the analysis lead to obtaining formative and 

summative results, ones that are clearly linked to the activity objectives and the CDP goals?

The detailed evaluation plan should:

• Produce a valid assessment of your implementation strategies; 

• Result in annual, quantifiable evidence of the extent to which you attained your 

objectives for each activity and your goals for which funding is requested; 

• Include the data elements and collection procedures that you will use; and

• Describe procedures for analyzing and using both formative and summative data. 

All applicants must submit a plan to conduct a project evaluation as part of their grant activities. 

The planned evaluation should be systematic in assessing the worth of a project and useful in 

guiding project objectives and focus primarily on determining the outcomes and impacts of the 

project relative to those objectives. The evaluation should also serve to strengthen the 

management of the project and lead to better knowledge of what works in producing the desired 

outcomes.

An individual or organization, independent of the project team (and all of its partners), but not 

necessarily external to the grantee institution, should execute the project evaluation plan. This 

independent evaluator should assist in the initial preparation of the evaluation plan and be willing 

to work alongside the project team throughout the duration of the project. The evaluator should 

possess good evaluation skills commonly found among practitioners of the American Evaluation 

Association. 
61

The project director and team should be committed to gathering the best evaluation data possible 

for formative and summative purposes. Projects should collect baseline data before the project 

starts as a basis for measuring progress. 

A summary of the evaluation report must be included in the final performance report submitted 

by the project to the Department of Education. The report, which also includes fiscal and 

management performance information, is due within 90 days after expiration of the award. The 

evaluation report should be included as an appendix to the final performance report as well as 

available upon request. (Please see 34 CFR §607.24 for information on how project performance 

may affect future funding). 

For the Title III, Strengthening Institutions Program, the evaluation plan should produce a valid 

assessment of the implementation strategies. It should also result in annual, quantifiable 

evidence of the attainment of objectives for each activity and of the goals in the CDP. 

(h) Quality of Budget (Maximum: 6 Points)

The extent to which the proposed costs are necessary and reasonable in relation to the 

project’s objectives and scope.

Content: Review the program regulations (34 CFR 607.10 and 607.30) for guidance on which 

activities and costs are allowable. For example, you may not use your grant funds to: 

- Recruit students; 

- Carry out activities that are operational rather than developmental;

- Carry out student activities such as entertainment, cultural or social enrichment 

programs, student publications, social clubs or associations; 

- Pay for organized fund raising; and 

- Cover indirect costs. 

Prepare a separate, detailed, budget narrative for each proposed activity for each year you are 

requesting grant funds. Demonstrate and justify that all costs are reasonable in today’s market 

and necessary to accomplish your activity objectives. Please pay particular attention in your 

justification to those (per item) costs exceeding $25,000, excluding salaries and fringe benefits. 

For each activity, provide itemized costs (in dollars), and a narrative justification to support your 

request for:

• Personnel,

• Fringe Benefits,

• Travel,

• Equipment,

• Supplies,

• Contractual,

• Construction,

• Other, and

• Total.

You must provide details so we can determine if the costs are allowable, necessary and 

reasonable. 
62

NOTE: The Title III, Strengthening Institutions Program, ALN 84.031A, does not 

reimburse grantees for indirect costs they incur in carrying out a project funded under this 

program. Therefore, applicants should not show any dollar amounts for indirect costs on 

either line 10 of the application budget form (ED 524) or in their budget narrative. 

Applicants should also be aware that un-reimbursed indirect costs under grants of this 

program may not be charged as direct cost items in the same award, used to satisfy 

matching or cost-sharing requirements, or charged to another Federal award.

Do not include a budget narrative (as a separate activity) for endowment investing. 

Note: Check the combined total for the proposed activity budgets and compare it to the total on 

the ED 524. The totals must match. 

U.S. Department of Education Budget Information Non-Construction Programs (Section A 

- Budget Summary U.S. Department of Education Funds and Section B - Budget Summary 

Non-Federal Funds (ED 524 form)).

First, carefully read the instructions contained in this document. Then, using the Department of 

Education Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (ED 524) form, prepare a budget 

for the entire project that totals all the costs for each year of the grant. If you choose to use up to 

20 percent of each year’s grant funds to establish or increase your institution’s endowment fund 

through endowment investing, enter the amount of your contribution in the summary budget on 

the “other” line. If you have additional items for the other category, separate the endowment 

contribution from the other items and make two entries for “other.” Endowment monies should 

be listed first. 
63

Instructions for Standard Forms

To obtain instructions for standard forms included in this application package, 

please visit https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html. 
64

Supplemental Information and Instructions 

SIP Profile: All applicants must complete the information requested on this page. Using the profile, the 

applicant will provide information on Assurances and Eligibility. Do not modify, amend or delete any 

of this document. 

Applicants must copy and paste this page into a separate document or recreate the page exactly as it 

appears. Then, complete the page, save it to your computer and attach it to the “Project Narrative

Attachment Form,” in Grants.gov, as a .PDF document. Do not modify or amend the contents of the form 

in any way. 

Page Limits: The project narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the 

selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We have established recommended page 

limits for Individual Development Grant applications. You should limit the section of the narrative that 

addresses the selection criteria to no more than 50 pages. For Cooperative Arrangement Development 

Grant applications, the recommended page limit is 65 pages. 

The page limit does not apply to Part I, the Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424); the Department 

of Education Supplemental Information form (SF 424); Part II, Budget Information—Non-Construction 

Programs (ED Form 524); Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page project abstract. 

However, the page limit does apply to all of the project narrative section (Part III), including the budget 

narrative of the selection criteria. You must include your complete response to the selection criteria in the 

project narrative.

Formatting Recommendations: A “page” is 8.5′′ x 11′′, on one side only, with 1-inch margins at the top, 

bottom, and both sides. Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application narrative, excluding titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, captions and all text in 

charts, tables, and graphs. Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or 

Arial. Use font size 12 or larger and no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch). 
65

84.031A Strengthening Institutions Program Profile

INSTRUCTIONS: ALL applicants must complete these pages. The completed pages must be attached 

to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in the application package in the Grants.gov system (as a 

.PDF document). DO NOT MODIFY OR AMEND THESE PAGES. 

 OPE ID #___________ 

1. INSTITUTION (Legal Name): 

_____________________________________________________________________ 

2. Are you applying as a Branch Campus? _____YES _____NO 

3. ADDRESS (Applicants must indicate the address where the project will be located):

Project Address: _______________________________________________________ 

City: _____________________________________State: ______Zip: _____________ 

4. ENDOWMENT FUND ASSURANCE: 

 By checking this box (or placing an “X” beside it), an applicant certifies that the institution of 

higher education proposes to use up to twenty percent (20%) of the Strengthening Institutions Program 

yearly grant award, made under the authority of Title III, Part A of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as 

amended, to establish or increase the institution’s endowment fund. The institution agrees to abide by the 

Department of Education’s regulations governing the Endowment Challenge Grant program, 34 CFR Part 

628, the program statute, and the program regulations, 34 CFR Part 607. The institution further agrees to 

raise the required matching funds. 

5. COOPERATIVE ARRANGEMENT FOR PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS: The applicant 

institution must provide for each participating institution: the institution name, Unique Entity Identifier

(UEI) number, location (city and state).

Institution Name UEI Number City State

6. TIE-BREAKER INFORMATION:

If the selection process ends in a tie and funds are not sufficient to fund all institutions, we will use 

the information provided here to determine who will receive a grant. In accordance with Section 

607.23(b), the Secretary will award up to three (3) additional points based on the information 

provided here. 

TOTAL 2020-2021 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE) STUDENTS= ___________ 

A. Total market value of endowment fund at the end of 2020-2021 $__________ 

 B. Total expenditures for library materials during 2020-2021 $__________ 
66

C. Check activities applicant proposes to carry out in application: 

a. Faculty development ____________

b. Funds and administrative management ____________

c. Development and improvement of academic ____________

programs

d. Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening ____________

management and academic programs

e. Joint use of facilities ____________

f. Student services ____________

7. SIP APPLICATIONS & OTHER PROGRAMS:

If your institution currently has a grant with any of the programs listed below, please indicate which one 

and the year the grant was awarded. Note that an institution may not have two Title III, Part A grants or 

a Part A and a Title V grant simultaneously.

Check (if 

applicable)

Date Grant Awarded

Program Name ALN # Title Part

Alaska Native – Native Hawaiian 

Program

(ANNH)

84.031N 

& 

84.031W

III A

Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program 

(DHSI) 84.031S V A

Promoting Postbaccalaureate 

Opportunities for Hispanic Americans 

Program

(PPOHA)

84.031M V B

Asian American Native American 

Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions 

Program

(AANAPISI)

84.031L III A

Native American-Serving Non-Tribal 

Institutions Program

(NASNTI)

84.031X III A
67

Application Checklist 

Use This Checklist While Preparing Your Application Package: All items listed on this 

checklist are necessary. 

 Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424) 

 Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424 

 Department of Education Budget Information Non-Construction Programs Form (ED 524) 

Sections A & B only. Section C is not enabled. 

 One-Page Program Abstract – Attached to the “ED Abstract Form” in Grants.gov 

 Project Narrative for the proposed grant – Attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in 

Grants.gov 

 If addressed, the response to the Competitive Preference Priority – Attached to the “Project 

Narrative Attachment Form” in Grants.gov

 If addressed, the response to the Invitational Priority – Attached to the “Project Narrative 

Attachment Form” in Grants.gov 

 Strengthening Institutions Program Profile – Attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” 

in Grants.gov 

 Assurances and Certifications – found in Grants.gov 

 ED GEPA 427 Form (Mandatory for this competition) 

 Grants.gov Lobbying Form (ED 80-0013) 

 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) -- Optional

 
68

Paperwork Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of 

information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control 

number for this information collection is 1840-0114. Public reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 65 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain 

benefit (authorized by Title III, Part A, Sections 311-315, of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as 

amended by the HEOA; and governed by the program regulations in 34 CFR Part 607; and the Education 

Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), Parts 74, 75 (except for §§ 75.215-75.221), 

77, 79, 80, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98 and 99). If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your 

individual submission of this application, please contact Strengthening Institutions Program, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20202-8510 directly. [Note: 

Please do not return the completed application to this address.]