1 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Postsecondary Education 

Washington, DC 20202

Fiscal Year 2023 

Application for Grants Under 

Postsecondary Student Success Program 

CFDA # 84.116M

Form Approved

OMB No. 1894-0006, Expiration Date: 02/29/2024 

CLOSING DATE: 09/25/2023

 

 

 
2 

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Dear Applicant Letter ..............................................................................................................3 

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

Supplemental Information .........................................................................................................9 

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants...................................................11 

Application Transmittal Instructions .......................................................................................16 

Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards ........................................................................17

Authorizing Legislation ...........................................................................................................64 

Supplemental Definitions...............................................................................65 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs .....................................................................70 

General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) .............................................................................71 

Instructions for Completing the Application Package .............................................................72 

Selection Criteria and Instructions ...........................................................................................75 

Instructions for Standard Forms ...............................................................................................81 

Instructions for Budget Summary Form and Itemized Line Item Budget ...............................82 

Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) ...............................................................85 

Application Checklist ...............................................................................................................87 

Paperwork Burden Statement ..................................................................................................88 
3 

 DEAR APPLICANT LETTER

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

July 26, 2023 

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for your interest in applying for a grant under the Postsecondary Student Success 

Grant (PSSG) Program. This grant competition is administered by the Office of Postsecondary 

Education of the U.S. Department of Education (Department). The purpose of this program, 

funded under the authority of the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education 

(FIPSE), is to equitably improve postsecondary student outcomes by leveraging data and 

implementing what works, scaling evidence-based programs, and rigorously evaluating activities 

to support data-driven decisions and actions. 

Please note that the FY 2023 PSSG program competition includes two absolute priorities and one 

competitive preference priority. Additional information is included in this package and detailed 

in the Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards (Notice). 

The Notice published in the Federal Register is the official document describing the 

requirements for submitting a grant application. We advise that you carefully review the 

application guidelines included in this package and the Federal Register notice. 

FY 2023 Competition Highlights found in this application package provide important 

information to help you prepare your application for a timely submission. The deadline for this 

application is September 25, 2023. 

We appreciate your interest in the PSSG competition and look forward to receiving your 

application. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the 

Program co-leads - Mrs. Nemeka Mason-Clercin and Ms. Nalini Lamba-Nieves - at 

pssg@ed.gov. 

Sincerely,

 /s/

Nasser H. Paydar, Ph.D. 

Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education
4 

COMPETITION HIGHLIGHTS

1. Postsecondary Student Success Grant (PSSG) Program FY 2023 applications must 

be submitted electronically using Grants.gov. You are urged to acquaint yourself with the 

requirements of Grants.gov early as the registration procedures may require 5 or more days 

to complete. A more thorough discussion is included later in this application package. 

Grants.gov is accessible through its portal page at: http://Grants.gov. The requirements for 

obtaining an exception to the electronic submission requirement are included in the Notice 

for FY 2023. If you think you may need an exception, you are urged to review the 

requirements promptly. 

2. It is important to know that the Grants.gov site is its own system separate from the 

Department’s G5 system. Grants.gov does not allow applicants to “un-submit” 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. You 

should know that if the Department receives duplicate applications, we will accept and 

process the application with the latest “date/time received” validation.

3. Please note that you must submit your application by 11:59:59 p.m. (Eastern 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 and time.

4. Electronic submission of applications is required; therefore, you must submit an 

electronic application unless you follow the procedures outlined in the Federal Register

Notice for FY 2023 and qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission 

requirement.

Applicants are strongly recommended to adhere to the page limit specified in the Application 

Narrative Instructions portion of the application. The Notice for FY 2023, published in the 

Federal Register, contains specific information governing recommended page limits and 

formatting instructions. We strongly recommend a 30-page limit that includes the 

applicant’s response to the Absolute Priorities, the Competitive Priority (if addressed), and 

the Selection Criteria. 

5. All attachments must be in .PDF format. Other types of files will not be accepted. Please 

note, once you download an application from Grants.gov, you will be working offline and 

saving data on your computer. It is important to note where you are saving the Grants.gov 

file on your computer. You will need to log on to Grants.gov to upload and submit the 

application (this is different from e-Application, where you may have previously worked 

online and saved data to the Department’s database). You must provide the UEI number that 

was used when your organization registered with the System for Award Management (SAM).
5 

For Grants.gov related questions and assistance, please contact: 

Support Desk email: support@Grants.gov 

Support Desk Telephone: (800) 518-4726 

Contact Telephone Hours: 24 hours, 7 days a week, except Federal holidays 

Online Website: https://www.grants.gov/

Also, refer to the “Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants” section found in this 

application package. 

You are reminded that the document published in the Federal Register is the official 

document, and that you should not rely upon any information that is inconsistent with the 

guidelines contained within the official document.

6. In the FY 2023 competition, the Department has established two absolute priorities and

one competitive preference priority which are outlined below:

Absolute Priorities: 

For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities.  Under 34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet one of these priorities. 

These Priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1 (AP1) - Applications that Demonstrate a Rationale, “Earlyphase” 

Under this priority, an applicant proposes a project that demonstrates a rationale to 

improve postsecondary success for underserved students, including retention and 

completion. 

Absolute Priority 2 (AP2)— Applicants that Demonstrate Moderate Evidence, “Midphase” or Strong Evidence, “Expansion” 

Under this priority, an applicant proposes a project supported by evidence that meets 

the conditions in the definition of “Moderate Evidence” or “Strong Evidence,” to 

improve postsecondary success for underserved students, including retention and 

completion rates. Projects under this priority must be implemented at a multi-site 

sample or include at least 2,000 students. 

(a) Applicants addressing this priority must: 

 (1) identify up to two studies to be reviewed against the What Works 

Clearinghouse (WWC) Handbooks (as defined in the Notice) for the purposes of 

meeting the definition of moderate evidence or strong evidence; 
6 

(2) clearly identify the citations and relevant findings for each study in the 

Evidence form; and 

(3) ensure that all cited studies are available to the Department from publicly 

available sources and provide links or other guidance indicating where each is 

available. 

Note: The studies may have been conducted by the applicant or by a third party. The 

Department may not review a study that an applicant fails to clearly identify for 

review. 

(b) In addition to including up to two study citations, an applicant must provide in 

the Evidence form the following information: 

(1) the positive student outcomes the applicant intends to replicate under its Midphase/Expansion grant and how these outcomes correspond to the positive student 

outcomes in the cited studies; 

(2) the characteristics of the population or setting to be served under its Midphase/Expansion grant and how these characteristics correspond to the 

characteristics of the population or setting in the cited studies; and 

(3) the practice(s) the applicant plans to implement under its Midphase/Expansion grant and how the practice(s) correspond with the practice(s) in 

the cited studies.

Note: If the Department determines that an applicant has provided insufficient 

information, the applicant will not have an opportunity to provide additional 

information. However, if the WWC team reviewing evidence determines that a study 

does not provide enough information on key aspects of the study design, such as 

sample attrition or equivalence of intervention and comparison groups, the WWC 

may submit a query to the study author(s) to gather information for use in 

determining a study rating. Authors would be asked to respond to queries within 10 

business days. Should the author query remain incomplete within 14 days of the 

initial contact to the study author(s), the study may be deemed ineligible under the 

grant competition. After the grant competition closes, the WWC will, for purposes of 

its own curation of studies, continue to include responses to author queries and make 

updates to study reviews as necessary. However, no additional information will be 

considered after the competition closes and the initial timeline established for 

response to an author query passes. 
7 

Competitive Preference 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 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 competitive preference priority. 

This priority is: 

Applicants that have made progress towards or can demonstrate they have a plan to improve 

student outcomes for underserved students by using data to continually assess and improve 

the effectiveness of funded activities and sustain data-driven continuous improvement 

processes at the institution after the grant period (up to 6 points). 

Applicants addressing this priority must: 

(a) Identify or describe how they will develop the performance and outcome measures 

they will use to monitor and evaluate implementation of the intervention(s), including 

baseline data, intermediate and annual targets, and disaggregation by student subgroups 

(up to 2 points); 

(b) Describe how they will assess and address gaps in current data systems, tools, and 

capacity and how they will monitor and respond to performance and outcome data to 

improve implementation of the intervention on an ongoing basis and as part of formative 

and summative evaluation of the intervention(s) (up to 2 points); and 

(c) Describe how institutional leadership will be involved with and supportive of project 

leadership and how the project relates to the institution’s broader student success 

priorities and improvement processes (up to 2 points). 

7. As you develop your proposal, we ask you to carefully consider the specific content that 

you will provide in the Project Narrative in the application. This part of the application must 

address the selection criteria as listed in this application package and the Federal Register. 

8. The grant duration is up to 48 months. 

9. All applicants must provide a one-page abstract. Upload a one-page abstract as a PDF 

document. The abstract provides a concise description of the proposed project objectives, 

activities, and intended outcomes. The abstract should also indicate whether you are 

addressing the absolute priority and/or the competitive priority. Complete instructions for 

submitting the abstract are included in the “Instructions for Completing the Application 

Package” section of this application. The abstract must be uploaded into the ED Abstract 

Form in Grants.gov. 

10. Information on the PSSG Program is accessible at the Department’s website at: 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/fipse/index.html. 
8 

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

1. Estimated Funding

 AP1--Early-Phase

- Estimated Available Funds: $22,275,000 

- Estimated Range of Awards: $2,000,000 to $4,000,000 

- Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,000,000 

- Maximum Amount of Award: $4,000,000 

- Estimated Number of New Awards: 5-8 

- Project Period for Award: 48 months 

 AP2--Mid-Phase

- Estimated Available Funds: $22,275,000 

- Estimated Range of Awards: $6,000,000 to $8,000,000 

- Estimated Average Size of Awards: $7,000,000 

- Maximum Amount of Award: $8,000,000 

- Estimated Number of New Awards: 3-4 

- Project Period for Award: 48 months 

The Department is not bound by these estimates. 

2. Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs was issued to foster an intergovernmental 

partnership and to strengthen federalism by relying on state and local processes for the 

coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance. 

3. Length of New Award 

 Applicants may apply for up to four years (48 months) of funding.

4. PSSG Program Assurances

All applications must comply with statutory and regulatory requirements. The assurances 

are included in the application package and must be signed by a certifying official in 

Grants.gov. By submitting a Postsecondary Student Success Grant program application, 

an applicant certifies that it has read the assurances and will fully comply with the 

requirements. 

 

5. Evaluation of Applications for Awards

A panel of two or three non-federal reviewers will review each application in accordance 

with the priorities and selection criteria published in the Federal Register. Each reviewer 

will complete a technical review form, which includes the score awarded and feedback 

pertaining to the application. 
9

Applications that do not meet eligibility, are submitted late, or do not address the absolute 

priorities will not be reviewed.

6. Selection Criteria

The selection criteria come from 34 CFR 75.210 and are detailed in the Notice. 

7. Applicant Funding

Applicants should pay close attention to the “Maximum Award” section of the Notice. 

The Department will reduce the amount to the maximum allowed of any application that 

proposes a budget exceeding the maximum amount specified for the specific project type 

as indicated in the Notice.

8. Selection of Grantees

The Secretary will select applications for funding in rank order, according to the average 

score received from the peer review. If the Secretary has insufficient funding to award 

multiple applications with the same score, the Department will follow the tie-breaker 

process published in the Notice for this grant competition. 

The Department’s Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs will inform Congress 

regarding applications approved for new PSSG Program awards. Successful applicants 

will receive award notices by e-mail shortly after Congress is notified. No funding 

information will be released before Congress is notified.

9. Notice to Unsuccessful Applicants

Unsuccessful applicants will be notified in writing following the notice to successful 

applicants.

10. Annual Performance Report Requirements 

If you receive a new grant award in FY 2023, you will be required during the funding 

cycle to submit annual and final performance reports.

11. Contact Information

Nemeka Mason-Clercin Or Nalini Lamba-Nieves

Education Research Analyst Program Manager 

Institutional Service Institutional Service

Office of Postsecondary Education Office of Postsecondary Education

U.S. Department of Education U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.,

HQ-LBJ-500 HQ-LBJ-5C127

Washington, D.C. 20202 Washington, D.C. 20202

Telephone: (202) 987-1340 Telephone: (202) 453-7953

Email: pssg@ed.gov
10 

12. For Grants.gov-related questions and assistance, please contact: 

 

Support Desk: Grants.gov Support Desk

 Telephone: (800) 518-4726 

 Hours: 24 hours, 7 days a week, except Federal holidays 

 Email: support@grants.gov
11 

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/applicantfaqs.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/workspace- overview.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 upperright corner of each page to access context- sensitive help. 
12 

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’s 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. 
13 

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. 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/entityregistration.

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 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/adobe-
14 

software-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 online and via e-mail about the status of your application. Please do 

not rely solely on e- mail to confirm whether your application has been received timely 

and validated successfully. 

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://grants- portal.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/applicant- faqs.html as well as additional 

information on Workspace at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicantfaqs.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:

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

sections and all other attachments to your application as files in either Portable 
15

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.
16 

APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

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

waiver instructions can be found in the Federal Register Notice. 

Applications Submitted Electronically

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

Grants.gov website (http://www.grants.gov) by 11:59:59 p.m. (Eastern Time) on or before the 

closing date.

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

an automatic acknowledgement when we receive your application. 

For more information on using Grants.gov, please refer to the Federal Register notice 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.
17 

 NOTICE INVITING APPLICATIONS FOR NEW AWARDS

4000-01-U 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; Postsecondary Student Success Grant 

Program (PSSG) 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

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

notice inviting applications (NIA) for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for 

the Postsecondary Student Success Grant Program (PSSG), 

Assistance Listing Number 84.116M. This notice relates to the 

approved information collection under OMB control number 1894-

0006. 

DATES: 

Applications Available: July 26, 2023. 

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 25, 2023. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: November 24, 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-
18 

26554. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the 

version published on December 27, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nemeka Mason-Clercin, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, 5th floor, 

Washington, DC 20202-4260. Telephone: (202) 987-1340. Nalini 

Lamba-Nieves, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW, room 5C127, Washington, DC 20202-4260. Telephone: (202) 

453-7953. Email: PSSG@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 purpose of this program is to equitably 

improve postsecondary student outcomes, including retention, 

transfer (including successful transfer of completed credits), 

credit accumulation, and completion, by leveraging data and 

implementing, scaling, and rigorously evaluating evidence-based 

activities to support data-driven decisions and actions by 

institutional leaders committed to inclusive student success. 

Background: In today’s economy, more than 60 percent of U.S. 

jobs require a postsecondary credential.1 Data show that as 

1 https://cew.georgetown.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2014/11/Recovery2020.FR_.Web_.pdf
19

educational attainment increases, median earnings steadily 

increase.2 It is critical for institutions of higher education 

(IHEs) to provide support systems to improve retention, 

progression, and completion rates to decrease economic and 

social equity gaps for students of color and low-income 

students. 

Students of color and low-income students still face 

barriers to successfully enrolling in and completing college. 

Between 2019 and 2021, there have been decreases in 

undergraduate enrollment for Native American students (7.9 

percent decrease), Black students (7.3 percent decrease), and 

Hispanic students (5 percent decrease).3 From 2019 to 2022, 

there has been a decrease in enrollment for Pell grant 

recipients (9.9 percent).4 In addition, while graduation rates 

have increased in four-year institutions overall by 4.6 

percentage points since 2015, double-digit graduation rate gaps 

between underrepresented students of color and white students 

remain, and there is a 9-percentage point gap in graduation 

rates between Pell and non-Pell students.5 The same is occurring 

in two-year institutions, with an overall graduation rate 

increase of 2.8 percentage points since 2012, but a declining 

2 https://www.bls.gov/emp/chart-unemployment-earnings-education.htm 3 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_306.10.asp?current=yes 4https://research.collegeboard.org/media/pdf/trends-in-student-aidpresentation-2022.pdf 5

https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?query=&query2=&resultType=all&page=1&sortBy=

date_desc&overlayTableId=32473 
20 

rate for Hispanic and Black students, leading to increasing gaps 

between white students and underrepresented students of color.6

Furthermore, as more “non-traditional” students attend 

college, additional and different supports are required to 

enable them to successfully complete their credentials. Today, 

25 percent of postsecondary students are age 25 or older,7 about 

70 percent of students work while enrolled,8 and 22 percent of 

students are parents.9 At community colleges,31 percent of 

students enrolled are age 25 or older,10 and 42 percent of all 

student parents attend community colleges.11 Research has found 

that IHEs should employ a multifaceted and integrated approach 

in mitigating barriers that hinder students in their educational 

trajectories, addressing academic, financial and other 

barriers.12 Moreover, IHEs that have improved completion rates 

use timely, disaggregated, actionable data to identify 

institutional barriers to student success, implement 

interventions, and evaluate impact on an on-going basis.13 

Institutional leadership has been found to be critical to 

6 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_326.10.asp, 

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_326.20.asp?current=yes, 

https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/Search?query=&query2=&resultType=all&page=1&sortBy=

date_desc&overlayTableId=32473 7 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes. 8 https://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Working-Learners-Report.pdf 9 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612580.pdf 10 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_303.50.asp?current=yes. 11 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED612580.pdf 12https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/doubling_graduation_rates_fr.pdf

13 Phillips, B. C., & Horowitz, J. E. (2013). Maximizing data use: A focus on 

the completion agenda. In Special Issue: The College Completion AgendaPractical Approaches for Reaching the Big Goal. New Directions for Community 

Colleges, 2013(164), 17-25. 
21

ensuring that the student experience is intentionally designed 

to increase student retention, persistence, and completion 

rates.14 

This grant program seeks to fund evidence-based (as defined 

in this notice) strategies that result in improved student 

outcomes for underserved students (as defined in this notice). 

The program has two absolute priorities that correspond to 

varying evidence standards. This multi-tiered competition 

invites applicants that are in the “early phase” or “midphase/expansion” of their evidence-based work to support 

students through degree completion. This grant also supports 

the evaluation, dissemination, scaling, and sustainability 

efforts of the activities funded under this grant. 

In this competition, eligibility is limited to institutions 

that are designated as eligible under the HEA titles III and V 

programs, nonprofits that are not IHEs or associated with an IHE 

in partnership with institutions that are designated as eligible 

under the HEA titles III and V programs, States in partnerships 

with institutions that are designated as eligible under the HEA 

titles III and V programs, and public systems of institutions. 

Institutions designated as eligible under titles III and V 

include Historically Black Colleges or Universities (HBCUs), 

Tribally Controlled Colleges or Universities (TCCUs), Minority14 McNair, T. B., Albertine, S., McDonald, N., Major Jr, T., & Cooper, M. A. 

(2022). Becoming a student-ready college: A new culture of leadership for 

student success. John Wiley & Sons.
22

Serving Institutions (MSIs) and other institutions with high 

enrollment of needy students and below average full-time 

equivalent (FTE) expenditures – including community colleges. 

The Department believes that targeting funding to these IHEs is 

the best use of the available funding because these institutions 

disproportionately enroll students from groups who are 

underrepresented among college completers, such as low-income 

students. Supporting retention and completion strategies at 

these institutions offers the greatest potential to close gaps 

in postsecondary outcomes.

Additionally, these under resourced institutions are most in 

need of Federal assistance to implement and evaluate evidencebased postsecondary college retention and completion 

interventions. 

Early-Phase

Early-phase grants provide funding to IHEs to develop, 

implement, and test the feasibility of a program that prior 

research suggests is likely to improve relevant outcomes, for 

the purpose of determining whether an initiative improves 

student retention and completion of postsecondary 

students. Early-phase grants must “demonstrate a rationale” (as 

defined in this notice) and include a logic model (as defined in 

this notice), theory of action, or another conceptual framework 

that includes the goals, objectives, outcomes, and key project 

components (as defined in this notice) of the project, and that 
23

demonstrates the relationship between such proposed activities 

and the relevant outcomes the project is designed to achieve. 

The evaluation design will be assessed on the extent to which it 

would meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Evidence Standards 

with or without reservations. The evaluation of an Early-phase 

project should be an experimental or quasi-experimental design 

study (both as defined in this notice) that can determine 

whether the program can successfully improve postsecondary 

student success outcomes for underserved students.

Early-phase grantees during their grant period are 

encouraged to make continuous and iterative improvements in 

project design and implementation before conducting a full-scale 

evaluation of effectiveness. Grantees should consider how easily 

others could implement the proposed practice, and how its 

implementation could potentially be improved. Additionally, 

grantees should consider using data from early indicators to 

gauge initial impact and to consider possible changes in 

implementation that could increase student outcomes. 

Mid-phase/Expansion

Mid-phase/Expansion grants are supported by moderate 

evidence (as defined in this notice) or strong evidence (as 

defined in this notice), respectively. These grants provide 

funding to IHEs to improve and/or expand initiatives and 

practices that have been proven to be effective in increasing 

postsecondary student retention and completion. Mid-
24 

phase/Expansion projects should provide vital insight about an 

intervention's effectiveness, such as for whom and in which 

contexts a practice/intervention is most effective. Mid-phase 

grantees should also measure the cost-effectiveness of their 

practices using administrative or other readily available data. 

Mid-phase/Expansion grant projects are distinctly situated 

to provide insight on scaling an initiative to a larger 

population of students or across multiple campuses. 

These grants must be implemented at a multi-site sample (as 

defined in this notice) with more than one campus or in one 

campus that includes at least 2,000 students. Project 

evaluations must evaluate the effectiveness of the project at 

each site. 

Mid-phase/Expansion grants must meet the “moderate 

evidence” threshold or “strong evidence” standard and include a 

logic model that demonstrates the relationship between the key 

project components and the relevant outcomes the project is 

designed to achieve. Mid-phase/Expansion grants are also 

required to submit an evaluation design that will be assessed on 

the extent to which it would meet WWC Evidence Standards without 

reservations. 

Note that all research that meets the strong evidence 

standard also meets the moderate evidence standard. As such, 

the effective evidence standard for Absolute Priority 2 is 

moderate evidence. However, we encourage applicants to propose 
25

projects based on strong evidence and to expand services even 

beyond the scale requirements under Absolute Priority 2. We 

have combined the two types of grants into a single tier given 

funding limitations and the fact that this is the first year of 

implementing a tiered evidence structure in this program.

All Grant Tiers

PSSG applicants should consider how these evidence-based 

practices are implemented and the impact these practices have on 

their student population given their context. PSSG applicants

seek to explore the effectiveness of practices/strategies that 

can improve student persistence and retention, leading to degree 

completion.

The evaluation of a PSSG project should be designed to

determine whether the program can successfully improve 

postsecondary student persistence, retention, and completion. 

As previously stated, the evaluation design for early phase 

applications will be assessed on the extent to which it could 

meet WWC Evidence Standards with or without reservations while 

the evaluation design for mid phase/expansion applications will 

be assessed on the extent to which it could meet WWC Evidence 

Standards without reservations. 

The Department intends to provide grantees and their 

independent evaluators with technical assistance in their 

evaluation, dissemination, scaling, and sustainability efforts. 

This could include grantees and their evaluators providing to 
26 

the Department or its contractor updated comprehensive 

evaluation plans in a format as requested by the technical 

assistance provider and using such tools as the Department may 

request. Grantees will be encouraged to update this evaluation 

plan at least annually to reflect any changes to the evaluation. 

Updates must be consistent with the scope and objectives of the 

approved application. 

PSSG applicants should consider their organizational 

capacity and the funding needed to sustain their projects and 

continue implementation and adaptation after Federal funding 

ends. 

Priorities: This notice contains two absolute priorities and 

one competitive preference priority. We are establishing the 

absolute priorities and competitive preference priority for the 

FY 2023 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we 

make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 

competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General 

Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1). 

Applicants have the option of addressing the competitive 

preference priority and may opt to do so regardless of the 

absolute priority they select. 

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in 

which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from 

this competition, these priorities are absolute 
27 

priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only 

applications that meet one of these priorities. 

These Priorities are: 

Absolute Priority 1 (AP1) - Applications that Demonstrate a 

Rationale. “Early-phase”. 

Under this priority, an applicant proposes a project that 

demonstrates a rationale to improve postsecondary success for 

underserved students, including retention and completion . 

Absolute Priority 2 (AP2)— Applicants that Demonstrate 

Moderate Evidence, “Mid-phase” or Strong Evidence, 

“Expansion”. 

Under this priority, an applicant proposes a project 

supported by evidence that meets the conditions in the 

definition of “Moderate Evidence” or “Strong Evidence,” to 

improve postsecondary success for underserved students, including 

retention and completion . Projects under this priority must be 

implemented at a multi-site sample or include at least 2,000 

students. 

(a) Applicants addressing this priority must: 

 (1) identify up to two studies to be reviewed against the 

WWC Handbooks (as defined in this notice) for the purposes of 

meeting the definition of moderate evidence or strong evidence; 

(2) clearly identify the citations and relevant findings 

for each study in the Evidence form; and 
28 

(3) ensure that all cited studies are available to the 

Department from publicly available sources and provide links or 

other guidance indicating where each is available. 

Note: The studies may have been conducted by the applicant or 

by a third party. The Department may not review a study that an 

applicant fails to clearly identify for review. 

(b) In addition to including up to two study citations, an 

applicant must provide in the Evidence form the following 

information: 

(1) the positive student outcomes the applicant intends to 

replicate under its Mid-phase/Expansion grant and how these 

outcomes correspond to the positive student outcomes in the 

cited studies; 

(2) the characteristics of the population or setting to be 

served under its Mid-phase/Expansion grant and how these 

characteristics correspond to the characteristics of the 

population or setting in the cited studies; and 

(3) the practice(s) the applicant plans to implement under 

its Mid-phase/Expansion grant and how the practice(s) correspond 

with the practice(s) in the cited studies. 

Note: If the Department determines that an applicant has 

provided insufficient information, the applicant will not have 

an opportunity to provide additional information. However, if 

the WWC team reviewing evidence determines that a study does not 

provide enough information on key aspects of the study design, 
29 

such as sample attrition or equivalence of intervention and 

comparison groups, the WWC may submit a query to the study 

author(s) to gather information for use in determining a study 

rating. Authors would be asked to respond to queries within 10 

business days. Should the author query remain incomplete within 

14 days of the initial contact to the study author(s), the study 

may be deemed ineligible under the grant competition. After the 

grant competition closes, the WWC will, for purposes of its own 

curation of studies, continue to include responses to author 

queries and make updates to study reviews as necessary. 

However, no additional information will be considered after the 

competition closes and the initial timeline established for 

response to an author query passes. 

Competitive Preference 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 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 competitive 

preference priority. 

This priority is: 

Applicants that have made progress towards or can 

demonstrate they have a plan to improve student outcomes for 

underserved students by using data to continually assess and 

improve the effectiveness of funded activities and sustain data-
30 

driven continuous improvement processes at the institution after 

the grant period (up to 6 points). 

Applicants addressing this priority must: 

(a) Identify or describe how they will develop the 

performance and outcome measures they will use to monitor and 

evaluate implementation of the intervention(s), including 

baseline data, intermediate and annual targets, and 

disaggregation by student subgroups (up to 2 points); 

(b) Describe how they will assess and address gaps in current 

data systems, tools, and capacity and how they will monitor and 

respond to performance and outcome data to improve 

implementation of the intervention on an ongoing basis and as 

part of formative and summative evaluation of the 

intervention(s)(up to 2 points); and (c) Describe how 

institutional leadership will be involved with and supportive of 

project leadership and how the project relates to the 

institution’s broader student success priorities and improvement 

processes (up to 2 points). 

Definitions: In accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, 

we are establishing definitions for “Students with 

disabilities,” “English learner,” “Minority-serving 

institution,” “multi-site sample” and “underserved student”15 for 

15 The definitions of “Students with disabilities,” “English learner,” and 

“underserved student,” for the purposes of this competition, align with the 

definitions of these terms in the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and 

Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal 

Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612) (Supplemental Priorities). 
31 

the FY 2023 grant competition and any subsequent year in which 

we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 

competition. The remaining definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1.

Baseline means the starting point from which performance is 

measured and targets are set. 

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.

English learner means an individual who is an English 

learner as defined in Section 8101(2) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual 

who is an English language learner as defined in section 203(7) 

of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. 

Evidence-based means the proposed project component is 

supported by one or more of strong evidence, moderate evidence, 

promising evidence,16 or evidence that demonstrates a rationale. 

Experimental study means a study that is designed to 

compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as 

students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their 

assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project 

component or a control group that does not. Randomized 

controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and 

single-case design studies are the specific types of 

16 The definition of “promising evidence” is from 34 CFR 77.1.
32 

experimental studies that, depending on their design and 

implementation (e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled 

trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet 

WWC standards without reservations as described in the WWC 

Handbooks: 

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random 

assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or 

schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the 

treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the 

control group). 

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the 

project component being evaluated using a measured variable 

(e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to 

tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for 

that variable in the analysis of outcomes. 

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a 

single case (e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral 

intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a 

controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the 

outcome is systematically related to the treatment. 

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

a framework that identifies key project components of the 

proposed project (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are 

hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) 
33 

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, available at 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/regions/pacific/pdf/ELMUserGuideJune

2014.pdf. Other sources include: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.p

df, and 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2015057

.pdf. 

Minority-serving institution means an institution that is 

eligible to receive assistance under sections 316 through 320 of 

part A of title III, under part B of title III, or under title V 

of the HEA. 

Moderate Evidence means that there is evidence of 

effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant 

outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations or 

settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant 

finding from one of the following: 

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 

2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong 

evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding 

practice guide recommendation; 
34

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using 

version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a 

“positive effect” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant 

outcome based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, with no 

reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative 

effect” on a relevant outcome; or 

(iii) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental 

design study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1, 

3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by 

the Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as 

appropriate, and that - (A) Meets WWC standards with or without 

reservations; (B) Includes at least one statistically 

significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant 

outcome; (C) Includes no overriding statistically significant 

and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study 

or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under 

version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and (D) Is 

based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, 

city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at 

least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple 

studies of the same project component that each meet 

requirements in paragraphs (iii) (A), (B), and (C) of this 

definition may together satisfy the requirement in this 

paragraph (iii)(D).
35 

Multi-site sample means at least two campuses of a single 

institution or multiple IHEs, including multiple IHEs within one 

public system of higher education. 

Nonprofit, as applied to an agency, organization, or 

institution, means that it is owned and operated by one or more 

corporations or associations whose net earnings do not benefit, 

and cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity. 

Note: For purposes of this competition, this definition of 

Nonprofit does not apply to institutions of higher education or 

nonprofits that are a part of an IHE. 

Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, 

statistic, or metric used to gauge program or project 

performance. 

Performance target means a level of performance that an 

applicant would seek to meet during the course of a project or 

as a result of a project. 

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). 

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a 

design that attempts to approximate an experimental study by 

identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment 
36 

group in important respects. This type of study, depending on 

design and implementation (e.g., establishment of baseline 

equivalence of the groups being compared), can meet WWC 

standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC standards 

without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks. 

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. 

Strong Evidence means that there is evidence of the 

effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant 

outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations and 

settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant 

finding from one of the following: 

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 

2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong 

evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide 

recommendation; 

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using 

version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a 

“positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a “medium to 

large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative 

effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; 

or 

(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by 

the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC 
37 

Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 

4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that 

 (A) Meets WWC standards without reservations; 

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and 

positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome; 

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and 

negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or 

in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under 

version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and 

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., 

State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) 

and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across 

sites. Multiple studies of the same project component that each 

meet requirements in paragraphs (iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this 

definition may together satisfy the requirement in this 

paragraph (iii)(D). 

Students with disabilities means students with disabilities 

as defined in section 602(3) of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1401(3) and 34 CFR 

300.8, or students with disabilities, as defined in the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 705(37), 705(202)(B)). 

Underserved student means a student in one or more of the 

following subgroups: 

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

schools with high concentrations of students living in poverty. 
38 

(b) A student of color. 

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

Indian Tribe. 

(d) An English learner. 

(e) A 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. 

WWC Handbooks means the standards and procedures set forth 

in the WWC Standards Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC 

Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, or in the WWC 

Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 

(all incorporated by reference, see § 77.2). Study findings 

eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards 
39 

without reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or 

not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention 

reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as 

described in the WWC Handbooks documentation. 

Note: The WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 4.1), 

as well as the more recent WWC Handbooks released in August 2022 

(Version 5.0), are available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

Handbooks.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative 

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers 

interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed 

priorities, definitions, and requirements. Section 437(d)(1) of 

GEPA, however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking 

requirements regulations governing the first grant competition 

under a new or substantially revised program authority. This 

program, as a substantially revised program, qualifies for this 

exemption. To ensure timely grant awards, the Secretary has 

decided to forgo public comment on the priorities, definitions, 

and requirements under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. These 

priorities, definitions, and requirements will apply to the FY 

2023 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 

competition. 
40 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; House Report 117-403 

and the Explanatory Statement accompanying Division H of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328). 

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

consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in 

the 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. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions 

of higher education only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Discretionary grant. 

Estimated Available Funds: $44,550,000. 

These estimated available funds are the total available for new 

awards for both types of grants under PSSG (Early-phase and Midphase/Expansion grants). 

Early-phase - $22,275,000 for AP1.
41 

Mid-phase/Expansion - $22,275,000 for AP2.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality 

of applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent 

years from the list of unfunded applications from this 

competition. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

 Early-phase (AP1) - $2,000,000 - $4,000,000 for 48 months. 

Mid-phase/Expansion (AP2) - $6,000,000 - $8,000,000 for 48 

months.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

Early-phase (AP1) - $3,000,000 for 48 months. 

Mid-phase/Expansion (AP2) - $7,000,000 for 48 months.

Maximum Awards: We will not make awards exceeding the following 

amounts for a 48-month budget period. 

Early-phase (AP1) - $4,000,000. 

Mid-phase/Expansion (AP2) - $8,000,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 

Early-phase (AP1) - 5-8. 

Mid-phase/Expansion (AP2) – 3-4. 

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

notice. 

Project Period: Up to 48 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: Institutions designated as 

eligible to apply under Title III/V (which includes HBCUs, 
42 

TCCUs, MSIs and SIP); nonprofits that are not an IHE or part of 

an IHE, in partnership with at least one eligible Title III/V 

IHE; a State, in partnership with at least one eligible Title 

III/V IHE; or a public system of higher education institutions.

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 

January 17, 2023, notice, and that meet the other eligibility 

requirements described in this notice, may apply for a grant 

under this program. To determine if your institution is 

eligible for this grant program please visit, 

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/eligibility.htm

l. 

 Institutions must include their FY 2023 Eligibility Letter 

in their application packet under other attachments. To retrieve 

the letter, please visit https://hepis.ed.gov/main. 

Note: If you are a nonprofit organization, under 34 CFR 75.51, 

you may demonstrate your nonprofit status by providing: (1) 

proof that the Internal Revenue Service currently recognizes the 

applicant as an organization to which contributions are tax 

deductible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code; 

(2) a statement from a State taxing body or the State attorney 
43 

general certifying that the organization is a nonprofit 

organization operating within the State and that no part of its 

net earnings may lawfully benefit any private shareholder or 

individual; (3) a certified copy of the applicant's certificate 

of incorporation or similar document if it clearly establishes 

the nonprofit status of the applicant; or (4) any item described 

above if that item applies to a State or national parent 

organization, together with a statement by the State or parent 

organization that the applicant is a local nonprofit affiliate.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: Each grant recipient 

must provide, from Federal, State, local, or private sources, an 

amount equal to or exceeding 10 percent of funds requested under 

the grant, which may be provided in cash or through in-kind 

contributions, to carry out activities supported by the grant. 

Applicants must include a budget showing their matching 

contributions to the budget amount requested of PSSG funds. 

The Secretary may waive the matching requirement on a caseby-case basis, upon a showing of exceptional circumstances, such 

as: 

(i) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a program 

to serve a high poverty area defined as a Census tract, a set of 

contiguous Census tracts, an American Indian Reservation, 

Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Area (as defined by the U.S. Census 

Bureau), Alaska Native Village Statistical Area or Alaska Native 

Regional Corporation Area, Native Hawaiian Homeland Area, or 
44 

other tribal land as defined by the Secretary in guidance or 

county that has a poverty rate of at least 25 percent as set 

every 5 years using American Community Survey 5-Year data; 

(ii) Serving a significant population of low-income 

students defined as at least 50% (or meet the eligibility 

threshold for the appropriate institutional sector) of degreeseeking enrolled students receiving need-based grant aid under 

Title IV; or 

(iii) Showing significant economic hardship as demonstrated 

by low average educational and general expenditures per fulltime equivalent undergraduate student, in comparison with the 

average educational and general expenditures per full-time 

equivalent undergraduate student of institutions that offer 

similar instruction. 

Note: Institutions seeking to waive the matching requirement 

must provide the outlined waiver request information within 

their application. 

 b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This competition involves 

supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. This program uses 

the waiver authority of section 437(d)(1) of GEPA to establish 

this as a supplement-not-supplant program. 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. 
45 

c. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program limits a 

grantee's indirect cost reimbursement to eight percent of a 

modified total direct cost base. We are establishing this 

indirect cost limit for the FY 2023 grant competition and any 

subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of 

unfunded applications from this competition in accordance with 

section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. For more information regarding 

indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, 

please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html. 

d. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not 

include any program-specific limitation on administrative 

expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and 

necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 

200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance. 

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may 

award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project 

activities described in its application. The grantee may award 

subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved 

application.

4. Evaluation: This program uses the waiver authority of 

section 437(d)(1) of GEPA to require a grantee to conduct an 

independent evaluation of the effectiveness of its project. 

 5. Other Requirements: Applicants may only apply to one 

absolute priority “tier”. One application per applicant. 

IV. Application and Submission Information 
46 

 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 reference regulations 

outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations 

section of this notice. 

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 (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 30 pages 

and (2) 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, 
47 

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. 

The recommended 30-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. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this 

competition are from 34 CFR 75.210. The points assigned to each 

criterion are indicated in the parentheses next to the 

criterion. An applicant may earn up to a total of 100 points 

based on the selection criteria for the application. An 

applicant that also chooses to address the competitive 

preference priority can earn up to 106 total points. 

1.1 Absolute Priority One - Early-Phase Selection Criteria 

(a) Significance. (up to 20 points) 
48 

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the 

proposed project involves the development or demonstration of 

promising new strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, 

existing strategies. (up to 20 points)

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (up to 30 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of 

the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the design of the 

proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework 

underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and 

the quality of that framework. (up to 10 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and 

outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly 

specified and measurable. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed 

project is appropriate to, and will successfully address, the 

needs of the target population or other identified needs. (up to 

15 points) 

(c) Quality of Project Personnel. (up to 10 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel 

who will carry out the proposed project. 
49 

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the 

Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages 

applications for employment from persons who are members of 

groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on 

race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. (up 

to 5 points) 

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the 

qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of 

key project personnel. (up to 5 points) 

(d) Quality of the Management Plan. (up to 10 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management 

plan for the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan, the 

Secretary considers the adequacy of the management plan to 

achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and 

within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, 

timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. (up 

to 10 points) 

(e) Quality of the Project Evaluation. (up to 30 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation 

to be conducted of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the 

Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if 

well implemented, produce evidence about the project's 
50 

effectiveness that would meet the WWC standards with or without 

reservations as described in the WWC Handbook. (up to 20 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will 

provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of 

progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly 

articulates the key project components, mediators, and outcomes, 

as well as a measurable threshold for acceptable implementation. 

(up to 5 points) 

1.2 Absolute Priority Two - Mid-phase/Expansion Selection 

Criteria 

(a) Significance. (up to 15 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The national significance of the proposed project. (up 

to 5 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project involves the 

development or demonstration of promising new strategies that 

build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (up to 5 

points) 

(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to 

increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, 

issues, or effective strategies. (up to 5 points) 
51 

(b) Strategy to Scale. (up to 35 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the applicant's strategy to 

scale the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the 

proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the applicant identifies a specific 

strategy or strategies that address a particular barrier or 

barriers that prevented the applicant, in the past, from 

reaching the level of scale that is proposed in the application. 

(up to 15 points) 

(ii) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the 

objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, 

including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project tasks. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The mechanisms the applicant will use to broadly 

disseminate information on its project so as to support further 

development or replication. (up to 15 points) 

(c) Quality of the Project Design. (up to 15 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of 

the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the design of the 

proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework 

underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and 

the quality of that framework. (up to 5 points) 
52 

(ii) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and 

outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly 

specified and measurable. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed 

project is appropriate to, and will successfully address, the 

needs of the target population or other identified needs. (up to 

5 points) 

(d) Quality of the Project Evaluation. (up to 35 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation 

to be conducted of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the 

Secretary considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if 

well implemented, produce evidence about the project's 

effectiveness that would meet the WWC standards without 

reservations as described in the WWC Handbook. (up to 20 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the evaluation will provide 

guidance about effective strategies suitable for replication or 

testing in other settings. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly 

articulates the key project components, mediators, and outcomes, 

as well as a measurable threshold for acceptable implementation. 

(up to 5 points) 
53 

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will 

provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of 

progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (up to 5 points) 

Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical 

assistance resources on evaluation: (1) WWC Procedures and 

Standards Handbooks: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks; (2) 

“Technical Assistance Materials for Conducting Rigorous Impact 

Evaluations”: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluationTA.asp;

and (3) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: https://ies.ed.gov/

ncee/tech_methods/. In addition, applicants may view an 

optional webinar recording that was hosted by the Institute of 

Education Sciences. The webinar focused on more rigorous 

evaluation designs, discussing strategies for designing and 

executing experimental studies that meet WWC evidence standards 

without reservations. This webinar is available at: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia/18.

2. Review and Selection Process: Potential applicants are 

reminded 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. 
54 

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the 

Secretary requires various assurances, 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). 

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

application in accordance with the selection criteria. The 

Department will prepare a rank order of applications for each 

Absolute Priority based solely on the evaluation of their 

quality according to the selection criteria and competitive 

preference priority points. Awards will be made in rank order 

according to the average score received from the peer 

review. The rank order of applications for each Absolute 

Priority will be used to create two slates.

Before making awards, we will screen applications submitted 

in accordance with the requirements in this notice to determine 

whether applications have met eligibility and other 

requirements. This screening process may occur at various 

stages of the process; applicants that are determined to be 

ineligible will not receive a grant, regardless of peer reviewer 

scores or comments. 

Tiebreaker: Within each slate, if there is more than one 

application with the same score and insufficient funds to fund 

all the applications with the same ranking, the Department will 
55 

apply the following procedure to determine which application or 

applications will receive an award: 

First Tiebreaker: The first tiebreaker will be the 

applicant with the highest percentage of undergraduate students 

who are Pell grant recipients. If a tie remains, the second 

tiebreaker will be utilized. 

Second Tiebreaker: The second tiebreaker will be the 

highest average score for the selection criterion titled 

“Significance.” 

 3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: 

Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this 

competition 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. 

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 
56 

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 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 
57 

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. 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 also may notify you informally. 

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 
58 

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 preexisting 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. 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 
59 

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 the purpose of Department 

reporting under 34 CFR 75.110, the Department has established a 

set of required performance measures (as defined in this 

notice): 

(1) First-year credit accumulation. 

(2) Annual retention (at initial institution) and 

persistence (at any institution) rates. 

(3) Success rates including graduation and upward transfer 

for two-year institutions. 

(4) Time to credential. 

(5) Number of credentials conferred. 

Note: All measures should be disaggregated by race/ethnicity 

and Pell grant recipient status and should be inclusive of all 
60

credential-seeking students (e.g., full-time and part-time, 

first-time and transfer-in.)

Project-Specific Performance Measures: Applicants must 

propose project-specific performance measures and performance 

targets (both as defined in this notice) consistent with the 

objectives of the proposed project. 

Applications must provide the following information as 

directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b):

(1) Performance measures. How each proposed performance 

measure would accurately measure the performance of the project 

and how the proposed performance measure would be consistent 

with the performance measures established for the program 

funding the competition.

(2) Baseline (as defined in this notice) data. (i) Why 

each proposed baseline is valid; or (ii) if the applicant has 

determined that there are no established baseline data for a 

particular performance measure, an explanation of why there is 

no established baseline and of how and when, during the project 

period, the applicant would establish a valid baseline for the 

performance measure.

(3) Performance targets. Why each proposed performance 

target is ambitious yet achievable compared to the baseline for 

the performance measure and when, during the project period, the 

applicant would meet the performance target(s).
61

Applications must also provide the following information as 

directed under 34 CFR 75.110(c):

(1) Data collection and reporting. (i) The data collection 

and reporting methods the applicant would use and why those 

methods are likely to yield reliable, valid, and meaningful 

performance data; and (ii) the applicant's capacity to collect 

and report reliable, valid, and meaningful performance data, as 

evidenced by high-quality data collection, analysis, and 

reporting in other projects or research.

 Depending on the nature of the intervention proposed in the 

application, common metrics may include the following: collegelevel math and English course completion in the first year 

(developmental education); unmet financial need (financial aid); 

program of study selection in the first year (advising); posttransfer completion (transfer); and re-enrollment (degree 

reclamation). 

These measures constitute the Department’s indicators of 

success for this program. Consequently, we advise an applicant 

for an award under this program to consider the 

operationalization of the measures in conceptualizing the 

approach and evaluation for its proposed project.

If funded, you will be required to collect and report data 

in your project’s annual performance report (34 CFR 75.590).

VII. Other Information
62 

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the 

application package in an accessible format. The Department 

will provide the requestor with an accessible format that may 

include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb 

drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, compact 

disc, or other accessible format. 

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. 

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 

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

documents published by the Department. 

Dated: 

______________________________ 

Nasser H. Paydar, 

Assistant Secretary 
63

for Postsecondary Education.
64 

 AUTHORIZING LEGISLATION

Program Authority:  20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d; House Report 117-403 and the Explanatory 

Statement accompanying Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-

328). 

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

nondiscrimination requirements contained in the 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. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only. 

PURPOSE. The purpose of this program is to equitably improve postsecondary student 

outcomes, including retention, transfer (including successful transfer of completed credits),

credit accumulation, and completion, by leveraging data and implementing, scaling, and 

rigorously evaluating evidence-based activities to support data-driven decisions and actions by 

institutional leaders committed to inclusive student success.
65 

 

SUPPLEMENTAL DEFINITIONS 

Definitions: In accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, we are establishing 

definitions for “Students with disabilities,” “English learner,” “Minority-serving institution,” 

“multi-site sample” and “underserved student”17 for the FY 2023 grant competition and any 

subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 

competition. The remaining definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1. 

Baseline means the starting point from which performance is measured and targets are 

set. 

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.

English learner means an individual who is an English learner as defined in Section 

8101(2) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, or an 

individual who is an English language learner as defined in section 203(7) of the 

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. 

Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by one or more of 

strong evidence, moderate evidence, promising evidence,18 or evidence that demonstrates 

a rationale.

Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two 

groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their 

assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group 

that does not. Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and 

single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending 

on their design and implementation (e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials 

and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet WWC standards without 

reservations as described in the WWC Handbooks: 

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, 

teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the 

treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group). 

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being 

evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score 

17 The definitions of “Students with disabilities,” “English learner,” and “underserved student,” for the purposes of 

this competition, align with the definitions of these terms in the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions 

for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612) 

(Supplemental Priorities). 18 The definition of “promising evidence” is from 34 CFR 77.1.
66 

to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the 

analysis of outcomes. 

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case (e.g., a student eligible 

for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled 

treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the 

treatment. 

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

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

hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the 

theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant 

outcomes. 

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, available at 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/regions/pacific/pdf/ELMUserGuideJune2014.pdf. Other 

sources include: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.pdf, 

and https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2015057.pdf. 

Minority-serving institution means an institution that is eligible to receive assistance 

under sections 316 through 320 of part A of title III, under part B of title III, or under title 

V of the HEA. 

Moderate Evidence means that there is evidence of effectiveness of a key project 

component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the 

populations or settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding 

from one of the following: 

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of 

the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence 

base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation; 

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 

4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “positive effect” or “potentially positive 

effect” on a relevant outcome based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, 

with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a 

relevant outcome; or 

(iii) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental design study reviewed 

and reported by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC 

Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 4.1 of the 

WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that – 

(A) Meets WWC standards with or without reservations; 

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) 

effect on a relevant outcome; 

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant 

outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report 

prepared under version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and 
67 

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, city, school 

district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other 

individuals across sites. 

Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in 

paragraphs (iii) (A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the requirement in 

this paragraph (iii)(D). 

Multi-site sample means at least two campuses of a single institution or multiple IHEs, 

including multiple IHEs within one public system of higher education. 

Nonprofit, as applied to an agency, organization, or institution, means that it is owned 

and operated by one or more corporations or associations whose net earnings do not 

benefit, and cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity. 

Note: For purposes of this competition, this definition of Nonprofit does not apply to 

institutions of higher education or nonprofits that are a part of an IHE. 

Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or metric used to gauge 

program or project performance. 

Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant would seek to meet 

during the course of a project or as a result of a project. 

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). 

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to 

approximate an experimental study by identifying a comparison group that is similar to 

the treatment group in important respects. This type of study, depending on design and 

implementation (e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being 

compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC 

standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks. 

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. 

Strong Evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project 

component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the 

populations and settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding 

from one of the following: 

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of 

the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong evidence base” for the corresponding 

practice guide recommendation; 
68 

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 

4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “positive effect” on a relevant outcome 

based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative 

effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or 

(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC using 

version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the 

Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that 

(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations; 

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) 

effect on a relevant outcome; 

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on 

relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention 

report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and 

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, city, school 

district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other 

individuals across sites. 

Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in 

paragraphs (iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the requirement in 

this paragraph (iii)(D).

Students with disabilities means students with disabilities as defined in section 602(3) of 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1401(3) and 34 CFR 

300.8, or students with disabilities, as defined in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 

U.S.C. 705(37), 705(202)(B)). 

Underserved student means a student in one or more of the following subgroups: 

(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 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. 
69 

WWC Handbooks means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Standards 

Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, or 

in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (all 

incorporated by reference, see § 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC 

standards can meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with 

reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention 

reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the WWC 

Handbooks documentation. 

Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 

4.1), as well as the more recent What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks released in 

August 2022 (Version 5.0), are available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks.
70 

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. 

Absent 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—

CFDA# 84.116M, U.S. Department of Education, room 7E200, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

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 11:59:59 p.m. (Eastern 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.
71 

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. 
72 

 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE APPLICATION PACKAGE

The Postsecondary Student Success Grant application consists of the following sections. These 

sections 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. The sections are as follows: 

It is recommended that your electronic application be organized in the following manner and 

include the following parts to expedite the review process. Instructions for all parts and forms

of the application are found either on the following pages of the application package or 

individually for each form on Grants.gov. 

Review your electronic application to ensure you have completed the following forms and 

sections:

Part 1: Standard Documents

 Application for Federal Assistance (Form SF 424) 

 ED Supplemental Information for SF 424 

 Evidence Form

Note: 

- Applicants must complete the Standard Form (SF) 424 first because some of the 

information provided here is automatically inserted into other sections of the Grants.gov 

application package.

- Do not attach any narratives, supporting files, or application components to the SF 424. 

Although the form accepts attachments, the Department of Education will only review 

materials/files attached to the forms listed below.

Part 2: Budget Information

 ED Budget Information Non-Construction Programs (ED Form 524) Sections A & B 

Note: 

- The non-federal funds that will be supplied by the institution should be included in 

Section B. 

- The use of non-federal funds is required for this program.

- This program requires cost sharing or matching. 

- The detailed Budget Narrative will be included in the “Budget Narrative Attachment 

Form.” 

- The detailed Budget Narrative is for each year of the budget period. 

- Refer to “Instructions for ED 524 Budget Summary Form, Section C” for additional 

instructions on the Budget Narrative. 

- Applicants are required to prepare a detailed and comprehensive Budget Narrative for 

all proposed line items listed in ED Form 524 (Sections A and B). This narrative should 
73 

be attached as the “Budget Narrative Attachment Form.”

Part 3: ED Abstract Form

 Project Abstract 

Note:

- Attach your one-page project abstract that will provide an overview of the proposed 

project. You should also include the OPEID of the institutions included in the grant 

proposal. 

Part 4: Project Narrative Attachment Form

 Application Narrative

Note: 

- You should include a Table of Contents as the first page of the Project Narrative.

- Refer to the Notice for recommendations on the page limit and format for the project 

narrative.

- Pages should be numbered consecutively in the lower right corner of page.

- This section addresses the program selection criteria that will be used to evaluate 

applications submitted for this competition. 

- Responses to the Absolute Priority should be included in this section. Additionally, for

those responding to the Competitive Preference Priority, the response should be clearly

marked as “Competitive Preference Priority.” 

- You should refer to the Completed Examples for guidance on the structure of your project 

evaluation. 

Part 5: Budget Narrative Attachment Form

 Budget Narrative

Note:

- The budget narrative should include a detailed line-item budget to justify costs are 

reasonable and necessary to accomplish the proposed project objectives. 

Part 6: Other Attachments Form

 Appendix A: FY 2023 Eligibility Letter (available at HEPIS Web Portal) 

 Appendix B: Nonprofit 501(c)(3) status verification (only applicable if lead submitter is not 

an IHE) 

 Appendix C: Letters of Support and Memoranda of Understanding, if applicable

 Appendix D: Logic Model

 Appendix E: Resumes of Key Personnel 

 Appendix F: Waiver Request of 10% Match Requirement, if applicable

 Appendix G: Demonstration of Match Contributions 

 Appendix H: Copy of Indirect Cost Rate Agreement 

 Appendix I: References
74

 Appendix J: Other, if applicable

NOTE:

- Eligible applicants should attach all appendices to the Other Attachments Form. The 

Grants.gov system will allow applicants to attach as many as ten separate appendices in 

this section; however, applicants are encouraged to limit the number of appendix entries 

to a reasonable number for a reviewer to read. The entire application package should be 

no larger than 8MB. Therefore, you may want to check the total size of your package

before submission.

- It is recommended that each Curriculum Vitae (CV) be no more than three (3) pages. 

Attach all CVs as a single document.

Part 7: Assurances and Certifications

 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL)

 Grants.Gov Lobbying Form – “Certification Regarding Lobbying” (ED 80-013 Form)

 General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) Requirements – Section 427 (ED GEPA 427 

form)
75 

SELECTION CRITERIA INSTRUCTIONS

Applicants will attach the project narrative to the Project Narrative Attachment Form as 

described in the instructions for completing the application package. 

Page Limits: The project narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that 

reviewers use to evaluate your application. We have established recommended page limits for 

grant applications. It is recommended to limit the section of the narrative that addresses the 

selection criteria to no more than 30 pages. 

Note: Please include separate heading when responding to the Absolute and Competitive

Priorities. 

The page limit does not apply to the Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424); the 

Department of Education Supplemental Information form (SF 424); Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED Form 524); the assurances and certifications; or the one-page project 

abstract, program activity budget detail form and supporting narrative. However, the page limit 

does apply to all of the project narrative section, including responses to the priorities. You must 

include your complete response to the selection criteria in the project narrative.

Formatting Requirements: 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, including 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).

SELECTION CRITERIA

The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210. The points assigned to each 

criterion are indicated in the parentheses next to the criterion. An applicant may earn up to a 

total of 100 points based on the selection criteria for the application. An applicant that also 

chooses to address the competitive preference priority can earn up to 106 total points. Please 

note that there are specific selection criteria for each Absolute Priority. Be sure to respond to the 

correct selection criteria. 

1.1 Absolute Priority One - Early-Phase Selection Criteria 

(a) Significance. (up to 20 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project. 
76 

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to 

which the proposed project involves the development or demonstration of promising new 

strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (up to 20 points) 

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (up to 30 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors:

(i) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying the proposed 

research or demonstration activities and the quality of that framework. (up to 10 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the 

proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will 

successfully address, the needs of the target population or other identified needs. (up to 

15 points) 

(c) Quality of Project Personnel. (up to 10 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which 

the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups 

that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, 

or disability. (up to 5 points) 

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the qualifications, including relevant training and 

experience, of key project personnel. (up to 5 points) 

(d) Quality of the Management Plan. (up to 10 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan, the Secretary considers the adequacy of 

the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 

project tasks. (up to 10 points) 

(e) Quality of the Project Evaluation. (up to 30 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed 

project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
77 

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce 

evidence about the project's effectiveness that would meet the What Works 

Clearinghouse standards with or without reservations as described in the What Works 

Clearinghouse Handbook (as defined in this notice). (up to 20 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback 

and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (up to 5 

points) 

(iii) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the key project 

components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a measurable threshold for acceptable 

implementation. (up to 5 points) 

1.2 Absolute Priority Two - Mid-phase/Expansion Selection Criteria 

(a) Significance. (up to 15 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors:

(i) The national significance of the proposed project. (up to 5 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project involves the development or demonstration 

of promising new strategies that build on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (up to 

5 points) 

(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased knowledge or 

understanding of educational problems, issues, or effective strategies. (up to 5 points) 

(b) Strategy to Scale. (up to 35 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the applicant's strategy to scale the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant identifies a specific strategy or strategies that 

address a particular barrier or barriers that prevented the applicant, in the past, from 

reaching the level of scale that is proposed in the application. (up to 15 points) 

(ii) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed 

project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, 

and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The mechanisms the applicant will use to broadly disseminate information on its 

project so as to support further development or replication. (up to 15 points) 

(c) Quality of the Project Design. (up to 15 points) 
78 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers 

the following factors:

(i) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying the proposed research 

or demonstration activities and the quality of that framework. (up to 5 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the 

proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. (up to 5 points) 

(iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will 

successfully address, the needs of the target population or other identified needs. (up to 5 

points) 

(d) Quality of the Project Evaluation. (up to 35 points) 

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed 

project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following 

factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will, if well implemented, produce 

evidence about the project's effectiveness that would meet the What Works 

Clearinghouse standards without reservations as described in the What Works 

Clearinghouse Handbook (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)). (up to 20 points) 

(ii) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about effective strategies 

suitable for replication or testing in other settings. (up to 5 points)

(iii) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the key project 

components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a measurable threshold for acceptable 

implementation. (up to 5 points) 

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback 

and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (up to 5 

points) 

Note: Applicants may wish to review the following technical assistance resources on evaluation: 

(1) WWC Procedures and Standards Handbooks: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks; (2) 

“Technical Assistance Materials for Conducting Rigorous Impact Evaluations”: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluationTA.asp; and (3) IES/NCEE Technical Methods papers: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/tech_methods/. In addition, applicants may view an optional webinar 

recording that was hosted by the Institute of Education Sciences. The webinar focused on more 

rigorous evaluation designs, discussing strategies for designing and executing experimental 

studies that meet WWC evidence standards without reservations. This webinar is available at: 

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Multimedia/18.
79 

Performance Indicator – Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) 

Under 34 CFR 75.110, the Secretary has established the following Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) performance measures for the PSSG: 

Performance Measures: For the purpose of Department reporting under 34 CFR 75.110, the 

Department has established a set of required performance measures (as defined in the Notice):

(1) First-year credit accumulation. 

(2) Annual retention (at initial institution) and persistence (at any institution) rates.

(3) Success rates including graduation and upward transfer for two-year institutions.

(4) Time to credential. 

(5) Number of credentials conferred. 

Note: All measures should be disaggregated by race/ethnicity and Pell grant recipient status and 

should be inclusive of all credential-seeking students (e.g., full-time and part-time, first-time and 

transfer-in.) 

Project-Specific Performance Measures: Applicants must propose project-specific performance 

measures and performance targets (both as defined in this notice) consistent with the objectives 

of the proposed project. 

Applications must provide the following information as directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b): 

(1) Performance measures. How each proposed performance measure would accurately 

measure the performance of the project and how the proposed performance measure 

would be consistent with the performance measures established for the program funding 

the competition. 

(2) Baseline (as defined in the Notice) data. (i) Why each proposed baseline is valid; or 

(ii) if the applicant has determined that there are no established baseline data for a 

particular performance measure, an explanation of why there is no established baseline 

and of how and when, during the project period, the applicant would establish a valid 

baseline for the performance measure.

(3) Performance targets. Why each proposed performance target is ambitious yet 

achievable compared to the baseline for the performance measure and when, during the 

project period, the applicant would meet the performance target(s).

Applications must also provide the following information as directed under 34 CFR 75.110(c): 

(1) Data collection and reporting. (i) The data collection and reporting methods the 

applicant would use and why those methods are likely to yield reliable, valid, and 

meaningful performance data; and (ii) the applicant's capacity to collect and report 
80

reliable, valid, and meaningful performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data 

collection, analysis, and reporting in other projects or research.

Depending on the nature of the intervention proposed in the application, common metrics may 

include the following: college-level math and English course completion in the first year 

(developmental education); unmet financial need (financial aid); program of study selection in 

the first year (advising); post-transfer completion (transfer); and re-enrollment (degree 

reclamation). 

These measures constitute the Department’s indicators of success for this 

program. Consequently, we advise an applicant for an award under this program to consider the 

operationalization of the measures in conceptualizing the approach and evaluation for its 

proposed project.

If funded, you will be required to collect and report data in your project’s annual performance 

report (34 CFR 75.590).

Other Attachments 

The Other Attachments Form is used to upload the application Appendix. The Appendix 

supports and supplements information in other parts of the application package. Several types of 

information may be included. 

Examples of Attachments:

• Narrative summaries of the qualifications of key personnel (maximum 1-page each)

• Short position descriptions for staff to be hired or determined

• References cited in the proposal narrative (if applicable)

• Documentation regarding the request for match waiver (if applicable)
81 

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. 
82 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE BUDGET SUMMARY AND ITEMIZED LINE 

ITEM BUDGET

NOTE: Applicants must submit: (1) budget information that categorizes the requested funds 

(ED Form 524), AND (2) a detailed budget narrative for the 48-month budget period. 

The budget summary is to be included on the Budget Information – Non-Construction 

Programs (ED Form 524). 

The budget narrative A separate budget narrative attachment should include an itemized budget 

for your 48-month project period (which does not count toward the 30-page limit). 

This section requests information on the applicant’s financial plan for carrying out the project. 

The federal and any non-federal shares are to be included on the Budget Information – NonConstruction Programs (ED Form 524). 

The Budget Information-Section A – Budget Summary – Non-Construction Programs (ED Form 

524) and the Budget Narrative must include all costs that are allowable, reasonable, and 

necessary for carrying out the objectives of the Postsecondary Student Success Program. Among 

the costs that may be supported with grant funds are: 

1. Personnel: On line 1 (ED Form 524), enter only the project personnel salaries and wages. 

[Fees and expenses for consultants should be included on line 8.] The budget should include 

the total commitment of time and the total salary to be charged to the project for each key 

staff member. You should provide a breakdown of project personnel that includes: the 

position titles; the percent of time and number of months committed to the project for each 

key staff member; the salary for each key staff member; and the total salary costs to be 

charged to the grant. 

2. Fringe Benefits: On line 2 (ED Form 524), enter the amount of fringe benefits. The 

institution or agency’s normal fringe benefit contribution may be charged to the program. 

Leave this blank if fringe benefits applicable to direct salaries and wages are treated as part 

of the indirect costs. In the budget, include an explanation and appropriate justification if the 

institution or agency’s normal fringe benefit contribution exceeds 20 percent of salaries.

3. Travel: On line 3 (ED Form 524), provide the costs for project personnel. [Consultants’ 

travel should be included on line 8.] In the budget, you should detail the proposed travel 

costs: for each trip explain the purpose and objective of the travel and provide the number of 

persons traveling. Transportation costs should not exceed tourist class airfare. For 

automobile mileage, the established institution or agency rate should be used. 

Reimbursement is allowed for taxicab, bus, train, or limousine transportation. Per diem at 

the established institution or agency rate is permitted when an individual is away from home 
83 

overnight on official project business (see OMB Circular A-21, J.48.c - Commercial Air 

Travel). 

All travel must be related to the project’s overall purpose and proposed activities. 

4. Equipment: On line 4 (ED Form 524), indicate the cost of equipment -- non-expendable 

personal property, which has a usefulness of greater than one year and an acquisition cost of 

$5,000 or more per unit. [Consistent with an applicant’s policy, a lower dollar amount may 

be used to define equipment.] In the budget, explain why the requested equipment is 

necessary to carry out project activities, and include a list of all equipment in the following 

format: item, quantity, cost per unit, and total cost. 

5. Supplies: On line 5 (ED Form 524), include the costs of all tangible personal property that 

was not included as “equipment” on line 4. In the budget, provide an itemized list of the 

supplies. 

6. Contractual: Include costs for contractual services.

7. Construction: Not applicable. Leave blank. 

8. Other: On line 8 (ED Form 524). Examples of “other” costs are: equipment rental, required 

fees, communication costs, rental of space, utilities, custodial services, and printing costs. In 

the budget, provide a breakdown of all direct costs not clearly covered by other budget 

categories. 

Consultants: If the project proposes to use consultants, identify the consultants who will 

work on the project, the scope of work to be performed by each consultant, and justify why 

project personnel cannot perform this work. Also, provide a detailed breakdown of the costs 

(daily fees to be paid, estimated number of days of services, and all travel expenses, 

including per diem). Cost allowances for consultant fees, honoraria, per diem, and travel 

should not exceed amounts permitted by comparable institutional or agency policies. 

9. Total Direct Costs: On line 9 (ED Form 524), provide the total direct costs requested – the 

sum of lines 1 through 8. 

10. Indirect Costs: On line 10 (ED Form 524). This program limits a grantee's indirect cost 

reimbursement to eight percent of a modified total direct cost base. We are establishing this 

indirect cost limit for the FY 2023 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we 

make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition in accordance with 

section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a 

negotiated indirect cost rate, please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html. 

11. A modified total direct cost base is defined as total direct costs, less stipends, tuition and 

related fees, and capital expenditures of $5,000 or more per unit. Therefore, calculations of 

indirect costs may not include cost of equipment, stipends, tuition and related fees, room and 
84 

board and summer non-residential meals associated with the Postsecondary Student Success 

Grant Program. 

Grantees charging indirect costs to a Department grant are required to have a negotiated rate 

with their cognizant agency (i.e., either the Federal agency from which it has received the 

most direct funding that is subject to indirect cost support, or a particular agency specifically 

assigned cognizance by the Office of Management and Budget). Although applicants are not 

required to submit with their application a copy of their indirect cost agreement to claim the 8 

percent rate for funding received in this program, they are required to have documentation 

available for audit that shows that their negotiated indirect cost rate is at least 8 percent 

[§75.563(d)]. In the event that they receive an award under this program, applicants without 

a negotiated indirect cost rate with its cognizant agency should seek to identify that agency 

and contact it to obtain an approved rate as soon as possible after award notification. 

Applicants should be aware that amounts representing the difference between the 8 percent 

rate and a greater indirect cost rate negotiated with a cognizant agency may not be charged to 

direct cost categories, used to satisfy matching or cost-sharing requirements, or charged to 

another Federal award. [§75.563(c) (3)] 

12. Training Stipends: This may include training stipends to eligible program participants. 

13. Total Costs: On line 12 (ED Form 524), provide the total amount that you are requesting – 

the sum of lines 9 and 10. Note: This amount should also be the same as that shown in 18g 

on the application face sheet (SF 424) and on the detailed budget narrative. 

 
85 

GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS ACT (GPRA)

What is GPRA?

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. Each agency is to clearly state what it intends to accomplish, identify the resources 

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

the GPRA 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.

The Department has established a set of required performance measures: 

(1) First-year credit accumulation. 

(2) Annual retention (at initial institution) and persistence (at any institution) rates.

(3) Success rates including graduation and upward transfer for two-year institutions.

(4) Time to credential. 

(5) Number of credentials conferred. 

Note: All measures should be disaggregated by race/ethnicity and Pell grant recipient status and 

should be inclusive of all credential-seeking students (e.g., full-time, and part-time, first-time and

transfer-in.) 

Project-Specific Performance Measures: Applicants must propose project-specific 

performance measures and performance targets (both as defined in this notice) consistent with 

the objectives of the proposed project. 

Applications must provide the following information as directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b): 

(1) Performance measures. How each proposed performance measure would accurately 

measure the performance of the project and how the proposed performance measure 

would be consistent with the performance measures established for the program funding 

the competition. 

(2) Baseline data. (i) Why each proposed baseline is valid; or (ii) if the applicant has 

determined that there are no established baseline data for a particular performance 

measure, an explanation of why there is no established baseline and of how and when, 

during the project period, the applicant would establish a valid baseline for the 

performance measure.

(3) Performance targets. Why each proposed performance target is ambitious yet 

achievable compared to the baseline for the performance measure and when, during the 

project period, the applicant would meet the performance target(s).

Applications must also provide the following information as directed under 34 CFR 75.110(c): 
86

(1) Data collection and reporting. (i) The data collection and reporting methods the applicant 

would use and why those methods are likely to yield reliable, valid, and meaningful performance 

data; and (ii) the applicant's capacity to collect and report reliable, valid, and meaningful 

performance data, as evidenced by high-quality data collection, analysis, and reporting in other 

projects or research.

Depending on the nature of the intervention proposed in the application, common metrics may 

include the following: college-level math and English course completion in the first year 

(developmental education); unmet financial need (financial aid); program of study selection in 

the first year (advising); post-transfer completion (transfer); and re-enrollment (degree 

reclamation). 

These measures constitute the Department’s indicators of success for this program. Consequently, 

we advise an applicant for an award under this program to consider the operationalization of the 

measures in conceptualizing the approach and evaluation for its proposed project.

If funded, you will be required to collect and report data in your project’s annual performance 

report (34 CFR 75.590).
87 

APPLICATION CHECKLIST 

Use This Checklist While Preparing Your Application Package. All items listed on this checklist 

are required except as noted. 

 SApplication for Federal Assistance (SF 424) 

 Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424 

 Department of Education Budget Information Non-Construction Programs Form 

(ED 524) 

 One-page Program Abstract (Use “ED Abstract Form”) 

 Project Narrative for the proposed grant (Use “Project Narrative Attachment Form”)

 Budget Narrative (Use “Budget Narrative Attachment Form”)

 Evidence Form (Use “Evidence of Effectiveness Form”)

 Other Attachments (Use “Other Attachments Form”) 

 FY 2023 Eligibility Letter (available at HEPIS Web Portal) 

 Nonprofit 501(c)(3) status verification (only applicable if lead submitter is not an 

IHE)

 Letters of Support and Memoranda of Understanding, if applicable

 Resumes of Key Personnel 

 Waiver Request of 10% Match Requirement, if applicable

 Demonstration of Match Contributions 

 Copy of Indirect Cost Rate Agreement

 References

 Assurances and Certifications 

 

 Grants.gov Lobbying Form (ED 80-0013) 

 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) 

 ED GEPA 427 Form (Mandatory for this Competition)

 
88 

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 1894-0006. Public reporting burden for 

this collection of information is estimated to average 40 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 (Section 873 of the Higher Education Act 

of 1965, as amended). If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual 

submission of this application, please contact the Postsecondary Student Success Program, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20202 directly. [Note: 

Please do not return the completed application to this address.]