**SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION**  **INVESTING IN INNOVATION (i3)**  **GRANT PROGRAM Justification:**  **1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.**  The Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund was established under section 14007 of the American Recovery

and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Since this is a competitive program, the Department needs to collect applications in order to determine which eligible applicants should receive a grant award. The Departm ent will make three types of awards under this program: Scale

- u p Grants , Validation Grants , and Development Grants
. These grants will provide funding to support local educational agencies (LEAs), and nonprofit organizations in partnership with one or more LEAs or a consortium of schools to apply for funding to expand and develop innovate practices that can serve as models of best practices, (2) allow eligible entities to work in partnership with the private sector and the philanthropic community , and (3) i dentify

and document best practices that can be shared and taken to scale based on demonstrated success.
**2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used.**  The information provided in the application will allow field readers and the Department of Education to determine if applicants are eligible and identify which applications qualify

for funding. An additional part of the application consists of assurances regarding the applicant's compliance with applicable Federal laws and re gulation in 34 CFR 76.132. **3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the**  **use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or forms of information technology.**  Applicants are required to submit application s electronicall y to the U.S. Department of Education. All applicants are currently required to submit their applications electronically

through Grants.gov
. **4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.**  The information supplied by the applicant is not contained in any other data collection, and is unique to this program and the particular grantee. The application is a single document intended to serve a specific authorized purpose, and is in keeping with statutory

requirements in 34 CFR 75.100.**5. If**  **the collection**  **of information**  **im pacts**  **sm all**  **bus inesses**  **or other**  **small entities,**  **describe any methods used to minimize burden.** Small businesses and other small entities are not impacted b y this data collection.
**6. Describe the consequences**  **to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently**  The Department cannot distribute these grant awards to recipients without an application requesting the funds. If no application information were c ollected, the Department would not know which organizations want or merit funding.
**7. Explain any special circumstance that would cause an information collection**  **to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with 5 CFR 1320.5.**  There are no special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.
**8. De**  **scribe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarit** **y of instruction and record keeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data**  **elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.** The Department has consulted with potential applicants, other interested organizations and entities to obtain their views on the availability of possible requested information and potential application processes for these grants. In addition, on December 14, 2012, the Department published a Federal Register notice requesting public comment on the proposed requirements, definitions, priorities, and selection criteria for this program and incorporated such feedback into the competition’s final requirements, which were published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2013.
**9. Explain any decision to provide any paym**  **ent or gift to respondents, other than**  **remuneration of contractors or grantees.**  No gifts or pay

ments will be made to application respondents other than the award to the grant recipient.
**10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents a**  **nd the basis for the assurance in statute, regulations, or agency policy.** No assuranc e of confidentiality is provided to respondents except as it’s provided by the Privacy

Act of 1974 and the Department of Education’s policies governing the review of Disc retionary

grant application as found in the Department of Education's Privacy Act Regulations 34 CFR Part 5b.
**11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature**  There is no question of sensitive nature in this collection of inform ation.
**12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.**  W e estimate that a total of approximately 1450 applications will be submitted each ye ar for the i3 grant competition s . This is based on the number of applications that we received in the most recent i3 competitions and also takes into account i3’s new Development pre

- application process that we implemented in FY 2012. The Development pre

- application process result ed in an increase in the number of applications received but it ultimately decrease d the net burden for all respondents. The following chart details the estimated burden for all i3 grant ty pes , Development pre - application, Development full application, Validation, and Scale

- up , which equals 66,000 hours. **Estim ated Hours of Burden and Cost of the Collection of Information**  **Application Type**  **Hours per**

**Application Cost per** 

**Application Number of** 

**Applications Respondent** 

**Cost per Application**  **Total**

**Hours Total Cost**  Development Pre
Application 30 $25.00 1000 $750.00 3 0 , 000 $750,000.00 Development Full Application 60 $25.00 300 $1,500.00 18 , 000 450,000.00 Validation 120 $25.00 100 $3,000.00 12 , 000 300,000.00 Scale

- up 120 $25.00 50 $3,000.00 6 , 000 150,000.00 **Totals** 1450 66,000 $1,650,000.00 **Previo us**  **Totals** 2200 117,000 $ 2 , 925 , 000 .00**13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents or record**  **keepers resulting from the collection of information.** Annual Costs to Respondents (capital/start

- up, and operation and maintenance): The total for the capital and start

- up cost components for this information collection is zero. This information collection will not require the purchase of any capital equipment nor create any startup costs. **14. Estimated annualized Federal cost:**  C ost to Federal Government: **Cost for Federally -**  **supervised review of applications**  Processing applications

– staff (8 staff x 120 hours x $48 per hours=$46,080) (Overhead cost: $46,080 x 50 percent = $23,040) $69,120.00 Contractor logistical suppo rt for application processing, field reading, and preparing notifications for successful and unsuccessful

applicants for all i3 competitions $1,000,000.00

Staff time for conducting peer review. (4 weeks x 95 review panels, each with a staff

person as panel chair) (95 staff x 160 hours x $48 per hour=$729,600) (Overhead cost: $729,600 x 50 percent=$364,800) $1,094,400.00

Staff time for generating slate (3 staff x $48 x 32 hours=$4608) (Overhead cost: $4608 x 50 percent = $2304) $6,912.00Staff time to review and approve funding recommendations (8 hours per grant award x 25 awards) (25 awards x 8 hours per award x $48 per hour = $9600 (Overhead cost: $9600 x 50 per cent = $4800) $14,400.00

Staff time to generate, approve, and issue grant awards (2 hours per award x 25 awards= 50 hours)

($48 per hr x 50 hours = $2400) (Overhead cost: $2400 x 50 percent = $1200) $3,600.00 Total estimate cost to government (competitive year) $2,188,432.00
**15. Explain the reasons for any program**  **changes or adjustments reported in Items 13 or 14**  We estimate that a total of approximately 1450 applications will be submitted each ye ar for the i3 grant competition s . This is a decrease from the estimate of 2200 applications in our current information collection . The new estimate is based on the number of applications that we received in the most recent i3 competitions . The new estimate also takes into account several changes in i3’s application process in an effort to streamline the application proce ss. First, in FY 2012, i3 implemented a pre

- application process for the Development competition

. Inprevious competitions, many more Development applicants completed the full application than were competitive for funding as judged by their peer review scores. Given that the pre

- application and its accompanying documents are substantiall y shorter than the full application, using a pre

- application reduce s the burden on prospective applicants. For future competitions , all applicants under th e i3 Development grant competition will submit a pre

- application. We anticipate an increase in the number of respondents as a result; however , we anticipate a decrease in the overall burden on applicants. F ollowing the initial review process, onl y entities that have submitted pre

- applications that are scored highl y b y the peer reviewers will be invited to submit full applications , though other pre - applicants may

submit full applications if they wish

. We do not anticipate many pre - applicants who were not highly scored to submit full applications. Based upon the small number of full application s that are expected , we anticipate a significantdecrease in the cumulative number of burden hours on applicants to the i3 competitions

. Additionally

the program will change th e method by which applicants submit the Applicant Information Sheet for all of the i3 competitions . Currently , applicants are asked to go to the program website and complete a fillable .PDF, save it, and upload to the grants.gov s ys tem for submission. Appl icants will still be asked to upload the .PDF that is generated to grants.gov , however, the survey will be hosted on a Website managed b y our contractor. The proposed change will be easier for applicants to complete and submit as part of their application , and will allow data to be collected through an online survey tool thus making data capture easier for the program as well

. Finally , the program has added two eligibility checklists for Scale

- up, Validation, and Development full applications. Each appli cant will complete only one of the two forms, depending on the ty pe of applicant. Each applicant will use the form to indicate that they

have met the i3 statutory requirements and to give the page numbers where the supporting information can be found within the application. The addition of the se forms will not have an impact on the burden for the applicants, but will facilitate the review process for the field readers and the Department. These changes will reduce the total number of burden hours for appli cations to the i3 competitions from 117,000 to 66,000 hours as explained in the chart in item 12 above. **16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for**  **tabulation and publication.** The Department will make the following available to the public on the Department’s i3 Web site:
 A list of all applicants and their partners; the type of grant for which the applicant applied; and the requested budget, including the amount of funds requested for each partner;
 All Scale

- up appl ications with personally identifiable information and proprietary

information identified by the applicant redacted;
 All successful Validation and Development applications with personally identifiable information and proprietary information identified by t he applicant redacted; and
 Peer reviewer scores and comments (T echnical Review F orm s) for all successful applications.
**17. If seeking approval to not display the expirati**  **on date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that displ**  **ay would be inappropriate.** The expiration date will be displayed on the information collection

.**18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 20,**  **"Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions form”** There is no exception to the “Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions”