1



# U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Postsecondary Education Washington, DC 20006
- 6078



## Fiscal Year **2014** 

# APPLICATION FOR GRANTS **UNDER THE LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS PROGRAM** 

**(CFDA NUMBER: 84.229 A)**  

## CLOSING DATE: **TBD Form Approved**  **OMB No . 1840**  **- 0808** **, Exp. Date: XX/XX/20XX** 2 

## Application for New Awards Under the **Language Resource Centers (**  **LRC ) Program** 

**Table of Contents PROGRAM SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMS**  **Dear A pplicant Letter**  **................................ ................................**  **.............................. 4**  **Competition Highlights ................................**  **................................ .............................**  **6 Introduction and Overview of the LRC Program**  **................................ .......................**  **9 Supplemental Information**  **................................ ................................**  **...................... 10**  **Federal Register Notice Inviting Applications for LRC**  **New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 20 14**  **................................ .....................**  **Place Holder Authorizing Legislation**  **and Regu lations**  **................................ ................................**  **. 14**  **Code of Federal Regulations ................................**  **................................ ...................**  **22 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and**  **Performance Indicator s**  **for the LRC**  **Program ................................**  **..................... 2**  **8 Guidance on Developing an Evaluation Plan**  **................................ ............................**  **30 Guidance to LRC Applicants**  **................................ ................................**  **.................... 3**  **6 Frequently Asked Questions**  **................................ ................................**  **................... 46**  **I nstructions for Completing the**  **LRC Application Package**  **................................ ........**  **48 Selection Criteria**  **................................ ................................**  **................................ ....**  **50 Instructions for Budget Summary Form & Itemized Line Item Budget**  **...................... 56**  **Application Checklist ................................**  **................................ ..............................**  **5 8**  **Burden Statement ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **.. 5**  **9 STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMS**  ***Placeholder for Standar d instructions and forms** 3 

### UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Dear Applicant: Thank you for your interest in applying for a grant in the F iscal Year (FY) 2014 competition for new awards under the Language Resource Centers (LRC) program. The LR program provides grants to institutions of higher education to establish, strengthen and operate centers that serve as resources for improving the nation’s capacity for teaching and learning foreign languages. This letter highlights a few items in the FY 2014 application package that will be important to you in applying for grants under this program. You should review the entire application package carefully before preparing and submitting your appl ication. Information on the LRC program is accessible at t he U.S. Department of Education’s Web site at:

http://www.ed.gov/programs/iegpslrc/index.html The Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards published in the Federal Register is the official document that contains the guidance for preparing a n LRC grant application. You should not rely upon any information that is inconsistent with the guidance contained in the official document. Applicants who have general questions concerning the LRC program are encouraged to submit their questions, via e
- mail, to LRC@ed.gov
. We encourage applicants to review the **Competition Highlights** found in the application package for an overview of important items.4

Finally, I would like to share with you the importance of ensuring that your application includes a strong evaluation plan. The peer reviewers will be instructed to look closely at each applicant’s plan of evaluation. Applicants must clearly state the performance goal s for their project s and the performance measures for the project. The evaluation plan should include clear information about the methodology that will be employed, the validity of the methodology and the appropriate controls that will be included. The eva luation plan should also include a description of the strategies that will be utilized to ensure that the evaluation will be independent in nature and led by an individual or entity other than the project director or materials developers. The plan should follow the development of the project and provide benchmarks for the measurement of progress throughout the grant award period. Where appropriate, attempt to link program outcomes to specific activities or materials and respond to all aspects of the questi ons in the **Supplemental Information**  of the application package regarding the development of your evaluation activit ies
. I appreciate your interest in LRC program and look forward to receiving your application.

Sincerely,

Lenore Yaffee Garcia Acting Senior Director International and Foreign Language Education Office of Postsecondary Education5 

### COMPETITION HIGHLIGHTS 1. For the FY 201 4 competition, the Department is particularly interested in applications that meet the following priorities : **Competitive Preference Priority #1**  : Applications that propose activities that focus on any of the 78 priority languages selected from the U.S. Department of Education's list of Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs). We will award an addition al five points to an application that meets this priority. The list includes the following : Akan (Twi

- Fante), Albanian, Amharic, Arabic (all dialects), Armenian, Azeri (Azerbaijani), Balochi, Bamanakan (Bamana, Bambara, Mandikan, Mandingo, Maninka, Dyula ), Belarusian, Bengali (Bangla), Berber (all languages), Bosnian, Bulgarian, Burmese, Cebuano (Visayan), Chechen, Chinese (Cantonese), Chinese (Gan), Chinese (Mandarin), Chinese (Min), Chinese (Wu), Croatian, Dari, Dinka, Georgian, Gujarati, Hausa, Hebrew (Modern), Hindi, Igbo, Indonesian, Japanese, Javanese, Kannada, Kashmiri, Kazakh, Khmer (Cambodian), Kirghiz, Korean, Kurdish (Kurmanji), Kurdish (Sorani), Lao, Malay (Bahasa Melayu or Malaysian), Malayalam, Marathi, Mongolian, Nepali, Oromo, Panjabi, Pash to, Persian (Farsi), Polish, Portuguese (all varieties), Quechua, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Sinhala (Sinhalese), Somali, Swahili, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Telugu, Thai, Tibetan, Tigrigna, Turkish, Turkmen, Ukrainian, Urdu, Uyghur/Uigur, Uzbek, Vietnamese, Wolof, Xhosa, Yoruba, and Zulu. **Competitive Preference Priority #2** : Applications that incorporate significant and sustained collaborative activities with a Minority
- Serving Institution (as defined in the Federal Register notice) or a community college (a s defined in t he Federal Register notice). These activities should be designed to incorporate foreign languages into the curriculum and to improve foreign language instruction on the MSI or community college campus.

 Community college is defined in section 312(f) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1058(f); or an institution of higher education (as defined in section 101 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1001)) that awards degrees and certificates, more than 50% of which are not bachelor’s degrees (or an equivalent); or master’s , p rofessional, or other advanced degrees.

 Minority
- Serving Institution (MSI) : means an institution that is eligible to receive assistance under sections 316 through 320 of part A or under part B of Title III or under Title V of the HEA.6

We will award up to an additional 5 points to an applic ation that meets this priority. Further i nformation on this priority is located under the “Selection Criteria” section of this application. Invitational Priority #1 : Applications from new applicants (as defined in t h e Federal Register notice ).New applicant refers to applicants who have not received a grant from the LRC program, either as an individual institution or as a member of a consortium, during the last two funding cycles (FY 2006

- 2009, FY 2010
- 2013). Invi tational Priority #2 : Applications that propose programs or projects that engage in collaborative activities with heritage language centers or schools to support the language maintenance and development of heritage language speakers. Note: For the purpo ses of the LRC program, a Heritage Language speaker is a person who grew up using the language of research at home and/or received K

- 12 education in the language.

 **Please note that these priorities are explained in detail in the Federal Register**  **n otice**  **c ontained in this application package. You are urged to fully review the**  **Federal Register n**  **otice carefully before preparing your application.**  2. The project abstract is limited to one page, single
- spaced. The abstract should include information about the pro posed project, the project methodology and the final product of the grant. The abstract must be uploaded into the ED abstract form as part of the e
application
. 3. Please note that you must submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m. (Washington, D.C. time) on o r 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 applicant s. 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 Federa l Register notice inviting applications for new awards for FY 201 4 and qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement. 5. All applicants are required to adhere to the 50
- page limit for the Program Narrative portion of the applicat ion. The Federal Register notice contains the specific standards and instructions for preparing the Program Narrative. 6. All attachments must be in .DOC, .RTF, or .PDF format. Other types of files will not be accepted , which may result in your application being rejected
.7

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.8

 **RODUCTION AN D OVERVIEW** 



### I **ntroduction & O** **verview of the LRC Program**  **AUTHORIZATION** Title VI, Part A, sections 601 and 603 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as amended. **PROGRAM REGULATIONS** Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) 34 CFR parts P arts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99. The regulations for this program are in 34 CFR parts 655 and 669. **PURPOSE** The Language Resource Centers Program makes awards for the purpose of establishing, strengthening, and operating centers th at serve as resources for improving the nation’s capacity for teaching and learning foreign languages effectively. **ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS** I nstitution s of higher education or a combination of institutions of higher education are eligible to receive an award. **ACTIVITIES FUNDED UNDER THIS PROGRAM** Centers must carry out activities to improve the teaching and learning of foreign languages. These efforts must include effective dissemination efforts, whenever appropriate, and may include
— a) The conduct and dis semination of research on new and improved methods for teaching foreign languages, including the use of advanced educational technology; b) The development and dissemination of new materials for teaching foreign languages, to reflect the results of research on effective teaching strategies; c) The development, application and dissemination of performance testing that is appropriate for use in an educational setting to be used as a standard and comparable measurement of skill levels in foreign languages; d) The trai ning of teachers in the administration and interpretation of foreign language performance tests, the use of effective teaching strategies and the use of new technologies; e) A significant focus on the teaching and learning needs of the less commonly taught la nguages, including an assessment of the strategic needs of the United States, the determination of ways to meet those needs nationally and the publication and dissemination of instructional materials in the less commonly taught languages; f) The development a nd dissemination of materials designed to serve as a resource for foreign language teachers at the elementary and secondary school levels; and g) The operation of intensive summer language institutes to train advanced foreign language students, to provide professional development and to improve language instruction through pre
- service and ins
- s ervice language training for teachers.9 

### SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION The following information supplements the information provided in the “Dear Applicant” letter and the Fe deral Register n otice
. 1. **Grants.gov** LRC applications submitted for FY 201 4 must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov system . You are urged to acquaint yourself with the requirements of Grants.gov early as the registration procedures may requi re five or more days to complete. More complete information is found in the Federal Register Notice and in this application package under “Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants ” . Grants.gov is accessible through its portal page at: http://www.grants.gov 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 resubmit the application. You should know that if the Department receives duplicate applications, we will accept and process the application with the latest date and time received validation. Please note, once you download an application from Grants.gov, you will be working offline and saving data on your computer. Please be sure 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 2. **Evaluation of Applications for Awa rds**  A three
- member panel of non
-federal reviewers reviews each application. Each reviewer will prepare a written evaluation of the application and assign points for each selection criterion. 3. **Selection of Grantees** The Secretary will select an applicatio n for funding in rank order, based on the application’s total score for the selection criteria. If there are insufficient funds to fund all applications with the same total score, the Secretary will choose among the tied applications using Criterion #1: N eed for the Project as a tiebreaker
. 4. **Applicant Funding**10

The Department is often unable to award the full amount of funds requested. Applicants should pay close attention to the “Maximum Award” section of the Federal Register n otice. The Department will not fund any application at an amount exceeding the applicable maximum award level. 5. **Notice to Successful Applicants** The Department's Office of Legislation and Congressional Affairs will inform the Congress regarding applicants approved for new LRC grants . Successful applicants will receive award notices by mail shortly after the Congress is notified. No funding information will be released before the Congress is notified. For the FY 201 4 competition, notification will occur no later than September 2014
. 6. **Notice to Unsuccessful Applicants** Unsuccessful applicants will be notified in writing following the notice to successful applicants. 7. **Performance Reports** All LRC grantees must submit project performance reports using the International Resource Informat ion System (IRIS) electronic reporting system. If you wish to view the performance report currently required, visit the IRIS website at http://iris.ed.gov/iris/pdfs/LRC.pdf . Please be advised that the report is for informational purposes only, and does not reflect the actual reporting instrument that you will use, should you receive a FY 201 4 grant award. The performance report will assist I FLE staff in determining whether or not the LRC project is makin g substantial progress toward meeting the approved project objectives and whether or not a continuation award , if applicable , is in the best interest of the federal government. Project Directors will be responsible for overall project reports as well as en tering entering any additional data into the IRIS website. The IRIS reporting instrument includes sections for grantees to input data and information that respond to the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) to assess overall program performance. 8. **Estimated Funding and Project Period**

 Estimated Available Funds: $2, 746, 768  Estimated Average Award: $ 1 83 , 118  Estimated Number of Awards: 15  Project Period for New Awards: Up to 48 months Applicants are limited to 8% indirect costs. The U.S. Department of Education is not bound by these estimates.11

9. **Appendices to Applications** Please limit the appendices to the following: a. The curricula vitae of key personnel and professional staff directly involved in the applicant’s program ; b. A timeline of project activities for the duration of the grant ; c. Letters of support ; and d. A table of objectives that will guide project activities for the FY 201 4
- 201 7 performance period. 10. **Selection Criteria** The selection criteria in 34 CFR sections 655.31 and 669.21 are used to evaluate applications. The selection criteria and maximum possible points are included in the Notice
. 11. **Performance Period** The performance period sta rt date for the FY 2014 grant cycle is September 15, 201 4 and the performance period end date is September 14, 2018
. **For LRC program -**  **related questions and assistance, please contact :**  Senior Program Officer: Tanyelle H. Richardson Address: International and Foreign Language Education U.S. Department of Education 1990 K Street, N.W., Room 60 99 Washington, D.C. 20006
- 6078 Telephone: (202) 502

- 7626 Fax: (202) 502

- 7859 E
- mail Address: tanyelle.richardson@ed.gov Senior Program Officer: Pamela Maimer, Ph
. D
. Address: International and Foreign Language Education U.S. Department of Education 1990 K Street, N.W., Room 6 100 Washington, D.C. 20006
- 6078 Telephone: (202) 502

- 7704 Fax: (202) 502

- 7859 E
- mail Address: p amela.maimer@ed.gov12



# Federal Register Notice Place Holder13



## Authorizing Legislation **and Regulations**
**TITLE VI –**  **INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS**
**SEC. 601. INTERNATIONAL AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES.** Part A of title VI (20 U.S.C. 1121) is amended to read as follows: **PART A --**  **INTERNATIONAL AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES SEC. 601. FINDINGS; P**  **URPOSES; CONSULTATION; SURVEY.** (a) FINDINGS

- Congress finds as follows: (1) The security, stability, and economic vitality of the United States in a complex global era depend upon American experts in and citizens knowledgeable about world regions, foreign languages, and international affairs, as well as upon a strong research base in these areas. (2) Advances in communications technology and the growth of regional and global problems make knowledge of other countries and the ability to communicate in other languages more essential to the promotion of mutual understanding and cooperation among nations and their peoples. (3) Dramatic changes in the world's geopolitical and economic landscapes are creating needs for American expertise and knowledge about a grea ter diversity of less commonly taught foreign languages and nations of the world. (4) Systematic efforts are necessary to enhance the capacity of institutions of higher education in the United States for
-- (A) producing graduates with international and foreign language expertise and knowledge; and (B) research regarding such expertise and knowledge. (5) Cooperative efforts among the Federal Government, institutions of higher education, and the private sector are necessary to promote the generation and disse mination of information about world regions, foreign languages, and international affairs throughout education, government, business, civic, and nonprofit sectors in the United States. (b) PURPOSES

- The purposes of this part are
-- (1) (A) to support centers, programs, and fellowships in institutions of higher education in the United States for producing increased numbers of trained personnel and research in foreign languages, area studies, and other international studies; (B) to develop a pool of internatio nal experts to meet national needs; (C) to develop and validate specialized materials and techniques for foreign language acquisition and fluency, emphasizing (but not limited to) the less commonly taught languages; (D) to promote access to research and training overseas, including through linkages with overseas institutions; and (E) to advance the internationalization of a variety of disciplines throughout undergraduate and graduate education;14

(2) to support cooperative efforts promoting access to and the dissemination of international and foreign language knowledge, teaching materials, and research, throughout education, government, business, civic, and nonprofit sectors in the United States, through the use of advanced technologies; and (3) to coordinate the programs of the Federal Government in the areas of foreign language, area studies, and other international studies, including professional international affairs education and research. (c) CONSULTATION.

- (1) IN GENERAL. – The Secretary shall, prior to re questing applications for funding under this title during each grant cycle, consult with and receive recommendations regarding national need for expertise in foreign languages and world regions from the head officials of a wide range of Federal agencies. (2) CONSIDERING RECOMMENDATIONS; PROVIDING INFORMATION. The Secretary
– (A) may take into account the recommendations described in paragraph (1) ; and (B) shall

- (i) provide information collected under paragraph (1) when requesting applications for funding under this title; and (ii) make available to applicants a list of areas identified as areas of national need. (d) SURVEY.
– The Secretary shall assist grantees in developing a survey to administer to students who have completed programs under this title to determine postgraduate employment, education, or training. All grantees, where applicable, shall administer such survey once every two years and report survey results to the Secretary.15



### SEC. 603. LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS. (a) LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTE RS AUTHORIZED
- The Secretary is authorized to make grants to and enter into contracts with institutions of higher education, or combinations of such institutions, for the purpose of establishing, strengthening, and operating a small number of national lang uage resource and training centers, which shall serve as resources to improve the capacity to teach and learn foreign languages effectively. (b) AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES

- The activities carried out by the centers described in subsection (a)

-- (1) shall includ e effective dissemination efforts, whenever appropriate; and (2) may include

-- (A) the conduct and dissemination of research on new and improved teaching methods, including the use of advanced educational technology; (B) the development and dissemination of new teaching materials reflecting the use of such research in effective teaching strategies; (C) the development, application, and dissemination of performance testing appropriate to an educational setting for use as a standard and comparable measurement of skill levels in all languages; (D) the training of teachers in the administration and interpretation of performance tests, the use of effective teaching strategies, and the use of new technologies; (E) a significant focus on the teaching and learning n eeds of the less commonly taught languages, including an assessment of the strategic needs of the United States, the determination of ways to meet those needs nationally, and the publication and dissemination of instructional materials in the less commonly taught languages; (F) the development and dissemination of materials designed to serve as a resource for foreign language teachers at the elementary and secondary school levels; and (G) the operation of intensive summer language institutes to train advanc ed foreign language students, to provide professional development, and to improve language instruction through preservice and inservice language training for teachers. (c) CONDITIONS FOR GRANTS

- Grants under this section shall be made on such conditions as the Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.16 PUBLIC LAW 110–315 — AUG. 14, 2008 

## TITLE VI **— INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS**  **SEC. 601. FINDINGS; PURPOSES; CONSULTATION; SURVEY.** Section 601 (20 U.S.C. 1121) is amend ed
— (1) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘**AND PURPOSES**’’ and inserting ‘‘**; PURPOSES; CONSULTATION; SURVEY**’’; (2) in subsection (a)(3), by striking ‘‘post

- Cold War’’; (3) in subsection (b)(1)(D), by inserting ‘‘, including through linkages with overseas institutions’’ before the semicolon; and (4) by adding at the end the following: ‘‘(c) CONSULTATION.
— ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.
— The Secretary shall, prior to requesting applications for funding under this title during each grant cycle, consult with and receive re commendations regarding national need for expertise in foreign languages and world AWS regions from the head officials of a wide range of Federal agencies. ‘‘(2) CONSIDERING RECOMMENDATIONS; PROVIDING INFORMATION.
— The Secretary
— ‘‘(A) may take into account the recommendations described in paragraph (1); and ‘‘(B) shall
— ‘‘(i) provide information collected under paragraph (1) when requesting applications for funding under this title; and ‘‘(ii) make available to applicants a list of areas identified as areas of national need. ‘‘(d) SURVEY.
— The Secretary shall assist grantees in developing a survey to administer to students who have completed programs under this title to determine postgraduate employment, education, or training. All grantees, where applicable, shall administer such survey once every two years and report survey results to the Secretary **SEC. 603. LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS.** Section 603(c) (20 U.S.C. 1123(c)) is amended by inserting ‘‘reflect the purposes of this part and’’ after ‘‘shall’’.17

Tit le 34: Education Revised as of September 25, 2009 **PART 655 —**  **INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS —**  **GENERAL PROVISIONS Subpart A**  **— General**  § 655.1 Which programs do the se regulations govern? § 655.3 What regulations apply to the International E ducation Programs? § 655.4 What definitions apply to the International Educa tion Programs? **Subpart B —**  **What Kinds of Projects Does the Secretary Assist?** § 655.10 What kinds of projects does the Secretary assist? **Subpart C [Reserved] Subpart D**  **— How Does the Secretary Make a Grant?**  § 655.30 How does the Secretary evaluate an application? § 655.31 What general selection criteria does the Secretary use? § 655.32 What additional factors does the Secretary consider in making grant awards? Authority: 20 U.S.C 1121– 1130b, unless otherwise noted. Source: 47 FR 14116, Apr. 1, 1982, unless otherwise noted. **Subpart A —**  **Genera l**  **§ 655.1**  **Which programs do these regulations govern?** The regulations in this part govern the administration of the following programs in international education: (a) The National Resource Centers Program for Foreign Language and Area Studies or Foreign Language and International Studies (section 602 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended); (b) The Language Resource Centers Program (section 603); (c) The Undergraduate International Studies and Foreign Language Program (section 604); (d) The Inter national Research and Studies Program (section 605); and (e) The Business and International Education Program (section 613). (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1130b) [47 FR 14116, Apr. 1, 1982, as amended at 58 FR 32575, June 10, 1993; 64 FR 7739, Feb. 16, 1999] **§ 655.3**  **What regulations apply to the International Education Programs?** The following regulations apply to the International Education Programs: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) as follows:18 (1) 34 CFR part 74 (Adm inistration of Grants to Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Nonprofit Organizations). (2) 34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs). (3) 34 CFR part 77 (Definitions that Apply to Department Regulations). (4) 34 CFR part 79 (Intergovernmental Rev iew of Department of Education Programs and Activities), except that part 79 does not apply to 34 CFR parts 660, 669, and 671. (5) 34 CFR part 82 (New Restrictions on Lobbying). (6) 34 CFR part 85 (Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) a nd Governmentwide Requirements for Drug
- Free Workplace (Grants)). (7) 34 CFR part 86 (Drug

- Free Schools and Campuses). (b) The regulations in this part 655; and (c) As appropriate, the regulations in
— (1) 34 CFR part 656 (National Resource Centers Program for Foreign Language and Area Studies or Foreign Language and International Studies); (2) 34 CFR part 657 (Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships Program); (3) 34 CFR part 658 (Undergraduate International Studies and Foreign Language Program); (4) 3 4 CFR part 660 (International Research and Studies Program); (5) 34 CFR part 661 (Business and International Education Program); and (6) 34 CFR part 669 (Language Resource Centers Program). (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127; 1221e–3) [47 FR 14116, Apr. 1, 1 982, as amended at 58 FR 32575, June 10, 1993; 64 FR 7739, Feb. 16, 1999] **§ 655.4**  **What definitions apply to the International Education Programs?** (a) Definitions in EDGAR. The following terms used in this part and 34 CFR parts 656, 657, 658, 660, 661, a nd 669 are defined in 34 CFR part 77: Acquisition EDGAR Grant period Private Applicant Equipment Local educational agency Public Application Facilities Nonprofit Secretary Award Fiscal year Project State educational agency Budget Grant Project period Supplies Contract Grantee Grant period (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127) (b) Definitions that apply to these programs: The following definitions apply to International Education Programs:19

Consortium of institutions of higher education means a group of institutions of higher education that have entered into a cooperative arrangement for the purpose of carrying out a common objective, or a public or private nonprofit agency, organization, or institution designated or created by a group of institutions of higher education for the purpose of carrying out a common objective on their behalf. Critical languages means each of the languages contained in the list of critical languages designated by the Secretary pursuant to section 212(d) of the Education for Economic Security Act, except that, in the implementation of this definition, the Secretary may set priorities according to the purposes of title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. Institution of higher education means, in addition to an institution that meets the definition of section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, an institution that meets the requirements of section 101(a) except that (1) it is not located in the United States, and (2) it applies for assistance under title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, in consortia with institutions that meet the definitions in section 101(a). (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127, and 1141) [47 FR 14116, Apr. 1, 1982, as amended at 58 FR 32575, June 10, 1993; 64 FR 7739, Feb. 16, 1999; 74 FR 35072, July 17, 2009] **Subpart B —**  **What Kinds of Projects Does the Secretary Assist? §**  **655.10 What kinds of projects does the Secretary assist?**  Subpart A of 34 CFR parts 656, 657, and 669 and subpart B of 34 CFR parts 658, 660, 661 describe the kinds of projects that the Secretary assists under the International Education Programs. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127) [74 FR 35072, July 17, 2009] **Subpart C [Reserved] Subpart D**  **— How Does the Secretary Make a Grant?**  **§ 655.30**  **H ow does the Secretary evaluate an application?**  The Secretary evaluates an applications for International Education Programs on the basis of
— (a) The general criteria in §655.31; and (b) The specific criteria in, as applicable, subpart D of 34 CFR parts 658 , 660, 661, and 669. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127) [64 FR 7739, Feb. 16, 1999]20

**§ 655.31**  **What general selection criteria does the Secretary use?** (a) Plan of operation. (1) The Secretary reviews each application for information that shows the quality of the plan of operation for the project. (2) The Secretary looks for information that shows
— (i) High quality in the design of the project; (ii) An effective plan of management that ensures proper and efficient administration of the project; (iii) A cle ar description of how the objectives of the project relate to the purpose of the program; (iv) The way the applicant plans to use its resources and personnel to achieve each objective; and (v) A clear description of how the applicant will provide equal acc ess and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, such as
— (A) Members of racial or ethnic minority groups; (B) Women; and (C) Handicapped persons. (b) Quality of key personnel. (1) The Secretary reviews each application for information that shows the quality of the key personnel the applicant plans to use on the project. (2) The Secretary looks for information that shows
— (i) The qualifications of the project director (if one is to be used); (ii) The qualifications of each of the other key personnel to be used in the project. In the case of faculty, the qualifications of the faculty and the degree to which that faculty is directly involved in the actual teaching and supervision of st udents; and (iii) The time that each person referred to in paragraphs (b)(2) (i) and (ii) of this section plans to commit to the project; and (iv) The extent to which the applicant, as part of its nondiscriminatory employment practices, encourages applicat ions for employment from persons who are members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, such as members of racial or ethnic minority groups, women, handicapped persons, and the elderly. (3) To determine the qualifications of a person, the Secretary considers evidence of past experience and training, in fields related to the objectives of the project, as well as other information that the applicant provides. (c) Budget and cost effectiveness. (1) The Secretary reviews each application for i nformation that shows that the project has an adequate budget and is cost effective. (2) The Secretary looks for information that shows
— (i) The budget for the project is adequate to support the project activities; and (ii) Costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives of the project.21

(d) Evaluation plan. (1) The Secretary reviews each application for information that shows the quality of the evaluation plan for the project. (2) The Secretary looks for information that shows methods of evaluation that are appropriate for the project and, to the extent possible, are objective and produce data that are quantifiable. (e) Adequacy of resources. (1) The Secretary reviews each application for information that shows that the applicant plans to devote adequate resources to the project. (2) The Secretary looks for information that shows
— (i) Other than library, facilities that the applicant plans to use are adequate (language laboratory, museums, etc.); and (ii) The equipment and supplies that the applicant plan s to use are adequate. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121
– 1127) **§ 655.32**  **What additional factors does the Secretary consider in making grant awards?** Except for 34 CFR parts 656, 657, and 661, to the extent practicable and consistent with the criterion of excel lence, the Secretary seeks to achieve an equitable distribution of funds throughout the Nation. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1126(b)). [58 FR 32575, June 10, 1993]

[Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 34, Volume 3] [Revised as of July 1, 2008] [CITE: 34CFR669]22

**TITLE 34 --**  **EDUCATION CHAPTER VI**  **-- OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION** 
**PART 669 —**  **LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS PROGRAM Subpart A**  **— General**  § 669.1 What is the Language Resource Centers Program? § 669.2 Who is eligible to receive assistance under this program? § 669.3 What activ ities may the Secretary fund? § 669.4 What regulations apply? § 669.5 What definitions apply? **Subpart B [Reserved]**
**Subpart C —**  **How Does the Secretary Make a Grant?** § 669.20 How does the Secretary evaluate an application? § 669.21 What selection criteria does the Secretary use? § 669.22 What pri orities may the Secretary establish?

**Subpart D —**  **What Conditions Must Be Met by a Gra ntee?**  § 669.30 What are allowable equipment costs? **Authority:** 20 U.S.C. 1 123, unless otherwise noted. **Source:** 55 FR 2773, Jan. 26, 1990, unless otherwise noted. **Subpart A —**  **General §**  **669.1 What is the Language Resource Centers Program?** The Language Resource Centers Program makes awards, through grants or contracts, for the pu rpose of establishing, strengthening, and operating centers that serve as resources for improving the nation's capacity for teaching and learning foreign languages effectively. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) **§ 669.2 Who is eligible to receive assistance und**  **er this program?**23

An institution of higher education or a combination of institutions of higher education is eligible to receive an award under this part. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) **§ 669.3 What activities may the Secretary fund?**  Centers funded under this part must carry out activities to improve the teaching and learning of foreign languages. These activities must include effective dissemination efforts, whenever appropriate, and may include
— (a) The conduct and dissemination of research on new and improved methods for teaching foreign languages, including the use of advanced educational technology; (b) The development and dissemination of new materials for teaching foreign languages, to reflect the results of research on effective teaching strategies; (c) The development, application, and dissemination of performance testing that is appropriate for use in an educational setting to be used as a standard and comparable measurement of skill levels in foreign languages; (d) The training of teachers in the admi nistration and interpretation of foreign language performance tests, the use of effective teaching strategies, and the use of new technologies; (e) A significant focus on the teaching and learning needs of the less commonly taught languages, including an a ssessment of the strategic needs of the United States, the determination of ways to meet those needs nationally, and the publication and dissemination of instructional materials in the less commonly taught languages; (f) The development and dissemination o f materials designed to serve as a resource for foreign language teachers at the elementary and secondary school levels; and (g) The operation of intensive summer language institutes to train advanced foreign language students, to provide professional deve lopment, and to improve language instruction through pre - service and in
- service language training for teachers. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) [64 FR 7741, Feb. 16, 1999] **§ 669.4 What regulations apply?**  The following regulations apply to this program: (a) Th e regulations in 34 CFR part 655.24

(b) The regulations in this part 669. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) [58 FR 32577, June 10, 1993] **§ 669.5 What definitions apply?**  The following definitions apply to this part: (a) The definitions in 34 CFR 655.4. (b) “Langua ge Resource Center” means a coordinated concentration of educational research and training resources for improving the nation's capacity to teach and learn foreign languages. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) **Subpart B [Reserved] Subpart C**  **— How Does the Secretary**  **Make a Grant? §**  **669.20 How does the Secretary evaluate an application?** The Secretary evaluates an application for an award on the basis of the criteria contained in §§669.21 and 669.22. The Secretary informs applicants of the maximum possible score for e ach criterion in the application package or in a notice published in the Federal Register. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) [70 FR 13377, Mar. 21, 2005] **§ 669.21 What selection criteria does the Secretary use?**  The Secretary evaluates an application on the basi s of the criteria in this section. (a) Plan of operation. (See 34 CFR 655.31(a)) (b) Quality of key personnel. (See 34 CFR 655.31(b))
c (c) Budget and cost
-effectiveness. (See 34 CFR 655.31(c)) (d) Evaluation plan. (See 34 CFR 655.31 (d)) (e) Adequacy of resources. (See 34 CFR 655.31(e)) (f) Need and potential impact. The Secretary reviews each application to determine
—25

(1) The extent to which the proposed materials or activities are needed in the foreign languages on which the project focuses; (2) The exten t to which the proposed materials may be used throughout the United States; and (3) The extent to which the proposed work or activity may contribute significantly to strengthening, expanding, or improving programs of foreign language study in the United St ates. (g) Likelihood of achieving results. The Secretary reviews each application to determine
— (1) The quality of the outlined methods and procedures for preparing the materials; and (2) The extent to which plans for carrying out activities are practicabl e and can be expected to produce the anticipated results. (h) Description of final form of results. The Secretary reviews each application to determine the degree of specificity and the appropriateness of the description of the expected results from the project. (i) Priorities. If, under the provisions of §669.22, the application notice specifies priorities for this program, the Secretary determines the degrees to which the priorities are served. (Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under contro l number 1840
–0608) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123) [55 FR 2773, Jan. 26, 1990, as amended at 58 FR 32577, June 10, 1993; 70 FR 13377, Mar. 21, 2005] **§ 669.22 What priorities may the Secretary establish?**  (a) The Secretary may each year select funding priori ties from among the following: (1) Categories of allowable activities described in §669.3. (2) Specific foreign languages for study or materials development. (3) Levels of education, for example, elementary, secondary, postsecondary, or teacher education. (b) The Secretary announces any priorities in the application notice published in the Federal Register. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123)26

**Subpart D —**  **What Conditions Must Be Met by a Grantee? §**  **669.30 What are allowable equipment costs?** Equipment costs may not exceed fifteen percent of the grant amount. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123)27



## Gov**ernment 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 ag encies 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 gover nment focus on results, service delivery, and customer. **How has the Department of Education Responded to the GPRA Requirements?** As required by GPRA, the Department of Education has prepared a strategic plan for 2007
- 2013. This plan reflects the Departme nt’s priorities and integrates them with its mission and program authorities and describes how the Department will work to improve education for all children and adults in the U.S. The Department’s goals, as listed in the plan, are: Goal 1: Increase student achievement, reward qualified teachers, and renew troubled schools so that every student can read and do math at grade level by 2014, as called for by the No Child Left Behind Act. Goal 2: Encourage more rigorous and advanced coursework to improve the academic performance of our middle and high school students. Goal 3: Work with colleges and universities to improve access, affordability, and accountability, so that our higher education system remains the world’s finest. **What are**  **the Performance Indic ator** **s for the Language Resource Centers (LRCs)?**  Language Resource Centers (LRCs) provide grants for establishing, strengthening and operating centers that serve as resources for improving the nation's capacity for teaching and learning foreign languages t hrough teacher training, research, materials development and dissemination projects. 1. Percentage of LRC products or activities judged to be successful by LRC customers with respect to quality, usefulness and relevance. 2. Percentage of LRC products jud ged to be successful by an independent expert review panel with respect to quality, usefulness and relevance.28

The information provided by grantees in their performance reports submitted via the IRIS reporting system will be the source of data for th e s e m easure s .29



## Guidance on Developing an Evaluation Plan **Overview of GPRA Measures, Program Evaluation, and Project Evaluation** The U.S. Congress passed the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 to asse ss and improve federally funded programs. GPRA requires that federal agencies document the achievements of grant
-funded programs. Specifically, GPRA requires federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Education, to develop and report quantifiable ann ual and long
-term measures to Congress. GPRA stipulates that these measures be limited in number, be specific, and have baselines and targets that are ambitious, yet achievable. Performance reporting occurs at the program level, meaning that the U.S. Depa rtment of Education (ED) aggregates data from all IFLE grantees and reports on measures of the IFLE program overall. ED’s challenge is to articulate program
- level measures that are relevant to several grant programs and that capture the achievements of man y disparate grantees. ED’s Budget Service and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and approve IFLE’s GPRA measures to make sure that the measures reflect the programs’ overall goals. Therefore, once approved, GPRA measures remain relative ly constant over time. **IFLE must collect data from grantees to respond to the GPRA measures for each program.** ED IFLE aggregates the GPRA information reported by all grantees to report the impact of each grant program (e.g., the Center for International Business and Education
- CIBE grant program as a whole) to Congress and other interested stakeholders. This information contributes to ED/IFLE’s overall evaluation of each grant program. By contrast, individual project measures yield specific informatio n that enables grantees to make mid
- course corrections in implementing their proposed projects, if necessary. Project
specific evaluation measures are tailored by project leadership to that project’s goals. Project leadership may establish specific measure s to garner internal institutional support, attract and train staff, attract and retain students, and sustain the project’s effort beyond the grant period. Project
- specific measures will vary greatly between institutions that have received IFLE grants before and novice applicant institutions. For example, an institution that is a current recipient of a CIBE grant or that has received CIBE grants in the past might offer many Study Abroad programs. Based on feedback from its prior project evaluations, that institution might propose a new Study Abroad program in a world region not previously served, or expand the duration of an existing program. In this case, a project
- specific measure might be the number of students enrolled in the new program. However, a fi rst-time CIBE applicant might propose to offer a few short
-term Study Abroad summer programs in its first year as part of a multi
-year plan that includes expanding the world regions served over time. In this case, a project
- specific measure might be the nu mber of faculty qualified to lead a summer program to specific world regions.30

**The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) and the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA)**  GPRA and GPRAMA are intended to improve accountability for the expen diture of public funds, enhance congressional decision
- making by providing Congress with objective information on the effectiveness of federal programs, and promoting federal programs’ results, delivery of services, and customers’ satisfaction. Accordingl y, GPRA and the GPRAMA mandate that federal agencies, including ED, submit three major products to Congress: multi
-year strategic plans, annual plans, and annual reports. To comply with GPRA and GPRAMA, ED must state clearly in these products what it inten ds to accomplish, identify the resources required, and report on its progress annually to Congress. How has the Department of Education Responded to the GPRA Requirements ? As required by GPRA, ED has developed a strategic plan that reflects its organi zational priorities and also integrates IFLE’s mission and program authorities. ED’s stated goal for IFLE is “to meet the nation’s security and economic needs through the development and maintenance of a national capacity in foreign languages, and area and international studies.” The Title VI international education programs’ overarching goals are to maintain a U.S. higher education system with the capacity to produce experts in less commonly taught languages and area studies who are capable of contributin g to the needs of U.S. government, academic, and business institutions. The Fulbright
- Hays programs provide opportunities for U.S. educators and postsecondary students to advance their studies of foreign languages, to create and improve curriculum, or to c onduct learning and research activities in host country settings. Each IFLE grant program addresses a specific objective related to the overarching goal. The next section of this document provides program
- specific guidance to applicants on selecting approp riate performance and evaluation measures. **IFLE Grant Project Evaluation** A strong project proposal by an applicant for an IFLE grant includes a well
- designed evaluation plan that is based on clearly stated goals and objectives. The evaluation plan must address all IFLE GPRA measures, as well as include project
- specific measures that are tied to the project’s goals and objectives. The evaluation plan also must identify how each of the specific objectives will be achieved, and establish the quantitative a nd qualitative measures that will be used to demonstrate the successful implementation of the proposed project. The Performance
Measure Form (PMF) serves as a guide for applicants to plan and articulate key aspects of a well
- designed evaluation plan. IFLE offers applicant institutions the following suggestions to consider in developing the Impact and Evaluation section of the grant application. **Developing an Evaluation Plan**31

**Working with an Independent Project Evaluator** Please note that an independent project evaluator may not be required for every IFLE grant program. Applicants and grantees should consult with their IFLE program officer and refer to program - specific materials for guidance. The independent project evaluator should be involved in the project throughout the entire grant cycle from the proposal development phase through the project’s funding and implementation to ensure that a well
- designed evaluation plan is developed and implemented. The independent project evaluator works with key project personnel to draft measurable objectives, identify appropriate progress indicators and benchmarks, and to formalize the data collection, calculation, and analytical methodologies. The primary role of the independent project evaluator is to provide techni cal support and expertise to the project in order to best demonstrate its progress toward achieving stated goals and objectives. The independent project evaluator may also provide support and guidance for the development of a dissemination plan to publiciz e the project results to internal and external entities. A grant applicant may wish to collaborate with other projects on a given campus to pool resources and share the cost of a professional evaluator. The guidance provided in this document is intended to help maximize evaluation resources by streamlining an evaluation process and by supporting collaboration between key project personnel and an independent evaluator. Very small projects may have very limited funds available to compensate an evaluator. In such cases, limited resources are best expended on working with an evaluator at the project’s start, as opposed to its later stages. To ensure both the quality and the credibility of the evaluation, it should be conducted by a qualified evaluator wit h appropriate expertise and training. The evaluator should be independent, whether the evaluator is internal or external to the grant project. The applicant should provide a plan to ensure that the evaluator maintains sufficient independence from the proje ct team, thus avoiding any potential or perceived conflict of interest. **Developing Clear Goals and Objectives** A well
- designed evaluation plan includes clearly articulated goals, measurable objectives, and a way to collect concrete data to substantiate t he project’s progress toward achieving its goals. The evaluation plan should be limited to a few clear and specific objectives that are linked directly to the proposed goals of the project and that can be measured. The applicant/grantee should consider the following when developing measurable objectives and planning for data collection: 1. What will indicate or demonstrate that the project is meeting its goals? Describe the expected measurable outcomes.32

2. What types and sources of data will best demonstrate tha t the project is achieving, or will achieve, its objectives? Identify the data and its sources that can serve as indicators or benchmarks that the project is meeting, or will meet, the intended outcomes. 3. How will the data be collected? Describe access and frequency. 4. How will the data be analyzed and reported? Describe the methodology and key personnel responsible. 5. Will the results demonstrate the project’s proposed outcome and impact (e.g., an increase in qualified language instructors, higher graduation ra te in international studies, better employment rate of program graduates, etc.)? Describe how the results may demonstrate short
-term and long
-term outcomes and impact. Examples of possible project
- specific quantitative objectives include:
 Increase the num ber of students completing advanced courses in priority languages;
 Increase the number of students in business, health, or science majors graduating with foreign language skills;
 Increase the number of study abroad opportunities for students on campus; or,
 Increase the number of certificates and degrees conferred in targeted programs of study. Examples of possible project
- specific qualitative objectives include:
 Improve employment opportunities for students who possess advanced language skills and internat ional experience;
 Strengthen collaboration between foreign language departments, international education, and other disciplines; or,
 Improve quality of assessment tools for priority and/or less

- commonly
-taught languages. Examples of specific activities t hat may support project objectives include:
 Recruit and hire of qualified priority language faculty; or,
 Create or increase professional development and training sessions for faculty. Progress indicators that relate to the quantitative and qualitative ex amples cited in the above sections include, but are not limited to, the following:
 Increase in the number of new faculty positions in priority and/or less

- commonly
-taught languages, area studies courses, or interdisciplinary courses that are institutionali zed after grant support has ended;33

 Increase in the number and type of courses developed, piloted, and subsequently submitted to the institution’s review board for inclusion in the college catalog for the upcoming academic year. **Developing Evaluation Ques tions**  An applicant should formulate evaluation questions that interest all stakeholders and audiences related to the proposed project, and align the questions with appropriate information gathering techniques. 1. Who/what will change? 2. When will the change(s ) take place? 3. How much change is expected? 4. How will change be measured, recorded, or documented? **Planning Data Collection and Analysis** In order to show change, baseline data must be included in the final evaluation plan, submitted to the program office, o nce the grant is awarded. Applicants should determine if baseline data already exist and where to find them. Data collection instruments that are not readily available need to be developed. Data collection instruments may include surveys, standardized test s, exams, focus groups, and topic guides. Institutions may have additional instruments that are specific to the proposed project. The final evaluation plan must specify the types and sources of data that will be collected and describe how the data will be collected, including access and frequency. The plan must also describe how the data will be compiled, analyzed, and reported, as well as the methodology that will be used and key personnel responsible for these tasks. The institutions should work with eval uation specialists to develop a detailed analysis plan to analyze the data and interpret results. In addition, the evaluation plan should include a timeline to delineate tasks and specify when and how progress benchmarks or indicators will be met. The time line will help projects to stay on track toward achieving their goals. On this phase, LRC projects may wish to collaborate with other projects on campus to enrich the process and share resources.34



## Guidance to Language Resource Center Applicants The Titl e VI international education programs’ overarching goal is to maintain a U.S. higher education system with the capacity to produce experts in less commonly taught languages and area studies who are capable of contributing to the needs of U.S. government, a cademic and business institutions. Each IFLE grant program addresses a specific objective related to this overarching goal. The objective of the LRC program is to strengthen and improve K
- 12 and undergraduate instruction in foreign languages. The overridin g goal of all LRC projects is to develop prototypes for teaching and measuring performance that can be applied broadly and used as resources to improve foreign language education nationally. The LRC program provides grants to establish, strengthen and operate centers that provide teacher training, research, materials development and dissemination projects to improve teachers’ abilities to teach and students’ capacities to learn foreign languages. US/ ED has developed and the Office of M anagement and B udget h as approved the following GPRA measures to evaluate the overall success of this IFLE grant program: **LRC GPRA Measure 1 :**  **Percentage of LRC products or activities judged to be successful**  **by LRC customers with respect to quality, usefulness and relevance .**  **LRC GPRA Measure 2:**  **Percentage of LRC products judged to be successful by an**  **independent expert review panel with respect to quality, usefulness and**  **relevance.** Applicants must define how they will collect and report data for these measures when they develop their proposed projects. **Successful applicants, later grantees, will be required to collect data on LRC GPRA Measures 1 and 2 and report that data to**  **US/ ED in their interim and**  **final performance reports.** 

### Example GPRA Performance Measure Form (PMF) T he following information on GPRA Performance Measures and their related PMFs is for applicants’ information purposes only. Applicants to the FY 2014 LRC program are not required to complete a PMF for GPRA Measure 1 and 2 as part of their application. Shou ld an applicant’s project be selected for funding, GPRA PMFs will be requested by the IFLE Program Office once awards are made. Please also note that all FY 2014 LRC grantees must report on the LRC GPRA Measure 1 and 2 on an annual basis as part of their regular online IRIS reporting. Below, please find an example of a PMF completed for the LRC GPRA Measure 2 in Figure 2.35 **Figure 1: PMF for GPRA Measures for LRC Applicants**  **1. Performance Measures**  **2.**

**Activities 3. Data/** 

**Indicators 4.** 

**Frequency 5.** 

**Data Source**  **6. Baseline and Targets**

**BL T1**  **T2 T3**  **T4** A) Percentage in the number of LRC products or activities judged to be successful by LRC customers with respect to quality, usefulness, and relevance. B) Percentage in the number of LRC product s judged to be successful by an independent expert review panel with respect to quality, relevance, and usefulness. 

### Instructions for Completing GPRA PMF 1. Performance Measures
– The GPRA measures are already filled in. **Note that applicants are to provide a count (raw number) rather than percentage for each measure.**  2. Activities – Fill in the major activities that the institution will undertake to achieve the GPRA performance measure goals. 3. Data/Indicators
– State the data or indicators that will b e used to track progress of each activity stated in #2. Note that one of the indicators should be synonymous with the performance measure, while other indicators will be used to track progress toward meeting the performance measure. Since the performance m easure might not change from the baseline in the early year(s) of the grant, supporting indicators will be used to track and demonstrate progress. 4. Frequency – State period of measurement (e.g., quarterly, by semester or annually). 5. Data Source – State the s ource of the data (e.g., grantee records or university registrar). 6. Baseline (BL) and Targets (T1

-T4)
– State the number of training programs for K
- 16 instructors of less commonly taught languages that the program currently runs as the “Baseline” and how ma ny training program s are expected to be running at the end of each grant year as the answers for T1 through T4.36

**The LRC**  **grantee will**  **need to**  **complete a**  **PMF for**  **LRC GPRA**  **Measures 1**  **and 2.**  The following guidance is offered to assist the applicant in calcul ating and inputting the proper baseline numbers. **Details Regarding GPRA Baseline Numbers** LRC grantees must provide baseline figures for the two GPRA Measures for LRC Projects. The IFLE office must know what that baseline number is since the LRC GPRA me asures will assess the change from baseline to outcome.37 

### Figure 2: Sample PMF for GPRA Measures for LRC Applicants **1. Performance Measures**  **2. Activities 3. Data/Indicators**  **4. Frequency**  **5. Data Source 6. Baseline and Targets**  **B L**  **T1 T2**  **T3 T4**  A ) **Perc entage of**  **LRC products or activities judged to**  **be successful by LRC customers**  **with respect to quality,**  **usefulness, and relevance**  A.1 Survey K
- 16 courses offered at

schools within the region of the LRC

– or nationally within the same LCTL areas to identify gaps/weaknesses. A.2 Prioritize manageable set of training programs to improve or reinvent. A.3 Pilot test training modules. A.4 Finalize training modules based on feedback. A.5 Offer training modules for use at K
- 16 institutions.  Number of respondents to a survey of K
12 teachers of LCTLs.

 Ranked list of estimates of “marketplace” demand for training programs by language and level of instruction.

 Average rating of training modules used by beta testers.

 Average rating of training modules after improvements based on feedback.

 Average composite rating (on a 0
– 5 scale) with respect to quality, relevance and usefulness by K
- 12 teachers who have completed the new training program. **Annually Annually**  **Annually Annually**  **Annually** Center records

Center record s
Center records
Center records Survey 1 of K
- 12 users of LRC products and activities **0**

**0**
**0**
**0 N**  **/ A**  **100 Yes** 
**B**
**A 4.0**  **140 Yes** 
**B**
**A 4.1**  **180 Yes** 
**B**
**A 4.2**  **220 Yes** 
**B**
**A 4.3** 

1 If an independent survey conducted at the LRC program level is fielded, then individual LRCs would be expected to cooperate with that survey effort rather than conduct a survey and provide the results
.38 **1. Performance Measures**  **2. Activities 3. Data/Indicators**  **4. Frequency**  **5. Data Source 6. Baseline and Targets**  **B L**  **T1 T2**  **T3 T4**  B ) **Percentage of**  **LRC products judged to be**  **successful by an independent**  **expert review panel with respect**  **to quality, usefulness and**  **relevance.** B.1 Scan peer
- reviewed journals for

promising practices in improved teaching methods. B.2 Carry out meta
- analysis of studies on most promising techniques. B.3 Conduct exp eriments to validate preliminary findings. B.4 Disseminate results of research and serve as distributor of materials used in improved teaching methods.  Number of new promising practices found.

 Number of new promising practices that rise to the level of evi dence
- based practice.

 Where evidence is equivocal, number of experiments to validate or reject hypotheses.

 Number of downloads of materials related to improved teaching methods.

 Satisfaction rating (on a scale of 1 to 5) of those who have downloaded and us ed materials related to new teaching methods.

 Average composite rating (on a 0
– 5 scale) with respect to quality, relevance, and usefulness by an independent expert panel. 2 **Annually Annually**  **Annually Annually**  **Annually Annually**  Center records

Cen ter records Center records
Webmaster’s records Web survey Expert Panel Review **0**

**0 0** 
**0**
**N /**  **A**
**N /**  **A 20**  **10 2** 
**200**
**4.0**
**4.0 20**  **10 4** 
**280**
**4.1**
**4.1 20**  **10 6** 
**360**
**4.2**
**4.2 20**  **10 8** 
**440**
**4.3**
**4.3**

2 If an expert panel is activated, then individual LRCs will be expected to cooperate with the expert panel process rather than supply the composite number.39



### Project**- Specific Performance Measu**  **re Form (PMF)** The following information on Project
- Specific Performance Measures and their related PMFs is for applicants to use in completing their applications to the FY 2014 LRC program. Applicants to the FY 2014 LRC program are required to partially complete a minimum of two PMFs for Project
- Specific Measures as part of their application to the program. Below, please find an example of a PMF completed for a sample LRC Project
- Specific Measure. Applicants must submit at least two Project
-Specific PM Fs, each one with a different Project Goal Statement. For each PMF submitted with the application, Items 1 (Project Goal Statement) and 2 (Performance Measures) in Figure 3 should be addressed. Should an applicant become a grantee, they will be required to submit a completed PMF for approval by the IFLE Program Office and report on it as part of the annual online reports in the IRIS system. An example of a PMF completed for LRC Project
-Specific Measures is provided in Figure 4.

**Figure 3: PMF for Project -** **Specific Measures for LRC Applicants**

**1. Project Goal Statement 2.**  **Performance Measures**  **3.**

**Activities 4. Data/** 

**Indicators 5.** 

**Frequency 6.** 

**Data Source**  **7. Baseline and Targets**

**BL T1**  **T2 T3**  **T4**40



### Instructions for Com **pleting a**  **Project -** **Specific PMF** 1. Project Goal Statement
– Each project will have more than one goal. Examples of goals include the following: “What nationally
- normed language tests are now available?” “Is there a need for a Computer Assisted Speech Tool (CAST) in this arena?” “Is CAST best used as a feedback loop to students and their teachers?” 2. Complete a separate PMF template row for each project goal. State the first project
- specific goal in the first (header) row of the template, then proceed to step 2. Repeat the process for each project
- specific goal. ***Note: Numbers 3 -**  **7 are to be completed if applicant is awarded a Fiscal Year 2014 LRC award.**  3. Performance Measures
– State the project
- specific measure in an objective and time
- bound manner. Make sure th e units of measure (e.g., number of courses, number of students, etc.) are well defined. 4. Activities – Fill in the major activities that the institution will undertake to achieve the project
- specific performance measure goal. 5. Data/Indicators
– State the dat a or indicators that will be used to track progress of each activity stated in #2. Note that one of the indicators should be synonymous with the performance measure, while the other indicators will be used to track progress toward meeting the performance m easure. Since the performance measure might not change from the baseline in the early year(s) of the grant, supporting indicators will be used to track and demonstrate progress. 6. Frequency – State period of measurement (e.g., quarterly, by semester or annua lly). 7. Data Source – State the source of the data (e.g., program records or university registrar). 8. Baseline (BL) and Targets (T1

-T4)
– State the level of each measure at the time that the application is submitted as the “Baseline” and provide the target levels at the end of each subsequent grant year. Where the measure specifies “new,” the baseline is stated as the existing total at the time of the application and the targets are stated as the incremental increase.41 **Figure 4: Sample PMF for Project -** **Specifi c Measures for LRC Applicants**  **1. Project Goal Statement:** To increase the number of highly qualified credentialed teachers in less commonly taught languages (LCTLs), first, in the sta te of XXX and, second, throughout the nation. **2. Performance Measures**  **3. Activities**  **4. Data/Indicators 5.**  **Frequency 6. Data** 

**Source 7.** 

**BL T1**  **T2 T3**  **T4** A) Research to identify alternative teacher credentialing pathways for critical and less commonly taught languages. A.1 Review XXX state teacher credentialing requirements for a language teaching credential. A.2 List all of the competency requirements for each of the content areas: language, culture, linguistics, etc. A.3 Research and identify exams or coursework that can meet the stated competency requirements and their availabi lity. A.4 Propose to XXX (XXX State Teacher Credentialing Commission) alternative means by which experienced teachers from other subject matters or countries could demonstrate teaching experience and have student teaching requirements waived.  A list of al ternative ways that teacher candidates may demonstrate their competencies in each of the required subject matter areas for a language teaching credential (updated annually).

 A comprehensive manual to assist a teacher candidate seeking to be credentialed in a less commonly taught language (updated annually). **Annually**

**Annually** Online and

peer-to - peer research

Compilation of online and peer
-to peer research **No**

**No Yes** 

**Yes Yes** 

**Yes Yes** 

**Yes Yes** 

**Yes**

B) Develop an online language i nstruction module to assist less commonly taught language teacher candidates in successfully passing the XXX Subject Examinations for Teachers (XSET) in order to qualify for their teaching credential. B.1 Identify the required language and culture componen ts on the XSET that teacher candidates must pass. B.2 Create a working group to develop online language and culture modules for each of the components (Year 1: Filipino; Year 2: Chinese & Arabic; Year 3: Korean & Vietnamese; Year 4: Review and Revise all b ased on learners’ feedback). B.3 Recruit teacher candidates to test the online modules designed to prepare them to pass the XSET. B.4 Document the teacher candidates who completed the online modules for each language and their success rate of passing the XSET. B.5 Collect and analyze examinees’ feedback to improve the online modules.  The number of language modules developed for each LCTL.

 The number of cultural modules developed for each LCTL.

 The number of teacher candidates who complete the online modules
.

 The number of teacher candidates who successfully pass the CSET. **Annually Annually** 
**Annually**
**Annually** Posted on

LRC website Posted on LRC website
LRC Records Survey of teacher candidates **0**

**0**

**0**

**0 4** 
**4**

**12**

**10 4** 
**8**

**36**

**31 4** 
**8**

**60**

**52 12** 
**20**

**60**

**54**42

**1. Project Goal Statement:** To increase the number of highly qualified credentialed teachers in less commonly taught languages (LCTLs), first, in the sta te of XXX and, second, throughout the nation. **2. Performance Measures**  **3. Activities**  **4. Data/Indicators 5.**  **Frequency 6. Data** 

**Source 7.** 

**BL T1**  **T2 T3**  **T4** C) Develop an online forum that includes researchers, experienced educators, and credentialed language teachers to integrate theories and practice to further the language instruction field. C.1 Identify and invite leadi ng researchers and educators in the field of second language acquisition and foreign language instruction and practicing foreign language teachers at K
- 16 levels. Be sure to have a wide representation of languages. C.2 Design and create an online forum tha t allows asynchronous multimedia participation including text, chat, audio, and video. C.3 Identify forum participation protocols to maximize constructive interactions and exchanges and hold an online orientation session. C.4 Ensure that there is always on e person who acts as a rotating facilitator to keep the conversation moving and to summarize the exchanges at the end of each time period.  The number of people who actively participate each week.

 The innovative or substantive ideas that emerge from each we ek’s forum that are being documented. **Weekly**

**Annually** Center

Records

Center Records **0**

**0 10** 

**40 25** 

**40 35** 

**40 40** 

**40**43

**Impact and Evaluation Selection Criteria** This section describes the selection criteria that reviewers wi ll use t o score the “Evaluation Plan.” The following questions in bold are quoted from the “Instructions for Project Narrative” on the LRC application. Each question is followed by guidance to help the applicant provide information that will enable reviewers to award the appropriate level of points for the applicant’s planned impact and evaluation efforts. The applicant should provide actual baseline numbers, including trend data if possible, when answering the questions in the grant application. If the applicant h as not tracked the data requested, the applicant should explain what mechanisms will be put into place to collect the desired data and analyze it to track progress toward the proposed project’s goals and objectives. For the LRC program , there are two questions that an applicant must answer concerning the Evaluation Plan: **What is the quality of the evaluation plan for the project?** The applicant should review the section entitled “Guidance on Developing an Evaluation Plan ” earlier in this document. This gu idance document simplifies and demonstrates the key elements of a comprehensive and objective evaluation plan. Applicants need to clearly express: Who/what will change? When will the change(s) to take place? How much change is expected? What are the propo sed data collection methodologies? Are the credentials, qualifications and impartial statuses of those who will carry out the evaluation plan sufficient to ensure that the results will be valid and reliable? **Does the plan have methods of evaluation that a re appropriate for the project and, to the**  **extent possible, are objective and produce data that are quantifiable?** Applicants should design the evaluation plan to reflect a clear and well
- defined set of goals and objectives. For instance, if a project’s de sired outcome is the development of a new and improved curriculum , its evaluation plan should contain questions to assess whether the curriculum development followed established best practice guidelines. The success of a new curriculum may be assessed from the students’ perspective to ascertain whether they are engaged in a classroom setting, be it virtual or in person. The assessment may be based on feedback from those students pertaining to their sense of engagement with the course, and on objective feedb ack pertaining to their mastery of the material as compared to a similar class of students using the old teaching method.44 

## FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS **Q: Our center has received an LRC grant in the past. Is it appropriate to refer to this in our applicat**  **ion? A:**  Yes, however, I IFLE strongly suggests that you refrain from referring to your proposal as an application for "renewal" of your grant. A new competition for grant awards is held every four years. In selecting applications for funding, no preference is given to applicants who have received LRC grants in the past. **Q: What techniques does the U.S. Department of Education (US/ED) consider helpful for presenting the application narrative and other important information?**  A: In presenting the applicatio n narrative (your responses to the selection criteria), we encourage you to follow the order of the selection criteria as listed in the “Instructions for the Project Narrative” section in the application booklet. Additional useful techniques include : usin g cross - references in the budget and appendices, providing an acronyms list and using tables and graphs to present information effectively. **Q: What criteria do the reviewers use when scoring the selection criteria**  **? A:**  Three peer reviewers score each ap plication using the selection criteria in 34 CFR 655.31 and 669.21. The selection criteria are explained further in the section, “Instructions for the Project Narrative.” The review panels provide written comments and scores to support their judgments abou t the quality, significance and impact of the proposed project. **Q: What criteria do the reviewers use when scoring the competitive preference priorities? A:**  Please see “ **F ISCAL YEAR**  **2014 -**  **Applying Competitive Preference Priority Points**” page of this app lication
. **Q: What happens to my application if US/ED finds it to be ineligible? A:**  It is not evaluated. Section 75.216 of EDGAR prohibits US/ED from evaluating an application if it does not meet the program eligibility criteria or does not otherwise co mply with application requirements. If ineligible, a letter is sent to the applicant explaining why it was not evaluated. **Q: Should references, footnotes, endnotes or the bibliography be included in the narrative? How long should they be?**  **A:** References, footnotes, endnotes and the bibliography will certainly strengthen an application. However, they will be considered part of the application narrative, and subject to the page limit restrictions. Please check the Federal Register n otice for more informati on regarding the narrative page limit. **Q: Do the provisions of the “Fly America Act” apply to this program? A:**  Yes. Travel paid for with grant funds must be in accordance with the **Fly America Act** (International Air Transportation Fair Competitive Practi ces Act of 1974, PL 93
- 624, PL 96
- 192).45

To be in compliance, travel must be on American carriers wherever available, based on jet economy high season rates. **Q: How will funding continuation decisions be made? A:**  Annual performance reports will be sub mitted in lieu of formal continuation requests. Continuation funding will be contingent upon demonstration of substantial progress toward the completion of the project activities in the annual performance report. Instructions for completing performance re ports will be forwarded to successful grantees shortly after the grant awards have been determined. **Q: When will selections be announced? A:**  The awards will be announced no later than September 30, 2014
. **Q: If an applicant has programmatic questions, whom should he or she contact?**  **A:** He or she should contact US/ED program officer at LRC@ed.gov
.46



### INSTRUCTION **S FOR COMPLETING THE LRC APPLICATION PACKAGE**  **A BSTRACT**  

### & **P ROJECT**  

### N **ARRATIVE** 

### :  Provide an abstract of no more than o ne page describing your program’s background, resources, goals, purpose, intended audiences and any special features. Please attach this document under “Abstract Attachment” in the online application.  The project narrative must be limited to **50 pages** and should adhere to the following format:
o A “page” is 8.5" x 11", on one side only, with 1" margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. Page numbers and an identifier may be within the 1” margin. Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) al l text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures and graphs.
o Applicants may **only** use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Cour ier New or Arial. **An application submitted in any other font (including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.**  Applicants must use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

o The page limit does not apply to the cover sheet, the budget section ( including the narrative budget justification ), the assurances and certifications, or the one
page abstract, the resumes, the timeline of project activities, the letters of support or the appendices. However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative section.  Before preparing the Program Narrative, applicants should also review the Dear Applicant Letter, Competition Highlights, the Federal Register n otice and program statute for specific guidance and requirements. Note that applications will be evaluated according to the specific selection criteria specified in the Notice and this package.  The Secretary evaluates an application on the basis of the broad criteria in 34 CFR Part 75, section s 75.209(a) and 75.210 of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR). Please see “Selection Criteria” in the Federal Register n otice
. To facilitate the review of the application, please construct the narrative in the order of th e selection criteria provided below. Be sure to address the components in each of the categories, as the reviewers will be using these guidelines to score the applications.47 

### APPENDICES TO BE INCLUDED  **The curricula vitae of key personnel and professional staff directly involved in the**  **applicant’s program .**   **A timeline of project activities for**  **the duration of the grant .**  o The timeline should reflect all proposed program development activities to be funded during the four
-year grant period and represent activities that contribute to strengthening of the overall program. o Cross
- reference pages in the narrative, when appropriate. Identify activities that are new, continuing or ending during the four
-year cycle. Demonstrate which costs will be shared by the instit ution(s). Use color or shading to illustrate program development, cost sharing and other strategies for institutionalizing the activities. If colors are used , please ensure that all copies have color. o If applying as a consortium, clearly identify the insti tutions conducting the activity ( ies).  **Letters of support .**   **A table of objectives that will guide project activities for the FY 2014 -** **201 7**  **performance period .**  o IFLE is requesting these objectives to assist with our review of the performance reports that you w ill be submitting in IRIS. In addition to the status information and data that you report, the objectives will provide a helpful context for assessing progress. o Helpful hints for developing objectives:
 Objectives must be clear.
 Objectives should not have too many parameters.  Objectives should define the outcome (effect or benefit) to be realized.
 Objectives should be time
- phased and measurable  **Performance Measure Form PMF**  **(Please see Guidance to LRC applicants)**48 

## Selection Criteria
To facilitate the review of the application, provide responses to each of the following selection criteria in the following order: 1. Plan of Operation ( 15 points) 2. Quality of Key Personnel (10 points) 3. Adequacy of Resources ( 5 points) 4. Ne ed for Potential Impact (20 points) 5. Likelihood of Achieving Results ( 10 points ) 6. Description of F inal F orm of R esults (10 p oints ) 7. Evaluation P lan (20 p oints ) * 8. Budget and Cost Effectiveness (10 p oints) **Total Base Score (100 points)**  9. Competitive Preference Priority I (5 points) 10. Competitive Preference Priority II ( 5 points)

_________ **Total Maximum Score for Selection Criteria 1**  **10 points**  **The following guidance may assist you in addressing each of the selection criteria :**  1. **PLAN OF OPERATION (15 points)** Does the application demonstrate : a. A h igh quality in the project design? b. An effective plan of management that ensures proper and efficient administration of the project? c. A clear description of how the objectives of the project relate to the purpose of the program? d. The way the applicant plans to use its resources and personnel to achieve each objective? e. A clear description of how the applicant will provide equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are mem bers of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, such as : i. Members of racial or ethnic minority groups ii. Women iii. Handicapped persons 2. **QUALITY OF KEY PERSONNEL (10 points)** Does the application demonstrate the quality of the key personnel the applic ant plans to use on the project? a. What are the qualifications of the project director?49 b. What are the qualifications of each of the other key personnel to be used in the project? i. In the case of faculty
– what are the qualifications of the faculty and the de gree to which that faculty is directly involved in the actual teaching and supervision of students? c. How much time does each of the mentioned key personnel plan to commit to the project? d. To what extent does the applicant, as part of its nondiscriminatory e mployment practices, encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, such as members of racial or ethnic minority groups, women, handicapped persons and the elderly? e. Do the qualifi cations of the proposed key personnel include evidence of past experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the project, as well as other information that the applicant provides? 3. **ADEQUACY OF RESOURCES (5 points)** Does the application demo nstrate that the applicant plans to devote adequate resources to the project? a. Other than libraries, are the facilities that the applicant plans to use adequate (language laboratories, museums, etc.)? b. Are the equipment and supplies that the applicant plans to use adequate? 4. **NEED AND POTENTIAL IMPACT (20 points)** a. To what extent are the proposed materials or activities needed in the foreign language(s) on which the project focuses? b. To what extent may the proposed materials be used throughout the United States? c. To what extent may the proposed work or activity contribute significantly to strengthening, expanding or improving programs of foreign language study in the United States? 5. **LIKELIHOOD OF ACHIEVING RESULTS (10 points)** a. What is the quality of the outlined me thods and procedures for preparing the materials? b. To what extent are the plans for carrying out activities practicable, and can they be expected to produce the anticipated results? 6. **DESCRIPTION OF FINAL FORM OF RESULTS (10 points)** a. What is the degree of spe cificity and the appropriateness of the description of the expected results from the project? 7. **EVALUATION PLAN (20 points)** a. What is the quality of the evaluation plan for the project?50 b. Does the plan have methods of evaluation that are appropriate for the project and, to the extent possible, are objective and produce data that are quantifiable? ***** **Note –**  **Please see Guidance**  **on Developing an Evaluation Plan section of this**  **application .**  8. **BUDGET AND COST EFFECTIVENESS (10 points)** a. Is the budget for the project adeq uate to support the project activities? b. Are costs reasonable in relation to the objectives of the project? **Competitive Preference Priorities Competitive Preference Priority**  **# 1:**  **( 0 or**  **5 points)**  A pplications that propose activities that focus on any of the 78 priority languages selected from the U.S. Department of Education's list of Less Commonly Taught Languages (LCTLs). We will award an additional five points to an application that meets this priority. The list includes the following: Akan (Twi

- F ante), Albanian, Amharic, Arabic (all dialects), Armenian, Azeri (Azerbaijani), Balochi, Bamanakan (Bamana, Bambara, Mandikan, Mandingo, Maninka, Dyula), Belarusian, Bengali (Bangla), Berber (all languages), Bosnian, Bulgarian, Burmese, Cebuano (Visayan), Chechen, Chinese (Cantonese), Chinese (Gan), Chinese (Mandarin), Chinese (Min), Chinese (Wu), Croatian, Dari, Dinka, Georgian, Gujarati, Hausa, Hebrew (Modern), Hindi, Igbo, Indonesian, Japanese, Javanese, Kannada, Kashmiri, Kazakh, Khmer (Cambodian), Kirg hiz, Korean, Kurdish (Kurmanji), Kurdish (Sorani), Lao, Malay (Bahasa Melayu or Malaysian), Malayalam, Marathi, Mongolian, Nepali, Oromo, Panjabi, Pashto, Persian (Farsi), Polish, Portuguese (all varieties), Quechua, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Sinhala (Si nhalese), Somali, Swahili, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Telugu, Thai, Tibetan, Tigrigna, Turkish, Turkmen, Ukrainian, Urdu, Uyghur/Uigur, Uzbek, Vietnamese, Wolof, Xhosa, Yoruba, and Zulu. **Competitive Preference Priority #2 (up to 5 points)**  : Applications that incorporate significant and sustained collaborative activities with a Minority
- Serving Institution (as defined in this notice) or a community college (as defined in this notice). These activities should be designed to incorporate foreign languages into th e curriculum and to improve foreign language instruction on the MSI or community college campus. We will award up to an additional 5 points to a n application that meets this priority.

 Minority
- Serving Institution (MSI) : means an institution that is elig ible to receive assistance under sections 316 through 320 of part A or under part B of Title III or under Title V of the HEA.51

Com munity college is defined in section 312(f) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1058(f); or an institution of higher education (as defined i n section 101 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1001)) that awards degrees and certificates, more than 50% of which are not bachelor’s degrees (or an equivalent); or master’s , professional, or other advanced degrees. **Please note that panel reviewers will be instruct ed to apply competitive priority points as**  **follows:** Please use the following information to apply points for this criterion. 0 points:
- Not Addressed. 1 point:
-Addressed, but unclear and little information provided. 2 points:
- Some information, but many questions left unanswered. 3 points:
-Adequate, neither poor nor stellar. Information is disjointed or confusing to

understand. 4 points:
- Good, most information provided, but could have included additional details

and better examples. 5 points:
- Considered excellent.

 Self
- identifies as a collaborative application. Lead applicant and partner institution(s) clearly identified by name and whether each is an MSI or community college.
 Multiple collaborative activities identified and described in detail, including lead partner, which partners and sectors of the international education community will be involved and benefit from each activity, and timeline. Each partner should be represented in leading and being responsible for implementation of activities. All relevant activities (international business, foreign language, area studies) to be undertaken should be specified and explained, with names and bios of lead individuals provided with excellent qualifications.
 Discussion of how partnership wil l build upon strengths and resources of each institution partner
 Convincing evidence that partners have consulted effectively during the pre - application phase and that the partnership and its activities will address documented need and lead to effective re sults.52

**Invitational Priority (0 points)**  **:** While no additional points will be awarded to an application that meets these priorities, we encourage applications from any of the following :

 Invitational Priority #1 : Applications from new applicants (as defined in th e Federal Register notice).

 Invitational Priority #2: Applications that propose programs or projects that engage in collaborative activities with heritage language centers or schools to support the language maintenance and development of her itage language speakers.53



## Instructions for Budget Summary Form **& Itemized Line Item Budget NOTE**  **:** Applicants to the LRC program must submit : (1) a budget summary form to categorize requested funds (ED Form 524, Sections A & B) **AND** (2) a detailed line i tem budget and accompanying budget narrative. **The budget summary** is to be included on the “Department of Education Budget Summary Form – (ED Form 524).” The applicant must complete both Sections A & B. **T he detailed line item budget AND accompanying b**  **udget narrative should be**  submitted for all four years. This should be included in the “Budget Narrative Attachment Form” in the online application
. This section requests information on the applicant’s financial plan for carrying out the project. Please s how both the Federal and any non
- Federal match (not required, but highly encouraged). Explain how these costs support the project activities. 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’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 explana tion and appropriate justification if the institution’s normal fringe benefit contribution exceeds 20 percent of salaries. 3. Travel : On line 3 (ED Form 524), provide the travel costs for project personnel and student participants. [Consultants’ travel shou ld 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 rate should be used. Reimbursement is allowed for taxi, bus, train or van transportation. Per diem at the established institution rate is permitted when an individual is away from home overnight on offi cial project business (see OMB Circular A

- 21, J.48.c
- Commercial Air Travel). F oreign travel can be authorized under the grant . Please include in your travel budget funds to travel to the annual LRC P roject D irectors’ M eeting. You may include costs for up to two54

people to attend. Allowable expenses include : airfare and ground transportation, hotels, conference fees, meals and incidentals. 4. Equipment : On line 4 (ED Form 524), indicate the cost of equipment

-- non - expendable personal property, which h as 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. **Note: n**  **o more than 15% of your total budget can be used in this category** 
. 5. Supplies : On line 5 (ED Form 524), inc lude 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 : Not applicable. Leave blank. 7. Construction : Not applicable. Leave blank. 8. Oth er : On line 8 (ED Form 524), indicate all direct costs not covered on lines 1 through 5. The costs/fees for consultants and consultants’ travel should be included here. Examples of “other” costs are: equipment rental, required fees, communications cost s, 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. Evaluators and Consultants: If the project proposes to use external/outside eval uators and 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 b e 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 policies. 9. Total Direct Cost s : 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), provide the amount of indirect costs that you propose to charge against the grant. Remember: Indirect costs are limited to 8 percent of a modified total direct cost base. {See EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.562 (c)} 11. Training Stipends : Not applicable. Leave blank. 12. Total Cost : On line 12 (ED Form 524 ) , provide total amount that you are requesting
– the sum of lines 9 and 10. Note: This amount should be the same as that shown as 14a on the application face sheet (SF 424).55



## Language Resource Centers (LRC**) Program**  **FY 20 14**  **Application Checklist Use This Checklist While Preparing Your Application.**  **All items listed on this c**  **hecklist are required. The list is organized in the same manner that the submitted**  **application should be organized.** 

### Part I: 424 Forms  Application for Federal Assistance
- (SF 424)  Department of Education Supplemental Information Form for the SF 424
-  **Note Please do not attach any narratives, supporting files or application components to the**  **Standard Form (SF 424). Although the form accepts attachments, the Department of Education will only review materials/files attached to the forms listed be**  **low**
. 

### Part II: 524 Forms  Department of Education Budget Summary Form
- (ED 524)
– Sections A & B 

### Part III: Program Narrative  Ed Abstract Attachment Form  Project Narrative Attachment Form  Other Attachments Form  Budget Narrative Attachment Form **NOTE:** The “Ed Abstract Attachment Form” is where you would attach your program abstract. The “Project Narrative Attachment Form” will include table of contents and the narrative sections addressing the program selection criteria that will be used to evaluate a pplications submitted for this competition. The “Other Attachments Form” should include appendices such as a detailed Performance Measure Form , (see Federal Register n otice) , curricul a vitas of key personnel, letters of support, examples of evaluation mat erials, etc. The “Budget Narrative Attachment Form” is where you would attach a detailed line item budget and any supplemental budget information. 

### Part IV: Assurances and Certifications  GEPA Section 427 Requirement  Assurances – Non
- Construction Progra ms (SF 424B)  Grants.gov Lobbying Form (formerly ED Form 80

-0013)  Survey on Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Applicants  Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF

- LLL)56 

### Paperwork Burden Statement According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are req uired to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number is **1840 -** **0808**
. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 100 hours per response, including time for reviewin g 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 ( 20 USC 1123) . Sen d comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to regulations.gov during the public comment period for this collection of information. If you have specific qu estions about the form, instrument or survey, please contact ( Office of Postsecondary Education/IFLE, U.S. Department of Education, 1990 K Street, N.W., Sixth Floor, Washington, D.C. 20006
- 6078.