State Voc. Rehab. Unit In-Service Training Slection Criteria and Statue

Selection Criteria (84.265A) – Page 4

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR APPLICATIONS

FY 2010 IN-SERVICE TRAINING NEW BASIC AWARDS

(CFDA 84.265A/B)

Note: The Secretary does not evaluate an application if:

1. The applicant is not eligible;

2. The applicant does not comply with all of the procedural rules that govern the submission of the application;

3. The application does not contain the information required under the program; or

4. The proposed project cannot be funded under the authorizing statute or implementing regulations for the program.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3 and 3474, 34 CFR 75.217 of EDGAR)

The Secretary of Education uses the following selection criteria to evaluate applications for new In-Service Training Basic Award grants under this competition per requirements set forth at 34 CFR 75.209 and 210, 34 CFR 385.31 and 34 CFR 388.20. The maximum possible score for all of these criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses. Because no points are assigned to the selected factors, the Secretary evaluates each factor within each criterion equally.

Additional factors, including: (a) the geographical distribution of projects; and (b) past performance of the applicant in carrying out similar training activities under previously awarded grants, are not included in this selection criteria but the Secretary will consider those factors when making the final selection of applications for basic awards in accordance with the 34 CFR 385.33(a) and (b).

EVIDENCE OF NEED (20 points)

1. The extent to which the proposed in-service training project relates to the mission of the State-Federal rehabilitation service program and can be expected to improve the competence of all State vocational rehabilitation personnel in providing vocational rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities that will result in employment outcomes or otherwise contribute to more effective management of the State unit program.

2. The extent to which the State Vocational Rehabilitation Unit In-Service Training project responds to needs identified in their training needs assessment and how the proposed training relates to the agency’s State plan, particularly the comprehensive system of personnel development in section 101(a)(7) of the Act.

3. The extent to which the significance of needs to be addressed by the proposed project is based on the State unit conducted needs assessment of the in-services training needs for all of the State unit employees. Also included is a description of the results from the needs assessment, specifically those needs that address recruitment and retention of qualified rehabilitation professionals, succession planning, and leadership development and capacity building.

4. The extent to which the proposed in-service training will improve the effectiveness of the services to individuals with disabilities served by the agency’s vocational Rehabilitation program and ensure employment outcomes.

QUALITY OF PROJECT DESIGN (15 points)

1. The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will successfully address the needs identified in the agency’s needs assessment, particularly the needs identified in the comprehensive system of personnel development, including one or more of the following personnel training needs:

• Effective recruitment and retention of qualified rehabilitation professionals;

• Effective succession planning; and

• Effective leadership development and capacity building.

2. The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will successfully address one or more of the following priorities.

• Priority 1--Development and Dissemination of Model In-Service Training Materials and Practices: The proposed project demonstrates an effective plan to develop and disseminate information on its State VR In-Service Training program, including the identification of training approaches and successful practices, in order to permit the replication of these programs by other State VR units.

• Priority 2--Distance Education: The proposed project demonstrates innovative strategies for training State VR unit personnel through accessible distance education methods, such as interactive audio, video, computer technologies, or existing telecommunications networks.

• Priority 3--Enhanced Employment Outcomes for Specific Populations: The proposed project supports specialized training in the provision of VR or related services to individuals with disabilities to increase the rehabilitation rate into competitive employment for all individuals or specified target groups.

3. The extent to which the proposed training methods and materials are appropriate for the project and, to the extent possible, will be useful in determining effective practices leading to increased employment outcome, increased employment rate of individuals with disabilities within the State, and contributes to more effective management of the State unit program.

QULITY OF PROJECT SERVICE (15 points)

1. The extent to which the quality and sufficiency of strategies ensures equal access and treatment for eligible individuals with disabilities who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

2. The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are likely to alleviate the personnel shortages that have been identified or are the focus of the proposed project.

3. The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of these services.

4. The extent to which the proposed project impacts on the competence of the State vocational rehabilitation personnel to facilitate the services of vocational rehabilitation services resulting in increases of employment outcomes or otherwise contribute to more effective management of the State unit program.

QUALITY OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT (15 points)

1. The extent to which the plan of operation that describes how the project will achieve each goal/objective; the manner in which the applicant plans to use its resources and personnel to achieve the project goals; and a management plan that ensures proper and efficient administration of the project.

2. The extent to which the projected methods and strategies proposed are sufficient to satisfy the goals and objectives, as stated.

3. The adequacy of the State agency policy and procedures for ensuring quality control, fiscal management, feedback, continuous improvement, and compliance with grant requirements in the operation of the proposed project.

4. The qualifications of key personnel, including the project director and other key project personnel to be used in the project, the time commitment of each key personnel, and the extent to which the responsibilities of each key personnel in the proposed project are clearly defined.

QUALITY OF THE BUDGET PROPOSAL (15 points)

1. The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project -- applicants for multi-year projects provided detailed budget information for each of the project years.

2. The extent to which the costs are reasonable and allowable in relation to the project design and the number of personnel to be trained and to the anticipated results and benefits.

3. The budget proposal meets the minimum matching requirement: 10 percent of the total cost of the proposed project. The minimum matching requirement for grantees who receive a minimum share of the basic awards ($18,883) is four percent of the total cost of the proposed project.

QUALITY OF PROJECT EVALUATION (20 points)

1. The extent to which the project goals and outcomes are objective and measurable.

2. The extent to which the performance measurements established for each of the expected goals and outcomes, and the evaluations are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals and outcomes of the proposed project.

3. The extent to which the established performance measures will yield data that demonstrates the impact of the proposed project on the capacity of the State vocational rehabilitation personnel to provide appropriate vocational rehabilitation services that will result in increased employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities or otherwise contribute to the effective management of the State unit program.

4. The extent to which the methods of evaluation will produce quantitative and qualitative data that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project, and the data collection procedures are clearly defined.

4