Response to OMB comment

 

1. How will ED measure if a certain system or practice is successful and worth including in guidance or technical assistance? 

   1. Will this be based solely on anecdotal evidence collected through interviews or will there be some attempt to tie in data to demonstrate that these strategies worked?

PPSS understands OMB’s interest in validating state systems or practices that are considered successful using more objective data.  However, the question is outside the scope of this study, which is not intended to measure the effectiveness of state systems or practices for managing their competitions for 21^st CCLC subgrants. Little is known about state capacity to compete, monitor, and support the local grants that they award. Therefore, this study will offer descriptive information about state administrative successes and challenges—or “lessons learned”—for purposes of informing efforts to improve state capacity to administer the 21^st CCLC program and other similarly structured grants programs under ESEA. The extent to which the study reports on a strategy or practice that seems successful will be based on the strength of the evidence a state provides as to why the strategy is successful.  The study will not, however, attempt to validate state systems or practices by conducting independent quantitative analyses of effectiveness.

In addition, documenting states’ successes and challenges in their efforts to implement Federal requirements regarding the 21^st CCLCs will help identify problem areas and provide Federal officials with insight into how to improve Federal support for SEA administration of the 21^st CCLC program and more generally for SEA administration of other ESEA programs.

The study is descriptive in nature and consists of state and 21^st CCLC personnel interviews. The study is not a program evaluation and does not purport to assess program outcomes. Data will be collected from a purposive sample of nine states and nine sub-grantees in order to capture relevant program practices. Sites are therefore not representative of all states.

The evaluation questions that guide the study including the following:

• How do states conduct their 21^st CCLC grant competitions?  What systems are used across the state and across state programs to inform the grant competition process?  How might states improve their grant competition processes?

• Do states have sufficient analytic capacity to analyze and synthesize data to inform improvements in programs funded through 21^st CCLC grants?

• What are the key factors or conditions related to state capacity (e.g., structural, human, organizational, systemic) that are needed to carry out the 21^st CCLC program and other state-administered discretionary programs?  What lessons can be applied to state competitions for other federal education programs?