Form 1840-0808 Application for Grants under the Language Resource Cente

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: 84.229A)

CLOSING DATE: TBD

Form Approved

OMB No. 1840-0808, Exp. Date: XX/XX/20XX

Application for New Awards Under the

Language Resource Centers (LRC) Program

Table of Contents

PROGRAM SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMS

Dear Applicant 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) 2014 Place Holder

Authorizing Legislation and Regulations 14

Code of Federal Regulations 22

Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and

Performance Indicators for the LRC Program 28

Guidance on Developing an Evaluation Plan 30

Guidance to LRC Applicants 36

Frequently Asked Questions 46

Instructions for Completing the LRC Application Package 48

Selection Criteria 50

Instructions for Budget Summary Form & Itemized Line Item Budget 56

Application Checklist 58

Burden Statement 59

STANDARD INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMS

*Placeholder for Standard instructions and forms

U NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for your interest in applying for a grant in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 competition for new awards under the Language Resource Centers (LRC) program. The LRC 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 application. Information on the LRC program is accessible at the 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 an 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 [email protected]. We encourage applicants to review the Competition Highlights found in the application package for an overview of important items.

Applications for grants under the LRC program must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov system. A detailed description of how to apply using this system is included in the FR notice. You are urged to acquaint yourself with the requirements of this system early. You may access the grants.gov system through its portal page at:

http://www.grants.gov

After you have submitted your application electronically, you will receive an e-mail with your assigned application number (P229A14…) confirming that your application was received. Applications submitted after the deadline will not be accepted.

Finally, I would like to emphasize the importance of ensuring that your application includes a strong evaluation plan, with clear statements of project performance goals and performance measures. The peer reviewers will be instructed to look closely at each applicant’s evaluation plan.

We look forward to receiving your application and appreciate your efforts to promote excellence in international education.

Sincerely,

Lenore Yaffee Garcia

Acting Senior Director

International and Foreign Language Education

Office of Postsecondary Education

COMPETITION HIGHLIGHTS

1. For the FY 2014 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 additional 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, Pashto, 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 one or more Minority-Serving Institutions (as defined in the Federal Register notice) or one or more community colleges (as defined in the 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(es).

• 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.

• 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 , professional, or other advanced degrees.

We will award up to an additional 5 points to an application that meets this priority. Further information on this priority is located under the “Selection Criteria” section of this application.

Invitational Priority #1: Applications from new applicants (as defined in the 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).

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 heritage language speakers. Note: For the purposes of the LRC program, a Heritage Language speaker is a person who grew up using the language at home and/or received some or all of his or her K-12 education in the language. 

• Please note that these priorities are explained in detail in the Federal Register notice contained in this application package. You are urged to review the Federal Register notice carefully before preparing your application.

2. The project abstract is limited to one page, single-spaced. The abstract should include information about the proposed 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 or before the application deadline date. Late applications will not be accepted. We suggest that you submit your application several days before the deadline. The Department is required to enforce the established deadline to ensure fairness to all applicants. No changes or additions to an application will be accepted after the deadline date and time.

4. Electronic submission of applications is required; therefore, you must submit an electronic application unless you follow the procedures outlined in the Federal Register notice inviting applications for new awards for FY 2014 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 application. 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.

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.

• RODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

Introduction & Overview 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 Parts 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 that serve as resources for improving the nation’s capacity for teaching and learning foreign languages effectively.

ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS

Institutions 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—

1. The conduct and dissemination of research on new and improved methods for teaching foreign languages, including the use of advanced educational technology;

2. The development and dissemination of new materials for teaching foreign languages, to reflect the results of research on effective teaching strategies;

3. 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;

4. The training of teachers in the administration and interpretation of foreign language performance tests, the use of effective teaching strategies and the use of new technologies;

5. A significant focus on the teaching and learning needs 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;

6. The development and dissemination of materials designed to serve as a resource for foreign language teachers at the elementary and secondary school levels; and

7. 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-service language training for teachers.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

The following information supplements the information provided in the “Dear Applicant” letter and the Federal Register notice.

1. Grants.gov

LRC applications submitted for FY 2014 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 require 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 Awards

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 application 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: Need for the Project as a tiebreaker.

4. Applicant Funding

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 notice. 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 2014 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 Information 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 2014 grant award. The performance report will assist IFLE staff in determining whether or not the LRC project is making 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 entering 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: $183,118

• 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.

9. Appendices to Applications

Please limit the appendices to the following:

1. The curricula vitae of key personnel and professional staff directly involved in the applicant’s program;

2. A timeline of project activities for the duration of the grant;

3. Letters of support; and

4. A table of objectives that will guide project activities for the FY 2014-2017 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 estimated grant performance period for the FY 2014 grant cycle is from September 15, 2014 to September 14, 2015.

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 6099

Washington, D.C. 20006-6078

Telephone: (202) 502-7626

Fax: (202) 502-7859

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Senior Program Officer: Pamela Maimer, Ph.D.

Address: International and Foreign Language Education

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street, N.W., Room 6100

Washington, D.C. 20006-6078

Telephone: (202) 502-7704

Fax: (202) 502-7859

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Federal Register Notice Place Holder

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; PURPOSES; 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 greater 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 dissemination 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 international 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;

(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 requesting 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.

SEC. 603. LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS.

(a) LANGUAGE RESOURCE CENTERS 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 language 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 include 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 needs 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 advanced 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.

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 amended—

(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 recommendations regarding

national need for expertise in foreign languages and worldAWS

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’’.

Title 34: Education

Revised as of September 25, 2009

PART 655—INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS—GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subpart A—General

§ 655.1   Which programs do these regulations govern?
§ 655.3   What regulations apply to the International Education Programs?
§ 655.4   What definitions apply to the International Education 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—General

§ 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 International 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:

(1) 34 CFR part 74 (Administration 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 Review 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) and 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) 34 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, 1982, 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, and 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:

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   How 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]

§ 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 clear 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 access 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 students; 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 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.

(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 information 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.

(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 plans 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 excellence, 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]

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 activities 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 priorities may the Secretary establish?

Subpart D—What Conditions Must Be Met by a Grantee?

§ 669.30 What are allowable equipment costs?

Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1123, 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 purpose 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 under this program?

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 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 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 advanced foreign language students, to provide professional development, 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) The regulations in 34 CFR part 655.

(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) “Language 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 each 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 basis 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—

(1) The extent to which the proposed materials or activities are needed in the foreign languages on which the project focuses;

(2) The extent 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 States.

(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 practicable 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 control 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 priorities 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)

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)

Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)

What is GPRA?

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires all federal agencies to manage their activities with attention to the consequences of those activities. Each agency is to clearly state what it intends to accomplish, identify the resources required, and periodically report its progress to Congress. In so doing, it is expected that the GPRA will contribute to improvements in accountability for the expenditures of public funds, improve Congressional decision-making through more objective information on the effectiveness of federal programs, and promote a new government focus on results, service delivery, and customer satisfaction.

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 2014-2018. This plan reflects the Department’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 2014-2018 plan includes the following six goals:

Goal 1: Increase college access, affordability, quality, and completion by improving postsecondary education and lifelong learning opportunities for youth and adults

Goal 2: Improve the elementary and secondary system’s ability to consistently deliver excellent instruction aligned with rigorous academic standards while providing effective support services to close achievement and opportunity gaps, and ensure all students graduate high school college- and career-ready

Goal 3: Improve the health, social-emotional, and cognitive outcomes for all children from birth through third grade, so that all children, particularly those with high needs, are on track for graduating from high school college- and career-ready

Goal 4: Increase educational opportunities for and reduce discrimination against underserved students so that all students are well-positioned to succeed

Goal 5: Enhance the education system’s ability to continuously improve through better and more widespread use of data, research, and evaluation, evidence, transparency, innovation, and technology

Goal 6: Improve the organizational capacities of the Department to implement its strategic plan

What are the Performance Indicators 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 through teacher training, research, materials development and dissemination projects.

The Department has developed (and OMB has 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.

LRC GPRA Measure 3: Efficiency: Cost per LRC project that increased the number of training programs for K-16 instructors of LCTLs.*

The information provided by grantees in their performance reports submitted via the IRIS reporting system will be the source of data for these measures.

*The US/ED IFLE office will be able to calculate Measure 3 (efficiency measure) based on future LRC performance reports submitted to the IRIS reporting system.

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 assess 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 annual 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. Department 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 many 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 relatively 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 information 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 measures 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 first-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 number of faculty qualified to lead a summer program to specific world regions.

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 expenditure 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. Accordingly, 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 intends 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 organizational 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 contributing 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 conduct 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 appropriate 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 and 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

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 technical 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 publicize 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 with 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 project 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 the 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.

2. What types and sources of data will best demonstrate that 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 rate 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 number 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 international 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 that may support project objectives include:

• Recruit and hire qualified priority language faculty; or,

• Create or increase professional development and training sessions for faculty.

Progress indicators that relate to the quantitative and qualitative examples 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 institutionalized after grant support has ended;

• 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 Questions

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, once 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 tests, 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 evaluation 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 timeline will help projects to stay on track toward achieving their goals.

Guidance to LRC Program Applicants

The Title 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, academic 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 overriding 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.

The Department has developed (and the Office of Management and Budget has 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, relevance, and usefulness.

• Efficiency: Cost per LRC project that increased the number of training programs for K-16 instructors of LCTLs.

Applicants must define how they will collect and report data for the measure when they develop their proposed projects. Successful LRC applicants (later grantees) will be required to collect data on LRC GPRA measures, and report those data to US/ED in their interim and final performance reports.

• LRC Project-Specific Performance Measure Form (PMF)

ATTENTION APPLICANTS: READ CAREFULLY

For applicant COMPLETE PMFs FOR ITEMS 1, 2, and 3 ONLY. IFLE will request fully completed PMFs if the application is recommended for funding. Include your LRC PMFs in the appendices.

ALL grantees must report Project-Specific Measures on an annual basis. You must create a PMF for each Project Goal. Figure 1 shows a blank template. One example of a PMF completed for LRC Project-Specific Measures is provided in Figure 2.

Figure 1: 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

Instructions for Completing an LRC Project-Specific PMF

1. Project Goal Statement – Each project will likely have more than one goal, such as “Expand outreach for foreign language instruction in LCTLs to under-resourced post-secondary institutions” or “Expand the center’s course offerings in South Asian area studies.” Complete a separate PMF template for each project goal. State the first project-specific goal in the first (header) row of the template; then proceed to steps 2-7 below. Repeat the process for each project-specific goal.

2. Performance Measures – State the project-specific measure in an objective and time-bound manner. Make sure that the units of measure (e.g., number of courses, number of students, etc.) are well defined.

3. Activities – Fill in the major activities that the institution will undertake to achieve the project-specific goal.

4. Data/Indicators – State the data or indicators that will be used to track progress of each activity stated in #2. Because 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.

5. Frequency – State period of measurement (e.g., quarterly, by semester, or annually).

6. Data Source – State the source of the data (e.g., center records or university registrar).

7. Baseline (BL) and Targets (T1-T4) – State the level of each measure at the time that the project commences as the “Baseline” and provide the target levels at the end of each grant year. Where the measure specifies “new,” the baseline is stated as the existing total at the time the project commences and the targets are stated as the incremental increase.

Should the LRC applicant become a grantee, a PMF will need to be fully completed for all project-specific measures.

Figure 2: Sample PMF for LRC Project-Specific Measures

1. Project Goal Statement: To increase the number of highly qualified credentialed teachers in less commonly taught languages (LCTLs), first, in the state 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 availability. 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 alternative 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 instruction 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 components 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 based 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
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 leading 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 that 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 one 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 week’s forum that are being documented.	Weekly Annually	Center Records Center Records	0 0	10 40	25 40	35 40	40 40

LRC Evaluation Plan Selection Criterion

This section describes the sub-criteria that reviewers will use to score the “Evaluation Plan” criterion. The following questions are 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 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 has 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 guidance 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 proposed 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 are 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 desired 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 feedback pertaining to their mastery of the material as compared to a similar class of students using the old teaching method.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q: Our center has received an LRC grant in the past. Is it appropriate to refer to this in our application?

A: Yes, however, IIFLE 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 application 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: using 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 application 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 about 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 “Fiscal year 2014 - Applying Competitive Preference Priority Points” page of this application.

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 comply 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 notice for more information 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 Practices Act of 1974, PL 93-624, PL 96-192). To be in compliance, travel must be on U.S. carriers wherever available, based on jet economy high season rates.

Q: How will funding continuation decisions be made?

A: Annual performance reports will be submitted 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 reports 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 [email protected].

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE LRC APPLICATION PACKAGE

Abstract & Project Narrative:

• Provide an abstract of no more than one 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:

• 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) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures and graphs.

• Applicants may only use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier 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).

• 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 notice 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, sections 75.209(a) and 75.210 of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR). Please see “Selection Criteria” in the Federal Register notice.

To facilitate the review of the application, please construct the narrative in the order of the 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.

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.

  • 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.

  • 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 institution(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.

  • If applying as a consortium, clearly identify the institutions conducting the activity (ies).

• Letters of support.

• A table of objectives that will guide project activities for the FY 2014-2017 performance period.

• IFLE is requesting these objectives to assist with our review of the performance reports that you will 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.

• 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)

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. Need for Potential Impact (20 points)

5. Likelihood of Achieving Results (10 points)

6. Description of Final Form of Results (10 points)

7. Evaluation Plan (20 points) *

8. Budget and Cost Effectiveness (10 points)

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 110 points

The following guidance may assist you in addressing each of the selection criteria:

1. PLAN OF OPERATION (15 points)

Does the application demonstrate:

1. A high quality in the project design?

2. An effective plan of management that ensures proper and efficient administration of the project?

3. A clear description of how the objectives of the project relate to the purpose of the program?

4. The way the applicant plans to use its resources and personnel to achieve each objective?

5. A clear description of how the applicant will provide equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented, such as:

   1. Members of racial or ethnic minority groups

   2. Women

   3. Handicapped persons

2. QUALITY OF KEY PERSONNEL (10 points)

Does the application demonstrate the quality of the key personnel the applicant plans to use on the project?

1. What are the qualifications of the project director?

2. What are the qualifications of each of the other key personnel to be used in the project?

   1. In the case of faculty – what are the qualifications of the faculty and the degree to which that faculty is directly involved in the actual teaching and supervision of students?

3. How much time does each of the mentioned key personnel plan to commit to the project?

4. To what extent does the applicant, as part of its nondiscriminatory employment 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?

5. Do the qualifications 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 demonstrate that the applicant plans to devote adequate resources to the project?

1. Other than libraries, are the facilities that the applicant plans to use adequate (language laboratories, museums, etc.)?

2. Are the equipment and supplies that the applicant plans to use adequate?

4. NEED AND POTENTIAL IMPACT (20 points)

   1. To what extent are the proposed materials or activities needed in the foreign language(s) on which the project focuses?

   2. To what extent may the proposed materials be used throughout the United States?

   3. 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)

   1. What is the quality of the outlined methods and procedures for preparing the materials?

   2. 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)

   1. What is the degree of specificity and the appropriateness of the description of the expected results from the project?

7. EVALUATION PLAN (20 points)

   1. What is the quality of the evaluation plan for the project?

   2. 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)

   1. Is the budget for the project adequate to support the project activities?

   2. Are costs reasonable in relation to the objectives of the project?

Competitive Preference Priorities

Competitive Preference Priority # 1: (0 or 5 points)

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 additional 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, Pashto, 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 (up to 5 points):

Applications that incorporate significant and sustained collaborative activities with one or more Minority-Serving Institutions (as defined in this notice) or one or more community colleges (as defined in this 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(es). We will award up to an additional 5 points to an application that meets this priority.

• 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.

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 , professional, or other advanced degrees.

Invitational Priorities (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 the 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 heritage language speakers.

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 item 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.

The detailed line item budget AND accompanying budget 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 show 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 explanation 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 should be included on line 8.] In the budget, you should detail the proposed travel costs: for each trip, explain the purpose and objective of the travel and provide the number of persons traveling. Transportation costs should not exceed tourist class airfare. For automobile mileage, the established institution 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 official project business (see OMB Circular A-21, J.48.c - Commercial Air Travel). Foreign travel can be authorized under the grant. Please include in your travel budget funds to travel to the annual LRC Project Directors’ Meeting. You may include costs for up to two 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 has a usefulness of greater than one year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit. [Consistent with an applicant’s policy, a lower dollar amount may be used to define equipment.] In the budget, explain why the requested equipment is necessary to carry out project activities and include a list of all equipment in the following format: item, quantity, cost per unit and total cost. Note: no more than 15% of your total budget can be used in this category.

5. Supplies: On line 5 (ED Form 524), include the costs of all tangible personal property that was not included as “equipment” on line 4. In the budget, provide an itemized list of the supplies.

6. Contractual: Not applicable. Leave blank.

7. Construction: Not applicable. Leave blank.

8. Other: 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 costs, rental of space, utilities, custodial services and printing costs. In the budget, provide a breakdown of all direct costs not clearly covered by other budget categories.

Evaluators and Consultants: If the project proposes to use external/outside evaluators 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 be paid, estimated number of days of services and all travel expenses, including per diem). Cost allowances for consultant fees, honoraria, per diem and travel should not exceed amounts permitted by comparable institutional policies.

9. Total Direct Costs: On line 9 (ED Form 524), provide the total direct costs requested – the sum of lines 1 through 8.

10. Indirect Costs: On line 10 (ED Form 524), 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)}

10. Training Stipends: Not applicable. Leave blank.

11. 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).

Language Resource Centers (LRC) Program

FY 2014 Application Checklist

Use This Checklist While Preparing Your Application. All items listed on this

checklist 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 below.

Part II: 524 Forms

• Department of Education Budget Summary Form - (ED 524) – Sections A & B

Part III: Program Narrative Forms

• 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 applications submitted for this competition. The “Other Attachments Form” should include appendices such as a detailed Performance Measure Form, (see Federal Register notice), curricula vitas of key personnel, letters of support, examples of evaluation materials, 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 Programs (SF 424B)

• Grants.gov Lobbying Form (formerly ED Form 80-0013)

• Survey on Ensuring Equal Opportunity for Applicants

• Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL)

Paperwork Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number is 1840-0808.  Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 100 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.  The obligation to respond to this collection is required to obtain or retain benefit (20 USC 1123). Send 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 questions 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.

8