Application Booklet

Thank you for your interest in applying for a new grant under the fiscal year (FY) 202X Title III Part A, Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) grant competition, Assistance Listing Number (ALN) 84.031A. This letter highlights specific requirements for the SIP competition. As you formulate your application, please review these requirements, and carefully and thoroughly read through the entire application package.

The purpose of SIP is to provide assistance to eligible institutions of higher education to improve their academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability in order to increase their self-sufficiency. In this year’s competition, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) is especially interested in programs that will support students through various services that will enable students to remain engaged through degree completion. For this reason, this year’s competition has two Competitive Preference Priorities (CPPs) that support student success. We encourage applicants to address the competitive priorities, as applicants may receive up to eight additional points depending on how well the application meets these priorities.

Also, in FY 202X, the Department will award both Individual Development Grants and Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants.

Applications for FY 202X grants under the SIP Program must be submitted electronically using Grants.gov at: http://www.grants.gov. Additional information about Grants.gov submission requirements can be found in the Competition Highlights, the Notice Inviting Applications (Notice) published in the Federal Register, and the transmittal instructions, which are included in this application package.

The Notice published in the Federal Register is the official competition document. You should not rely upon any information that is inconsistent with the guidance contained within the official document.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Nalini Lamba-Nieves at [email protected] or at 202-453-7953.

We appreciate your interest in the Strengthening Institutions Program and look forward to receiving your application.

Sincerely,

/s/

Michelle Asha Cooper, Ph.D.

Acting Assistant Secretary

Office of Postsecondary Education

Competition Highlights

New in 202X:

One competition, 84.031A.

Both Individual Development Grants (Individual) and Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants (Coops) will be awarded in this competition.

Points for the selection criteria have been changed to better align with the increased emphasis on grant implementation.

There are two Competitive Preference Priorities (CPPs):

1 -- Tutoring, Counseling, and Student Service Programs (up to 5 points).

2 -- Providing Flexible and Affordable Paths to Obtaining Knowledge and Skills (up to 3 points).

Maximum total possible points: 108.

Double space all text in the application, excluding text in charts, tables, figures and graphs.

Application Submission Instructions are now in a separate Federal Register Notice, Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, which can be accessed here: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-12-27/pdf/2021-27979.pdf.

The deadline to submit applications in Grants.gov is now 11:59:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on the closing date.

Unique Entity Identifier (UEI):

The Federal Government has transitioned from the use of the DUNS Number to the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) as the primary means of entity identification for Federal awards government-wide. UEIs are required in accordance with 2 CFR Part 25, and the transition from DUNS to UEI has resulted in the UEI being issued by the Federal Government in SAM.gov.

If your organization is currently registered in SAM.gov with either an active or inactive registration, you have already been assigned a UEI. Your UEI is viewable on your entity’s registration record in SAM.gov. To learn how to view your UEI, see this guide: How can I view my Unique Entity ID?

If you have an inactive registration or need to update your registration, you must ensure that your renewal or updates occur on time and as required, but this does not affect whether you have been assigned a UEI. If you have a registration, you already have a UEI. If your registration has expired, you can access instructions addressing how to renew your entity registration at: How to Renew or Update an Entity.

If you are not registered in SAM.gov, create a new registration by clicking on the “Get Started” link under the “Register Your Entity…” heading in SAM.gov. Grantees, and other entities wanting to do business with the U.S. Department of Education (e.g., entities applying for a grant), that are not already registered in SAM.gov must complete the “Register Entity” registration option and NOT the “Get a Unique Entity ID” option. The “Get a Unique Entity ID” option, which is not a full registration, is only available to entities for reporting purposes. Failing to complete the “Register Entity” option may result in loss of funding, loss of applicant eligibility, and/or delays in receiving a grant award.

Once assigned, the UEI number will never expire; however, entity registrations do expire annually and require annual renewal. Please ensure that your organization renews its registration prior to the expiration date. The expiration date is listed in your entity record in SAM.gov.

Where to get help:

The Federal Service Desk, available at FSD.gov, is the help desk that has been established for all Integrated Award Environment systems. FSD.gov includes resources that address the recent UEI transition and these FAQs and other resources are available at: Help Resources.

If you have questions about UEIs or the recent UEI transition that are not answered in the FAQs or in other resources available at FSD.gov, you may contact the FSD.gov by calling, or by choosing “Create an Incident” or engaging in a “Live Chat.” You may also send the question directly to the General Services Administration at: [email protected].

Grants.gov:

Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP) grant applications for FY 202X must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov at: http://www.grants.gov.

Please note that the Grants.gov site is different from the Department’s e-Application system used in past competitions.

We urge you to consider the following three important administrative factors when applying for this grant program:

Register at the Grants.gov website early. The registration procedures may require anywhere from one week to several weeks, since Grants.gov registration includes having a System for Award Management (SAM) registration.

Consider submitting your application 2-3 days prior to the closing date. The time it takes to upload an application will vary depending on your application and the speed of your Internet connection. The application submission process must be complete prior to the deadline for transmittal of applications.

You must provide the UEI on your application that was used when you registered as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) on Grants.gov. This UEI is assigned to your organization in SAM at the time your organization registers in SAM. If you do not enter the UEI assigned by SAM on your application, Grants.gov will reject your application.

Grants.gov does not allow applicants to “un-submit” or delete applications. Therefore, if you discover that changes or additions are needed once your application has been accepted and validated by the Department, you must “re-submit” the application. If the Department receives duplicate applications, we will accept and process the application with the latest “date/time received” validation.

Please note that you must submit your application by 11:59:59 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.

It is recommended that Grants.gov attachments be in PDF format. PDFs cannot be password protected. Word documents will be accepted; however, consider uploading PDFs, as opening Word documents in the Department’s G5 grant system may be difficult.

Eligibility:

Applicants who are not deemed eligible institutions will not have their applications reviewed.

The Department has recently instituted the Eligibility Matrix (EM) process. With the EM, the Department now uses applicants’ Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) data to determine eligibility. Applicants who are deemed not eligible may submit waiver requests to have their eligibility re-reviewed. The Federal Register Notice announcing the opening of the eligibility and waiver request period was published XXX, 202X and was extended to end XXXX, 202X. Applicants who requested waivers will be emailed with the waiver decision.

Your institution's application for a FY 202X Title III, SIP grant must be in the same name that appears in the FY 202X Eligibility Matrix or include the name that appears in the EM. This will minimize the chances that your institution is deemed ineligible.

SIP, Other Title III, Part A Programs, and Title V:

There is a statutory limitation that prohibits institutions from having simultaneous Title V and Title III Part A grants (Section 505 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended). If your institution has a 84.031S, Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program (HSI) or a 84.031M, Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans Program (PPOHA) Title V grant, it is not eligible to receive a Title III Part A grant.

Similarly, if your institution has another Title III, Part A grant, it cannot receive a Title III, Part A SIP grant. Other Title III, Part A programs are:

Alaska Native – Native Hawaiian Program (ANNH)	84.031N & 84.031W
Asian American Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions Program (AANAPISI)	84.031L
Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institutions Program (NASNTI)	84.031X
Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Program (TCCU)	84.031T
Predominantly Black Institutions Program (PBI)	84.031P

Logic Models:

Logic models are now a part of the SIP selection criteria. The point value of logic models has also been increased, to reflect the importance of having a visual map of the grant.

Think of a logic model as a visual representation of the assumptions and theory of actions of your program. When logical relationships are built on theory and evidence, you can explore outputs, outcomes, and impact. These logical relationships are built into the program or service and you can more effectively evaluate the program and assess the outcomes and impact.

You can find information on logic models at:

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.pdf, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2015057.pdf or,

https://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide.

Allowable Activities & Program Regulations:

Authorized grant activities for SIP are listed in Title III, Part A, Section 311 of the Higher Education Act, as amended (HEA); however, Section 301 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA) modified the authorized grant activities for SIP. Please review the original grant activities and these modifications prior to preparing your SIP application.

Applicants should also review the program regulations (34 CFR 607.10 and 607.30) for guidance on which activities and costs are allowable. For example, you may not use your grant funds to:

Recruit students;
Provide scholarships (or any kind of aid) for students;
Carry out activities that are operational rather than developmental;
Carry out student activities such as entertainment, cultural or social enrichment programs, student publications, social clubs or associations;
Pay for organized fund raising; and
Cover indirect costs.

For further guidance, applicants should also review the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200—Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards).

Endowment:

If you request an endowment, you must include who will be managing the funds in your application.

Maximum amount you can request is 20% of your yearly budget request, not the full 5-year request.

Funds must be invested for 20 years. For those 20 years, your institution will need to complete an electronic endowment reporting form.

During the 20 years, you may use up to 50% of the interest earned each year.

Page Limits & Points:

Individual Development Grants:

Application Section	Recommended max pages	Where to attach in Grants.gov	Maximum points
Selection Criteria (Individual)	50	Project Narrative Attachment Form	100
Competitive Preference Priority 1	3	Project Narrative Attachment Form	5
Competitive Preference Priority 2	2	Project Narrative Attachment Form	3
Recommended maximum pages:	55	Maximum possible points:	108

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants:

Application Section	Recommended max pages	Where to attach in Grants.gov	Maximum points
Selection Criteria (Coop)	65	Project Narrative Attachment Form	100
Competitive Preference Priority 1	3	Project Narrative Attachment Form	5
Competitive Preference Priority 2	2	Project Narrative Attachment Form	3
Recommended maximum pages:	70	Maximum possible points:	108

Please do not include resumes, letters of support and/or any other items not specifically requested in the application. For key personnel, describe the experience and qualifications of the candidates in the narrative or in a table.

Program Profile and Abstract:

All applicants must submit a Program Profile Form, which contains the tie-breaker information. If you do not submit this form and there is a tie, your institution will not be considered in the tiebreaker. Tiebreaker situations are a regular occurrence in SIP.

If you are requesting endowment funds, please carefully read question #4 on the Program Profile Form and check the box, certifying that they will comply with the statutory requirement and program assurances regarding endowments cited in the program regulations.

All applicants must provide an abstract limited to one single-spaced page. The abstract should be uploaded as a PDF file. Complete instructions for submitting the abstract are included in the Instructions for Completing the Application Package.

Information on SIP is accessible at the Department’s Web site at:

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/iduestitle3a/index.html.

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants

Revised 04/2022

IMPORTANT – PLEASE READ FIRST

U.S. Department of Education

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants

To facilitate your use of Grants.gov, this document includes important submission procedures you need to be aware of to ensure your application is received in a timely manner and accepted by the Department of Education.

Browser Support

The latest versions of Microsoft Internet Explorer (IE), Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, and Apple Safari are supported for use with Grants.gov. However, these web browsers undergo frequent changes and updates, so we recommend you have the latest version when using Grants.gov. Legacy versions of these web browsers may be functional, but you may experience issues. Grants.gov no longer provides support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 or below.

For additional information or updates, please see the Grants.gov Browser information in the Applicant FAQs: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-faqs.html#browser.

ATTENTION – Workspace, Adobe Forms and PDF Files

Grants.gov applicants can apply online using Workspace. Workspace is a shared, online environment where members of a grant team may simultaneously access and edit different web forms within an application. For each funding opportunity announcement (FOA), you can create individual instances of a workspace.

Below is an overview of applying on Grants.gov. For access to complete instructions on how to apply for opportunities, refer to: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/workspace-overview.html.

Create a Workspace: Creating a workspace allows you to complete it online and route it through your organization for review before submitting.

2) Complete a Workspace: Add participants to the workspace to work on the application together, complete all the required forms online or by downloading PDF versions, and check for errors before submission. The Workspace progress bar will display the state of your application process as you apply. As you apply using Workspace, you may click the blue question mark icon near the upper-right corner of each page to access context-sensitive help.

a. Adobe Reader: If you decide not to apply by filling out web forms you can download individual PDF forms in Workspace. The individual PDF forms can be downloaded and saved to your local device storage, network drive(s), or external drives, then accessed through Adobe Reader.

NOTE: Visit the Adobe Software Compatibility page on Grants.gov to download the appropriate version of the software at: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html.

b. Mandatory Fields in Forms: In the forms, you will note fields marked with an asterisk and a different background color. These fields are mandatory fields that must be completed to successfully submit your application.

c. Complete SF-424 Fields First: The forms are designed to fill in common required fields across other forms, such as the applicant name, address, and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) Number. Once it is completed, the information will transfer to the other forms.

Submit a Workspace: An application may be submitted through workspace by clicking the Sign and Submit button on the Manage Workspace page, under the Forms tab. Grants.gov recommends submitting your application package at least 24-48 hours prior to the close date to provide you with time to correct any potential technical issues that may disrupt the application submission.

Track a Workspace Submission: After successfully submitting a workspace application, a Grants.gov Tracking Number (GRANTXXXXXXXX) is automatically assigned to the application. The number will be listed on the Confirmation page that is generated after submission. Using the tracking number, access the Track My Application page under the Applicants tab or the Details tab in the submitted workspace.

For additional training resources, including video tutorials, refer to https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-training.html.

Helpful Reminders

REGISTER EARLY – Grants.gov registration involves many steps including registration on SAM (www.sam.gov), which usually takes approximately 7 to 10 business days, but can take longer depending on the completeness and accuracy of the data entered into the SAM database by an applicant. You may begin working on your application while completing the registration process, but you cannot submit an application until all of the Registration steps are complete. Please note that once your SAM registration is active, it will take 24-48 hours for the information to be available in Grants.gov, and before you can submit an application through Grants.gov. For detailed information on the Registration Steps, please go to: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html. Please note that your organization will need to update its SAM registration annually.

To register in SAM.gov, click on the “Get Started” link under the “Register Your Entity…” heading in SAM.gov. Grantees, and other entities wanting to do business with the U.S. Department of Education (e.g., entities applying for a grant), that are not already registered in SAM.gov must complete the “Register Entity” registration option and NOT the “Get a Unique Entity ID” option. The “Get a Unique Entity ID” option, which is not a full registration, is only available to entities for reporting purposes. Failing to complete the “Register Entity” option may result in loss of funding, loss of applicant eligibility, and/or delays in receiving a grant award. Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further assist you with registering in SAM or updating your existing SAM registration, see the Quick Start Guide for Grant Registrations and the Entity Registration Video at https://sam.gov/content/entity-registration.

SUBMIT EARLY – We strongly recommend that you do not wait until the last day to submit your application. Grants.gov will put a date/time stamp on your application and then process it after it is fully uploaded. The time it takes to upload an application will vary depending on a number of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection, and the time it takes Grants.gov to process the application will vary as well. If Grants.gov rejects your application (see step three below), you will need to resubmit successfully to Grants.gov before 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the deadline date.

You must provide the UEI on your application that was used when you registered as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) on Grants.gov. This UEI is assigned to your organization in SAM at the time your organization registers in SAM. If you do not enter the UEI assigned by SAM on your application, Grants.gov will reject your application.

VERIFY SUBMISSION IS OK – You will want to verify that Grants.gov received your application submission on time and that it was validated successfully. To see the date/time your application was received, login to Grants.gov and click on the Track My Application link. For a successful submission, the date/time received should be earlier than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on the deadline date, AND the application status should be: Validated, Received by Agency, or Agency Tracking Number Assigned. Once the Department of Education receives your application from Grants.gov, an Agency Tracking Number (PR/award number) will be assigned to your application and will be available for viewing on Grants.gov’s Track My Application link.

If the date/time received is later than 11:59:59 p.m. Eastern Time, on the deadline date, your application is late. If your application has a status of “Received” it is still awaiting validation by Grants.gov. Once validation is complete, the status will either change to “Validated” or “Rejected with Errors.” If the status is “Rejected with Errors,” your application has not been received successfully. Some of the reasons Grants.gov may reject an application can be found on the Grants.gov site: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/encountering-error-messages.html. For more detailed information on troubleshooting Adobe errors, you can review the Adobe Reader Software Tip Sheet at: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/adobe-software-compatibility.html. If you discover your application is late or has been rejected, please see the instructions below. Note: You will receive a series of confirmations both online and via e-mail about the status of your application. Please do not rely solely on e-mail to confirm whether your application has been received timely and validated successfully.

Submission Problems – What Should You Do?

If you have problems submitting to Grants.gov before the closing date, please contact Grants.gov Customer Support at 1-800-518-4726 or email at: mailto:[email protected] or access the Grants.gov Self-Service Knowledge Base web portal at: https://grants-portal.psc.gov/Welcome.aspx?pt=Grants.

We discourage paper applications, but if electronic submission is not possible ( e.g., you do not have access to the internet), (1) you must provide a prior written notification that you intend to submit a paper application and (2) your paper application must be postmarked by the application deadline date. If you submit your prior written notification by email, it must be received by the Department no later than 14 calendar days before the application deadline date. If you mail your notification to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than 14 calendar days before the application deadline date. (See the 2021 Common Instructions for detailed instructions regarding this procedure.)

Helpful Hints When Working with Grants.gov

Please go to http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html for help with Grants.gov. For additional tips related to submitting grant applications, please refer to the Grants.gov Applicant FAQs found at this Grants.gov link: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-faqs.html as well as additional information on Workspace at https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-faqs.html#workspace.

Slow Internet Connections

When using a slow internet connection, such as a dial-up connection, to upload and submit your application, it can take significantly longer than when you are connected to the Internet with a high-speed connection, e.g., cable modem/DSL/T1. While times will vary depending upon the size of your application, it can take a few minutes to a few hours to complete your grant submission using a dial up connection. Failure to fully upload an application by the deadline date and time will result in your application being marked late in the G5 system. If you do not have access to a high-speed internet connection, you may want to consider following the instructions in the Federal Register notice to obtain an exception to the electronic submission requirement no later than 14 calendar days before the application deadline date. (See the Federal Register notice for detailed instructions and the 2021 Common Instructions.)

Attaching Files – Additional Tips

Please note the following tips related to attaching files to your application:

When you submit your application electronically, you must upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your application as files in either Portable Document Format (PDF) or Microsoft Word. Although applicants have the option of uploading any narrative sections and all other attachments to their application in either PDF or Microsoft Word, we recommend applicants submit all documents as read-only flattened PDFs, meaning any fillable PDF files must be saved and submitted as non-fillable PDF files and not as interactive or fillable PDF files, to better ensure applications are processed in a more timely, accurate, and efficient manner.

Grants.gov cannot process an application that includes two or more files that have the same name within a grant submission. Therefore, each file uploaded to your application package should have a unique file name.

When attaching files, applicants should follow the guidelines established by Grants.gov on the size and content of file names. Uploaded file names must be fewer than 50 characters, and, in general, applicants should not use any special characters. However, Grants.gov does allow for the following UTF-8 characters when naming your attachments: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore, hyphen, space, period, parenthesis, curly braces, square brackets, ampersand, tilde, exclamation point, comma, semi colon, apostrophe, at sign, number sign, dollar sign, percent sign, plus sign, and equal sign. Applications submitted that do not comply with the Grants.gov guidelines will be rejected at Grants.gov and not forwarded to the Department.

Applicants should limit the size of their file attachments. Documents submitted that contain graphics and/or scanned material often greatly increase the size of the file attachments and can result in difficulties opening the files. For reference, the average discretionary grant application package with all attachments is less than 5 MB. Therefore, you may want to check the total size of your package before submission.

Notice Inviting Applications

4000-01-U

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards; Strengthening Institutions Program

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2021 for the Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP), Assistance Listing Number 84.031A. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1840-0114.

DATES:

Applications Available: May 14, 2021.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 13, 2021.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 13, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nalini Lamba-Nieves, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, room 2B116, Washington, DC 20202-4260. Telephone: (202) 453-7953. Email: [email protected].

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The Strengthening Institutions Program provides grants to eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) to help them become self-sufficient and expand their capacity to serve low-income students by providing funds to improve and strengthen the institution’s academic quality, institutional management, and fiscal stability.

Priorities: This notice contains two competitive preference priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), Competitive Preference Priority 1 is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see section 311 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA)). Competitive Preference Priority 2 is from the Secretary’s Notice of Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Supplemental Priorities).

Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2021 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to eight additional points for the priorities, depending on how well the application meets these priorities. Applicants may address one or both of the competitive preference priorities.

These priorities are:

Competitive Preference Priority 1--Tutoring, Counseling, and Student Service Programs (up to 5 points).

Background: The SIP Program is critical to the Department’s efforts to improve college completion for students who have been traditionally underrepresented in postsecondary education. In recent years, attention to the importance of other supports, such as mental health, food pantries, and childcare, among others, to student persistence and graduation rates has increased.^¹ Through this priority we encourage IHEs to develop and/or create internal support systems and/or train personnel on ways to enhance and/or develop systems of support that provide wrap around services to students and promote retention. These services can be provided to newly admitted students or to existing students at the institution.

Priority:

Projects designed to provide tutoring, counseling, and student service programs designed to improve academic success, including innovative, customized, instruction courses designed to help retain students and move the students rapidly into core courses and through program completion, which may include remedial education and English language instruction.

Competitive Preference Priority 2-- Fostering Flexible and Affordable Paths to Obtaining Knowledge and Skills (up to 3 points).

Background: One of the top expectations of students who attend postsecondary education is that they will gain the knowledge and skills necessary to get a job. However, a Lumina Foundation/Gallup Poll^² report found that less than half (43 percent) of Americans agree that college graduates are well-prepared for success in the workplace, and when polling business leaders, just 11 percent strongly agreed that higher education institutions are graduating students with the skills and competencies that their businesses need. With the coronavirus pandemic’s negative impact on higher education enrollment and employment, the previously found gap between skills and degrees has likely worsened. To ameliorate these gaps, institutions are encouraged to provide their students employability-related experiences.

Priority:

Projects designed to provide work-based learning experiences (such as internships, apprenticeships, and fellowships) that align with in-demand industry sectors or occupations (as defined in section 3(23) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 (WIOA)).

Definitions: These definitions apply to the priorities and the selection criteria for this competition and are from section 3(23) of WIOA and 34 CFR 77.1.

Demonstrates a rationale means a key project component included in the project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant outcomes. (34 CFR 77.1).

In-demand industry sector or occupation means-–

(a) In General.— (i) An industry sector that has a substantial current or potential impact (including through jobs that lead to economic self-sufficiency and opportunities for advancement) on the State, regional, or local economy, as appropriate, and that contributes to the growth or stability of other supporting businesses, or the growth of other industry sectors; or

(ii) An occupation that currently has or is projected to have a number of positions (including positions that lead to economic self-sufficiency and opportunities for advancement) in an industry sector so as to have a significant impact on the State, regional, or local economy, as appropriate.

(B) Determination.- The determination of whether an industry sector or occupation is in-demand under this paragraph shall be made by the State board or local board, as appropriate, using State and regional business and labor market projections, including the use of labor market information. (WIOA).

Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes. (34 CFR 77.1).

Note: In developing logic models, applicants may want to use resources such as the Regional Educational Laboratory Program’s (REL Pacific) Education Logic Model Application, available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp

to help design their logic models. Other sources include: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014025.pdf, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/pdf/REL_2014007.pdf, and https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northeast/pdf/REL_2015057.pdf.

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers). (34 CFR 77.1).

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program. (34 CFR 77.1).

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1057-1059d (title III, part A, of the HEA).

Note: In 2008, the HEA was amended by the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (HEOA), Pub. L. 110-315. Please note that the regulations for SIP in 34 CFR part 607 have not been updated to reflect these statutory changes. The statute supersedes all other regulations.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program are in 34 CFR part 607. (e) The Supplemental Priorities.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Five-year Individual Development Grants and Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants will be awarded in FY 2021.

Note: A cooperative arrangement is an arrangement to carry out allowable grant activities between an institution eligible to receive a grant under this competition and another eligible or ineligible IHE, under which the resources of the cooperating institutions are combined and shared to better achieve the purposes of this part and avoid costly duplication of effort.

Estimated Available Funds: $17,182,981.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Individual Development Grants:

Estimated Range of Awards: $400,000-$450,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $425,000 per year.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $450,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 28.

Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants:

Estimated Range of Awards: $500,000-$550,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $525,000 per year.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $550,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 10.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants:

This program is authorized by title III, part A, of the HEA. To qualify as an eligible institution under any title III, part A program, an institution must--

(a) Be accredited or preaccredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association that the Secretary has determined to be a reliable authority as to the quality of education or training offered;

(b) Be legally authorized by the State in which it is located to be a junior or community college or to provide an educational program for which it awards a bachelor’s degree; and

(c) Be designated as an “eligible institution” by demonstrating that it: (1) has an enrollment of needy students as described in 34 CFR 607.3; and (2) has low average educational and general expenditures per full-time equivalent (FTE) undergraduate student as described in 34 CFR 607.4.

Note: The notice announcing the FY 2022 process for designation of eligible institutions, and inviting applications for waiver of eligibility requirements, was published in the Federal Register on March 4, 2021 (86 FR 12665). The Department extended the deadline for applications in a notice published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2021 (86 FR 19231). Only institutions that the Department determines are eligible, or which are granted a waiver under the process described in the March 4, 2021 notice, may apply for a grant in this program.

An eligible IHE that submits applications for an Individual Development Grant and a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant in this competition may be awarded both in the same fiscal year. A grantee with an Individual Development Grant or a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant may be a partner in one or more Cooperative Development Arrangement Grants. The lead institution in a Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant must be an eligible institution. Partners are not required to be eligible institutions.

Relationship between the Title III, Part A Programs and the Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI) Program

A grantee under the HSI program, which is authorized under title V of the HEA, may not receive a grant under any HEA, title III, part A program. The title III, part A programs are: SIP; the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities program; the Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions program; the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions program; and the Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions program. Furthermore, a current HSI program grantee may not give up its HSI grant to receive a grant under SIP or any title III, part A program as described in 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1).

An eligible HSI that is not a current grantee under the HSI program may apply for a FY 2021 grant under all title III, part A programs for which it is eligible, as well as receive consideration for a grant under the HSI program. However, a successful applicant may receive only one grant as described in 34 CFR 607.2(g)(1).

Note: If you are a nonprofit organization, under 34 CFR 75.51, you may demonstrate your nonprofit status by providing: (1) proof that the Internal Revenue Service currently recognizes the applicant as an organization to which contributions are tax deductible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code; (2) a statement from a State taxing body or the State attorney general certifying that the organization is a nonprofit organization operating within the State and that no part of its net earnings may lawfully benefit any private shareholder or individual; (3) a certified copy of the applicant's certificate of incorporation or similar document if it clearly establishes the nonprofit status of the applicant; or (4) any item described above if that item applies to a State or national parent organization, together with a statement by the State or parent organization that the applicant is a local nonprofit affiliate.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching unless the grantee uses a portion of its grant for establishing or improving an endowment fund. If a grantee uses a portion of its grant for endowment fund purposes, it must match those grant funds with non-Federal funds (20 U.S.C. 1057(d)(1)-(2)).

b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This program involves supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. Grant funds must be used so that they supplement and, to the extent practical, increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the activities to be carried out under the grant and in no case supplant those funds (34 CFR 607.30(b)).

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities described in its application.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which contains requirements and information on how to submit an application.

2. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this program.

3. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR 607.10(c). We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages for Individual Development Grants and no more than 65 pages for Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants. If you are addressing one or both competitive preference priorities, we recommend that you limit your response to no more than an additional five pages total, three additional pages for Competitive Preference Priority 1 and two additional pages for Competitive Preference Priority 2. Please include a separate heading when responding to one or both competitive preference priorities. We also recommend that you use the following standards:

A “page” is 8.5" x 11", on one side only, with 1" margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, excluding titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger, and no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.

The recommended 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. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.

Note: The Budget Information-Non-Construction Programs Form (ED 524) Sections A-C are not the same as the narrative response to the Budget section of the selection criteria.V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The following selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 607.22(a) through (g) and 34 CFR 75.210. Applicants should address each of the following selection criteria separately for each proposed activity. The selection criteria are worth a total of 100 points; the maximum score for each criterion is noted in parentheses.

(a) Quality of the Applicant’s Comprehensive Development Plan. (Maximum 20 Points) The extent to which--

(1) The strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems of the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are clearly and comprehensively analyzed and result from a process that involved major constituencies of the institution;

(2) The goals for the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are realistic and based on comprehensive analysis;

(3) The objectives stated in the plan are measurable, related to institutional goals, and, if achieved, will contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution; and

(4) The plan clearly and comprehensively describes the methods and resources the institution will use to institutionalize practice and improvements developed under the proposed project, including, in particular, how operational costs for personnel, maintenance, and upgrades of equipment will be paid with institutional resources.

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (Maximum 15 Points) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in this notice).

(1) Realistic and defined in terms of measurable results; and

(2) Directly related to the problems to be solved and to the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

(d) Quality of Implementation Strategy. (Maximum 15 Points) The extent to which--

(1) The implementation strategy for each activity is comprehensive;

(2) The rationale for the implementation strategy for each activity is clearly described and is supported by the results of relevant studies or projects; and

(3) The timetable for each activity is realistic and likely to be attained.

(e) Quality of Key Personnel. (Maximum 8 Points) The extent to which--

(1) The past experience and training of key professional personnel are directly related to the stated activity objectives; and

(2) The time commitment of key personnel is realistic.

(f) Quality of Project Management Plan. (Maximum 10 Points) The extent to which--

(1) Procedures for managing the project are likely to ensure efficient and effective project implementation; and

(2) The project coordinator and activity directors have sufficient authority to conduct the project effectively, including access to the president or chief executive officer.

(g) Quality of Evaluation Plan. (Maximum 10 Points)

The extent to which--

(1) The data elements and the data collection procedures are clearly described and appropriate to measure the attainment of activity objectives and to measure the success of the project in achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan; and

(2) The data analysis procedures are clearly described and are likely to produce formative and summative results on attaining activity objectives and measuring the success of the project on achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

(h) Budget. (Maximum 6 Points) The extent to which the proposed costs are necessary and reasonable in relation to the project’s objectives and scope.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant’s use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

A panel of non-Federal reviewers will review and score each application in accordance with the selection criteria. A rank order funding slate will be made from this review. Awards will be made in rank order according to the average score received from the peer review and from the two competitive preference priorities.

In tie-breaking situations for development grants, 34 CFR 607.23(b) requires that we award one additional point to an application from an IHE that has an endowment fund of which the current market value, per FTE enrolled student, is less than the average current market value of the endowment funds, per FTE enrolled student, at similar type institutions that offer similar instruction. We award one additional point to an application from an IHE that has expenditures for library materials per FTE enrolled student that are less than the average expenditure for library materials per FTE enrolled student at similar type institutions. We also add one additional point to an application from an IHE that proposes to carry out one or more of the following activities--

(1) Faculty development;

(2) Funds and administrative management;

(3) Development and improvement of academic programs;

(4) Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening

management and academic programs;

(5) Joint use of facilities; and

(6) Student services.

For the purpose of these funding considerations, we use 2018-2019 data.

If a tie remains after applying the tie-breaker mechanism above, priority will be given to applicants that have the lowest endowment values per FTE enrolled student.

3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this program the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, under 2 CFR 3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

5. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and Budget’s guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting applications in accordance with--

(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering results based on the program objectives through an objective process of evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);

(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. No. 115—232) (2 CFR 200.216);

(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States (2 CFR 200.322); and

(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and 34 CFR 75.110, the following performance measures will be used in assessing the effectiveness of SIP:

(a) The percentage change, over the five-year period, of the number of full-time degree-seeking undergraduates enrolled at SIP institutions. Note that this is a long-term measure that will be used to periodically gauge performance.

(b) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at four-year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

(c) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at two-year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

(d) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at four-year SIP institutions graduating within six years of enrollment.

(e) The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at two-year SIP institutions graduating within three years of enrollment.

6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, whether the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the performance targets in the grantee’s approved application.

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

VII. Other Information

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Dated:

/s/

_ __________________________

Michelle Asha Cooper,

Acting Assistant Secretary for the Office of Postsecondary Education.

Application Transmittal Instructions

This program requires the electronic submission of applications; specific requirements and waiver instructions can be found in the Federal Register NIA.

Applications Submitted Electronically:

You must submit your grant application through the Internet using the software provided on the Grants.gov Web site (http://www.grants.gov) by 11:59:59 p.m. (Washington, D.C. time) on or before the deadline date.

If you submit your application through the Internet via the Grants.gov Web site, you will receive an automatic acknowledgement when we receive your application.

For more information on using Grants.gov, please refer to the NIA that was published in the Federal Register or visit http://www.grants.gov.

Other Submission Instructions:

For detailed instructions on applications sent by mail or delivery, please review the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs Notice, published in the Federal Register on December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264), and available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-12-27/pdf/2021-27979.pdf.

Late Applications

If your application is late, we will notify you that we will not consider the application.

Authorizing Legislation

Legislation:

Regulations:

34 CFR Part 607.1-607.31

Government-wide Guidance:

Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 CFR 200).

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs

Executive Order 12372

This program falls under the rubric of Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive order is to strengthen federalism--or the distribution of responsibility between localities, States, and the Federal government--by fostering intergovernmental partnerships. This idea includes supporting processes that State or local governments have devised for coordinating and reviewing proposed Federal financial grant applications.

The process for doing this requires grant applicants to contact State Single Points of Contact for information on how this works. Multi-state applicants should follow procedures specific to each state. Further information about the State Single Point of Contact process and a list of names by State can be found at:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SPOC-4-13-20.pdf

For State specific State review programs, applicants may submit comments directly to the Department. All recommendations and comments must be mailed or hand-delivered by the date indicated in the actual application notice to the following address: The Secretary, EO 12372—ALN #84.031A/F, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Room 7E200, Washington, DC 20202.

Proof of mailing will be determined on the same basis as applications (see 34 CFR §75.102). Recommendations or comments may be hand-delivered until 4:30:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) on the closing date indicated in this notice.

Important note: The above address is not the same address as the one to which the applicant submits its completed applications. Do not send applications to the above address.

General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) Section 427

Section 427 of GEPA requires all applicants for new awards to include in their applications a description of the steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access to, and participation in, its federally-assisted programs for students, teachers, and other program beneficiaries with special needs. The provision allows applicants discretion in developing the required description. The statute highlights six types of barriers that can impede equitable access or participation: gender, race, national origin, color, disability, or age.

A general statement of an applicant’s nondiscriminatory hiring policy is not sufficient to meet this requirement. Applicants must identify potential barriers and explain steps they will take to overcome these barriers.

NOTE: Applicants for new awards must include information in their applications to address this provision in order to receive funding under this program.

Government Performance and Results Modernization Act (GPRAMA)

What is GPRAMA?

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) is a straightforward statute that requires all federal agencies to manage their activities with attention to the consequences of those activities. Reauthorized in 2010 by the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA), each agency is to clearly state what it intends to accomplish in measurable terms, identify the resources required, and periodically report their progress to the Congress. In so doing, it is expected that the GPRAMA 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 GPRAMA Requirements?

As required by GPRAMA, the Department of Education has prepared a strategic plan for 2018-2022. 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 Department’s goals, as listed in the plan, are:

Goal 1: Support state and local efforts to improve learning outcomes for all P-12 students in every community.

Goal 2: Expand postsecondary educational opportunities, improve outcomes to foster economic opportunity and promote an informed, thoughtful and productive citizenry.

Goal 3: Strengthen the quality, accessibility and use of education data through better management, increased privacy protections and transparency.

Goal 4: Reform the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of the Department.

What are the Performance Indicators for SIP?

The performance indicators for Title III, Part A, SIP are part of the Department’s plan for meeting Goal 2:

Goal 2: Expand postsecondary educational opportunities, improve outcomes to foster economic opportunity and promote an informed, thoughtful and productive citizenry.

The number of full-time degree-seeking undergraduates enrolled at SIP institutions. Note that this is a long-term measure, which will be used periodically to gauge performance, beginning in FY 2009.

The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at 4-year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students at 2-year SIP institutions who were in their first year of postsecondary enrollment in the previous year and are enrolled in the current year at the same SIP institution.

The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at 4-year SIP institutions graduating within six years of enrollment.

The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking undergraduate students enrolled at 2-year SIP institutions graduating within three years of enrollment.

The cost per successful program outcome: federal cost per undergraduate and graduate degree at SIP institutions.

How does the Department of Education determine whether performance goals have been met?

An applicant that receives a grant award will be required to submit annual progress reports and a final report as a condition of the award. The reports will document the extent to which project goals and objectives are met.

The most recent version of this program’s annual performance report can be viewed at https://hepis.ed.gov/ISAPR/.

Instructions for Completing the Application

The SIP application consists of the following four parts. These parts are organized in the same manner that the submitted application should be organized. Remember to upload all forms and sections and follow carefully the Grants.gov application instructions. Note: All attachments should be PDF files. The parts are as follows:

Part I: 424 Forms

Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424)
Department of Education Supplemental Information form for SF 424

Part II: U.S. Department of Education Budget Summary Forms

ED 524 (Section A and Section B)

The “U.S. Department of Education Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs” is where applicants provide budget information for Section A – Budget Summary U.S. Department of Education Funds and Section B – Budget Summary Non-Federal Funds. Section C will NOT be available. Applicants should include costs for all project years under the Budget selection criterion.

Part III: Department of Education Abstract Form

Include a one-page abstract as a PDF file.

Project Narrative Attachment Form

Project Narrative Attachment Form

Responses to Competitive Preference Priorities (if addressed)
Program Profile

Part IV: Assurances and Certifications

GEPA Section 427 requirement
Lobbying Form (ED Form 80.0013)
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) Now OPTIONAL

ED Abstract Form: Attach your one-page project abstract that will provide an overview of the proposed project.

Project Narrative Attachment Form: The project narrative should include the narrative responses to the selection criteria that will be used to evaluate your application submitted for this competition. Please include a Table of Contents as the first page of the application narrative. You should limit the application narrative to no more than 55 pages for Individual Development Grants (if addressing both priorities) and 70 pages for Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants (if addressing both priorities). The project narrative pages should be consecutively numbered.

Program Profile: Included in this application is a SIP Program Profile. You must complete this profile and attach it to Part III, Project Narrative Attachment Form, in Grants.gov.

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 attachment forms listed above. All attachments should be in PDF format.

Project Narrative Instructions

The project narrative shall be attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in Grants.gov.

Before preparing the Project Narrative, applicants should review the program statute, program regulations, Federal Register Notice, and Dear Applicant Letter for specific guidance and requirements.

The Secretary evaluates an application according to the program specific criteria in 34 CFR 607.22 and 34 CFR 75.210. The Project Narrative should provide in detail the responses to each selection criterion. The maximum possible score for each category of selection criterion is indicated in parenthesis. For ease of reading by the reviewers, applicants should follow the sequence of the criteria as provided below. Applications should be written in a concise and clear manner. You should limit the section of the narrative that addresses the selection criteria to no more than 50 pages for Individual Development Grants or 65 pages for Cooperative Arrangement Development Grants.

Applicants should address each of the following SIP selection criteria:

Criterion	Points Value
Quality of Comprehensive Development Plan	20
Quality of Project Design	15
Quality of Activity Objectives	16
Quality of Implementation Strategy	15
Quality of Key Personnel	8
Quality of Project Management Plan	10
Quality of Evaluation Plan	10
Quality of Budget	6
Total Maximum Criteria Points	100

Priority	Points Value
Tutoring, Counseling, and Student Service Programs	5
Providing Flexible and Affordable Paths to Obtaining Knowledge and Skills	3
Total Maximum Priority Points	8

SIP grants are institutional grants. They are designed to strengthen the institution so it can better serve its students. Therefore, the activities you propose should achieve long-term change at the institution. This is why there is a selection criterion that specifically asks about how the particular implementation of the selected activities was chosen—whether based on existing literature or a successful project at a similar institution (Quality of Implementation Strategy).

The Department has added a selection criterion whereby applicants submit a logic model. That logic model should be a visual depiction that displays the rationale for the chosen activities, including the expected objectives and outcomes. To create a logic model for a SIP grant, we recommend you examine the data regarding the strengths and weaknesses of your organization, in order to identify the problem to be solved. Once the problem(s) is (are) identified, the next step is to establish the desired outcome/outcomes—the long-term change that is expected to result. Knowing what is effective (strengths), what is less effective (weaknesses) and what you want to achieve (long term outcome), you can now determine what you will do (activity/activities) to reach your long-term outcome (after 5 years of SIP funding) and your yearly outcomes. Though there is no need to attach a study for the FY 2022 competition, the activity chosen should be validated by existing studies that have explored that particular method. The goal is the same, long term outcomes to strengthen the institution, the difference is the method—an attached study is not required.

The following guidance may assist you in addressing the questions that will be used to evaluate your responses to the selection criteria:

(a) Quality of Comprehensive Development Plan (Maximum: 20 points)

(1) The strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems of the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are clearly and comprehensively analyzed and result from a process that involved major constituencies of the institution.

Content: Separately describe and analyze your institution's strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems in the following three areas as they relate to each proposed activity:

Academic programs,
Institutional management, and
Fiscal stability.

We are considering “weaknesses” and “significant problems” to be one and the same. Use the grant funds to address some of these weaknesses and problems. Here are some guidelines for stating the problems:

Avoid problem statements that declare the problem as "the lack of " or "the need for" the very solution you are proposing for funding. Such as, “the problem with our academic programs is a lack of or need for student services outside the classroom. Thus, we propose an activity to establish those student services." This type of statement usually contains circular reasoning.
Provide summaries of or excerpts from recent data, reports, evaluations or studies that demonstrate that you have objectively and thoroughly analyzed your institution’s main problems.
Describe the process you used to formulate the above information.
Provide evidence of the extent and nature of the faculty, staff, students, community, industry, and other major constituents' involvement in this process. You may rely on previously written information, such as a self-study for accreditation, as long as your process for developing the information involved the major constituencies' representatives and reflects your institution's current situation.

(2) The goals for the institution’s academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are realistic and based on comprehensive analysis.

Content: Based on a comprehensive analysis of your institution's strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems, separately state the institutional goals as they relate to each proposed activity you plan to address using Title III, Part A Strengthening Institutions Program funds. These will be the overall goals you expect from the successful implementation of the activity/activities. These goals should include the performance measures established for SIP, which can be found on pages 46-47 of this booklet. Broadly, the SIP performance measures can be classified under enrollment, retention, graduation and program costs.

(3) The objectives stated in the plan are measurable, related to institutional goals, and if achieved, will contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution.

Content: Note—though the sub-criterion speaks of objectives, as does criterion 3, in this instance we are referring to outcomes. Focusing on the overall (5-year or long-term), institutional outcomes that are specifically related to your proposed Title III, Part A Strengthening Institutions Program activities, separately provide measurable objectives for how you will reach each of the goals you discussed in sub-criterion #2. Achieving the outcomes outlined should contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution. For example, by revamping the curriculum (academic stability) to include technology and other pedagogical best practices, the goal is to increase the retention of first-year students by 40% by 9/30/20XX. These outcomes are directly related to the individual activity objectives, but they are not the same. These are the cumulative result of each activity’s objectives. To continue with the above example, yearly objectives will show shorter increases in retention of first-year students—5% in year one, 10% in year two, 20% in year three, 30% in year four and 40% in year five.

Describe in measurable terms how objectives are related to the goals of the institution. The description should include details on the following:

Specific Tasks

Institutionalize personnel, programs, and services.

Methods Involved

Operational funding budgeted and allocated to sustain improvements.

Tangible Results

Program, services, and personnel fully institutionalized.

(4) The plan clearly and comprehensively describes the methods and resources the institution will use to institutionalize practices and improvements developed under the proposed project, including, in particular, how operational costs for personnel, maintenance, and upgrades of equipment will be paid with institutional resources.

Content: In this section, separately describe the following for each proposed activity:

The methods your institution will use to integrate practices and improvements developed into its operations and, if appropriate, continue them after the grant ends. For example, provide specifics on how your institution will obtain approval from appropriate internal and/or external governance authorities to conduct new or revised curricula and use new intervention strategies. What will the time period be for these actions?

Provide the resources you will need to institutionalize newly developed practices and improvements and, most importantly, how you will fund them. In particular, discuss how your institution will fund operational costs such as personnel, maintenance, and upgraded equipment. For example, one way to ensure that positions continue after the grant ends is for your institution to pay a percentage of the salary during the grant and increase that percentage during years two, three, four, and five.

Your response should be clear, specific, and realistic. It is not realistic to solely depend on revenue from the expected increase in retention or enrollment (long-term outcome) to fund the institutionalization of the activity/activities. Should these increases not materialize, how will the institution continue to implement successful activities?

(b) Quality of the Project Design. (Maximum 15 Points)

(1) The Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in the Notice Inviting Applications).

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program.

Content: A logic model shows the reasoning of your project, what resources you have, how you will implement them and what you expect to change as a result of those actions. In your logic model, include the main institutional objectives that you outline in your CDP (increase retention, graduation, etc.), as part of your long-term outcomes. The connections between the resources, individual activities and outputs should show how they all “feed” into achieving the overall goals of the CDP (and the program—the performance measures on page 41).

As defined above, the logic model is analogous to the theory of action/theory of change. Theory of change shows the ideas (activities) that are expected to lead to change (outcomes). Theory of action details how the theory of change is delivered/implemented. A logic model encompasses both. This means that your logic model and your Implementation Strategy are in direct relationship to each other. The goals and activities in the logic model should also be listed in the implementation strategy table and vice-versa.

A logic model does not have to be only one page; it can be longer. We encourage applicants to provide a thorough and detailed logic model. Nevertheless, you may not be able to include every component of the inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes of your proposed project. These complete, detailed steps needed for the thorough grant execution should be entirely represented in your Implementation Strategy section of the application.

When creating a logic model, it is usually best to start with your end in mind. What is your overall goal (outcomes = CDP and program performance goals)? Build your logic model by reverse engineering. How are you going to achieve these goals (activities)? What are the tangible measures that will indicate you are on the right path (outputs)?

In general,

Inputs are fixed characteristics that serve as resources or barriers for organizational or student change.
Activities are the intended development, implementation, or restructuring of projects, programs, and services.
Outputs are evidence that the intended activities are being implemented (participation rates or numbers served).
Outcomes are student or organizational changes in attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, skills, status, or levels of functioning.
- Short-term outcomes reflect yearly/bi-yearly changes.
- Long-term outcomes are the changes you will see after 5 years of grant implementation.

Impacts are what you hope happens to your students or organization as a result of the long-term outcomes. These include changes you expect to see after institutionalizing the grant activities, which should include the program performance indicators.

Do not just include a logic model. There should be a narrative section (can be a table) that details the logic model and its relationship to the implementation strategy.

To develop your logic models, you may want to use resources such as the Pacific Education Laboratory’s Education Logic Model Application (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp). The three examples provided in the site all show the interrelationship between all the components of the logic model.

We have also included a sample logic model below, to assist you as you develop your project-specific logic model.

Logic Model

Shape1

Outcomes

Short(S) Medium(M) Long(L)

Overall Outcome/Goal: To increase developmental education completion by 40%; student persistence by 5%; graduation by 5%; and transfer rates by 5% over the baseline.

Shape4 Shape3 Shape2

Outputs

Activities

Inputs

Shape5

•550 students total enroll in 15 sections each of remedial Math and remedial English

•All receive intrusive advising

Shape7 Shape6 Shape9 Shape8

Targeted students:

•complete developmental courses at rate of 10% over baseline (S)

•enroll in and complete college-level courses at a rate of 5% over baseline (S)

Strengths:

Technology, student services, faculty and business process subject matter experts
Committed leadership support
Existing technology systems
Range of learning and personal supports for student success

Weaknesses (also Inputs):

Low rates of developmental transfer to degree-credit courses
Insufficient advising resources
Lack of accessibility of information about student career and academic goals

•Co-requisite developmental education model designed to accelerate remediation established

•Faculty trained to teach revised curriculum

Shape16 Shape25 Shape12 Shape13 Shape10 Shape14 Shape11 Shape15 Shape26 Shape21 Shape19 Shape24 Shape23 Shape22 Shape20 Shape18 Shape17

40% of new program students complete an educational plan in their first year in college (S)

•Unified portal with student and advisor views centralizes key educational planning and advising data for all students

•100% of students unsure of career goal or off-track of educational plan are identified and receive timely interventions

•400 students create My Roadmap

Shape27

•Build and deploy online individualized educational planning and service delivery tool integrated with college data systems (My Roadmap)

Shape28 Shape29

Shape31 Shape30

Shape32 Shape33

Increase by 30% over baseline the yearly rate at which targeted student groups access career and/or advising services (S)

Shape34 Shape35

Shape37 Shape36

Shape38

Shape40 Shape39

Rate at which targeted students are retained from their first year to their second increases 5% over baseline (S)

•Implement comprehensive, coherent advising and career services model, leveraging technology and data to provide proactive individualized services

•Provide robust advising professional development for faculty

Shape42 Shape41

•100% of professional advisors receive Master Advising Certification, renewed yearly

•300 full-time faculty complete advising training

•85% of trained faculty provide advising within their programs congruent with model

•All students have assigned advisors

Shape44 Shape43

Rate at which targeted students complete a credential or transfer within 3 years increases 5% over baseline (M)

Shape45

Shape46

Impacts:

Shape47

Increased enrollments and tuition revenue ▪ Sustainable IT infrastructure ▪ Institutionalized faculty advising ▪ More efficient use of advising resources
Improved access and success for low-income and underrepresented students ▪ Transformed delivery of developmental education

Key Assumptions and Supporting Evidence
ASSUMPTION	SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
An important factor contributing to poor completion and progression is the length of time needed to complete remedial sequences	Hodara & Jaggars, 2014 – Level of Evidence: Moderate evidence
Strategies that accelerate remediation lead to improved completion and progression to college-level courses	Weisburst et al, 2017; Hodara & Jaggars, 2014 – Moderate evidence
Students without defined education or career goals persist and complete credentials at lower rates	Karp, 2013 – Promising practice
Not following a coherent educational program or frequently changing programs leads to students paying for credits they can’t use and lengthens time to completion	Bailey et al, 2015; Wang, 2017 – Emerging evidence
Intrusive, developmental advising is effective	Karp et al, 2016 – Promising practice
Strategies that help students navigate complex college processes and program requirements lead to improved progression to degree and transfer	Karp et al, 2016 – Promising practice
Appropriately used technology can extend the reach and impact of college advising services	Kalamkarian & Karp, 2015 – Emerging evidence

Shape50 Shape48 Shape49

What do yu hope happens to your students or organization?

Impact

(c) Quality of Activity Objectives (Maximum: 16 Points)

(1) The extent to which the objectives for each activity are realistic and defined in terms of measurable results.

Content: State your yearly objectives, separately for each individual activity, which are measurable and realistic (not too high, not too low). Connect each objective to the problem or weakness it should address, as you described in the CDP. In addition:

DO NOT create process objectives such as: "To establish a college-wide committee,” whose measurement is: "We formed a committee." Identify processes or tasks under the Implementation Strategy as discussed next.
DO NOT begin your objective with words such as "to provide," "to develop," or "to establish." This heightens the likelihood you may be describing a process or task rather than an outcome objective.
DO use words such as "to increase by" or "to decrease by" since you are more likely to be describing a genuine, outcome objective. However, please add a measurable target by which you will increase or decrease your proposed action and a date by which you expect the increase or decrease to be completed.
DO provide a realistic number of objectives and performance indicators for each proposed activity and for each year you are requesting funds for that activity.

For example:

Objective:

By the end of year 2 (9/30/20XX) 30% of all at-risk incoming freshmen will have a college pathway plan established.

Some Possible Performance Indicators:

Train an additional 15 faculty members on advising methods by October 30, 20XX.
By October 1^st, schedule advising appointments for 60% of incoming freshmen.
Send electronic reminders to all scheduled students (60% of incoming freshmen) regarding their upcoming appointments.

(2) The extent to which the objectives for each activity are directly related to the problems to be solved and to the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

Content: Separately describe how meeting the objectives of each proposed activity will address a problem identified in the CDP and affect your institution's ability to address its goals for its academic programs, institutional management, or fiscal stability.

If you need funds for more than one activity, you may propose different start and end dates and vary the duration of each. For example, you may need only three years to develop a new curriculum but five years to develop a new management information system. Any proposed activity should address a critical problem that the CDP describes as hindering institutional growth and self-sufficiency.

Please note that there is a difference between the objectives mentioned in the CDP section and the objectives in this section. The word objective is equal to the word goals in the CDP section. The CDP objectives are the “grand” objectives, the ones that are linked to the GPRAMA Indicators such as to increase enrollment, retention, and strengthen fiscal stability. For example, you have a problem with retention and, realize that those dropping out are low-income and/or minority students who need additional academic assistance. You design an activity to offer intensive advising, a first-year experience (FYE) program, etc. In this example, the CDP goals/objectives would be something like increase freshman retention by 5% at the end of the grant (current baseline 55%).

Your activity objectives would be those tasks directly related to the activity you have decided to implement to address your retention issue. Those would perhaps include, by Y5, 100% of courses with high DFW rates across Departments (15) will have established learning communities (3 by Y2, 7 by Y3, etc.). Performance Indicators would be: By the end of Y1, instructors for all 3 gateway courses (6 instructors) are trained in creating learning communities.

If you are a visual learner, please see the table below. Note that the table has different examples, to provide more options.

CDP Objective--OUTCOMES	Activity	Activity Objectives	Performance Indicators-- OUTPUTS
By end of the grant, increase retention of FT degree-seeking students by 5% (current baseline 55%).	Create internal support systems via tutoring, mentoring, and learning communities.	By Fall of Year 2, 25% of at-risk students will enroll in learning communities to increase a sense of belonging. (Year 3 40%; Year 4 50%; Year 5 65%.)	By the end of Year 1, identify courses and build block schedules for 20 learning communities (750 students) to be implemented in Year 2. (Year 3: 18 new sections (1200 total students); Year 4 12 new sections (2100 total students); Year 5: 12 sections (1800 students).
By end of the grant, increase retention of FT degree-seeking students by 5% (current baseline: 55%).	Create internal support systems via tutoring, mentoring, and learning communities.	By Fall of Year 2, 25% of at-risk students will enroll in learning communities to increase sense of belonging. (Year 3: 40%; Year 4: 50%; Year 5: 65%.)	Sense of belonging survey designed and administered Year 1 to establish baseline. Year 2 to 5, sense of belonging survey administered with the goal of 2.5% annual increase from prior year.
By the end of the grant, decrease the number of students in academic probation by 50% (baseline: 1,250 students).	Develop and scale recovery courses for students on academic probation.	By the end of Year 1, the academic probation recovery course will be available to 50% of students on probation. (Year 2: 60%; Year 3: 70%; Year 4 75%; Year 5 100%)	By the end of Year 1, recruit and train 10 additional UNIV 1101 instructors for Fall 202X courses. (Year 2: 12 instructors; Year 3: 12 instructors; Year 4 12 instructors)

Lastly, if you propose to use up to 20% for endowment investing, you do not need to write a detailed activity narrative regarding this use of endowment investing. However, we do need to know which entity will manage the funds. For example, will a foundation be managing the endowment, or will it be an office at the institution?

(d) Quality of Implementation Strategy (Maximum: 15 Points)

(1) The extent to which the implementation strategy for each activity is comprehensive.

(2) The extent to which the rationale for the implementation strategy for each activity is clearly described and is supported by the results of relevant studies or projects.

Content: For each proposed activity, explain why you chose a specific method for implementing that activity. Indicate the relevant studies that you reviewed and experts that you consulted. In this section, expand on the selected study that guided your project and logic model. While you are not required to use a study cleared by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), as in recent years, keep in mind that a study is not an article in a magazine or newspaper. Studies are peer-reviewed and generally appear in journals or books.

(3) The timetable for each activity is realistic and likely to be attained.

Chart an implementation strategy to meet your objectives for each year you are requesting funds and for each activity. Make sure the implementation strategy is detailed and expands on the submitted logic model.

Use time frames that are realistic for completing a task. Chart each of the five years using the budget period of October 1 to September 30.

Describe in a comprehensive, sequential and clear manner who will do what and how they will do it to meet the objectives of each activity.

Identify, by title, the primary participants who will carry out the tasks to meet the objectives. Describe how the personnel will perform the tasks and the results you expect from them.

(e) Quality of Key Personnel (Maximum: 8 Points)

(1) The extent to which the experience and training of key professional personnel are directly related to the stated activity objectives.

(2) The extent to which the time commitment of key personnel is realistic.

Content: For each proposed activity, list, by title and name (if available) which positions are being proposed to manage the Title III grant and describe the qualifications you require of that position and the amount of time each person will allot to the proposed activity. This information should be included for all staff that are key for the successful implementation of the grant, not only the project director or the activity director, regardless of whether they are paid by the grant or by the institution. For example, in a project that requires significant software and IT hardware updates, the institution’s IT manager’s experience and training are relevant and should be included.

If you want to use a consultant, explain why a consultant is more advantageous than using the institution’s personnel.

(f) Quality of Project Management Plan (Maximum: 10 Points)

(1) The extent to which procedures for managing the project are likely to ensure efficient and effective project implementation.

(2) The extent to which project coordinator and activity directors have sufficient authority to conduct the project effectively, including access to the president or chief executive officer.

For the project director/coordinator, activity director and other key positions, provide the following:

Under “Quality of Key Personnel,” be sure to include the director’s/coordinator's required qualifications (education, experience, training) and the specific duties of the position. Directly relate the duties to the stated purposes and objectives of the project.
Indicate how much time the Title III, Part A, director/coordinator and other key staff will commit to the project. Make the time commitment realistic, not too high nor too low, relative to the tasks the individual will perform.

Note: Your Title III, Part A director’s/coordinator’s time commitment to a project may vary considerably from that in another project or another institution’s project. One project focused on developing a management information system, for example, may have a director/coordinator who is the director of technology in the ordinary hierarchy of the college. He or she may allot 10 percent time to coordinate the project for which the college will pay. On the other hand, a new director/coordinator of a faculty development project may be an instructional developer with a 50 percent time or 100 percent time commitment paid for with Title III, Part A, funds. Carefully think through the management structure and time commitment that will work best at your institution and specify the reasons for your choice.

Describe the procedures the project director/coordinator will use to manage and monitor the project's progress such as how information will be provided to key administrators so they can integrate project activities with related, on-going institutional activities.
Describe the project director’s/coordinator's administrative authority over the activity director(s) who is normally responsible for accomplishing a specific activity's objectives. Also, describe the administrative authority of the activity director(s) over subordinates.
Chart the lines of authority of the project director/coordinator to key institutional decision makers, including the president.

(g) Quality of Evaluation Plan (Maximum: 10 Points)

(1) The extent to which the data elements and the data collection procedures are clearly described and appropriate to measure the attainment of activity objectives and to measure the success of the project in achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

Content: For each proposed activity, describe the data collection procedures the institution will use to identify the data elements, objectives, and goals identified in the CDP. Include measure attainment of each proposed activity. Include procedures for analyzing and using both formative and summative data.

The overall impact indicator, the goals and the objectives in the implementation of this grant have been identified. How will they be measured? What elements need to be measured? How will information on those elements be collected? How often? Who’s going to do it? Will it be an internal evaluator (an institutional staff member) or an external one? What are the benefits of the chosen measures? When will the evaluator begin work?

(2) The extent to which the data analysis procedures are clearly described and are likely to produce formative and summative results on attaining activity objectives and measuring the success of the project on achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan.

Content: For each proposed activity, describe in detail the project's evaluation plan, including who, what, when and how. Define the baseline indicators of progress that you will use. Once the above data are established, how will they be analyzed to show what the yearly (formative) and the 5-year (summative) results are? Will the analysis lead to obtaining formative and summative results, ones that are clearly linked to the activity objectives and the CDP goals?

The detailed evaluation plan should:

Produce a valid assessment of your implementation strategies;

Result in annual, quantifiable evidence of the extent to which you attained your objectives for each activity and your goals for which funding is requested;

Include the data elements and collection procedures that you will use; and

Describe procedures for analyzing and using both formative and summative data.

All applicants must submit a plan to conduct a project evaluation as part of their grant activities. The planned evaluation should be systematic in assessing the worth of a project and useful in guiding project objectives and focus primarily on determining the outcomes and impacts of the project relative to those objectives. The evaluation should also serve to strengthen the management of the project and lead to better knowledge of what works in producing the desired outcomes.

An individual or organization, independent of the project team (and all of its partners), but not necessarily external to the grantee institution, should execute the project evaluation plan. This independent evaluator should assist in the initial preparation of the evaluation plan and be willing to work alongside the project team throughout the duration of the project. The evaluator should possess good evaluation skills commonly found among practitioners of the American Evaluation Association.

The project director and team should be committed to gathering the best evaluation data possible for formative and summative purposes. Projects should collect baseline data before the project starts as a basis for measuring progress.

A summary of the evaluation report must be included in the final performance report submitted by the project to the Department of Education. The report, which also includes fiscal and management performance information, is due within 90 days after expiration of the award. The evaluation report should be included as an appendix to the final performance report as well as available upon request. (Please see 34 CFR §607.24 for information on how project performance may affect future funding).

For the Title III, Strengthening Institutions Program, the evaluation plan should produce a valid assessment of the implementation strategies. It should also result in annual, quantifiable evidence of the attainment of objectives for each activity and of the goals in the CDP.

(h) Quality of Budget (Maximum: 6 Points)

The extent to which the proposed costs are necessary and reasonable in relation to the project’s objectives and scope.

Content: Review the program regulations (34 CFR 607.10 and 607.30) for guidance on which activities and costs are allowable. For example, you may not use your grant funds to:

- Recruit students;

- Carry out activities that are operational rather than developmental;

- Carry out student activities such as entertainment, cultural or social enrichment programs, student publications, social clubs or associations;

- Pay for organized fund raising; and

- Cover indirect costs.

Prepare a separate, detailed, budget narrative for each proposed activity for each year you are requesting grant funds. Demonstrate and justify that all costs are reasonable in today’s market and necessary to accomplish your activity objectives. Please pay particular attention in your justification to those (per item) costs exceeding $25,000, excluding salaries and fringe benefits. For each activity, provide itemized costs (in dollars), and a narrative justification to support your request for:

Personnel,
Fringe Benefits,
Travel,
Equipment,
Supplies,
Contractual,
Construction,
Other, and
Total.

You must provide details so we can determine if the costs are allowable, necessary and reasonable.

NOTE: The Title III, Strengthening Institutions Program, ALN 84.031A, does not reimburse grantees for indirect costs they incur in carrying out a project funded under this program. Therefore, applicants should not show any dollar amounts for indirect costs on either line 10 of the application budget form (ED 524) or in their budget narrative. Applicants should also be aware that un-reimbursed indirect costs under grants of this program may not be charged as direct cost items in the same award, used to satisfy matching or cost-sharing requirements, or charged to another Federal award.

Do not include a budget narrative (as a separate activity) for endowment investing.

Note: Check the combined total for the proposed activity budgets and compare it to the total on the ED 524. The totals must match.

U.S. Department of Education Budget Information Non-Construction Programs (Section A - Budget Summary U.S. Department of Education Funds and Section B - Budget Summary Non-Federal Funds (ED 524 form)).

First, carefully read the instructions contained in this document. Then, using the Department of Education Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (ED 524) form, prepare a budget for the entire project that totals all the costs for each year of the grant. If you choose to use up to 20 percent of each year’s grant funds to establish or increase your institution’s endowment fund through endowment investing, enter the amount of your contribution in the summary budget on the “other” line. If you have additional items for the other category, separate the endowment contribution from the other items and make two entries for “other.” Endowment monies should be listed first.

Instructions for Standard Forms

To obtain instructions for standard forms included in this application package, please visit https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

Supplemental Information and Instructions

SIP Profile: All applicants must complete the information requested on this page. Using the profile, the applicant will provide information on Assurances and Eligibility. Do not modify, amend or delete any of this document.

Applicants must copy and paste this page into a separate document or recreate the page exactly as it appears. Then, complete the page, save it to your computer and attach it to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form,” in Grants.gov, as a .PDF document. Do not modify or amend the contents of the form in any way.

Page Limits: The project narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We have established recommended page limits for Individual Development Grant applications. You should limit the section of the narrative that addresses the selection criteria to no more than 50 pages. For Cooperative Arrangement Development Grant applications, the recommended page limit is 65 pages.

The page limit does not apply to Part I, the Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424); the Department of Education Supplemental Information form (SF 424); Part II, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED Form 524); Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page project abstract. However, the page limit does apply to all of the project narrative section (Part III), including the budget narrative of the selection criteria. You must include your complete response to the selection criteria in the project narrative.

Formatting Recommendations: A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, excluding titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, captions and all text in charts, tables, and graphs. Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. Use font size 12 or larger and no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

84.031A Strengthening Institutions Program Profile

INSTRUCTIONS: ALL applicants must complete these pages. The completed pages must be attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in the application package in the Grants.gov system (as a .PDF document). DO NOT MODIFY OR AMEND THESE PAGES.

OPE ID #___________

1. INSTITUTION (Legal Name):

_____________________________________________________________________

2. Are you applying as a Branch Campus? _____YES _____NO

3. ADDRESS (Applicants must indicate the address where the project will be located):

Project Address: _______________________________________________________

City: _____________________________________State: ______Zip: _____________

4. ENDOWMENT FUND ASSURANCE:

 By checking this box (or placing an “X” beside it), an applicant certifies that the institution of higher education proposes to use up to twenty percent (20%) of the Strengthening Institutions Program yearly grant award, made under the authority of Title III, Part A of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, to establish or increase the institution’s endowment fund. The institution agrees to abide by the Department of Education’s regulations governing the Endowment Challenge Grant program, 34 CFR Part 628, the program statute, and the program regulations, 34 CFR Part 607. The institution further agrees to raise the required matching funds.

5. COOPERATIVE ARRANGEMENT FOR PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS: The applicant institution must provide for each participating institution: the institution name, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number, location (city and state).

Institution Name	UEI Number	City	State

6. TIE-BREAKER INFORMATION:

If the selection process ends in a tie and funds are not sufficient to fund all institutions, we will use the information provided here to determine who will receive a grant. In accordance with Section 607.23(b), the Secretary will award up to three (3) additional points based on the information provided here.

TOTAL 2019-2020 FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE) STUDENTS= ___________

Total market value of endowment fund at the end of 2019-2020 $__________

B. Total expenditures for library materials during 2019-2020 $__________

C. Check activities applicant proposes to carry out in application:

a. Faculty development ____________

b. Funds and administrative management ____________

c. Development and improvement of academic ____________

programs

d. Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening ____________

management and academic programs

e. Joint use of facilities ____________

f. Student services ____________

7. SIP APPLICATIONS & OTHER PROGRAMS:

If your institution currently has a grant with any of the programs listed below, please indicate which one and the year the grant was awarded. Note that an institution may not have two Title III, Part A grants or a Part A and a Title V grant simultaneously.

Check (if applicable)	Date Grant Awarded	Program Name	ALN #	Title	Part
		Alaska Native – Native Hawaiian Program (ANNH)	84.031N & 84.031W	III	A
		Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program (DHSI)	84.031S	V	A
		Promoting Postbaccalaureate Opportunities for Hispanic Americans Program (PPOHA)	84.031M	V	B
		Asian American Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions Program (AANAPISI)	84.031L	III	A
		Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institutions Program (NASNTI)	84.031X	III	A
		Predominantly Black Institutions Program (PBI)	84.031P	III	A

Application Checklist

Use This Checklist While Preparing Your Application Package: All items listed on this checklist are necessary.

 Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424)

 Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424

 Department of Education Budget Information Non-Construction Programs Form (ED 524)

 One-Page Program Abstract – Attached to the “ED Abstract Form” in Grants.gov

 Project Narrative for the proposed grant – Attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in Grants.gov

 Strengthening Institutions Program Profile – Attached to the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” in Grants.gov

 Assurances and Certifications – found in Grants.gov

 ED GEPA 427 Form (Mandatory for this competition)

 Grants.gov Lobbying Form (ED 80-0013)

 Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF-LLL) -- Optional

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. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1840-0114. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 65 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 (authorized by Title III, Part A, Sections 311-315, of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended by the HEOA; and governed by the program regulations in 34 CFR Part 607; and the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), Parts 74, 75 (except for §§ 75.215-75.221), 77, 79, 80, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98 and 99). If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this application, please contact Strengthening Institutions Program, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20202-8510 directly. [Note: Please do not return the completed application to this address.]

1 M. Mechur Karp, 2011, Toward a New Understanding of Non-Academic Student Support: Four Mechanisms Encouraging Positive Student Outcomes in the Community College, Retrieved 3/2/2021 from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments/new-understanding-non-academic-support.pdf.

2 Gallup and Lumina Foundation, What America Needs to Know about Higher Education Redesign (Indianapolis: Lumina Foundation, 2014).

File Type	application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Author	Nalini Lamba-Nieves
File Modified	0000-00-00
File Created	2022-05-26