1 / 20

Overview of the FY 2010 SPDG Competition

Overview of the FY 2010 SPDG Competition. Jennifer Coffey. The Basics. An estimated $10 million will be available for new awards Application is due July 9th If using E-applications due 4:30:00:00 Eastern time If mailing, postmarked before 12:00 AM 100 pages for the Project Narrative

elina
Download Presentation

Overview of the FY 2010 SPDG Competition

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Overview of the FY 2010 SPDG Competition Jennifer Coffey

  2. The Basics • An estimated $10 million will be available for new awards • Application is due July 9th • If using E-applications due 4:30:00:00 Eastern time • If mailing, postmarked before 12:00 AM • 100 pages for the Project Narrative • Double-spaced • 12 point font

  3. Budget • Note: We will set the amount of each award after considering-- • (1) The amount of funds available for making the grants; • (2) The relative population of the State or outlying area; • (3) The types of activities proposed by the State or outlying area; • (4) The alignment of proposed activities with section 612(a)(14) of IDEA; • (5) The alignment of proposed activities with State plans and applications submitted under sections 1111 and 2112, respectively, of the ESEA; and • (6) The use, as appropriate, of scientifically-based research and instruction. • Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1 million, excluding outlying areas. • Estimated Number of Awards: 10. • Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

  4. Keep in Mind • 90% of your budgeted amount needs to be for activities delineated in (a) “Professional Development Activities” under “Use of Funds” • Must also have an activity or activities related to (b) “Other Activities” under Use of Funds • You must budget to attend the Project Directors’ Conference & $4,000 annually for support of the State Personnel Development Grants Program Web site

  5. Contracts and Subgrants • Must award contracts or subgrants to LEAs, institutions of higher education, parent training and information centers, or community parent resource centers, as appropriate, to carry out the State plan; and • May award contracts and subgrants to other public and private entities, including the lead agency under Part C of IDEA, to carry out the State plan.

  6. State Personnel Development Plan • Can reference IDEA (Statute) Section 651-655 for a more holistic view of the SPDG program • An applicant must submit a State Personnel Development Plan that identifies and addresses the State and local needs for personnel preparation and professional development of personnel, as well as individuals who provide direct supplementary aids and services to children with disabilities, and that--

  7. Competitive Preference Priorities • Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional five points to an application that meets one of the following competitive preference priorities. We will award points on an “all or nothing” basis (i.e., five points or zero points) to an applicant that addresses one of the competitive preference priorities in its application based on whether the applicant meets the priority. These points are in addition to any points the application earns under the selection criteria. To be considered for a competitive preference, an applicant must identify in its application the one competitive preference priority it is seeking to meet.

  8. Competitive Preference Priority 1--Partnerships with LEAs and IHEs to Improve Special Education Teacher Effectiveness. We give competitive preference to applicants that demonstrate (1) how they will provide evidence-based professional development activities to improve the effectiveness of special education teachers of children with disabilities from low-income or minority backgrounds or children with disabilities who are English learners; (2) how they will track the effectiveness of the professional development activities; and (3) how these professional development activities will incorporate partnerships between one or more LEAs serving high concentrations of these children and one or more institutions of higher education (IHE).

  9. Competitive Preference Priority 2--Professional Development Activities for High School Personnel. We give competitive preference to applicants that demonstrate how they will provide professional development activities to enhance the capacity of personnel, as defined in section 651(b) of IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1451(b)), in high schools with high concentrations of low-income students and students from minority backgrounds to deliver high-quality instruction and improve outcomes for high school youth with disabilities. Examples include professional development activities related to mentoring, post-school transition, and literacy.

  10. Competitive Preference Priority 3--Professional Development for Personnel Who Work with Children Who Need High Levels of Support. We give competitive preference to applicants that demonstrate how they will provide professional development to enhance the capacity of early intervention personnel, special education and regular education teachers, related services personnel, and school principals to use collaborative and consultative models to serve infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities who need high levels of support to participate successfully in natural environments or in the least restrictive environment.

  11. The application narrative should include the following sections in this order: • (a)Need for project. (19 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. • (2) In determining the need for the proposed project the Secretary considers the extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

  12. (b) Significance. (19 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project. • (2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the likelihood that the proposed project will result in system change or improvement.

  13. (c) Quality of the project design. (19 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. • (2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: • (i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. • (ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target population or other identified needs. • (iii) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of training in the field. • (iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects up‑to‑date knowledge from research and effective practice. • (v) The extent to which the proposed project will establish linkages with other appropriate agencies and organizations providing services to the target population. • (vi) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support rigorous academic standards for students.

  14. (d) Quality of project personnel. (8 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. • (2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. • (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors: • (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel. • (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

  15. (e) Adequacy of resources. (8 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. • (2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: • (i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization. • (ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project. • (iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project. • (iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project. • (v) The potential for continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to this type of support.

  16. (f) Quality of the management plan. (8 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. • (2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors: • (i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. • (ii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

  17. (g) Quality of the project evaluation. (19 points) • (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. • (2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors: • (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. • (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies. • (iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible. • (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

  18. Program Measures (B-10) • Performance Measures: The goal of the SPDG Program is to reform and improve State systems for personnel preparation and professional development in early intervention, educational, and transition services in order to improve results for children with disabilities. Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Department has developed performance measures to assess the success of the program in meeting these goals. • Each grantee must annually report its performance on these measures in the project’s annual performance report to the Department in accordance with section 653(d) of IDEA and 34 CFR 75.590.

  19. E-Application Hours & Hotline • The hours of operation of the e-Grants Web site are 6:00 a.m. Monday until 7:00 p.m. Wednesday; and 6:00 a.m. Thursday until 8:00 p.m. Sunday, Washington, DC time. Please note that, because of maintenance, the system is unavailable between 8:00 p.m. on Sundays and 6:00 a.m. on Mondays, and between 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and 6:00 a.m. on Thursdays, Washington, DC time. Any modifications to these hours are posted on the e-Grants Web site. • GAPS Hotline (Helpdesk) at 1-888-336-8930. Helpdesk hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, Washington, D.C. time.

  20. E-application • http://e-grants.ed.gov • Password is e-mailed immediately and applicants cannot work on the application until they have a username and password. • Applicants work online to complete forms and upload narratives. Applicants save data (the work in progress) directly to the GAPS database. • Applicants can see multiple instructions documents and form instructions are separate. • Applicants can only upload .doc, .rtf & PDF files, and the software does not allow other file types. • The e-Application submission process is almost instantaneous after the applicant completes the authorized representative information and clicks on the submit button • Demo • SPDG application package

More Related