Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund

1. Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund July 25, 2011 National Education Statistics Agenda Committee

2. Overview • Overview of the i3 Program • Key features of i3 • Review of the FY2010 Competition & Results • Grants funded under the Use of Data Priority • FY2011 i3 Competition • Major Changes from the FY2010 Competition • i3 Looking Forward

3. Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund Summary • To provide competitive grants to applicants with a record of improving student achievement, attainment or retention in order to expand the implementation of, and investment in, innovative practices that are demonstrated to have an impact on: • Improving student achievement or student growth, closing achievement gaps, decreasing dropout rates, increasing high school graduation rates • Increasing college enrollment and completion rates Purpose • Eligible applicants are: • Local educational agencies (LEAs) • Nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools Applicants

4. Types of Awards Available Under i3 i3 Development Validation Scale-up

5. What Makes i3 Different • Builds portfolio of solutions to some of America’s most persistent educational challenges • Aligns amount of funding with level of evidence • Aims explicitly to scale effective programs and create a pipeline of promising innovations • Provides funding for required independent evaluation in order to build understanding of “what works”

6. How We Think About Innovation Invention Innovation product, process, strategy, or approach that improves significantly upon the status quo and reaches scale Greater Impact Baseline Trend Scale Note: The definition of innovation on this slide is presented as an overview of the concept, not as a specific definition in the i3 program

7. Vibrant Competition in 2010 • $650 million to be obligated by September 30, 2010 • Nearly 1700 applications across all three grant categories (received 19 Scale-up, 355 Validation, 1324 Development applications) • 49 grantees - 4 Scale-up, 15 Validation, 30 Development grants – aiming to collectively serve millions of students • All 49 grantees secured private-sector matching • Multiple unfunded i3 applicants subsequently have identified organizations to fund at least part of their proposal

8. i3 Priorities in FY2010 Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Early Learning (0 or 1 point) Enhanced Data Systems College Access and Success (0 or 1 point) Improve Achievementfor High-Need Students College- and Career-ready Standards and Assessments Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students (0 or 1 point) Improving Achievement in Persistently Low-performing Schools Serving Students in Rural LEAs (0, 1, or 2 points) Required forall applications Must address oneAbsolute Priority May address one or moreCompetitive Preference

9. Grantees Distributed Across Grant Types and Priorities

10. Post Award Requirements All i3 Grantees MUST MUST • Evaluation • Conduct an independent project evaluation • Cooperate with technical assistance provided by the Department or its contractors • Share broadly the results of any evaluation (and data sets for Validation and Scale-up) • Participate in, organize, or facilitate, as appropriate, communities of practice for the i3 program MUST

11. Overview • Overview of the i3 Program • Key features of i3 • Review of the FY2010 Competition & Results • Grants funded under the Use of Data Priority • FY2011 i3 Competition • Major Changes from the FY2010 Competition • i3 Looking Forward

12. Projects Funded under Data Priority

13. Examples of Projects funded under Data Priority • Project READS: Using Data to Promote Summer Reading Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College Validation Grant Amount of Grant Award: $12,773,136 Length of Project: 5 years Partnering with LEAs in NC – uses student achievement growth data to identify which version of its program is cost effective in its goal to reduce summer learning loss and will support LEAs in using student achievement growth data to determine whether a targeted summer intervention is needed

14. Examples of Projects funded under Data Priority • School of One New York City Department of Education Development Grant Amount of Grant Award: $4,999,560 Length of Project: 4 years Expands model to four additional schools sites where students receive instruction through multiple modalities and an adaptive learning platform

15. Examples of Projects funded under Data Priority • Engage ME: PLEASE (Personalized Learning Experiences Accelerate Standards-Based Education) Forsyth County Schools Development Grant Amount of Grant Award: $4,738,315 Length of Project: 5 years Uses a role-based portal that allows students and teachers to access resources necessary for reflection on student learning and teacher instruction by integrating several data systems into one system

16. Examples of Projects funded under Data Priority • Expansion and Evaluation of Education Pilot Program(EPP) Advancement Through Opportunity and Knowledge Development Grant Amount of Grant Award: $3,742,580 Length of Project: 4 years Partnering with LEAs in CA – shares data across sectors through an integrated service model so that a multidisciplinary care team can monitor student progress and service provision for foster youth

17. Example of Data Use by a Project funded under another Priority • Educator Evaluation for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (E3TL) Consortium American Federation of Teachers Educational Foundation (AFTEF) Development Grant Amount of Grant Award: $4,989,9944 Length of Project: 4 years Partnering with LEAs in NY and RI – provides training and professional development to support LEAs in the implementation of performance-based teacher evaluation systems – to support this project, AFTEF is working to develop software that will facilitate the data collection process used in teacher evaluation

18. Overview • Overview of the i3 Program • Key features of i3 • Review of the FY2010 Competition & Results • Grants funded under the Use of Data Priority • FY2011 i3 Competition • Major Changes from the FY2010 Competition • i3 Looking Forward

19. Major Changes from 2010

20. Major Changes from 2010

21. Major Changes from 2010

22. Major Changes from 2010

23. i3: Looking Forward • FY 2012 Competition • Funding for i3 is in the Department’s FY2012 budget • “Long Term” Focus • The design of the i3 program supports a pipeline of promising innovations and provides incentives for building an evidence base that may allow a project to move up funding categories • Importance of a well-designed and well-implemented evaluation that provides data on the impact of the intervention • Importance of collecting high-quality implementation data and performance feedback to support replication

24. Other Important Resources • Investing in Innovation Fund Web site: • (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/index.html) • Notice of Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection Criteria (March 12, 2010) • Notice of Final Revisions to Priorities, Requirements, and Selection Criteria (June 3, 2011) • Notices Inviting Applications for the FY2011 i3 Competition (June 3, 2011) • Frequently Asked Questions • Evidence Summary Table • Selection Criteria Summary Table • i3 At-A-Glance (quick reference) • For information on the FY2010 grantees: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/awards.html All questions about i3 may be sent to i3@ed.gov