Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund Pre-Application Meeting

1. Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund Pre-Application Meeting Summary Document June 2011 Note: These slides are intended as guidance only. Pleaserefer to the official documents published in the Federal Register.

2. Note for Webinar Participants The slides that will be presented during today’s pre-application meeting are available for download on the Resources page of the i3 website at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/innovation/resources.html

3. A Few Notes on Q&A • We have budgeted time during the meeting for Q&A • Live participants should submit their questions via the computers around the room that are set up to receive questions • Webinar participants should submit their questions via the webinar chat function • Due to time constraints, we will not be able to answer all questions received • If you have additional questions, please send them to the i3 mailbox: i3@ed.gov

4. A Few Notes on Q&A (cont’d) • Content of the Investing in Innovation (i3) Notices and Application • Timeline of the i3 program • Application process What We Can Address • Questions about the eligibility of a specific entity • Questions about the competitiveness of a specific entity or research focus • Questions about 2010 applications • Substantive explanation of the rationale behind inclusion or exclusion of specific items in i3 beyond what is in the Federal Register What WeCannot Address

5. Schedule for Today

6. 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 Funding $148.2 million (est.) to be obligated by December 31, 2011 • Eligible applicants are: • Local educational agencies (LEAs) • Nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools Applicants

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

8. 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”

9. 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

10. Vibrant Competition in 2010 • Nearly 1700 applications across all three grant categories • 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

11. Warnings from 2010 • Applicants failed to submit applications on time and so were not reviewed (this year, submit no later than 4:30:00PM DC time on August 2, 2011) • Some highly-rated applicants were declared ineligible for funding because they did not meet the evidence eligibility requirements for the type of grant they requested • READ THE NOTICES and FAQs • UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENTS • PLAN AHEAD

12. Schedule for Today

13. Major Changes from 2010

14. Major Changes from 2010

15. Major Changes from 2010

16. Major Changes from 2010

17. Schedule for Today

18. All Eligible Applicants Must Implement Practices, Strategies, or Programs for High-need Students High-need studentmeans a student at risk of educational failure, or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as students who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools, who are far below grade level, who are over-age and under-credited, who have left school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at risk of not graduating with a regular high school diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are limited English proficient. MUST MUST

19. Applicants Eligible Applicants can be: A local educational agency (LEA) A nonprofit organization in partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools

20. Eligibility Requirements: LEA Eligible Applicant: LEA TO RECEIVE A GRANT,MUST MUST, TO RECEIVE A GRANT MUST • Address one absolute priority • Demonstrate that it: • (a) significantly closed achievement gaps between groups of students or demonstrated success in significantly increasing academic achievement for all groups of students, and • (b) made significant improvement in other areas • Establish partnerships with private sector • Secure commitment for required private sector match • Meet the evidence requirement for the type of grant for which it has applied MUST

21. Eligibility Requirements:Non-Profit with LEA/Consortium Eligible Applicant: Non-profits, in partnership with LEA(s) or a consortium of schools TO RECEIVE A GRANT,MUST • Address one absolute priority • Demonstrate that the non-profit organization has a record of significantly improving student achievement, attainment, or retention through its record of work with an LEA or schools • Secure commitment for required private sector match • Meet the evidence requirement for the type of grant for which they have applied MUST

22. Key Definition: Partners Why It Is Important Official partnermeans any of the entities required to be part of a partnership under section 14007(a)(1)(B) of the ARRA (i.e., a non-profit organization, an LEA, or a consortium of schools). In the case of an eligible applicant that is a partnership between a nonprofit organization and (1) one or more LEAs or (2) a consortium of schools, the partner that was the applicant, and became the grantee when the partnership was selected to receive an award, may make subgrants to one or more of the official partners Other partnermeans any entity, other than the applicant and any official partner, that may be involved in a proposed project.

23. Q&A

24. Schedule for Today

25. i3 Priorities Early Learning Teacher and Principal Effectiveness College Access and Success Promoting STEM Education Improve Achievementfor High-Need Students Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students College- and Career-ready Standards and Assessments Productivity Improving Achievement in Persistently Low-performing Schools Improving Rural Achievement Technology May address up to twoCompetitive Preferences(0 or 1 point each) Required forall applications Must address oneAbsolute Priority

26. Notes on Absolute Priority 1:Teacher and Principal Effectiveness • “…increase the number or percentages of teachers or principals who are highly effective teachers or principals or reducethe number or percentages of teachers or principals who are ineffective, especially for teachers of high-need students…” • “…by identifying, recruiting, developing, placing, rewarding, and retaining highly effective teachers or principals (or removing ineffective teachers or principals).” • “…teacher or principal effectiveness should be determined through an evaluation system that is rigorous, transparent, and fair; performance should be differentiated using multiple rating categories of effectiveness; multiple measures of effectiveness should be taken into account, with data on student growth as a significant factor, and the measures should be designed and developed with teacher and principal involvement.” Two Possible Routes for Teachers or Principals Multiple Methods Multiple Measures of Effectiveness 26

27. Notes on Absolute Priority 2Promoting STEM Education “(a) Providing students with increased access to rigorous and engaging coursework in STEM. (b) Increasing the number and proportion of studentsprepared for postsecondary or graduate study and careers in STEM. (c) Increasing the opportunities for high-quality preparation of, or professional development for, teachers or other educatorsof STEM subjects. (d) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with disabilities, and women, who are provided with access to rigorous and engaging coursework in STEM or who are prepared for postsecondary or graduate study and careers in STEM. (e) Increasing the number of individuals from groups traditionally underrepresented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with disabilities, and women, who are teachers or educators of STEM subjects and have increased opportunities for high-quality preparation or professional development.” Multiple Areas of Focus Focus on Teachers or Students Focus on High-Need Populations 27

28. Notes on Absolute Priority 3:Standards and Assessments Focus on College & Career Readiness • “…standards and assessments that measure students’ progress toward college and career-readiness…” • “…may include, but are not limited to, … • increase the success of underrepresented student populations in academically rigorous courses and programs…; • increase the development and use of formative assessments or interim assessments, or other performance-based tools and “metrics” that are aligned with high student content and academic achievement standards; or • translate the standards and information from assessments into classroom practices that meet the needs of all students, including high-need students.” • “…eligible applicant must propose a project that is based on standards that are at least as rigorous as its State’s standards…” Range of Allowable Projects RigorousStandards 28

29. Notes on Absolute Priority 4:Persistently Low-Performing Schools • “Whole-school reform, including, but not limited to, comprehensive interventions to assist, augment, or replace Investing in Innovation Fund Absolute Priority 4 schools, including the school turnaround, restart, closure, and transformation models of intervention … or …” • “Targeted approaches to reform, including, but not limited to: • Providing more time for students to learn core academic content by expanding or augmenting the school day, school week, or school year, or by increasing instructional time for core academic subjects • integrating ‘‘student supports’’ into the school model to address non-academic barriers to student achievement • creating multiple pathways for students to earn regular high school diplomas” Projects May Choose Either Approach 29

30. i3 Priority 4 Schools High Schools • Elementary and middle school categories + • Title 1 eligible schools with a graduation rate lower than 60% over a number of years Middle Schools • Elementary school categories + • Title 1 eligible schools that would be in corrective action or restructuring Elementary Schools • Title 1 schools in corrective action or restructuring • Title 1 schools in improvement and in the lowest-achieving five percent (or lowest-achieving five schools) 30

31. Notes on Absolute Priority 5:Improving Rural Achievement • “…designed to address accelerating learning and helping to improve high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) and college enrollment rates” • “…designed to address accelerating learning and helping to improve high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice) andcollege enrollment rates” • “…for students in rural local educational agencies” Outcomes Focused Multiple Metrics Rural Students Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency (LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI, Part B of the ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to information on the Department’s Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html. 31

32. Guidance to Applicants and Peer Reviewerson Absolute Priority 5 • “Secretary encourages applicants that choose to respond to Absolute Priority 5 to also address how their applications meet one of the other Absolute Priorities” • “…applicants that choose to respond to Absolute Priority 5 should identify in the application and the i3 Applicant Information Sheet all rural LEAs where the project will be implemented, or identify in the application how the applicant will choose any rural LEAs where the project will be implemented” Focus on Key Reforms Identify Rural Locations

33. Guidance to Applicants and Peer Reviewerson Absolute Priority 5 Focus on Rural Needs • “…explain how the proposed innovative practices, strategies, or programs address the unique challenges of high-need students in schools within a rural LEA, resulting in accelerated learning and improved high school graduation and college enrollment rates” • “Applicants may also provide information on the applicant’s experience and skills, or the experience and skills of their partners, in serving high-need students in rural LEAs in responding to Selection Criterion D. Quality of the Management Plan and Personnel” Demonstrate Past Experience

34. Note on Removing Use of Data as an Absolute Priority “For this year’s competition, the Secretary chooses not to use the priority Innovations That Improve the Use of Data (Absolute Priority 2 in the 2010 i3 NFP). This action is not intended to discourage applicants from proposing projects that improve the use of data, so long as the proposal addresses one of the absolute priorities in this notice. Specifically, proposed projects that address Absolute Priority 1--Innovations That Support Effective Teachers and Principals, Absolute Priority 3--Innovations That Complement the Implementation of High Standards and High-Quality Assessments, and Absolute Priority 4--Innovations That Turn Around Persistently Low-Performing Schoolsmay also include using data in innovative ways to support the broader aims of the absolute priorities” Effective Data Use Allowable in Other Priorities

35. i3 Priorities Early Learning Teacher and Principal Effectiveness College Access and Success Promoting STEM Education Improve Achievementfor High-Need Students Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students College- and Career-ready Standards and Assessments Productivity Improving Achievement in Persistently Low-performing Schools Improving Rural Achievement Technology May address up to twoCompetitive Preferences(0 or 1 point each) Required forall applications Must address oneAbsolute Priority

36. Explanation of Competitive Preference Priorities • Applicants for all types of grants may, but are not required to, identify up to twocompetitive preference priorities to earn extra points • Points will be awarded depending on how well the applicant addresses a particular competitive preference priority, based on the judgment of the peer reviewers • All competitive preference priorities are worth up to one point, and the point is awarded all or nothing by peer reviewers Important Note on CPPs The Department will not review or award points under any competitive preference priority for an application that: (1) fails to clearly identify the competitive preference priorities it wishes the Department to consider for purposes of earning the competitive preference priority points, or (2) identifies more than two competitive preference priorities 36

37. Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 6:Early Learning • “…improve educational outcomes for high-need students who are young children (birth through 3rd grade) by enhancing the quality of early learning programs” Focus on High-need Children • “…(a) improving young children’s school readiness (including social, emotional, and cognitive readiness) so that children are prepared for success in core academic subjects (as defined in section 9101(11) of the ESEA); (b) improving developmental milestones and standards and aligning them with appropriate outcome measures; and (c) improving alignment, collaboration, and transitions between early learning programs that serve children from birth to age three, in preschools, and in kindergarten through third grade…” Projects Must Address All 3 37

38. Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 7:College Access and Success • “… enable kindergarten through grade 12 (K–12) students, particularly high school students, to successfully prepare for, enter, and graduate from a two- or four-year college…” • “…(a) address students’ preparedness and expectations related to college; (b) help students understand issues of college affordability and the financial aid and college application processes; and(c) provide support to students from peers and knowledgeable adults.” Focus on College Graduation Projects Must Address All 3 38

39. Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 8:Students with Disabilities & Limited English Proficiency • “…address the unique learning needs of students with disabilities, including those who are assessed based on alternate academic achievement standards, or the linguistic and academic needs of limited English proficient students.” • “…must provide for the implementation of particular practices, strategies, or programs that are designed to improve academic outcomes, close achievement gaps, and increase college- and career-readiness, including increasing high school graduation rates (as defined in this notice), for students with disabilities or limited English proficient students.” Focus on Either Student Population Projects That Improve Specific Outcomes 39

40. Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 9:Improving Productivity • “…applications for projects that are designed to significantly increase efficiency” • “…use of time, staff, money, or other resources while improving student learning or other educational outcomes (i.e., outcome per unit of resource)” • “Such projects may includeinnovative and sustainable uses of technology, modification of school schedules and teacher compensation systems, use of open educational resources (as defined in this notice), or other strategies.” Make Significant Improvement Must Improve Outcomes Multiple Possible Approaches 40

41. Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 10:Technology • “…projects that are designed to improve student achievement orteacher effectiveness” • “…use of high-quality digital tools or materials” • “…which may includepreparing teachers to use the technology to improve instruction, as well as developing, implementing, or evaluating digital tools or materials” Focus on Teachers or Students Two Types of Products Multiple Possible Projects 41

42. Q&A

43. Schedule for Today

44. Evidence in i3 • We will provide an overview of the role of evidence in the i3 competition today • The Institute of Education Sciences will be hosting a webinar(s) in coming weeks to provide greater detail on evidence and evaluation • June 30 – further details will be available soon

45. Grant Types and Evidence • All applications must meetthe evidence requirement for the type of grant they are seeking • Applications that do not meet the evidence requirement will notbe eligible for a grant award, regardless of scores on the selection criteria • If an application is judged not to meet the evidence requirement of the grant type to which it applied, it will notbe considered for a different type of i3 grant

46. Strong Evidence: Scale-up Note: Italicized items are addressed as part of selection criterion A

47. Strong Evidence: Scale-up (cont’d)

48. Moderate Evidence: Validation Note: Italicized items are addressed as part of selection criterion A

49. Moderate Evidence: Validation (cont’d)

50. Reasonable Hypothesis: Development Note: Italicized items are addressed as part of selection criterion A