Arts in Education Model Development and Dissemination Grant Program (AEMDD) Pre-Application Webinar

1
Arts in Education Model Development and
Dissemination Grant Program (AEMDD)
Pre-Application Webinar

• U.S. Department of Education
• Office of Innovation and Improvement
• Improvement Programs
• March 18, 2014

2
Agenda

• Welcome
• Program Overview
• AEMDD Priorities
• AEMDD Selection Criteria
• Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
• Grant Submission Process
• Final QA

3
A Few Notes on QA

• We have budgeted time after each speaker for QA.
  Participants should submit their questions via
  the webinar QA function.
• Please only submit questions relevant to the
  topic being addressed by the current speaker.
• Due to time constraints, we may not be able to
  answer all questions received.
• If your question is not addressed, you can submit
  it to artsdemo_at_ed.gov. We cannot respond to each
  inquiry with an individual response, but we will
  regularly post answers to the most frequently
  asked questions on our website
  http//www2.ed.gov/programs/artsedmodel/index.html
  .

4
A Few Notes on QA (contd)
5
Whats New in 2014?

• Pre-Application Webinar
• Available funding amount increased
• -8,655,781 available for approximately 17 new
  awards
• Average award size increased
• - 500,000 average (450,000-550,000 range)
• Competitive Preference Priorities
• -Two Competitive Preference Priorities have been
  removed
• New Selection Criteria/point values
• -Quality of the Design 25 points (logic models
  required)
• -Quality of the Management Plan 20 points
• -Quality of the Evaluation 20 points

6
AEMDD Program
Authorization

• Authorized under section 10401, part D, Subpart 1
  of Title X of the Elementary and Secondary
  Education Act.
• To support the further development,
  documentation, evaluation and dissemination of
  innovative, cohesive models that
• 1) integrate standards-based arts education into
  the core elementary and middle school
  curricula
• 2) strengthen arts instruction in these grades
  and
• 3) improve students academic performance,
  including their skills in creating, performing,
  and responding to the arts.
• Grants are four (4) years and include an optional
  planning year.

Purpose
7
AEMMD Program Eligibility
Local Educational Agencies

• -or consortium of LEAs including charter schools
  that are considered LEAs under State law and
  regulations
• May partner with one or more of the following
• Non profit arts organizations or governmental
  arts
• organizations
• State educational agency (SEA) or regional
  educational service agency.
• Institution of higher education
• Public or private agency, institution, or
  organization, such as a community- or faith-based
  organization

8
AEMMD Program Eligibility
Non-profit or governmental arts organizations

• One or more non-profit organizations or
  governmental arts organizations
• Must work in partnership with one or more LEAs
• May partner with one or more
• SEA or regional educational service agency.
• Institution of higher education.
• Public or private agency, institution, or
• organization, such as a community- or faith-based
  organization.

9
QA

• Please submit questions via the chat box.

10
AEMDD Priorities
Absolute Priority

• This priority supports projects that are based on
  research and have demonstrated their
  effectiveness in
• (1) integrating standards-based arts education
  into the core elementary or middle school
  curriculum,
• (2) strengthening standards-based arts
  instruction in the elementary or middle school
  grades, and
• (3) improving the academic performance of
  students in elementary or middle school grades,
  including their skills in creating, performing,
  and responding to the arts.
• In order to be eligible for the AEMDD program, an
  applicant must propose to serve at least one
  elementary or middle school in which 35 or more
  of the children enrolled are from low- income
  households as defined by Title I.

Application Requirement
11
Competitive Preference PrioritiesApplicants
can earn up to an additional 10 points depending
on how well they address each of the two
Competitive Preference Priorities (CPPs).

• Improving student achievement in persistently
  lowest-achieving schools
• and/or
• Providing services to students enrolled in
  persistently lowest-achieving schools (as defined
  in the notice).

CPP 2 Technology (0 to 5 points)
CPP 1 -Turning Around Persistently
Lowest-Achieving Schools (0 to 5 points).

• Projects that are designed to improve student
  achievement (as defined in the notice) or teacher
  effectiveness through the use of high-quality
  digital tools or materials, which may include
  preparing teachers to use the technology to
  improve instruction, as well as developing,
  implementing, or evaluating digital tools or
  materials.

12
Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools

• Persistently lowest achieving school means- as
  determined by the state any Title I school in
  improvement, corrective action, or restructuring
  that is among the lowest achieving five percent
  of Title I schools in improvement, corrective
  action, or restructuring or the lowest achieving
  five Title I schools in improvement, corrective
  action, or restructuring in the State, whichever
  number of schools is greater.
• The Department considers persistently lowest
  achieving schools to be schools listed on the
  Student Improvement Grant (SIG) Tier I and Tier
  II list.
• Student Improvement Grant site
• http//www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html

13
School Improvement Grant Site
14
Selection Criteria
15
Need for Project (15 Points)

• The extent to which the proposed project will
  provide services or otherwise address the needs
  of students at risk of educational failure.
• The extent of 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.

16
Significance (10 Points)

• The likely utility of the products (such as
  information, materials, process or techniques)
  that will result from the proposed project
  including the potential for their being used
  effectively in a variety of other settings.

17
Quality of the Project Design (25 points)

• The extent to which the design of the proposed
  project reflects up-to-date knowledge from
  research and effective practice.
• The extent to which the proposed project is
  supported by strong theory.
• 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.
• The potential and planning for the incorporation
  of project purposes, activities, or benefits into
  the ongoing work of the applicant beyond the end
  of the grant.

18
Strong Theory

• Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed
  process, product, strategy, or practice that
  includes a logic model.
• The following links are resources available to
  assist you in developing a logic model
• http//www.relnei.org/events/skill-builder-archive
  .html
• http//relpacific.mcrel.org/ELM.html

19
Logic Model Resources
20
Logic Model Resources
21
Logic Model Resources
22
Logic Model Resources
23
Logic Model Resources
24
Quality of Project Personnel (10 points)

• The extent to which the applicant encourages
  applications from persons who have traditionally
  been underrepresented based on race, color,
  national origin, gender, age or disability.
• The qualifications, including relevant training
  and experience, of key project personnel.

25
Quality of the Management Plan(20 points)

• 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.
• The extent to which the time commitments of the
  project director and principal investigator and
  other key personnel are appropriate and adequate
  to meet the objectives of the proposed project.
• The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback
  and continuous improvement in the operation of
  the proposed project.

26
Quality of the Project Evaluation (20 points)

• 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.
• The extent to which the methods of evaluation
  will provide performance feedback and permit
  periodic assessment of progress towards achieving
  the intended outcomes.
• The extent to which the methods of evaluation
  will, if well implemented, produce evidence of
  promise.

27
Evidence of Promise

• Evidence of promise means there is empirical
  evidence to support the theoretical linkage(s)
  between at least one critical component and at
  least one relevant outcome presented in the logic
  model for the proposed process, product,
  strategy, or practice.

28
Evidence of Promise

• Evidence of promise means the conditions in
  paragraphs (i) and (ii) are met
• i) There is at least one study that is a
• (A) Correlational study with statistical
  controls for selection bias
• (B) Quasi-experimental study that meets the
  What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with
  reservations or
• (C) Randomized controlled trial that meets
  the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards
  with or without reservations.
• (ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) found
  a statistically significant or
• substantively important (defined as a difference
  of 0.25 standard deviations or
• larger), favorable association between at least
  one critical component and one
• relevant outcome presented in the logic model for
  the proposed process,
• product, strategy, or practice.
• What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards
  Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), link
  http//ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid19
  .

29
Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

• Quarterly calls are conducted to monitor the
  progress of projects and to provide technical
  assistance .
• Annual performance reports are required in order
  to receive continuation funding.
• Project Performance Measures must be addressed
  as part of the interim annual performance report.
• At the end of your project period each grantee
  is required to submit a final performance report,
  including financial information.

30
GPRA Performance Measures

• (1) The percentage of students participating in
  arts model projects funded through the AEMDD
  program who demonstrate proficiency in
  mathematics compared to those in control or
  comparison groups.
• (2) The percentage of students participating in
  arts model projects who demonstrate proficiency
  in reading compared to those in control or
  comparison groups.

31
QA

• Please submit questions via the chat box.

32
Application Submission Procedures and Tips

• Step 1 - Find Grant Opportunity
• Step 2 - Download Application Package
• Step 3 - Complete the Registration Process
• Step 4 - Complete and Submit the Application
  Package via Grants.gov by April 28, 2014 at
  43000 p.m., Washington, DC time.

33
Submission Procedures and Tips
34
Submission Procedures and Tips
35
Submission Procedures and Tips
36
Submission Procedures and Tips
37
Submission Procedures and Tips
38
Submission Procedures and Tips
39
Submission Procedures and Tips
40
Submission Procedures and Tips

• Register early in Grants.gov
• Obtain DUNS Number
• Register with SAM
• Username Password
• AOR Authorization
• TRACK AOR STATUS

41
Submission Procedures and Tips
42
Submission Procedures and Tips
43
Submission Procedures and Tips
44
Submission Procedures and Tips
45
Submission Procedures and Tips
46
Submission Procedures and Tips

• What to Expect After Submitting an Application
• Submission Confirmation Screen
• Submission Receipt Email (with "Track My
  Application" link)
• Submission Validation (or Rejection with Errors)
• Grantor Agency Retrieval Email
• Agency Specific Tracking Number Assignment

47
Application Review Process
48
Final QA

• Please submit questions via the chat box.

49
CONTACT US

• If your questions were not addressed today, or if
  you have additional questions please contact us.
• AEMDD Program website http//www2.ed.gov/programs
  /artsedmodel/index.html
• Email artsdemo_at_ed.gov
• Call 202-453-6850