Legislation
Subpart 3 of Title IV, Part F of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7281)
<!–>
–>>
Tag Archives: Child Development
Funding Status
Estimated Available Funds: $8,000,000
Estimated Range of Awards: $250,000 to $750,000 per year for up to 5 years.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $500,000
Maximum Award: $750,000 per 12 months budget period
Estimated Number of Awards: 16
Frequently Asked Questions
- Administrative: What is the deadline date for this competition?
- Administrative: May I get an extension of the deadline date?
- Administrative: Do I have to submit my application electronically?
- Administrative: How do I submit my application electronically?
- Administrative: What information do I enter in box 4 Applicant Identifier, box 5a Federal Entity Identifier, and box 5b Federal Award Identifier on the SF-424 form?
- Administrative: How does the Freedom of Information Act affect my application?
- Administrative: For my GEPA 427 statement is it adequate to state that our organization does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, etc.?
- Administrative: What is required from an applicant whose State Single Point of Contact indicates that they are not reviewing applications for this grant competition?
- Administrative: By what date do applicants have to submit their application to their State Single Point of Contact, if participating?
- Admnistrative: What steps should the applicant’s Authorized Representative take before signing a grant application?
- Admnistrative: 11. What should I include in the “Table of Contents”?
- Eligibility: Who is eligible to apply?
- Eligibility: Are colleges or universities eligible to apply for this grant?
- Eligibility: Must an SEA assist only high-need LEAs to be eligible to receive a grant?
- Eligibility: Must an application list the specific high-need LEAs that an SEA plans to include in the project?
- Eligibility: In order to determine whether an LEA is a high-need LEA as defined in the NIA, what sources of data may be used to determine an LEA’s poverty rate?
- Priorities: What priority must all applicants address to be eligible for funding?
- Priorities: Are applicants required to address the competitive preference priority?
- Priorities: If we decide to apply for the competitive preference priority, are we required to state our intention to do so in the abstract section of the application?
- Priorities: Where should we provide supporting information to address the competitive preference priority for purposes of earning competitive preference priority points?
- Requirements: What Assurances and Certifications are required?
- Requirements: What are the Project Performance Measures for this program?
- Requirements: What technical assistance is available for grantees?
- Application Review: How will applications be reviewed?
- Application Review: Will an applicant receive its scores and reviewer comments after the competitions are completed?
- Application Review: Will the reviewers be asked to read every part of each application?
- Budget: Is there a maximum award amount for this competition?
- Budget: Are these grants subject to Supplement, Not Supplant provisions?
- Budget: What is an indirect cost?
- Budget: Does this program use a restricted or unrestricted indirect cost rate?
- Budget: If an applicant intends to charge indirect costs to the grant, what documentation should it submit with its application?
- Budget: If a grantee fails to propose indirect costs in the budget section of the application, may it charge indirect costs to the grant once awarded?
- Budget: If, at the time it receives a grant award, a grantee does not have an approved indirect cost agreement, may it still charge indirect costs to the grant?
- Budget: Are there guidelines for how much money can be spent on consultants?
- Budget: What are the funding restrictions?
- Budget: When direct costs include equipment and large contracts, how are these costs treated in the calculation of a grantee’s indirect costs?
- Budget: Are applicants required to secure cost sharing or matching funds?
- Budget: When an applicant commits non-Federal funds to the proposed project, does this create a legal obligation to fulfill the commitment?
- Budget: What is the project and budget period for these grants?
- Budget: What should I use as the project start date?
- Budget: Must a grantee wait until the start of the initial budget period to begin incurring costs that grant funds will reimburse?
- Budget: Can applicants budget for “training stipend” costs on ED Form 524?
- Budget: What should be included in the budget narrative?
Display Dotted Divider –>>
1. Administrative: What is the deadline date for this competition? The deadline for this competition is August 27, 2018.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
2. Administrative: May I get an extension of the deadline date?
Waivers for individual applications failing to meet the deadline will not be granted, regardless of the circumstances. Under very extraordinary circumstances the Department may change the closing date for a grant competition. When this occurs, the Department announces such a change in a notice published in the Federal Register.
If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described in the NIA.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
3. Administrative: Do I have to submit my application electronically?
Yes. Unless you qualify for an exception in accordance with the instructions found in the Notice Inviting Applications (NIA), you must submit your application electronically.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
4. Administrative: How do I submit my application electronically?
For more information on using Grants.gov, please refer to the “Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs” published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 and available at https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2018-02558; the Grants.gov “Submission Procedures and Tips” document found in this application package; and/or visit www.grants.gov.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
5. Administrative: What information do I enter in box 4 Applicant Identifier, box 5a Federal Entity Identifier, and box 5b Federal Award Identifier on the SF-424 form?
These boxes are not applicable for this competition. Please leave boxes 4, 5a, and 5b blank. You may input “NA” in each box, but be sure not to include a slash (i.e., “N/A”), the system will not allow you to input special characters.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
6. Administrative: How does the Freedom of Information Act affect my application?
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) provides that any person has the right to request access to federal agency records or information. All U.S. Government agencies are required to disclose records upon receiving a written request for them, except for those records that are protected from disclosure by the nine exemptions listed in the FOIA. All applications submitted for funding consideration under this grant competition are subject to the FOIA. To read the text of the Freedom of Information Act, visit http://www.ed.govhttps://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/foiatoc.html.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
7. Administrative: For my GEPA 427 statement is it adequate to state that our organization does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, etc.?
No. An organization’s non-discrimination statement is not sufficient to meet the GEPA requirements. A GEPA statement should outline an entity’s potential barriers and solutions to equal access, specific to the proposed project.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
8. Administrative: What is required from an applicant whose State Single Point of Contact indicates that they are not reviewing applications for this grant competition?
Applicants should include a copy of such a response from the State Single Point of Contact in their application package submitted to ED and check the appropriate line on the SF 424 form.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
9. Administrative: By what date do applicants have to submit their application to their State Single Point of Contact, if participating?
Applicants must submit their application to the State Single Point of Contact by the deadline date for transmitting their application to ED.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
10. Admnistrative: What steps should the applicant’s Authorized Representative take before signing a grant application?
The standard form that serves as a cover sheet for grant applications includes a certification statement that accompanies the authorized representative’s signature. That certification indicates that the information provided in the grant application is true and complete to the best of the authorized representative’s knowledge, and that any false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or claims may subject the authorized representative to administrative, civil, or criminal penalties. As a result, an authorized representative should carefully review a grant application before signing in order to be sure that all of the information contained in the application package is correct. Additionally, an authorized representative should be sure that the application describes a project that has the organization’s support and reflects an approach that the organization is committed to implementing.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
11. Admnistrative: 11. What should I include in the “Table of Contents”?
The Table of Contents shows where and how the important sections of your proposal are organized and should not exceed one double spaced page. The application package shows the “Table of Contents” falling within the “Project Narrative,” but the “Table of Contents” should be comprehensive, covering all application content.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
12. Eligibility: Who is eligible to apply?
Eligible applicants are State Educational Agencies (SEAs), as defined by section 9101(41) of the ESEA.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
13. Eligibility: Are colleges or universities eligible to apply for this grant?
No. Colleges and universities are not considered SEAs and thus are not eligible for this grant. Only entities that meet the definition of an SEA may receive funding under this program.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
14. Eligibility: Must an SEA assist only high-need LEAs to be eligible to receive a grant?
No. Multi-tiered behavioral frameworks are intended to support teaching and learning for all children and youth in all schools. However applicants must describe how the proposed project will address the needs of high-need LEAs (as defined), including those with high-poverty schools (as defined), low-performing schools (including persistently lowest-achieving schools (both as defined)), and priority schools (as defined).
Display Dotted Divider –>>
15. Eligibility: Must an application list the specific high-need LEAs that an SEA plans to include in the project?
No. Applicants are not required to identify specific high-need LEAs or the process to identify them in the application project narrative; however, while not required, doing so may strengthen the application. The application should include an estimated number of high-need LEAs that will be assisted. Consistent with Application Requirement (c), the application must describe how the proposed project will address the needs of high-need LEAs, as defined in the NIA.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
16. Eligibility: In order to determine whether an LEA is a high-need LEA as defined in the NIA, what sources of data may be used to determine an LEA’s poverty rate?
Consistent with the definition of “poverty line” in section 9101(33) of the ESEA, census data is the appropriate measure to use to determine an LEA’s poverty rate. https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html
Display Dotted Divider –>>
17. Priorities: What priority must all applicants address to be eligible for funding?
All applications must address the absolute priority as written: Grants to State Educational Agencies (SEAs) to Implement Statewide Systems of Support for Multi-Tiered Behavioral Frameworks to Improve School Climate. Under this priority, we provide grants to SEAs to develop, enhance, or expand systems of support for, and provide technical assistance to, LEAs implementing a multi-tiered behavioral framework to improve school climate and behavioral outcomes for all students.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
18. Priorities: Are applicants required to address the competitive preference priority?
No. Applicants are not required to address the competitive preference priority, but may earn competitive preference points by designing grant programs that meet the expectations defined in the competitive preference priority language.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
19. Priorities: If we decide to apply for the competitive preference priority, are we required to state our intention to do so in the abstract section of the application?
Yes. In order to be eligible for earning competitive preference priority points, an applicant must state in the abstract section of its application that it is seeking points under the competitive preference priority, and we encourage you to specifically identify your response to the competitive preference priority to assist reviewers. Applications that fail to clearly state in the abstract section that they are seeking to earn points under the competitive preference will not be reviewed against the competitive preference priority and will not be awarded competitive preference priority points.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
20. Priorities: Where should we provide supporting information to address the competitive preference priority for purposes of earning competitive preference priority points?
You should discuss in more detail how you will be addressing the competitive preference priority as part of the overall proposed project goals and objectives in the application narrative.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
21. Requirements: What Assurances and Certifications are required?
Be certain to complete all required assurances and certifications in Grants.gov, and include all required information in the appropriate place on each form. The assurances and certifications required for this application are:
- Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF 424B Form)
- Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (SF LLL Form)
- Certification Regarding Lobbying (ED 80-0013 Form)
- General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) Requirements – Section 427
Display Dotted Divider –>>
22. Requirements: What are the Project Performance Measures for this program?
The Department has established the following performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of the School Climate Transformation Grant Program:
- (a) The number of training and technical assistance events provided by the SEA School Climate Transformation Grant Program to assist LEAs in implementing a multitiered behavioral framework.
- (b) The number and percentage of schools in LEAs provided training or technical assistance by the SEA School Climate Transformation Grant Program that implement a multitiered behavioral framework.
- (c) The number and percentage of LEAs provided training or technical assistance by the SEA School Climate Transformation Grant Program that implement a multitiered behavioral framework with fidelity.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
23. Requirements: What technical assistance is available for grantees?
In September of 2014 the Department funded the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
The PBIS Center provides a comprehensive and specific TA activities and products; including:
- Information about PBIS practices, systems, outcomes, and data;
- Demonstrations of implementation of PBIS systems and practices with evaluation data at the student, school, district, and state levels;
- Professional development materials and resources for skill and capacity building in the implementation, coordination, leadership, etc. of PBIS practices and systems;
- Collaboration activities across schools, districts, and states; professional organizations; state and federal offices and departments; other federally sponsored centers and projects; etc.;
- Research about the efficacy, efficiency, and relevance of a given PBIS practice, system, and/or demonstration, and
- Evaluation planning tools, evaluation tools, online websites for collection of fidelity and impact data.
All activities and products found directly at the Center website www.pbis.org are downloadable and/or accessible for free. General assistance (e.g., conference calls, material review) that is provided by indirect communications (e.g., telephone, email, mail) also is no cost.
Some targeted and intensive technical assistance as contracted and required by the Office of Special Education Programs or Office of Safe and Healthy Students, U.S. Department of Education might be provided at no cost to specified LEAs or SEAs. Please note that intensive or personalized and on-site technical assistance is not included in the TA Center activities and will need to be budgeted for in grant applications.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
24. Application Review: How will applications be reviewed?
The Department will first screen applications to determine which applications should be forwarded to reviewers based on the adequacy of the applications’ response to the absolute priorities, eligibility, and other requirements published in the NIA.
The Department intends to use non-federal reviewers from various backgrounds and professions with relevant expertise. These reviewers will use their professional judgment to evaluate and score each application based on the selection criteria.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
25. Application Review: Will an applicant receive its scores and reviewer comments after the competitions are completed?
Yes. Both funded and unfunded applicants will receive a copy of the technical review form completed by the peer reviewers. Individual reviewer names are deleted from the forms to preserve confidentiality.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
26. Application Review: Will the reviewers be asked to read every part of each application?
Yes. Reviewers will be asked to read every part of the application (including the budget narrative, and project narrative, among others). For this reason and to facilitate the review, the Department encourages applicants to carefully follow the directions in the application package. Applicants should pay particular attention to the flow of the narrative and correctly label all attachments.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
27. Budget: Is there a maximum award amount for this competition?
Yes. We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $750,000 for a single budget period of 12 months. The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
28. Budget: Are these grants subject to Supplement, Not Supplant provisions?
No.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
29. Budget: What is an indirect cost?
An indirect cost is an expense that you incur that is necessary for implementing the grant, but may be difficult to identify directly with your grant. For example, indirect costs may include money spent for heat, light, rent, telephone, security, accounting, and Internet use.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
30. Budget: Does this program use a restricted or unrestricted indirect cost rate?
This program uses an unrestricted indirect cost rate.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
31. Budget: If an applicant intends to charge indirect costs to the grant, what documentation should it submit with its application?
If an applicant has a current indirect cost rate, it should submit a copy of its current indirect cost rate agreement, including its current rate.
If an applicant does not have a current indirect cost rate agreement, applicants should submit a provisional indirect cost rate. Applicants may choose not to submit indirect cost rate information at the time of application; however, in order to charge indirect costs to the grant, this applicant will need to submit an indirect cost rate agreement. The applicant should include any proposed indirect costs in its proposed budget and budget narrative.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
32. Budget: If a grantee fails to propose indirect costs in the budget section of the application, may it charge indirect costs to the grant once awarded?
During the Department’s budget review process, which occurs prior to grant award, the Department reviews each applicant’s requested budget. If the requested budget does not include estimated indirect costs, they will not be included in the budget approved by the Department that forms the basis of the grant award. This means that, after award, a grantee would only have funds with which to charge indirect costs to the grant if the approved direct costs of the grantee’s project for any budget period exceed the grantee’s actual direct costs. Where this occurs, the grantee may submit a requested budget revision to the Department program office to use the excess funds budgeted for direct costs to cover its indirect costs.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
33. Budget: If, at the time it receives a grant award, a grantee does not have an approved indirect cost agreement, may it still charge indirect costs to the grant?
A grantee that does not have an indirect cost agreement at the time of application may still be able to charge indirect costs until it receives an approved rate, if the Secretary approves the grantee’s request to use a temporary rate of ten percent of budgeted direct salaries and wages. However, after the grant award is issued, the grantee must receive an indirect cost rate within 90 calendar days of the start of the grant to continue to charge indirect costs to the grant.
For additional information about obtaining an approved indirect cost rate or applying for an indirect cost rate, contact the Department’s indirect cost group at IndirectCostGroup@ed.gov.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
34. Budget: Are there guidelines for how much money can be spent on consultants?
No. Under EDGAR 75.515, a grantee must use its general policies and practices when it hires, uses, and pays a consultant as part of the project staff. However, grant funds may not be used to pay a consultant unless there is a need in the project for the services of that consultant and the grantee cannot meet that need by using an employee rather than a consultant.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
35. Budget: What are the funding restrictions?
Program funds may be used for costs related to training, technical assistance, and capacity building, in addition to other allowable costs.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
36. Budget: When direct costs include equipment and large contracts, how are these costs treated in the calculation of a grantee’s indirect costs?
The terms of the applicable indirect cost agreement govern this issue. In general, the indirect cost rate is applied to direct costs to calculate the indirect costs that can be charged to a grant. However, many indirect cost rate agreements exclude from the direct costs used for this calculation equipment costs and contractual costs that exceed the first $25,000 of each contract. Each applicant should consult its own indirect cost rate agreement to determine which expenses can be included in direct costs when calculating indirect costs.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
37. Budget: Are applicants required to secure cost sharing or matching funds?
No.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
38. Budget: When an applicant commits non-Federal funds to the proposed project, does this create a legal obligation to fulfill the commitment?
Yes. Section 75.700 of the Education Department General Administrative regulations (EDGAR) (34 C.F.R. 75.700) requires each grantee to comply with the content of its approved application. Therefore, if an application is approved, the grantee is responsible for fulfilling the commitment of non-Federal funds or in-kind resources set forth in Section B of ED Form 524 included in its application and any commitment of non-Federal funds identified in the application. Grantees are required to meet these commitments and to report on the extent to which they have been met in their annual performance reports.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
39. Budget: What is the project and budget period for these grants?
The project period for this grant is up to five years (60 months). Each grant year is considered its own budget period. The application should include a description of the proposed activities for all five years, as well as a budget narrative that includes information for each budget year. Continuation awards are made based on an applicant’s ability to demonstrate substantial progress in their required annual performance reports.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
40. Budget: What should I use as the project start date?
Should you receive a grant, the start date will depend on when funds can be awarded and obligated. The proposed project start date might be slightly modified to accommodate this.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
41. Budget: Must a grantee wait until the start of the initial budget period to begin incurring costs that grant funds will reimburse?
No. SCTG funds are available to reimburse a grantee for pre-award costs that are reasonable, necessary, and otherwise allowable when these costs were incurred within 90 days prior to the beginning of the grant’s initial budget period. For instance, a grantee with a budget period start date of October 1 may begin carrying out tasks for the new project as early as July 1, although it cannot draw down any payments until October 1 when the grant is awarded and the initial budget period has begun.
However, until notified of receipt of a grant award, an applicant bears the risk of committing its own funds to these pre-award obligations. If the applicant is not awarded a SCTG grant, the Department will not reimburse the applicant for any costs incurred in anticipation of a possible grant award.
Display Dotted Divider –>>
42. Budget: Can applicants budget for “training stipend” costs on ED Form 524?
No. These costs are not allowable for this program. All applicants must complete the “training stipend” line item with a “0.”
Display Dotted Divider –>>
43. Budget: What should be included in the budget narrative?
As explained in the application package, an application should include one budget narrative. This narrative should provide a detailed description of how the applicant plans to use its requested grant funds, and should be of sufficient scope and detail for the Department to determine if the costs are necessary, reasonable, and otherwise allowable, and for the reader to understand how the applicant proposes to use Federal and non-Federal funds to support the proposed project.
Additionally, the “Budget Narrative” section of the application package provides extensive detail, including examples, on how an applicant might present the assumptions on which the proposed performance-based compensation costs are based.
Eligibility
Who May Apply (by category): State educational agencies
Awards
Fiscal Year (FY) 2020
Continuation Awards
| PR/Award No. | Grantee Name | Year-Three Funding |
| S184F180010 | Colorado Department of Education | $737,225 |
| S184F180024 | Georgia Department of Education | $749,980 |
| S184F180013 | Kentucky Department of Education | $465,000 |
| S184F180016 | New Hampshire Department of Education | $699,414 |
| S184F180021 | Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education | $674,950 |
| S184F180018 | Michigan Department of Education | $673,390 |
| S184F180019 | Minnesota Department of Education | $553,732 |
| S184F180007 | Nevada Department of Education | $749,998 |
| S184F180012 | Ohio Department of Education | $625,000 |
| S184F180008 | Oklahoma State Department of Education | $749,072 |
| S184F180005 | Rhode Island Department of Elementary and Secondary Education | $491,012 |
| S184F180014 | Virginia Department of Education | $734,993 |
| S184F180006 | Washington State Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction | $664,304 |
| S184F180015 | Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction | $681,288 |
| TOTAL | $9,249,358 |
FY 2019
Year Two Continuation Awards (PDF)
FY 2018
Grant Awards (PDF)
Abstracts for the FY 2018 Awards (PDF)
FY 2016
Year Three Continuation Awards – $7,529,161
FY 2015
Year Two Continuation Awards – $7,422,479
FY 2014
Grant Awards (PDF)
Applicant Information
Timeline
Application closed on: August 27, 2018
Application
- FY 2018 Application
MS WORD (422K) | PDF (1.1MB) - Applications for grants under this program must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at http://www.Grants.gov.
- If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
- U.S. Department of Education
Application Control Center
Attention: (CFDA 84.184F)
LBJ Basement Level 1
400 Maryland Avenue, SW.
Washington, DC 20202-4260
Other Required Forms
You will also need to download the other required Federal forms .
Federal Register Notice
Contacts
Carlette KyserPegram
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW.
Washington, DC 20202-6450
Telephone: (202) 453-6732
e-mail: Carlette.KyserPegram@ed.gov
2018 Awards
Ohio Department of Education (OH) – $482,196 – The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) proposes a project to support and expand its current efforts. Ohio’s approach will do the following: enhance state, regional and local capacity, develop additional tools and approaches including strategies to integrate and align PBIS with other climate related initiatives, improve coordination with state and local partners, improve data collection especially regarding fidelity of implementation, focus on the needs of high-need schools and districts, and pursue culturally responsive practices. It will also explicitly focus on improving integration of PBIS with the state’s plan to address the opioid epidemic and raise student awareness about the dangers of drug abuse. In doing so, Ohio hopes to increase the overall number of schools implementing PBIS with fidelity and integrating efforts to address the needs of the whole child, reduce the number of school disciplinary actions, reduce chronic absenteeism, improve student awareness regarding drug abuse prevention, and increase the broad understanding of school challenges related to school climate and how best to address them.
Oklahoma State Department of Education (OK) – $742,552 – The Oklahoma State Department of Education is seeking funding to implement a School Climate Transformation project in the state to be provided through five regional technical assistance centers located in Hominy, Durant, Lawton, Oklahoma City, and Woodward, Oklahoma. The project will provide PBIS implementation training and technical assistance to 50 schools in the state over the course of the five-year project. Student behavior problems continue to be a nationwide concern, despite decades of practice with a myriad of disciplinary systems. Students who frequently engage in problematic behaviors are at-risk for a variety of negative life outcomes. School-wide positive behavior interventions and support (PBIS) is an evidence-based system of school-wide reinforcement and disciplinary procedures that relies on a problem-solving model from a systems perspective. The Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) proposes to implement a statewide Oklahoma School Climate Transformation (OKSCT) project that will provide training and technical assistance in the implementation of a multi-tiered behavioral framework to improve school climate. Training and technical assistance will be provided in general to all 513 school districts in the state, and specifically to 50 schools in the state through regional behavioral technical assistance centers.
New Hampshire Department of Education (NH) – $ 698,703 – The New Hampshire Department of Education (NH DOE) will lead this effort through the Office of Social & Emotional Wellness, which is part of the Bureau of Student Wellness, Division of Learner Support. In partnership with the Bureaus of Student Support and Instructional Support, this project will provide technical assistance to Local Education Agencies in three regions of the state as they (1) Build, improve, or enhance the use of a multi-tiered behavioral framework; (2) Establish local student wellness teams; and (3) Collect and report data in an effort to inform additional school climate efforts. This initiative will serve students in the South West, South Central, and South East regions of New Hampshire. Technical assistance will be delivered to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) in each of these regions by a MTSS-B Educational Consultant. Through participation in this effort, each LEA will develop needed infrastructure, identify opportunities to strengthen professional development and training, and receive technical assistance to advance and sustain school climate transformation efforts through the adoption of policies, practices, and programs that address both in-school and out-of-school time.
Virginia Department of Education (VA) – $ 749,701 – The Virginia Department of seeks to improve instruction and student outcomes in identified rural and low income LEAs and those most profoundly affected by the opioid crisis in Virginia and support rigorous standards for ALL students. Specifically, this proposal seeks to expand the number of LEAs implementing Virginia Tiered Systems of Supports (VTSS) and improve fidelity of implementation in both existing and newly implementing LEAs. The goal is to target 12 new LEAs for expansion into designated regions, specifically those identified rural, low income and those affected by prolific substance use and abuse. In addition, it is within the scope of this proposal to expand the implementation and fidelity of advanced tiers (inclusive of those evidence based practices for substance abuse) to 15 existing LEAs. The proposed project seeks to respond to implementation needs in three targeted areas: building the capacity of the state to offer high quality, evidence-based professional learning and coaching services; increasing opportunities for LEAs to improve the fidelity of implementation of a tiered framework (VTSS) inclusive of practices and innovations at advanced tiers and those that specifically address mental health and substance use behaviors, increasing the ease and accessibility of rural and low income LEAs to access VTSS supports and innovation; and fortifying the infrastructure of an aligned system by coordinating with Federal, State, and local resources to install and implement visionary solutions to current realities.
Michigan Department of Education (MI) – $ 661,222 – The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) proposes to develop a coordinated and aligned technical assistance delivery structure to develop local capacity for the implementation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) that focuses on (1) developing local implementation capacity, (2) enhancing the implementation fidelity of effective practices, (3) producing meaningful student outcomes and (4) evaluating the effectiveness of the PBIS implementation model and identify additional infrastructure needs. This proposal focuses on three targeted groups of educators (a) district implementation team, (b) school leadership teams, and (c) educators who work with students. Participating districts will be identified and selected through an application process to identify strengths and needs, and to determine implementation readiness.
Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (WA) – $ 749,730 – The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) proposes to build and sustain SEA capacity for supporting the broad-scale implementation of a multitiered behavioral framework by creating a state leadership team (SLT) to plan, implement, evaluate, and sustain a statewide professional development system. OSPI will develop a cadre of trained and experienced SEA staff to provide ongoing training and coaching to LEA leadership teams using a Training of Trainers (TOT) model. The SLT will: 1) facilitate an inventory and assessment of the quality, accessibility, and usefulness of the statewide data collection to identify gaps and develop an action plan for addressing areas of improvement; and 2) will create a learning system that is consistent with the phases of implementation in alignment with the PBIS PD Blueprint (v3). The proposal will impact 30 target high-need school districts and 9 Educational Service Districts statewide, which collectively serve 98,336 students, ranging from 168 students at Lake Quinault School District to 16,363 students in the Yakima School District.
Kentucky Department of Education (KY) – $ 688,979 – The Kentucky Department of Education proposes to collaborate with existing state agencies to enhance statewide supports for PBIS and become the go-to for MTBF/Interconnected Systems Framework (ISF) implementation through the state School Climate Transformation (SCT) Team. This includes hiring 4 staff members to promote, recruit, and provide training and ongoing support to districts interested in implementing evidence-based practices, as well as coordinate with other state and regional partners currently providing MTSS/ISF training and fidelity of implementation support across the state. The SCT Team will collaborate with KDE’s Education Recovery staff and Novice Reduction Coaches to incorporate positive school climate efforts into their work with the state’s Priority/CSI and Focus/TSI schools, respectively. The SCT Team will also coordinate with the state Department of Behavioral Health to enhance their existing supports for substance use and suicide prevention to support synergy for these existing initiatives to combat the widespread opioid epidemic in Kentucky. Culturally responsive and trauma informed practices will be integrated into every aspect of this project through partnership with Kentucky State University’s Center for Research on the Eradication of Educational Disparities and University of Kentucky’s Center on Trauma and Children. The SCT Team will work to incorporate any school-based recommendations to emerge from the State Interagency Council for Services to Children, Youth, and Young Adults (SIAC) Social Emotional Health Task Force, anticipated in 2019.
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (WI) – $ 286,264 – The Wisconsin School Climate Transformation Project will continue efforts to effectively build local capacity to provide, improve, and expand multi-level systems of positive behavioral interventions and support, as well as high quality approaches to address opioid abuse and prevention. It will do this by strengthening Wisconsin statewide capacity to deliver expanded effective training and technical assistance through an existing statewide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) training center and through an existing statewide safe and healthy schools training center. Proposed project outcomes include the following: a.) 50 high schools will implement high quality PBIS and will see a reduction in suspensions and increase in school climate survey scores (engagement and environment domains); b.) 50 high schools will utilize existing data or research-based screening tools to identify students at-risk for opioid abuse or who are actively abusing opioid drugs and implement a high-quality treatment protocol (SBIRT), and will see a reduction in suspensions for AODA violations, decreases in student-reported AODA use, and an increase in school climate survey scores (safety domain); and, c.) 50 high schools will achieve both a.) and b.) above in concert and see an increase in all domains of school climate survey scores.
Georgia Department of Education (GA) – $ 749,980 – The Georgia Department of Education proposes a program to expand State Education Agency (SEA) systems of support for, and technical assistance to, local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools implementing an evidence-based, multi-tiered behavioral framework for improving behavioral outcomes and learning conditions for all students. The project goal in Georgia is to develop and enhance the SEA’s infrastructures and systems to increase the fidelity of PBIS Implementation in Tiers 1-3 by 50%. Georgia will target ten high need LEA’s in urban, suburban, and rural communities with populations above 10,000 and greater than 20% of families living below the poverty line. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) reports that these targeted districts have high incidents of familial opioid misuse. The number of participants to be served will correlate with the numbers of participants currently served thought Georgia’s Project Aware Grant (60,000+ students). Trainings will be held throughout the state and within the 16 Regional Education Service Agencies (RESA) which houses Georgia’s legislative funded School Climate Specialists (SCS).
Minnesota Department of Education (MN) – $ 586,432 – The goal of the Minnesota Department of Education School Climate Transformation( MDE SCT) project is to enhance the capacity of MDE and 30 school districts to implement a high functioning multi-tiered behavioral framework for improving school climate and behavioral outcomes for students. The six ambitious yet attainable objectives of the MDE SCT project include: 1. Increase capacity to lead school climate improvement efforts and improve systems and infrastructure for sustaining a multi-tiered system of support (MTSS) infrastructure; 2. Increase engagement of students, families, school staff, and community members in all climate improvement efforts; 3. Increase capacity of school leaders to assess and evaluate progress; 4. Improve policies, rules, and supports for school climate improvement; 5. Improve tier one instructional and relational management practices; 6. Improve tier two and three interventions. Under Minnesota’s North Star Accountability system, 194 schools have been identified for comprehensive, on-site support and improvement and 291 schools identified for targeted support and improvement. These schools represent 238,115 students across Minnesota.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education (MA) – $ 644,950 – The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education proposes to build on the foundation of the existing PBIS Academy in order to significantly expand our statewide capacity to help schools implement a robust, fully-articulated multi-tiered behavioral health framework, particularly in high-need and underperforming schools. The project goals are as follows: • Goal 1: Build out our PBIS Academy so that we can expand the breadth and depth of support we provide to schools around the deeper, “next stage” implementation issues Massachusetts educators are encountering – specifically in areas involving classroom practice, mental health support, opioid/substance use prevention , and the integration of initiatives into a coherent multi-tiered behavioral health support system. • Goal 2: Build the capacity of our Statewide System of Support team (assistance for underperforming schools) to provide high quality technical assistance for multi-tiered behavioral framework implementation and serve as a strong feedback loop to inform agency strategy. • Goal 3: Evaluate the impact of multi-tiered system support on participating schools and DESE staff.
Colorado Department of Education (CO) – $ 727,844 – The purpose of this project is to develop a statewide infrastructure for implementing the Colorado Multi-Tiered Behavioral Framework (CO-MTBF) through successful models of implementation that can be scaled up across the state. CO-MTBF will positively impact the outcomes of all students by creating capacity for an integrated culture and climate improvement system that can be implemented with fidelity and sustained over time, utilizing data-based decision making at all levels of implementation. Through a partnership with high need LEAs, the CO-MTBF project will embed within its multi-tiered behavioral framework evidence-based strategies that meaningfully prevent and mitigate opioid abuse. This will include specific outreach to LEAs with high levels of opioid abuse along with the progress monitoring of implementation and outcomes of implemented strategies.
The Rhode Island Department of Education (RI) – $ 486,655 – The Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) is seeking to engage 9 districts, with an emphasis on high need as defined by ESSA, over the five year funding period. The estimated number of students to be impacted by this project is 43,791. The proposed project will create a platform that facilitates a closer relationship between state and local implementation of policies and programs supporting the development of a multi-tiered and integrated behavioral health framework that create safe and respectful environments for learning and promotes the mental health (MH) of school-aged youth. State and local partners will collectively impact the challenges and factors that contribute to MH problems and identify assets and opportunities to support positive MH, and social and emotional development across the lifespan to ensure that school prevention and intervention programs and services are linked to existing resources and new capacity to supports students is created.
Nevada Department of Education (NV) – $ 749,998 – The Nevada Department of Education (NDE) and the Nevada Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Technical Assistance Center (Nevada PBIS) plan to build capacity to establish, scale-up, and sustain a Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) in 10 of the 17 Nevada Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), including the state’s largest urban districts and small rural districts across the entire state. The NDE and Nevada PBIS have spent the past 5 years building a multi-tiered behavior framework across 7 LEAs through Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). Due to the exciting success of implementing a PBIS framework in several of our LEAs, including significant reductions in discipline and improvement in overall school climate around Nevada, the intention of the proposed project is to now leverage the existing PBIS framework and move towards creating and scaling an integrated MTSS.
2014 Awards
| State | Amount |
|---|---|
| Connecticut State Department of Education |
$578,499 |
|
Delaware Department of Education |
$458,660 |
|
Florida Department of Education |
$641,017 |
|
Hawaii Department of Education |
$608,901 |
|
Iowa Department of Education |
$688,566 |
|
Michigan Department of Education |
$640,788 |
|
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education |
$680,508 |
|
Montana Office of Public Instruction |
$750,000 |
|
Nevada Department of Education |
$748,340 |
|
Ohio Department of Education |
$260,427 |
|
Virginia Department of Education |
$705,427 |
|
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction |
$578,521 |
Legislation, Regulations, and Guidance
Funding Status
Estimated Available Funds: $40,000,000.
Estimated Range of Awards: $100,000 to $750,000 per year for up to 5 years.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $500,000.
Maximum Award: $750,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 80.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
