2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 Federal Initiatives Update Investing in Innovation (i3) Brian Lekander August 2,2011 Presentation #210-S and 222-S

2 Investing in Innovation (i3) Summary Purpose Funding Applicants 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 $148.2 million (est.) to be obligated by December 31, 2011 Eligible applicants are: (1)Local educational agencies (LEAs) (2)Nonprofit organizations in partnership with (a) one or more LEAs or (b) a consortium of schools

i3 Development Validation Scale-up 3 Types of Awards Available Under i3 Funding Available Up to $3MM/awardUp to $15MM/awardUp to $25MM/award Estimated Awards Up to 15Up to 5Up to 2 Evidence Required Reasonable - research findings or hypotheses, including related research or theories in education and other sectors Moderate – either high internal validity and moderate external validity, or vice versa Strong – both high internal validity and high external validity Scaling Required Able to further develop and scale Able to be scaled to the regional or state level Able to be scaled to the national, regional, or state level

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” 4

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 5

Major Changes from 2010 Funding by Grant Type The maximum award for each grant type has changed: Scale-up: Up to $25 million Validation: Up to $15 million Development: Up to $3 million Absolute Priorities The competition now includes five APs, with the changes noted below: Retaining: Teachers and Principals Standards and Assessments Low-Performing Schools Adding: Promoting STEM Education Improving Rural Achievement 6

7 Major Changes from 2010 Competitive Preference Priorities Applicants may identify no more than two competitive preference priorities that they wish scored. Applicants may address as many of the competitive preference priorities as they wish for the purpose of comprehensiveness. However, the Department will review and award points only for the maximum of two CPPs the applicant identifies. The competition now includes five CPPs, with the changes noted below: Retaining: Early Learning College Access and Success Students With Disabilities and Limited English Proficiency Adding: Productivity Technology

8 Major Changes from 2010 Selection Criteria The number of selection criteria has been reduced to 4 Specifically, selection criteria that were addressed elsewhere last year – Strength of Research, Significance of Effect, and Magnitude of Effect and Experience of the Eligible Applicant – are no longer selection criteria (but remain important parts of the competition and should be addressed by applicants) Allocation of points by selection criterion varies by competition Matching Requirements The percentage of required private sector match now differs by competition: Scale-up: 5% of the total award requested Validation: 10% of the total award requested Development: 15% of the total award requested Applicants may still request a reduction of the required match percentage

Must Target High Need Students 9 MUST High-need student means 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.

Improve Achievement for High-Need Students Teacher and Principal Effectiveness Promoting STEM Education College- and Career-ready Standards and Assessments Improving Rural Achievement Early Learning College Access and Success Serving Students with Disabilities and Limited English Proficient Students Productivity 10 i3 Priorities Required for all applications Must address one Absolute Priority May address up to two Competitive Preferences (0 or 1 point each) Improving Achievement in Persistently Low- performing Schools Technology

11 Absolute Priority 2 - Promoting STEM “(a) Providing students with increased access to rigorous and engaging coursework in STEM. (b) Increasing the number and proportion of students prepared 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 educators of 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

12 Notes on Competitive Preference Priority 8 “…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

2010 CPP on Disabilities/LEP (28/49) Professional Development on Special Education (JHU, Dist 75) Creation of In-School Supports (Dist 75) Creation of Multiple Entry Points to Learning (Dist 75) Using Technology to Address Learning Challenges (Corona-Norco) Customizing Instruction Based on Assessed Needs (Plymouth Schools, Bd of Ed NYC) Graduated Approaches (Success for All) Data-Driven Instruction (Teach for America) Recruitment of Special Ed Teachers (Teach for America) Demonstrated Results on SWD’s (Dist 1 of Denver) 13

Other Important Resources Investing in Innovation Fund Website: (  Notices of Final Revisions to Priorities, Requirements, and Selection Criteria  Application Packages for each competition (includes the respective Notice Inviting Applications)  Eligibility Checklists  Frequently Asked Questions  Evidence Summary Table  Selection Criteria Summary Table  i3 At-A-Glance (quick reference)  Copies of Funded Proposals  See for data on the application poolhttp://data.ed.gov All questions about i3 may be sent to 14