Title II, Part D (EETT) Grant Program
FY10 COMPETITIVE GRANT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
PROGRAM QUICK FACTS
Delaware Department of Education
Delaware Center for Educational Technology
35 Commerce Way, Suite 1
Dover, DE 19904
Phone 302.857.3305 Fax: 302.739.1775
Title IID, Enhancing Education Through Technology (Ed Tech) Program
Program Purpose / To improve instructional strategies and student academic achievement (including technology literacy) through research-based and technology-infused school and district implementation projects
Goals of Title II, Part D / PRIMARY GOAL- The primary goal of NCLB Title II, Part D is to improve student academic achievement through the use of technology in elementary schools and secondary schools.
ADDITIONAL GOALS- The additional goals of NCLB Title II, Part D are the following:
(A) To assist every student in crossing the digital divide by ensuring that every student is technologically literate by the time the student finishes the eighth grade, regardless of the student's race, ethnicity, gender, family income, geographic location, or disability.
(B) To encourage the effective integration of technology resources and systems with teacher training and curriculum development to establish research-based instructional methods that can be widely implemented as best practices by State educational agencies and local educational agencies.
Funding Source / Enhancing Education Through Technology
Title II Part D Competitive Funding
Grant Type / Technology Innovation Grants
Program Purpose and Possible Projects (provided as suggestions only) / These projects are as designed by applicant. Project narratives should detail what will occur if the grant is awarded. The narrative should provide an introduction that details the community, school, or LEA needs, target population(s), major implementation strategies, and expected outcomes. The narrative should also include an action plan that details the professional development activities and timeline, a dissemination plan, and an evaluation plan. Projects must be research-based.
The following are possible suggestions that could be undertaken:
  • Improvement in ESL student achievement grades through the use of MP3 players
  • Increase of math achievement through the use of interactive white boards for instruction
  • Increase in reading scores through the use of interactive software
  • Increase student technology literacy by implementing an articulated curriculum

Applicants / LEA or Consortium of LEAs
A consortium should consist of multiple LEAs where at least 50% of the consortium members are high need LEAs.
Applicant
Eligibility
Requirements / High-need LEA who is:
  • Among LEAs in the state with the highest numbers or percentages of children from families with incomes below the poverty line determined by the U.S. Census (please see last page of RFP for list of eligible LEAs) , and
  • Serves one or more schools identified for improvement or corrective action under ESEA OR has a substantial need for assistance in acquiring and using technology.

Program Appropriation / $ 882,268.00
(Allocations from FY10 and FY11)
Funds Distribution / Funds are distributed across the state.
Maximum Grant
Award Amounts / Up to $126,038
Consortium awards may apply for $105,000 per site.
  • 25% of the budget amount must be expended towards professional development
  • Budget items must relate directly to the project being implemented and must be directly related to the goals of the program. Applicants may be contacted for budget revisions.
Adjustments will be made to budgets during the award period at the discretion of the Delaware Department of Education, where necessary.
Expected Number of Grant Awards / The DDOE anticipates that there will be seven (7) grant awards. Allocation of funds will be dependent on the number of grants received and the dollar amounts requested.
Grant Expenditures /
  • Grant funds support necessary and appropriate technology equipment, resources and professional development costs related to implementation project goals, objectives and strategies.
  • 25% of all projects must be expended on Professional Development
  • See specific project information sheet for required set-asides

LEA Match Requirement / None
Special Considerations /
  • Proposal must clearly indicate how a LoTi level 3 or higher will be achieved. Visit or for additional information and resources.
  • Previously funded Innovation Grants awarded in Spring 2010 with ARRA funding may not be extended or repeated at this time as research has not been completed.

Technical Assistance:
OPTIONAL Webinar / Any LEA interested in submitting a proposal for this grant has the option of participating in an Elluminate sessions with the DDOE. This session will take place On October 21, 2010 at 10:00 AM. Email Jennifer Roussell at to RSVP. Please write “FY10 Competitive Grant” in the subject line.
Prior to these calls, make sure you have access to the internet and speaker and microphone capabilities. Information on Elluminate is included in the RFP.
Intent to Participate Notification Requirement / In order to plan sufficient time and resources for proposal evaluations, the DCET requires that all LEAs that intend to submit an RFP must inform the DCET, via email, no later than October 29, 2010. Please use a subject heading of “INTENT TO PARTICIPATE.” If the proposal is for a consortium, please include the names of all participating LEAs in the body of the email. Emails should be sent to Jennifer Roussell ().
Submission Process / Paper application (original plus two copies)
Payment Schedule / Funding will be split into two parts:
  1. 62% from FY10 EETT funds released upon approvals and receipt of State budget sheets. (approximately $78,143.56)
  2. 38% from FY11 EETT funds released upon receipt of Year 1 progress report (estimated time: August, 2011 or sooner) (approximately $47,894.44)

Reporting Requirements and Due Dates / Reports (specific dates TBA)
  • Mid-Year Progress Report
  • Final Expenditure Report
  • Program Evaluation Narrative
  • Project Final Evaluation
  • Other reporting (both online and paper-based) as required by DDOE and USDOE

Application Due Date / Tuesday, November 16, 2010 no later than 12 noon.
Late applications will NOT be accepted.
Approval Notification Date / ApproximatelyNovember 24, 2010.
Grant End Date / LEAs must expend:
  • FY10 funds by September 30, 2011
  • FY11 funds by September 30, 2012

Program Contacts / Wendy Modzelewski
Voice: 302.857.3305
Email:
DATE TO REMEMBER
Technical Assistance Webinar via Elluminate (Participation is OPTIONAL) / Thursday, October 21, 2010
10:00 AM
File Intent to Participate / Friday, October 29, 2010
No later than 4:30 PM
Application Due Date / Tuesday, November 16, 2010
No later than 12 noon
Approval Notification Date / Approximately November 24, 2010
Grant End Dates /
  • FY10 funds by September 30, 2011
  • FY11 funds by September 30, 2012

1

Table of Contents

Program Quick Facts / 1
Dates to Remember / 3
Table of Contents / 4
Program Background / 5
NCLB Title II, Part D – Program Overview / 5
Application Review and Approval Process / 6
  1. Review Process
/ 6
  1. Application Narrative Criteria
/ 6
  1. Economic and Technology Need Criteria
/ 6
  1. EETT Competitive Grant Program
/ 8
  1. Funding
/ 8
  1. Funding Period
/ 8
  1. Eligible Applicants
/ 8
  1. Type of Grant
/ 8
  1. Distribution of Funds
/ 9
  1. Grant Awards
/ 9
  1. LEA Match
/ 9
B. Program Guidelines / 9
  1. Application Deadlines
/ 9
  1. Mailing or Delivery of Applications
/ 9
  1. Application Contact Person
/ 9
  1. Application Components
/ 10
  1. Assurances and Submission Process
/ 10
  1. Allowable and Unallowable Costs
/ 10
  1. Application Procedures
/ 11
  1. Applications Deadlines
/ 11
  1. Application Contact Person
/ 11
  1. Application Components
/ 11
  1. Completing the EETT Application for State Assistance
/ 11
  1. Completing the Proposed Budget Information Form
/ 12
  1. Developing the Project Narrative
/ 14
Application for State Assistance under the Title II, Part D EETT Competitive Grant Program (form) / 15
EETT Competitive Grant Program Application –
Proposed Budget Information (form) / 16
Project Narrative Components / 17
Guiding Questions for Writing the Project Narrative / 19
Project Narrative Scoring Criteria / 25
Frequently Asked Questions / 27
Program Rules and Guidelines / 27
Project Proposal Development / 28
Application Approval Process / 29
Pre-Submission Checklist / 31
Elluminate Call Information / 33
U.S. Census Data, Fall 2009 / 34

Program Background

  1. NCLB Title II, Part D - PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The NCLB Title II, Part DEnhancing Education through Technology (Ed Tech or EETT) Program was signed into law with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L.107-110). This legislation reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and established the Ed Tech Program that consolidated the Technology Literacy Challenge Fund (TLCF) Program and the Technology Innovative Challenge Grant (TIC) Program into a single state grant program (ESEA Title II, Part D, SubPart 1).

The primary goal of the Ed Tech program is to improve student achievement through the use of technology in schools. Specifically, this program aims to assist every student in crossing the digital divide by ensuring that every student is technology literate by the end of the 8th grade, and to encourage the effective integration of technology with teacher training and curriculum development to establish successful research-based instructional methods.

The Title II, Part D program’s first appropriation, as determined by Congress in FY02, was set at $696 million, nationwide. State grant allocations are based on each state’s proportionate share of funding as determined by NCLB, Title I, Part A formulas. States then establish grant programs for disseminating flow-through funds to eligible local education agencies (LEAs).

The original appropriation language directed states to disseminate half of flow-through funds via formula grants, based on LEAs’ NCLB Title I, Part A allocations, and half of flow-through funds via competitive grants, targeted for high-need LEAs.

After three years of steady funding, the Title II, Part D annual allocation was reduced by Congress in FY05 (set at $496 million) and again in FY06 (set at $276 million). With the second significant reduction, Congress amended the appropriation language giving states the option of disseminating flow-through funds solely through competitive grants (100%) or through a combination of formula grants (not more than 50%) and competitive grants (not less than 50%).

Annually, the Delaware Department of Education determines how the state’s Title II, Part D allocation will be distributed. For all programs years, the Department has opted to distribute flow-through funds via both formula and competitive grants. Due to significant budget reductions in Title IID by the federal government, the decision for the school year 2010-2011 has been made to distribute funds 100% competitively.

Application Review and Approval Process

  1. Review Process

As applications are received Department staff screen the proposals for compliance with program rules and completeness. LEAs may only apply or be involved in one infrastructure and one instructional project application. An application will be withdrawn from the competition if, in the judgment of the Department, the proposal is considered non-responsive. A responsive application is submitted by an eligible LEA and is submitted on time, does not exceed the page-length or the maximum request amount, and does not violate any program rules.

  1. Application Narrative Criteria

Applications are competitive and funded based on their scores and the amount of money requested by the grants and allocated to the program.

  • The application narratives are reviewed by panels of readers comprised of Delaware educators. Evaluators score the narratives using set criteria (up to 170 points for all models).
  • Following the reader review process, the Department assigns the LEA or building the possible 30 economic and technology need points,
  • In total, 200 points are possible for all applications.

The applications are rank ordered by total score and approved based on the funding as available. To be approvable, a grant must score, on average, at least 60 percent. If insufficient or unacceptable proposals are received in any category, the DDOE reserves the right to distribute funds through the other categories.

  1. Economic and Technology Need Criteria

The Delaware Department of Education Grant Reviewers, using data supplied by LEAs via the Department’s core data collection system, assign up to 30 additional points based on need.

  • The applicant(s) serve(s) economically disadvantaged students (10 points).
  • The applicant(s) serve(s) technologically disadvantaged students (10 points).
  • The applicant(s) serve(s) one or more schools identified for improvement or corrective action under ESEA. (10 points).
  1. Poverty points are assigned based on the applicant’s percentages of children from families with incomes below the poverty line (determined by the U.S. Census)*see last page of RFP using the following table.

LEA – U.S. Poverty Census Data / Assigned Score
25.00% - 29.99% / 10
20.00% - 24.99% / 8
15.00% - 19.99% / 6
10.00% - 14.99% / 4
9.99% or lower / 2
  1. Technology need points are assigned based on the number of students per Internet-connected computer in the buildings involved in the proposed project (5 points possible) and previous Title II, PART D competitive grant funding (5 points possible), using the following table. In the case of multiple buildings, the computer ratios are averaged (all scores added and divided by the number of buildings).

Number of Students per Internet-connected Computer / Assigned
Score / PLUS / Previous Competitive Title II, PART D Funding Status / Assigned
Score
5.81 or more students / 5 / No funding in past 5 years / 5
4.21 – 5.80 students / 4 / 1 year of funding / 4
3.21 – 4.20 students / 3 / 2 years of funding / 3
2.41 – 3.20 students / 2 / 3 years of funding / 2
2.40 or fewer students / 1 / 4 or more years of funding / 1
  1. Schools identified for improvement or corrective action under ESEA will be given 10 points.
  1. EETTCompetitive Grant Program

DelawareTitle II, Part D competitive funds may be used to help LEAs implement Technology Innovation Projectsthat aim to improve instructional strategies and student achievement (including technology literacy).

  1. Funding

The Congress makes an annual appropriation for the Technology Grants Program to the USDOE that administers state and federal education technology programs. The funding for the Title II, Part D program is based on federal appropriation estimates. Annually, the Delaware Department of Education advises LEAs of the estimated Title II, Part D appropriation and the purposes for which grants may be awarded.

  1. Funding Period

The fiscal year is July 1 to June 30. The funding period for competitive grants begins the date the grant is approved by the Department. Projects are funded for one year at time. Grants are competitive.

  1. Eligible Applicants

As required by law, Title II, Part D competitive funds must target "high-need” LEAs, defined as schools serving the highest numbers and/or percentages of children living in poverty based on U.S. Census data. Usually in January, the Department receives the Census data that are used in determining next year’s LEA allocations for Title I grants – and the Title II, Part D grants.

LEAs are ranked by percentage of school-aged children living in poverty, from highest to lowest. The State average is calculated and those LEAslisted that serve above the State average are eligible to apply. The average number of students in poverty served by those LEAs is then determined. The remaining LEAs that serve above the average number of students of poverty are also eligible to apply. Up-to-date listings of eligibility are included in this RFP.
A consortium application may include any LEAor school in the state – with the following caveats: the applicant must be an eligible LEA; the consortium must consist of multiple LEAs where at least 50% of the consortium members are high need LEAs; and the (consolidated) proposed budget cannot exceed the established grant maximums.

  1. Type of Grants

The intent of the Title II, Part D competitive grant program is to help LEAs enhance curriculum and instruction through the use of education technologies in a sustainable model that can be carried on after the initial funding period. The goal of the Delaware competitive grant program is to create school- and/or LEA-wide changes and improvement. Funded projects should promote systemic implementations that promote high-quality teaching and improved student performance.

There is onetype of grant:

Technology Innovation Projects: LEAs develop technology-related projects to improve teaching and learning through technology integration and professional development that promotes effective use of research-based instructional strategies that results in improved student performance.

An LEA may only submit and/or participate in one EETT grant application.

  1. Distribution of Funds

Applications will be ranked based on proposal score and awarded in rank order. If an insufficient number of approvable proposals are submitted to award the entire amount of funding by grant type, the DDOE reserves the right to reallocate funding.

  1. Grant Awards

The actual number of awards is dependent on the state’s allocation distributed via competitive grants and the amounts requested. The maximum amounts that may be requested, by grant type, are listed below.

  1. LEA Match

Matching funds are not required for competitive Title II, Part D grants,

  1. Program Guidelines
  1. Application Deadlines

An application with original signatures must be submitted along with two copies of the application. The deadline for ALL applications is noted in the Program Quick Facts on pages 1-3 of this document. DCET will not accept any grant proposals that arrive after the 12 Noon deadline.

Applications will be accepted for Technology Innovation Grants. LEAs applying for Technology Innovation grants are instructed to use the grant instructions and application forms contained in this manual.

  1. Mailing or Delivery of Applications

Mail or deliver applications to:

Wendy R. Modzelewski, Ed.D.

Delaware Center for Educational Technology

John W. Collette Education Resource Center

35 Commerce Way

Suite 1

Dover, DE 19904

  1. Application Contact Person

Each application requires designation of a project contact person. This person should be a member of the planning team since the contact must be familiar with the project and must be able to make decisions about the project, whether a single LEA or consortium project. Ideally, the contact should be a building principal of a School application and a central office administrator (e.g., a superintendent, assistant superintendent, or a coordinator for curriculum, instruction, or technology) for an LEA application.

  1. Application Components

An application consists of forms provided by the Department and a project narrative to be created by the applicant using a word processing program. The application is to be constructed in the following order:

  • Technology Innovation Projects:
  1. Application for State Assistance under the EETT Competitive Grant Program (form)
  2. EETT Program Application – Proposed Budget Information (form)
  3. Project Narrative
  4. DDOE Budget Summary/ Expenditure Report Of Federal Funds
  5. If a consortium: Letters of support from participating LEAs
  1. Assurances and Submission Process

To submit a grant application, a representative authorized by the LEA (the applicant LEA or the LEA applying as the fiscal agent of a consortium application) must agree to program assurances. Submission of the grant assures the Department that the board-authorized representative fully understands the assurances and the responsibility for compliance placed upon the applicant by the assurances. The applicant will refund directly to the Department the amount of any funds made available to the applicant, which may be determined, by the Department or an auditor representing the Department, to have been misspent or otherwise misapplied.