|
NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION |
|
|
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS |
|
|
No Child
Left Behind, Title II-D
RFP Release Date: September 15, 2009 Application Due Date: October 23, 2009 Anticipated Awards Date: October 30, 2009 *This RFP pertains to the regular Title IID funds received this year. There is a separate RFP for the ARRA funding. The technical assistance sessions will address questions about both types of grants. |
|
|
This Request for Proposal (RFP) is designed to distribute funds to qualified district applicants pursuant to Title IID, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, to improve student achievement through the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools. The New Hampshire Department of Education (NHDOE) will issue a total of approximately $1 million in federal funding for competitive grants to districts from the Enhancing Education through Technology Program (commonly known as No Child Left Behind, Title II-D Program) in 2009-10 to support the activities described within this document. Two grant types -- the Technology Leaders Program and the Classroom Technology Mini-Grants Program – provide grants in the amount of $10,000 per program to school districts to support the professional development of teachers and administrators and the integration of technology into instruction, in order to advance student learning. Districts may apply for one or both grant types and may submit applications individually or as consortium applications. Districts are strongly encouraged to apply for the Tech Leaders Program as part of a consortium. This document is the official “Request for Proposals” used to outline the application process. It contains important information on the background of the federal program and its requirements. Those districts eligible per the high need districts list in Appendix A may apply to receive Title II-D competitive grant funds. Please review all pages of this document to learn how to apply for an NCLB Title II-D 2009-10 Competitive Grant. Applications must be submitted according to the guidelines described in this document and using the application form available at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb. |
|
|
Technical Assistance Webinars: |
Webinar – September 16 at 9 AM Webinar – September 16 at 11 AM Visit www.nheon.org/oet/nclb to register for one or more webinars and receive the login information to the webinar location. All you need is your computer and web browser, plus speakers and a microphone. If you don’t have a microphone, you can still participate in the dialogue using the text chat area on the webinar screen. |
|
On-Site Session: |
Optional on-site information session – October 1st at NHDOE in Room 15 from 9AM to 3PM October 7th at NHDOE in Room 15 from 9AM to 1PM |
|
Dr. Cathy Higgins, NCLB Title II-D Program Manager Office of Educational Technology, Division of Instruction New Hampshire Department of Education, 101 Pleasant St, Concord, NH
03301 Voice:
603.271.2453 *** Email: chiggins@ed.state.nh.us Applicants are strongly advised to regularly visit the ETNews Blog at
www.nheon.org/oetb and use the RSS
feed to ensure timely receipt of information, and to subscribe to the ETNews
listserv at http://maillist2.nh.gov/mailman/listinfo/nhdoe-etnews
|
|
|
Table of Contents Enhancing Education Through Technology Technology Leadership Cohort (TLC) Program Classroom Technology Mini-Grants Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) Required Evaluation Data and Reports Required Budget Forms & Reports APPENDIX A: Report of Current U.S. Census Data APPENDIX B: Project New Media Literacies APPENDIX C: Application Format & Content APPENDIX D: Rubrics for Application Reviews |
|
|
Part A: PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
With the No
Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, Congress appropriated regular and ARRA funds in
2009-10 for NCLB Title II Part D, the Enhancing Education Through Technology
(Ed Tech) Program. NHDOE is releasing this RFP to address the goals of this
program using the regular funds. A separate RFP is available for the ARRA
application process. The primary goal of the federal Enhancing Education
Through Technology Program is to improve student academic achievement
through the use of technology in elementary and secondary schools. In addition,
the program is designed to: (a) assist every student to become
technologically literate by the end of eighth grade, regardless of race,
ethnicity, income, geographical location, or disability, and (b) encourage effective integration of
technology with curriculum development and high quality professional
development to promote research-based instructional methods. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Approximately $700,000 has been reserved for the TLC program. High
need districts (according to Appendix A) may apply to support teams of educators
from one or more schools within their districts to participate in this
statewide effort to bolster technology leadership. Each participating school
team should be comprised of 2 teacher leaders and one supporting principal per
school. Each team will be supported by $10,000 in grant funding ($4,000 per
educator plus $2,000 per principal). The ultimate
goal of the TLC Program is to support a statewide cadre of skilled, informed
teacher leaders and principals who are empowered to support their colleagues
in creating truly 21st century learning environments. Grant
Amounts and Numbers of Participants Consortium applications, including those which originate at PD
Centers (www.lescn.org) are strongly
encouraged. Such consortia applications may include teams from several
districts, with approximately 20 participants plus 10 principals per
consortium grant. These approximate sizes per consortium are suggested to
ensure a manageable level of coordination per group, as well as to distribute
participation across the state. It is estimated that this statewide
initiative will serve up to 6 consortium grants, totaling 120
teachers/specialists ($4,000 x 120 teacher leaders = $480,000) and 60 principals
($2,000 per principal = $120,000). Lead districts for each consortium grant are permitted to include $500
per teacher in their budgets for coordination. These districts must be
prepared to coordinate and host TLC activities (in collaboration with NHDOE
and the other consortia), replicate and expand the TLC09 program, and work
with other TLC program consortia to ensure a common experience for
participants. (See http://www.nheon.org/oet/nclb/2008-09/focus4.htm
for information about TLC09). TLC
Program Materials and Activities In an effort to create a high quality professional development experience
in support of emerging technologies and innovative approaches, the following
programs are highlighted. Districts are strongly encouraged to plan for
participation in these programs within their proposals. These resources can acquaint
a significant number of teachers and principals with resources and approaches
for creating 21st century learning environments which combine face
to face learning with online learning: ·
Project New Media Literacies – This research initiative originated
within MIT's Comparative Media Studies program. NML explores how we might
best equip young people with the social skills and cultural competencies
required to become full participants in an emergent media landscape and raise
public understanding about what it means to be literate in a globally
interconnected, multicultural world. A series of online NML activities in the
form of webinars and social networking resources will be offered to
interested NH educators from January through August 2010. Through online
activities, educators will learn about the framework of social skills and
cultural competencies which shape the work of Project New Media Literacies,
and look more closely at learning through such cultural phenomenon as
computer game guilds, YouTube video production, Wikipedia, fan fiction,
Second Life and other virtual worlds, music remixing, and social network
sites. New curricular materials which have emerged from Project New Media
Literacies, Global Kids, Harvard’s GoodPlay Project, Common Sense Media, the
George Lucas Foundation, and other projects will be examined to identify ways
to introduce these skills into contemporary educational practices and take
the material, information, and methods back into their classroom. Ideal
proposals would recommend one educator per consortium to participate in the
monthly webinars as part of the NML “Early Adopter Working Group.” These
early adopters would then be able to help guide the growth of the NML online
community in New Hampshire, while helping invite many other educators to join
the online community over time. (See Appendix B for more details.) http://www.newmedialiteracies.org/
·
Intel Thinking With Technology Course – This course provides from 24 to 40
hours (depending on number of modules chosen) of professional development to
teachers to learn strategies for addressing and assessing thinking skills,
using technology to support deeper understanding of core content. The goal is
for teachers to leave the course with a standards-based unit plan, support
materials, and implementation strategies to improve and assess students'
higher-order thinking with the use of free online tools. This program was
offered in last year’s Tech Leader Program and will again be offered. Ideal
proposals would plan for new TLC teachers to participate in this program,
anticipating 3-4 days of workshop days, with 3 of them as Intel days, hosted
in winter-spring 2010 at LESCN sites across the state. http://educate.intel.com/education/teach/workshops/index.asp
·
Intel Teach Leadership Forum - The Intel Teach Leadership Forum
provides a 4-hour face-to-face professional development session focusing on
the importance of leadership in promoting, supporting, and modeling the use
of technology in instruction. Through the forum, participants explore
relevant research and behaviors related to supporting effective technology
integration and associated professional development. Ideal proposals would
plan for principals from all participating schools to attend an after school
Intel session dedicated to principals and other administrators, hosted at
LESCN sites across the state. http://www.intel.com//education/teach/forums/index.htm ·
OPEN NH – This e-learning program, now entering its
5th year in New Hampshire, provides online courses for
professional development geared to school or district needs. Courses are
facilitated by NH educators, designed by NH educators, and customized to meet
the needs of NH schools and educators. Courses include several content areas
and instructional topics. Some courses were developed by the national
partnership, while others were developed and customized to meet specific
needs in New Hampshire. All TLC teachers will be required to regularly access
an online OPEN NH workspace for monthly themes and ongoing discussions,
anticipating 1-3 hours per week of online engagement. The number of hours
online is largely dependent on the extent to which participants explore
resources provided within each monthly theme. http://www.opennh.org
Dates,
Expectations, and More Applications should indicate a date when an initial face to face consortium
meeting for participants will be held (an after school time is recommended).
At this meeting, participants would receive their iTouch and get started with
the program. Teachers who are already participants in the TLC program may
continue with the program by becoming the second school team member, in which
case they can act as mentors and support for new participants. In your proposal,
please indicate participants who are interested in being part of the NML
Early Adopters Working Group, briefly indicating the background of each
recommended early adopter. We anticipate engaging approximately 6 New
Hampshire educators in this working group. An unlimited number of additional
NH educators are invited and encouraged to join the online NML community, with
the early adopters acting as leaders and guides in this effort. Participant Expectations (approximately 80 hours distributed over the
year) ·
Each
teacher leader is expected to login to the TLC online workspace at least
twice each week during 3 weeks each month, posting an original substantive
message on the weekly topic and responding to two other participants (average
3-6 hours per month from December through August). Each group will be
facilitated by an OPEN NH trained facilitator. ·
Teacher
leaders who are new to TLC should plan to attend the 4 Intel Teach workshop
dates scheduled by their consortium lead (estimated 24 hours total). (This is
optional for returning TLC participants or those who will be part of the NML early
adopters working group.) ·
Each
consortium is strongly encouraged to identify a teacher leader to participate
in the New Media Literacies “Early Adopter Working Group” (estimated 1-2
hours per week from January through August). These participants would attend
monthly webinars from January through August to brainstorm on a monthly theme
relevant to participating schools. Themes will vary and could range from
digital media and ethics to exploring Wikipedia to citing examples of
effective blended learning. These teacher leaders will then be able to engage
other NH teachers in the NML online community as well as implement activities
in their own classrooms. ·
Principals
are expected to attend the initial TLC meeting held by the consortium lead; provide
ongoing support and encouragement to teacher leaders; utilize an iTouch
classroom observation application (apps) as well as other apps in order to
become more familiar with educational uses for handheld devices; and attend
the 21st Century Learner event (spring 2010), one day at the
Christa McAuliffe Technology Conference (December 2009), Intel Leadership
Forum, and 4-6 other after school sessions organized at consortium sites for
participating principals. We anticipate 5-6 consortium awards of $100,000 each, distributed
across all regions of the state, which would support $10,000 per TLC team (total
of 20 teacher leaders and 10 principals per consortium) as described below.
(As the work of this initiative unfolds during the grant period, additional
funding, if available, may be used to provide further support for this
effort.)
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Approximately $400,000
has been reserved for this program. Districts may
apply to sponsor one team per district to either replicate an exemplary
mini-grant project or propose a new project. Projects which can directly
impact more than one classroom are preferred. We anticipate up to 40
mini-grants of $10,000 each, distributed across all regions of the state and
within each grade range of K-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12. Federal guidelines
require that each grantee spend at least $2,500 of the total grant for
professional development. (As the work of this initiative unfolds during the
grant period, additional funding, if available, may be used to provide
further support for this effort.) The goal of
this effort is to create exemplary
projects to disseminate to all NH schools, supported with technology, within
each core content area: The Arts, English Language Arts, Mathematics, Science,
Social Studies, and/or World Languages. These mini-grants will have similar requirements to previous years,
although there are some changes. Each year, the mini-grants have been
supported by training sessions and a celebration event provided by the Local
Educational Support Center Network (LESCN) and coordinated by Matt Treamer at
NCES-PDC. It is clear that many educators are more experienced in video
production than ever before. Thus, the professional development requirements
have been adapted to accommodate the varying needs of teams. Teams are asked
to contact their nearest PD Center (see www.lescn.org)
or contact Matt Treamer directly at matt@ncedservices.org
to inquire about professional development services that might be offered at a
nearby center and customized to meet your project needs. Requirements and
Expectations ·
Projects must be carried out by teams of 2-4 educators
from each project school. ·
Projects must be focused on a primary content area, as
well as address ICT literacy skills. Project based learning (or problem based
learning) with a constructivist approach and essential questions are the
heart of these projects. Team projects must show evidence that these
pedagogies are clearly understood and applied. ·
Teams must attend an initial mini-grants meeting to review
expectations, especially the requirements around video production, and
establish procedures and contact information during the project period. Several
dates for one-hour webinar sessions will be offered during the week of
November 16. Awardees will receive these dates when notified of their awards. ·
Teams must produce a 3 minute video, lesson plan, assessment
rubric, and related documentation to indicate how the project was carried out
and submit draft copies of these materials to the mini-grants coordinator,
Matt Treamer, by the end of April 2010. Templates will be provided at the
initial webinars in November. ·
Teams must attend one of three after-school mini-grant
meetings during the week of May 3-7, 2010 at one of the PD Centers. Support
will be provided at these meetings to refine project documentation materials.
Such documentation will be made publicly available prior to the Celebration
Event at www.nheon.org/omeka. This
is also where examples of previous grant materials can be found. Please note
that as you browse previous projects, some materials from previous
mini-grants might not include all of the required elements. This year, the
initial grantees meeting is required attendance for all team members to ensure
requirements and expectations are understood by all teams. Awardees will
receive the specific May 2010 dates and locations when notified of their awards.
·
Each team must present their project at the annual Mini-Grant
Celebration Event on May 21, 2010 at Church Landing in Meredith, NH, as well
as present at two other local or regional venues, such as the Christa
McAuliffe Technology Conference or other similar event. Important budget note: Please include $500 in your proposed
budget for 5 people to attend this event, but do not include the $500 in your
OBM Form 1. Instead, this amount will be awarded to one district on behalf of
all mini-grant awardees in order to simplify invoicing for all awardees. This
is a required event for team members. We encourage teams to invite their
principals and superintendents to also attend. It is important that teams
understand the costs involved in coordinating this event which includes
facilitation, food, and facility costs. When teams are asked to register
attendees, please register ONLY those who are sure they will attend to avoid
being charged $100 per person for non-attendees. ·
Budgets should contain equipment, supplies,
travel, and professional development expenses appropriate to carry out the
proposed project. Please contact Cathy Higgins at chiggins@ed.state.nh.us if you have
questions about expenses that don’t easily fit into these categories. The
total for professional development should be at least $2,500, of which $500
should be set aside for the Celebration Event (see section above). ·
Project proposals must identify and explain at least three
specific learning goals the team needs to address and how the proposed
professional development will address these. ·
Proposals must indicate that support has been obtained from the
superintendent Exemplary
projects are sought which can address the following topics and standards: Social Studies –
Contact Ken Relihan, NHDOE Social Studies Consultant Increase accessible technology in GIS and GPS, as outlined in the standards below. Geographic standards which can be exemplified through technology are not limited to those below. Settlement patterns, migration, and natural resources are examples of geographic issues that lend themselves to technological expression. Technology can certainly be used to support other standards, such as those in Economics and Civics. ArcUser is full of examples of how GIS has been applied to problems in Economics and Government. It should be pointed out that geography is an important topic to address with these projects, and connections with math and science can be achieved through GPS projects. Geography Grades 3-4 SS:GE:4:1.1: Identify and describe the characteristics and purposes of geographic tools: maps, globes, graphs, diagrams, photographs, satellite-produced images, and other technologies. (Themes: C: People, Places and Environment, F: Global Transformation) Geography Grades 5-6 SS:GE:6:1.3: Utilize maps, globes, graphs, charts, models, and databases to analyze spatial distributions and patterns, e.g., climate zones, natural resources, or population density. (Themes: C: People, Places and Environment) Geography Grades 7-8 SS:GE:8:1.1: Compare relative advantages and disadvantages of using maps, globes, aerial and other photographs, satellite-produced images, and models to solve geographic problems, e.g., the Mercator projections versus Robinson projections. (Themes: C: People, Places and Environment) Geography Grades 9-12 SS:GE:12:1.1: Use graphic tools to depict geographic
issues, e.g., ice production in the World Languages -
Contact Ken Relihan, NHDOE World Languages Consultant Applicants are encouraged to consider the use of technology in World Language instruction (e.g., Rosetta Stone) and assessment (various forms of voice recognition software which can assess oral proficiency, etc.). For languages, there is currently not much technology used, so any tools that use technology, or software programs, would be useful. If software programs are more expensive than can be purchased just with a mini-grant, applicants are encouraged to seek other additional funding sources that can supplement the mini-grant budget. Proposals should reference the national standards for World Languages when describing the content that will be addressed. The Arts – Contact Marcia McCaffrey, NHDOE Arts Consultant This framework was guided by the broad goals in the National Standards for Arts Education. They were tailored to meet the needs of New Hampshire students. (Bolded standards are of particular importance.) · Students will create, perform, and
respond with understanding to all of the arts including Dance, Music,
Theatre, and Visual Arts. · Students will be able to communicate proficiently in at least one art form: Dance, Music, Theatre or Visual Arts. · Students will be able to analyze and evaluate works of art from structural, historical, and cultural perspectives. This includes the ability to understand and evaluate works of art in various arts disciplines. · Students will recognize exemplary works of art from a variety of historical periods and cultures, as well as understand historical development within and among the arts disciplines. · Students will relate various types of arts knowledge and skills within and across the arts disciplines. · Students will use technology as ways to
create, perform or respond in various arts disciplines. Additionally, the framework is a foundation for local development of assessment instruments. The New Hampshire Curriculum Framework for the Arts provides expectations for student learning which may serve as a basis for assessment design. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and State Consortium for Assessment and Student Standards/Arts (SCASS) models may also be used as a reference for designing performance assessments, keeping in mind that curriculum, instruction and assessment work together to promote strong educational programs. If arts educators utilize the framework as intended,
students should be able to achieve to the best of their ability. It is
expected that students will be able to communicate proficiently in all four
arts disciplines by the end of grade 8. Where necessary, modifications and
supports should be provided for students with disabilities, often in
collaboration with other professional staff. By offering varied opportunities
for personal expression, a wide range of options for successful participation
of every student can be insured. It is critical that NH students create art and learn to create it using technology, in order to help integrate deeper student knowledge of concepts and ideas in the arts. Science – Contact
Jan McLaughlin, NHDOE Science Consultant Teachers in the K-4
classroom should provide students opportunities to engage with concrete
manipulative activities that will lead children to construct the desired
concepts through investigation and analysis of experience. At this level in
particular, science should be integrated with other curricular areas (e.g., reading,
writing, math, social studies, technology, art, music, or physical
education). Children in grades 5-8 will build on their K-4 measurement and observation skills to construct new understandings and validate scientific theories and explanations. At this level, effective learning environments provide opportunities for collaborative inquiry in the field, classroom, and laboratory. These students need content knowledge as well as frequent and varied practice in experimentation and inquiry. It is important that students develop a solid understanding of how specific domains of science operate. Students in high school should learn science in courses with clear content goals and expectations. Understanding the connections of one science domain to another is important but research indicates students need concentrated knowledge and skills in specific science domains. Courses become more content-intensive without losing the field, experiential, and laboratory components. Although content may take on a more prominent role, instruction should proceed as much as possible on an inquiry basis. Science Process Skills: · SPS1– Scientific Inquiry and Critical Thinking Skills · SPS2– Unifying Concepts of Science (including NECAP Science Assessment Targets by Big Idea) · SPS3– Personal, Social, and Technological Perspectives · SPS4– Science Skills for Information, Communication and Media Literacy Earth Space Science Standards: ·
ESS1–
The Earth and Earth materials, as we know them today, have developed over
long periods of time, through constant change processes. ·
ESS2– The
Earth is part of a solar system, made up of distinct parts, which have
temporal and spatial interrelationships. ·
ESS3–
The origin and evolution of galaxies and the universe demonstrate fundamental
principles of physical science across vast distances and time. · ESS4– The growth of scientific knowledge in Earth Space Science has been advanced through the development of technology and is used (alone or in combination with other sciences) to identify, understand and solve local and global issues. Earth Space Science is lacking in the High School and all science domains need coherence in the elementary school. All levels need increased inquiry and development of science process skills. Project based learning approaches beyond standardized laboratories should be used more often. English Language Arts & Mathematics – The positions for these NHDOE content
consultants are currently vacant. Within these content areas, it is suggested that teams look at their own curriculum to determine which standards most need to be addressed within a mini-grant project. |
|
According to NCLB Title II-D federal
program guidelines dated March 11, 2002 (p.12) (see www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/legislation.html), funding should be targeted toward
“high need districts” which are those districts: (a) With the highest numbers or
percentages of children from families with incomes below the poverty line
(see www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe) AND (b) That have either one or more “schools
in need of improvement” or a substantial need for assistance in acquiring and
using technology. Based on updated information from the USDOE, the Title II-D high need districts list has been updated for the 2009-10 academic year to indicate eligibility according to the census data (see Appendix A). If you can answer YES to the following
questions, your district is eligible to request Title II-D grant funding for
the activities described within this RFP:
If you answered NO to any of the above,
your district is not eligible to request Title II-D ARRA funding. |
|
Districts receiving Title II-D funds must
have budgets and planned activities that are consistent with their technology
plans. Federal law requires districts to have an approved district technology
plan on file to receive Title II-D funds. Districts must have a new or
updated long-range strategic technology plan that aligns with the guidance
contained in the New Hampshire Technology Planning Guide (www.nheon.org/oet/tpguide) and is consistent with the objectives
of the State Educational Technology Plan. Districts should keep in mind that
these federal funds are intended to “supplement and not supplant” the use of
local funding. Districts are required to inform the NHDOE whenever
significant modifications are made to a local technology plan. Check the Tech
Plan Status List (link located on the home page of the Tech Planning Guide) to
ensure that your plan is current. (Please note: plans which were received by
NHDOE after June 30, 2009 may not have been reviewed yet. Such plans will be
reviewed by the end of September and contact persons notified of their plan
status.) For approval criteria, districts should refer to the elements
described in the current Technology Plan Approval Rubric, available from the
home page of the Guide. As part of the grant evaluation process, upon
receiving grant awards, districts will be asked to submit a self-assessment
of the criteria within the NH School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart,
which is also located in the Tech Planning Guide. |
|
The NHDOE conducts an annual technology
survey as part of its obligation to monitor and collect data about the impact
of the Title II-D program. While all districts are encouraged to complete the
survey, districts that received grants last year were required to submit an
Annual District Technology Survey, as well as School Technology Surveys (and
Case Study Reports) for each school in the district. Visit www.nheon.org/oet/survey to check the list of surveys submitted.
Please contact the NHDOE Office of Educational Technology if you have
questions about your district survey submissions. |
|
Successful grantees will be asked to
certify on their grant signature page the conditions that are met by their
district relative to the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) requirements.
Districts must be CIPA compliant in terms of their Internet filtering if they
are purchasing any equipment that will be used by students to access the
Internet. |
|
Federal guidelines permit eligible
districts to submit either a Single District Application for their district
alone or a Partnership Application for more than one district. We suggest
that districts form consortia for the Tech
Leader grants but apply individually for the Classroom Tech Mini-Grants. The focus of all
applications for funding must be on addressing the needs of the high-need An “eligible local partnership” includes
at least one high-need LEA and at least one of the following: 1) An LEA that can demonstrate that teachers
in its schools are effectively integrating technology and 2) An LEA that has proven teaching practices
into instruction, based on a review of relevant research, and that the
integration results in improvement in classroom instruction and in helping students
meet challenging academic standards; 3) An institution of higher education that
is in full compliance with the reporting requirements of section 207(f) of
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, and that has not been identified
by the State as low-performing under that Act; 4) A for-profit business that develops,
designs, manufactures, or produces technology products or services or has
substantial expertise in the application of technology in instruction; or 5) A public or private nonprofit
organization with demonstrated expertise in the application of educational
technology in instruction. The eligible local partnership may
include other LEAs, libraries, specialists, or other education entities appropriate
to local programs. |
|
According to federal guidelines, as a
district, you must provide an opportunity for local non-public schools within
your locality to consult with you when you write your proposal. Contact them
to discuss ways they might be included in your project. If they are not
interested in partnering with your district, you are not required to include
them in your project activities, but you do need to offer them the
opportunity. For a list of non-public schools and their contact information,
visit this page on the NHDOE website and click on the link to the non-public
schools list: http://www.ed.state.nh.us/education/doe/organization/instruction/boip.htm IMPORTANT: According to federal
guidelines, if a private school is part of your application, any equipment
purchased with the grant remains the property of the public school. It is
permissible to loan equipment to the private school, if needed, to carry out
the project. It is the responsibility of the district receiving the grant to
inventory and maintain any equipment purchased by the grant. |
|
§
25%
Requirement – Federal program guidelines require that districts use at least
25% of their total grant funds for ongoing, sustained, intensive,
high-quality professional development. Districts may budget more than 25% for
professional development, as appropriate, within the proposed project. Such
professional development should be focused on the integration of advanced
technologies, including emerging technologies, into curriculum and
instruction and in using those technologies to create new learning
environments. (TLC grants are considered largely professional development.
Mini-grants should include at least $2,500 towards professional development.) §
Alternatives
– According to federal guidelines, this 25% professional development
requirement can be waived only if the district can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the NHDOE that it already provides ongoing, sustained,
intensive, high-quality professional development, based on a review of
relevant research, to all teachers in core academic subjects. Districts
should keep in mind that these federal funds are intended to “supplement and
not supplant” the use of local funding. Any district considering such a waiver must
contact Cathy Higgins to discuss this possibility before submitting the
proposal. If your district receives a waiver, that documentation will need to
be submitted with the proposal. |
|
Federal guidelines require that districts
have a means of evaluating the extent to which Title II-D activities are
effective in (1) integrating technology into curricula and instruction; (2)
increasing the ability of teachers to teach; and (3) enabling students to
meet challenging state standards. Because the Title II-D program is a
state-administered program, NHDOE is responsible for ensuring that districts
comply with statutory requirements. Therefore, districts are required to
submit updated budgets, data for performance reports, and other reasonable
data to the NHDOE before being awarded funds in subsequent years. All
grantees will be required to participate in a statewide evaluation of their
grant activities. For the TLC and mini-grant programs, the primary evaluation
instruments used will be surveys. Districts interested in the possibility of
leading the evaluation efforts (in consultation with the NHDOE) on behalf of
multiple grantees may indicate their interest within their proposal. This
configuration is desired in order to maximize the potential for a larger and
more meaningful evaluation across all projects. While details of the statewide evaluation
plan will ultimately be worked out after all grants are awarded, the
following data reports are anticipated requirements for all grantees: §
NH
School Technology Survey – This
is an annual survey submitted for each building in the district as well as
the district as a whole. State data from previous tech surveys may be viewed
at www.nheon.org/oet/survey. §
Administrator
& Teacher Student Surveys – Pre and post surveys will be used. §
NH
School Technology and Readiness (STaR) Chart – Awardees will be asked to
complete a district’s self-assessment of the criteria within this chart by no
later than December 31, 2009. This chart may be downloaded from the Tech
Planning Guide at www.nheon.org/oet/tpguide. Instructions for online submission will
be provided within award letters. §
Case
Studies Report – This is a short form to report progress on district project
activities midway through the project and again after the project is
completed. The case studies form is available as a downloadable Word document
and an online survey at www.nheon.org/oet. Previously submitted case studies are
available at www.nheon.org/ictliteracy. It is possible that this report may be
revised during the development of the statewide evaluation plan this year. |
|
Each grant type has a different set of
meetings. Both types require attendance at an initial meeting to review grant
requirements and ensure that expectations and outcomes are understood. Please
see the appropriate section above for meeting dates. |
|
These grants will utilize the standards
OBM Form 2 System. OBM
Form 1 ·
An
electronic as well as a signed copy of the OBM Form 1 should be submitted with
the application. This form is used to authorize federal projects issued by
the NHDOE. When completing this budget form, it is important that you double
check all entries with your business manager before submitting to the NHDOE.
(In many districts, the form is normally completed by the business manager.)
Sending the form with errors can result in delays in processing your grant.
Common errors include missing or incorrect project start and end dates,
missing fiscal agent name in “make checks payable to” box, or incorrectly
calculated indirect cost amounts. For detailed instructions on indirect cost
calculations and other instructions related to OBM Forms, visit the NHDOE ·
If
submitting funding requests for more than one grant type, please list items
according to each grant type on the bottom half of page two of the Form 1.
This will also be an important tracking strategy if you have any
unanticipated changes in expenditures over the project period. ·
See
Project Dates section regarding the project start and end dates to be entered
on the Form 1. Obligation
and Disbursement Reports FY 2010 Title II-D projects may remain
open until 3/31/11. Funding obligations for awarded projects must be reported
by a school district no later than the quarterly report which ends March 2011,
with final disbursements reported on the quarterly reports due July 10, 2011.
Budget OBM Forms 3 and 4 from the NHDOE are used for these reports. ·
Failure
to submit obligation and disbursement reports to the NHDOE Office of Business
Management by July 10, 2011 will result in the forfeiture of any outstanding
obligations. |
|
Part B: WRITING A SUCCESSFUL PROPOSAL |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Step
1. Read all sections of this document to understand the grant requirements. Step
2. Review the application format (see Appendix C), which describes the
information that should be included within each section of your proposal.
Then review the scoring rubric which will be used to score your proposal. Step
3. Enter your contact information by 9/30/09 from the link at www.nheon.org/oet/nclb to indicate your district’s intent to
apply. This will help us know how many proposal reviewers will be needed. Step
4. Write your proposal using the application form provided on the website.
Then read this guidance document again to be sure you have covered all the required
information. Ask someone unfamiliar with the project to read your proposal to
assess it for clarity and completeness. Step
5. Follow the Submission Instructions to submit your proposal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Submission Instructions1.
Download the application form, OBM Budget Form 1, and
submission guidelines from the website at: www.nheon.org/oet/nclb. Use the forms
provided to create your proposal and budget form. 2.
EMAIL the complete application electronically as
attachments to an email to chiggins@ed.state.nh.us by no later than
Monday, 10/23/09. The following files should be attached: Attach the
"District Application Cover Page" which indicates the grant type(s)
you are applying for and the amount of grant funds requested. (The electronic
file does not have to include the superintendent's signature, but the hard
copy version that you mail on 10/23/09 must have the signature.) Attach the
application forms containing narrative and budget for each grant application. Attach only one
single Budget OBM form 1. This form will include all requested funds (break
out items for each grant type on bottom half of page 2 detail section). The subject
line of the email must read: <Your
District Name> Title II-D Application 3. As soon as you
email your application, put your signed original OBM Form 1 and the
application pages in the mail on the same day (10/23/09). Only one copy
(original with signature) is needed. Mail the budget form 1 and application pages to: Dr. Cathy Higgins |
APPENDIX A: Report of Current U.S. Census DataAccording to NCLB Title II-D federal
program guidelines dated March 11, 2002 (p.12) (see www.ed.gov/programs/edtech/legislation.html), funding should be targeted toward
“high need districts.” These would be districts whose numbers or percentages
of children from families with incomes below the poverty line are above the
state median (39 and 6.8% respectively) (see www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/) The “eligible for funds” column in the
table below indicates whether your district is eligible to apply by number,
percent, or both, according to Census Data available as of December 2008. |
|
District |
Total Pop. |
Total Kids 5-17 |
Total Kids in Poverty 5-17 |
Poverty % |
Urban / Rural |
Eligible By % or #? |
|
ALLENSTOWN |
5,271 |
964 |
79 |
8.2% |
U |
Eligible by Both |
|
ALTON |
4,881 |
544 |
58 |
10.7% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
AMHERST |
11,376 |
1,910 |
42 |
2.2% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
ANDOVER |
2,296 |
367 |
46 |
12.5% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
ASHLAND |
2,057 |
204 |
18 |
8.8% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
AUBURN |
5,004 |
986 |
31 |
3.1% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
BARNSTEAD |
4,212 |
528 |
57 |
10.8% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
BARRINGTON |
8,105 |
1,562 |
149 |
9.5% |
U |
Eligible by Both |
|
BARTLETT * |
2,955 |
418 |
69 |
16.4% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
BATH |
934 |
161 |
2 |
1.2% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
BEDFORD |
19,304 |
3,837 |
100 |
2.6% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
BERLIN * |
10,452 |
1,407 |
204 |
14.5% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
BETHLEHEM |
2,306 |
180 |
28 |
15.6% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
BOW |
7,769 |
1,800 |
56 |
3.1% |
R |
Eligible by Number |
|
BRENTWOOD |
3,418 |
275 |
10 |
3.6% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
BROOKLINE |
4,417 |
638 |
11 |
1.7% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
CAMPTON * |
2,928 |
331 |
34 |
10.3% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
CANDIA |
4,182 |
746 |
31 |
4.2% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
CHESTER |
4,056 |
826 |
41 |
5.0% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
CHESTERFIELD |
3,729 |
654 |
29 |
4.4% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
CHICHESTER |
2,434 |
416 |
27 |
6.5% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
CLAREMONT |
13,879 |
2,121 |
228 |
10.7% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
COLEBROOK * |
3,112 |
466 |
74 |
15.8% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
CONCORD |
39,707 |
5,947 |
619 |
10.4% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
CONTOOCOOK VALLEY |
18,756 |
3,718 |
383 |
10.3% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
CONWAY * |
10,762 |
1,570 |
277 |
17.6% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
CORNISH |
1,764 |
319 |
16 |
5.0% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
CROYDON |
697 |
109 |
7 |
6.4% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
DEERFIELD |
3,935 |
801 |
39 |
4.9% |
R |
Eligible by Number |
|
DERRY |
36,380 |
7,509 |
350 |
4.7% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
DOVER |
29,126 |
4,021 |
410 |
10.2% |
U |
Eligible by Both |
|
DRESDEN |
11,351 |
607 |
9 |
1.5% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
DUNBARTON |
2,423 |
414 |
19 |
4.6% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
EAST KINGSTON |
1,907 |
209 |
13 |
6.2% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
EPPING |
5,855 |
1,057 |
62 |
5.9% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
EPSOM |
4,375 |
712 |
40 |
5.6% |
R |
Eligible by Number |
|
ERROL * |
368 |
37 |
7 |
18.0% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
EXETER |
15,030 |
1,203 |
78 |
6.5% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
EXETER REGIONAL COOP |
30,833 |
2,687 |
105 |
3.9% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
FALL MOUNTAIN REGIONAL |
12,341 |
2,028 |
221 |
10.9% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
FARMINGTON * |
7,815 |
1,535 |
125 |
8.1% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
FRANKLIN |
9,149 |
1,489 |
328 |
22.0% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
FREEDOM |
1,414 |
151 |
9 |
6.0% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
FREMONT |
3,753 |
684 |
25 |
3.7% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
GILFORD |
7,373 |
1,158 |
74 |
6.4% |
R |
Eligible by Number |
|
GILMANTON |
3,311 |
540 |
39 |
7.2% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
GOFFSTOWN |
17,883 |
2,901 |
117 |
4.0% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
GORHAM * |
12,668 |
921 |
72 |
7.8% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
GOSHEN LEMPSTER COOP |
1,806 |
309 |
31 |
10.0% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
GOV WENTWORTH REGIONAL |
17,942 |
2,795 |
350 |
12.5% |
R |
Eligible by Both |
|
GRANTHAM |
2,286 |
301 |
6 |
2.0% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
GREENLAND |
3,430 |
604 |
48 |
7.9% |
U |
Eligible by Both |
|
HAMPSTEAD |
8,869 |
1,826 |
65 |
3.6% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
HAMPTON |
15,968 |
1,660 |
105 |
6.3% |
U |
Eligible by Number |
|
HAMPTON FALLS |
2,010 |
260 |
10 |
3.8% |
U |
Not Eligible |
|
HANOVER |
11,351 |
549 |
9 |
1.6% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
HARRISVILLE |
1,128 |
187 |
8 |
4.3% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
HAVERHILL COOP * |
4,948 |
771 |
40 |
5.2% |
R |
Eligible by Number |
|
HENNIKER |
4,825 |
631 |
21 |
3.3% |
R |
Not Eligible |
|
HILL |
1,080 |
210 |
21 |
10.0% |
R |
Eligible by Percent |
|
HILLSBORO-DEERING COOP * |
7,398 |
1,427 |
115 |