Applying for the SPDG

Jennifer Coffey, Ph.D.November 23, 2010

A few things to note…

Electronic vs. mailed submissionAppendicesClearly developed plansCompetitive Preference Priorities

StatutoryRequirements

• --(1) Provides professional development activities that improve the knowledge and skills of personnel as defined in section 651(b) of IDEA in delivering scientifically-based instruction to meet the needs of, and improve the performance and achievement of infants, toddlers, preschoolers, and children with disabilities;

• (2) Implements practices to sustain the knowledge and skills of personnel who have received training in scientifically-based instruction; and

• (3) Implements strategies that are effective in promoting the recruitment, hiring, and retention of highly qualified special education teachers in accordance with section 602(10) and section 612(a)(14) of IDEA.

General Requirements

(a) Budget for a three-day Project Directors’ meeting in Washington, DC during each year of the project;

(b) Budget $4,000 annually for support of the State Personnel Development Grants Program Web site currently administered by the University of Oregon (http://www.signetwork.org); and

(c) If a project receiving assistance under this program authority maintains a Web site, include relevant information and documents in a form that meets a government or industry-recognized standard for accessibility.

From the Notice90% of the budgeted amount needs to be for

activities delineated in (a) “Professional Development Activities” under “Use of Funds”

Must also have an activity or activities related to (b) “Other Activities” under Use of Funds

Contracts and Subgrants

Must award contracts or subgrants to LEAs, institutions of higher education, parent training and information centers, or community parent resource centers, as appropriate, to carry out the State plan; and

May award contracts and subgrants to other public and private entities, including the lead agency under Part C of IDEA, to carry out the State plan.

State Personnel Development Plan

Can reference IDEA (Statute) Section 651-655 for a more holistic view of the SPDG program

An applicant must submit a State Personnel Development Plan that identifies and addresses the State and local needs for personnel preparation and professional development of personnel, as well as individuals who provide direct supplementary aids and services to children with disabilities, and that--

8

Selection CriteriaA. Need for Project

B. Significance

C. Quality of Project Design

D. Quality of Project Personnel

E. Adequacy of Resources

F. Quality of the Management Plan

G. Quality of Project Evaluation

The application narrative should include the following sections in this order:

(a) Need for project. (1) The Secretary considers the need for the

proposed project. (2) In determining the need for the proposed

project the Secretary considers the extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

Reviewer Comments

+ Applicant reported qualitative findings of needs assessment efforts that were used to determine need of the proposed project.

+ Clear connections were made between gaps and project objectives (p. 9-16).

-- Additional data (quantitative) to support overall need for some objectives (3, 4, and 5) would have provided a more complete picture of need in this section. 10

11

-- …there was no connection in this section to significance of the project on the targeted populations identified by the applicant…

+ The need for the project is nicely outlined and focuses on students with disabilities in the state, especially those from diverse ethnic backgrounds as this is a growing population with unique support needs. Specific data are provided on pages 2-5.

+ Data are provided on page 7 regarding poor academic performance among students with disabilities (in the schools they will be working in) in comparison to students with disabilities state-wide. This discrepancy also applies in the discipline area as well (p. 8).

+ The section highlighting the need for increased parent involvement (p. 12-13) appears especially important due to the diverse immigrant population base in the state.

(b) Significance.

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the likelihood that the proposed project will result in system change or improvement.

13

+ Project appears to be well aligned with current reform efforts in the state, especially with IHE’s in the personnel preparation programs. Previous efforts have focused on --- SPED programs and appear to be very successful and they provide a model for current efforts.

+ This project intends to expand on the state’s unique collaboration efforts which are profiled in the narrative and clarified in multiple Letters of Support. Longstanding, noteworthy partnerships with IHEs and their parent center are highlighted.

- Minimal information provided by applicant in this section. While applicant discussed some outcomes from previous SIG/SPDG projects in qualitative terms in the Need section, critical information (i.e., baseline data from initial projects, data-supported progress/impact of previous & ongoing efforts) was missing from this section making it difficult for the reviewer to determine the likelihood for success in system change or improvement.

14

(c) Quality of the project design. (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed

project. (2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project,

the Secretary considers the following factors: (i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be

achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.

(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target population or other identified needs.

(iii) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of training in the field.

(iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects up‑to‑date knowledge from research and effective practice.

(v) The extent to which the proposed project will establish linkages with other appropriate agencies and organizations providing services to the target population.

(vi) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support rigorous academic standards for students.

16

+ Applicant connected project with GPRA program performance goals (p. 20).

+ Description of how applicant utilized program theory is presented clearly (p. 26-29). Reviewer found the description on pages 28-29 particularly useful in understanding how the practical aspects of the proposed project aligned with the theory.

+ Clearly this project aims to maximize efforts within the context of the other DOE initiatives and national centers discussed in section B. This will enable the work of this project to be braided with existing initiatives in a manner that coordinates and leverages DOE and district resources and structures to institutionalize change.

17

+ The proposal provides unique features of this project, including utilizing innovative ways to share expertise and resources via technology through cross-district and cross-initiative collaboration; using a differentiated model of staff development in order to meet the individual needs of administrators, teachers and other personnel; and utilizing strategies that recognize strengths and expertise of district staff, with the understanding that the most effective personnel development comes from within or can be developed in districts in collaboration with DOE and IHE partners.

18

-- Additional information (identification process, number of schools per year, etc.) about the proposed schools for project activities would have been helpful to the reviewer to understand how some of the work will be completed.

--The need identified in the previous section (relevant engagement strategies need to be identified) was not clearly reflected in the description of activities for this area.

(d) Quality of project personnel.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

20

+ Commitment letters from the consultants to the project was a great addition to the overall proposal.

+ The applicant identifies how it encourages applications for employment from persons who are member of groups traditionally underrepresented including active recruitment.

(e) Adequacy of resources.

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.

(ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.

(iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project.

(iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

(v) The potential for continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to this type of support.

22

+ Costs appear reasonable in relation to proposed work and are based on applicant’s experience with similar projects.

+ Partnership agreements are a strength of this proposal.

+ SPDG partners have been involved in the needs assessment process and have documented their involvement in the implementation of project activities for the anticipated five year grant cycle. Budget appears adequate combined with in-kind contributions.

-- While some specifics about program sustainability are provided, additional information about the state’s ability to sustain some components of the project (i.e., parent engagement, principal leadership development) after federal funding was needed.

(f) Quality of the management plan. (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management

plan for the proposed project. (2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the

proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

(ii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

24

--Two key areas were missing from this section that resulted in point deduction: (1) information about the responsibilities and effort expectations of project consultants was absent from this section and (2) project timelines and milestones.

+ Applicant describes how multiple perspectives will be brought to the project (p. 66-67). Multiple committees/teams are outlined in this section (Project Management Team, Advisory Committee, Practitioners’ Advisory Committee). - Additional information about the coordination between these groups would have been helpful to the reviewer.

- The reader had concerns regarding the purpose and use of the advisory board since it only meets twice a year. More detail on how they will be used and what strategies will be employed to accomplish the work is needed.

+ There does appear to be collaboration among the various groups and this provides a fairly diverse level of perspectives. - The application would have benefitted from documentation of involvement by the cultural group receiving PD.

- Required partners/perspectives are outlined in Appendix J. Additional information about how the applicant will solicit input from the stakeholders listed was needed

- The role of focus groups and the steering committee was not clear with regard to how their input will result in program refinement or changes to activities. This caused the reader concern for the level of diversity of those providing input.

- Project Advisory Board membership is described on page 70 with members listed on page 71. Reviewer noted that most members of the Advisory Board are also key personnel on the project. Additional perspectives need to be reflected by adding non-project related members to board.

- Follow up meetings will be conducted for parents, community members and elders to share information on the use of the intervention, but limited detail regarding the way this will be done is provided

(g) Quality of the project evaluation.

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

29

+ Evaluation design incorporates principles of empowerment evaluation. Plan was developed with current project evaluators, project staff, and advisory committee members. Four overarching questions shaped the evaluation

+ Evaluation is geared to provide both outcome and process information that will be used for annual reporting and program revisions.

30

- Evaluation methods reflect the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data for the project.

- Information about evaluation timelines would have provided a more complete picture of the overall evaluation plan.

In Summary

Provide detailed explanations of why, what, who, how, and when. Timelines and milestones are critical

Plan with relevant partners and have evidence that there is agreement in place in regard to those plans.

Do not portray a blank slate. Build on what the previous SPDG did (if applicable) and other work happening in the State. 31