4
Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the total number of highest-rated applications *Only applicable to Validation applications GrantType Count FundsRequested Developm ent 18 $53,100,045 Validation 7 $82,552,652 Grand Total 25 $135,652,697 1 Priority Count Percent CostEffectiveness& Productivitiy 3 43% Adoption ofEffective Practices 6 86% Novice 7 100% Priority Count Percent Teachers & Principals 2 8% STEM 4 16% Family 4 16% Low-Performing 3 12% Technology 3 12% Disabilities 2 8% ELs 3 12% Rural 4 16% Grand Total 25 100%

Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the

Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs)

Type of Grant

Absolute Priority

Competitive Preference Priority*

*Calculated as a percentage of the total number of highest-rated applications*Only applicable to Validation applications

Grant Type Count Funds Requested

Development 18 $53,100,045

Validation 7 $82,552,652

Grand Total 25 $135,652,697

1

Priority Count PercentCost Effectiveness & Productivitiy 3 43%Adoption of Effective Practices 6 86%Novice 7 100%

Priority Count PercentTeachers & Principals 2 8%

STEM 4 16%Family 4 16%Low-Performing 3 12%Technology 3 12%Disabilities 2 8%

ELs 3 12%Rural 4 16%Grand Total 25 100%

Page 2: Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the

Highest-Rated Application Data

HRA by Competition and Applicant Type

HRA by Competition and Absolute Priority

2

Applicant Type Development Validation Grand TotalLEA 4 0 4Nonprofit w/consortium of schools 4 3 7Nonprofit w/LEA 10 4 14Grand Total 18 7 25

Page 3: Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the

Highest-Rated Application Data

Total Funding by Competition and Absolute Priority

Total Number of Students Served by Competition and Applicant Type

3

Priority Development Validation Grand TotalTeachers & Principals $3,000,000.00 $12,000,000.00 $15,000,000STEM $8,999,712.00 $11,998,919.00 $20,998,631Family $11,749,205.00 NA $11,749,205Low-Performing $8,998,964.00 NA $8,998,964Technology $5,991,838.00 $12,000,000.00 $17,991,838Disabilities $5,399,989.00 NA $5,399,989Els $6,000,000.00 $11,199,578.22 $17,199,578Rural $2,960,337.00 $35,354,155.00 $38,314,492Grand Total $53,100,045 $82,552,652 $135,652,697

Priority Development Validation Grand TotalTeachers & Principals 9,700 48,000 57,700STEM 5,495 22,000 27,495Family 21,600 NA 21,600Low-Performing 45,400 NA 45,400Technology 3,500 100,000 103,500Disabilities 3,620 NA 3,620Els 17.153 105,000 122,153Rural 485 77,683 78,168Grand Total 106,953 352,683 459,636

Page 4: Summary of 2013 i3 Highest-Rated Applications (HRAs) Type of Grant Absolute Priority Competitive Preference Priority* *Calculated as a percentage of the

Highest-Rated Application Data

25 HRA’s across 13 states and DC

Note: Site level data is not reflected. States represent applicant’s location.

4

State Development Validation Grand Total

California 4 2 6

Arizona 2 2

Utah 1 1

Illinois 1 1

Alabama 1 1

Georgia 2 2

North Carolina 1 1

District of Columbia

2 2

Pennsylvania 1 1

New York 2 2 4

Massachusetts 1 1

Maryland 1 1

Rhode Island 1 1

Maine 1 1