Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection Criteria-Expanding Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)-Grants to State Entities (SE Grants); Grants to Charter Management Organizations for the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools (CMO Grants); and Grants to Charter School Developers for the Opening of New Charter Schools and for the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools (Developer Grants)

CourtEducation Department
Citation87 FR 14197
Published date14 March 2022
Record Number2022-05463
Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
                [Proposed Rules]
                [Pages 14197-14210]
                From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
                [FR Doc No: 2022-05463]
                =======================================================================
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
                34 CFR Chapter II
                [Docket ID ED-2022-OESE-0006]
                Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection
                Criteria--Expanding Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program
                (CSP)--Grants to State Entities (SE Grants); Grants to Charter
                Management Organizations for the Replication and Expansion of High-
                Quality Charter Schools (CMO Grants); and Grants to Charter School
                Developers for the Opening of New Charter Schools and for the
                Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools (Developer
                Grants)
                AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
                Education.
                ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
                criteria.
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                SUMMARY: The Department of Education proposes priorities, requirements,
                definitions, and selection criteria for CSP SE Grants, CMO Grants, and
                Developer Grants, Assistance Listing Numbers (ALNs) 84.282A, 84.282B,
                84.282E, and 84.282M. We may use one or more of these priorities,
                requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for grant
                competitions under these programs in fiscal year (FY) 2022 and later
                years. We take this action to create results-driven policies to help
                promote positive student outcomes, student and staff diversity,
                educator and community empowerment, promising practices, and
                accountability, including fiscal transparency and responsibility, in
                charter schools supported with CSP funds, which can serve as models for
                other charter schools.
                DATES: We must receive your comments on or before April 13, 2022.
                ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
                or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
                accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
                the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
                please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
                Docket ID at the top of your comments.
                 Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
                submit your comments electronically. Information on using
                Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
                submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
                under ``Help.''
                 Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
                mail or deliver your comments about these proposed priorities,
                requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, address them to
                Porscheoy Brice, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
                Room 3E209, Washington, DC 20202-5970.
                 Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
                received from members of the public available for public viewing in
                their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
                www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
                in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
                available.
                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Porscheoy Brice, U.S. Department of
                Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E209, Washington, DC 20202-
                5970. Telephone: (202) 260-0968. Email: [email protected].
                 If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
                telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
                800-877-8339.
                SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                 Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
                the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
                criteria. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
                developing the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions,
                and selection criteria, we urge you to clearly identify the specific
                section of the proposed priority, requirement, definition, or selection
                criteria that each comment addresses.
                 We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
                requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall
                requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from these
                proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria.
                Please let us know of any further ways we could reduce potential costs
                or increase potential benefits while preserving the effective and
                efficient administration of the program.
                 During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
                comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and
                selection criteria by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also inspect
                the comments in person. Please contact the person listed under FOR
                FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to make arrangements to inspect the
                comments in person.
                 Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
                Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate
                accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
                needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
                public rulemaking record for the proposed priorities, requirements,
                definitions, and selection criteria. If you want to schedule an
                appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
                contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
                 Purpose of Programs: SE Grants, CMO Grants, and Developer Grants
                are three of six CSP grant programs that support various activities
                critical to the successful creation and implementation of charter
                schools. The major purposes of the CSP are to expand opportunities for
                all students, particularly traditionally underserved students, to
                attend charter schools and meet challenging State academic standards;
                provide financial assistance for the planning, program design, and
                initial implementation of charter schools; increase the number of high-
                quality charter schools available to students across the United States;
                evaluate the impact of charter schools on student achievement,
                families, and communities; share best practices between charter schools
                and other public schools; aid States in providing facilities support to
                charter schools; and support efforts to strengthen the charter school
                authorizing process.
                 SE Grants (ALN 84.282A) comprise the largest portion of CSP funds.
                These competitive grants are awarded to State entities (SEs) that, in
                turn, award competitive subgrants to eligible applicants for the
                purpose of opening new charter schools and replicating and expanding
                high-quality charter schools. Eligible applicants are charter school
                developers that have applied to an authorized public chartering agency
                to operate a charter school and have provided adequate and timely
                notice to that authority. A developer is an individual or group of
                individuals (including a public or private nonprofit organization),
                which may include teachers, administrators and other school staff,
                parents, or other members
                [[Page 14198]]
                of the local community in which a charter school project will be
                carried out.\1\ For-profit organizations are ineligible to apply for
                grants or subgrants under the CSP.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \1\ Section 4310(5) and (6) of the Elementary and Secondary
                Education Act of 1965, as amended (20 U.S.C. 7221i(5) and (6))
                (www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ95/PLAW-114publ95.pdf).
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 In addition to making subgrants to eligible applicants to open new
                charter schools and to replicate or expand high-quality charter
                schools, SE grantees may use grant funds to provide technical
                assistance to eligible applicants and authorized public chartering
                agencies in opening new charter schools and replicating and expanding
                high-quality charter schools; and work with authorized public
                chartering agencies in the State to improve authorizing quality,
                including developing capacity for, and conducting, fiscal oversight and
                auditing of charter schools. SE Grant funds may also be used for grant
                administration, which may include technical assistance and monitoring
                of subgrants for performance and fiscal and regulatory compliance, as
                required under 2 CFR 200.332(d).
                 If a State does not have an active CSP SE Grant, the Department may
                award Developer Grants (ALNs 84.282B and 84.282E) to eligible
                applicants in the State on a competitive basis to enable them to open
                new charter schools or to replicate or expand high-quality charter
                schools. Through CMO Grants (ALN 84.282M), the Department provides
                funds to non-profit charter management organizations (CMOs) on a
                competitive basis to enable them to replicate or expand one or more
                high-quality charter schools.
                 CSP SE Grants, CMO Grants, and Developer Grants are intended to
                support charter schools that serve elementary or secondary school
                students. Funds also may be used to serve students in early childhood
                education programs or postsecondary students. Section 4310 of the
                Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA),
                defines ``replicate'' as opening a new charter school, or a new campus
                of a high-quality charter school, based on the educational model of an
                existing high-quality charter school; and ``expand'' as significantly
                increasing enrollment or adding one or more grades to a high-quality
                charter school (20 U.S.C. 7221i(9) and (7)). Section 4310 defines
                ``high-quality charter school,'' in pertinent part, as a charter school
                that shows evidence of strong academic results, which may include
                strong student academic growth, as determined by a State; has no
                significant issues in the areas of student safety, financial and
                operational management, or statutory or regulatory compliance; and has
                demonstrated success in significantly increasing student academic
                achievement, including graduation rates where applicable, for all
                students served by the charter school and for each of the subgroups of
                students defined in section 1111(c)(2) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C.
                7221i(8)).
                 For CMO Grants and Developer Grants, these proposed priorities,
                requirements, definitions, and selection criteria are intended to
                supplement the regulatory priorities, requirements, definitions, and
                selection criteria in: Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and
                Selection Criteria--Expanding Opportunity Through Quality Charter
                Schools Program; Grants to Charter Management Organizations for the
                Replication and Expansion of High-Quality Charter Schools (CMO NFP),
                published in the Federal Register on November 30, 2018 (83 FR 61532),
                and Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection
                Criteria--Expanding Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools
                Program; Grants to Charter School Developers for the Opening of New
                Charter Schools and for the Replication and Expansion of High-Quality
                Charter Schools (Developer NFP), published in the Federal Register on
                July 3, 2019 (84 FR 31726).
                 Program Authority: Title IV, part C of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7221-
                7221j).
                Proposed Priorities
                 Proposed Priorities Applicable to CMO Grants and Developer Grants:
                We propose two priorities for CMO Grants and Developer Grants.
                Proposed Priority 1--Promoting High-Quality Educator- and Community-
                Centered Charter Schools to Support Underserved Students.
                 Background: Charter schools were envisioned to drive the creation
                of innovative approaches to teaching and learning for all students
                while being held accountable for academic performance.\2\ The original
                proponents of charter schools anticipated that charter schools would be
                shaped by educators and offer opportunities for developing and sharing
                new instructional methods and resources that address the needs of
                students and families in the community. While that is the case in some
                charter schools, in others, teachers, parents, and community leaders
                have expressed concerns about not being included as active participants
                in charter school decision-making.\3\ Such concerns may be due, in
                part, to limited requirements for community engagement. According to
                the National Resource Center on Charter School Finance and Governance,
                ``most laws require only peripheral participation, such as garnering
                parent support for the school during the application process or keeping
                parents informed of student performance. These participation
                requirements do not take full advantage of charter schools' potential
                to draw on the knowledge and expertise of their parent community.'' \4\
                Similarly, some charter schools may not fully engage other community
                members and organizations that are also well-positioned to help assess
                the educational aspirations and needs of students living in their
                neighborhoods and can offer important contributions to help improve the
                academic, financial, and organizational or operational performance of
                the school.\5\ Charter schools and CMOs may have needs that community
                members and organizations can help meet, including, for example,
                specific teacher areas of expertise; facilities for activities such as
                arts, sports, or enrichment; or serving their students' well-being and
                readiness to learn. Similarly, community partnerships can expand
                options for courses that may not be available in a school, enhance
                independent study or skill development opportunities (e.g., career and
                technical education or work-based learning), and build sustainability
                of program offerings. Community partnerships can also assess the
                receptiveness of a community to a new charter school.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \2\ Kahlenberg, Richard D. & Potter, Halley (2014). Restoring
                Shanker's Vision for Charter Schools [verbar] American Federation of
                Teachers (aft.org) www.aft.org/ae/winter2014-2015/kahlenberg_potter.
                 \3\ Baker, Timberly L., Wise, Jillian, Kelley, Gwendolyn, and
                Skiba, Russell J. (2016). Identifying Barriers: Creating Solutions
                https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1124003.pdf.
                 \4\ National Resource Center on Charter School Finance &
                Governance. Enhancing_Charter_Schools Through Parent Involvement
                https://charterschoolcenter.ed.gov/sites/default/files/files/field_publication_attachment/Enhancing_Charter_Schools-AmyBiehlHS.pdf.
                 \5\ National Charter School Resource Center (2021). How Charter
                Schools Can Leverage Community Assets through Partnerships https://charterschoolcenter.ed.gov/sites/default/files/files/field_publication_attachment/How Charter Schools Can
                LeverageCommunity Assets through Partnerships.pdf.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Educator- and community-centered charter schools can provide
                opportunities to meet the needs of all students, particularly
                underserved students. Studies show that when teachers are engaged in
                educational decision-making and are given an
                [[Page 14199]]
                opportunity to collaborate with administrators, it promotes a better
                learning environment for students that leads to increased student
                achievement and college and career readiness.\6\ For example, charter
                schools can ensure meaningful input of educators by appointing multiple
                educators to their governing boards or purposefully developing
                instructional and operational models that proactively solicit and
                respond to educators' feedback. Additionally, community-centered
                charter schools are built on relationships that may enable them to be
                more transparent and collaborative in their design and practices,
                including proactively recruiting, enrolling, and retaining students of
                diverse backgrounds and abilities.\7\ Community-centered charter
                schools may have established partnerships with local organizations and
                informal and formal processes to engage with and solicit input from
                local stakeholders on a regular basis.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \6\ Rimm-Kaufman, Sara and Sandilos, Lia (2010). Improving
                students' relationships with teachers (apa.org) www.apa.org/education-career/k12/relationships.
                 \7\ Safal Partners: Kern, Nora (2016). Intentionally Diverse
                Charter Schools: A Toolkit for Charter School Leaders https://charterschoolcenter.ed.gov/sites/default/files/files/field_publication_attachment/NCSRC%20Intentionally%20Diverse%20Charter%20School%20Toolkit.pdf.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Proposed Priority:
                 (a) Under this priority, an applicant must propose to open a new
                charter school, or replicate or expand a high-quality charter school,
                that is developed and implemented--
                 (1) With meaningful and ongoing engagement with current and former
                educators, including current and former teachers, including in founding
                the school, board governance, school-level decision-making related to
                curriculum and instruction, and day-to-day operations of the school;
                and
                 (2) Using a community-centered approach that includes an assessment
                of community assets, informs the development of the charter school, and
                includes the implementation of protocols and practices designed to
                ensure that the charter school will use and interact with community
                assets on an ongoing basis to create and maintain strong community
                ties.
                 (b) In its application, an applicant must provide a high-quality
                plan that demonstrates how its proposed project would meet the
                requirements in paragraph (a) of this priority, accompanied by a
                timetable with milestones.
                Proposed Priority 2--Charter School and Traditional Public School or
                District Collaborations That Benefit Students and Families
                 Background: Research has shown that collaborations among charter
                schools and traditional public schools or traditional school districts
                (charter-traditional collaborations) have the potential to improve the
                quality of charter schools and traditional public schools.\8\ In order
                to benefit the public school system as a whole, and students and
                families in the community, charter-traditional collaborations require
                significant investments of time and resources to address commonly
                shared barriers and challenges in both charter schools and traditional
                public schools. Successful charter-traditional collaborations can lead
                to information-sharing about best practices for developing systems and
                processes that benefit all families and students served by the members
                of the collaboration.\9\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \8\ Chait, Robin (2019). Bridging the Divide: Collaboration
                Between Traditional Public Schools and Charter Schools.
                www.ested.org/wested-insights/collaboration-between-traditional-public-schools-and-charter-schools/.
                 \9\ DeArmond, Michael, Cooley Nelson, Elizabeth, and Bruns,
                Angela (2015). The Best of Both Worlds: Can District-Charter Co-
                Location Be a Win-Win? https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED559807.pdf.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Some examples of charter-traditional collaborations that benefit
                students and families include: Sharing curriculum resources and
                instructional materials, including opportunities for students to have
                increased access to a more comprehensive set of course offerings;
                creating systems and structures for the delivery of shared, effective
                teacher and leader professional development and instructional
                practices, including through professional learning communities;
                developing strong principal pipeline programs; and shared
                transportation systems that increase student access to and diversity
                within schools while lessening the financial burden all schools
                encounter when providing transportation.\10\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \10\ Yatsko, Sarah, Cooley Nelson, Elizabeth, and Lake, Robin
                (2013). District-Charter Collaboration Compact: Interim Report.
                https://crpe.org/district-charter-collaboration-compact-interim-report/.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Under the proposed priority, an applicant must propose to
                collaborate with at least one traditional public school or traditional
                school district in an activity that would be beneficial to all partners
                in the collaboration and lead to increased educational opportunities
                and improved student outcomes.
                 Proposed Priority:
                 (a) Under this priority, an applicant must propose to collaborate
                with at least one traditional public school or traditional school
                district in an activity that is designed to benefit students and
                families served by each member of the collaboration, designed to lead
                to increased educational opportunities and improved student outcomes,
                and includes implementation of--
                 (1) One or more of the following services and resources:
                 (i) Curricular and instructional resources or academic course
                offerings.
                 (ii) Professional development opportunities for teachers and
                leaders, which may include professional learning communities,
                opportunities for teachers to earn additional certifications, such as
                in a high need area or National Board Certification, and partnerships
                with educator preparation programs to support teaching residencies.
                 (iii) Evidence-based (as defined in section 8101(21) of the ESEA)
                practices to improve academic performance for underserved students.
                 (iv) Policies and practices to create safe, supportive, and
                inclusive learning environments, including systems of positive
                behavioral intervention and support; and
                 (2) One or more of the following initiatives:
                 (i) Transparent enrollment and retention practices and processes
                that include clear and consistent disclosure of policies or
                requirements (e.g., discipline policies, purchasing and wearing
                specific uniforms and other fees, or caregiver participation), and any
                services that are or are not provided, that could impact a family's
                ability to enroll or remain enrolled (e.g., transportation services or
                participation in the National School Lunch Program).
                 (ii) A shared transportation plan and system that reduces
                transportation costs for partners in the collaboration and takes into
                consideration various transportation options, including public
                transportation and district-provided or shared transportation options,
                cost-sharing or free or reduced-cost fare options, and any distance
                considerations for prioritized bus services.
                 (iii) Other collaborations designed to address a significant
                barrier or challenge faced by both charter schools and traditional
                public schools and improve student outcomes.
                 (b) In its application, an applicant must provide a letter from
                each partnering traditional public school or school district
                demonstrating a commitment to participate in the proposed charter-
                traditional collaboration. Within 45 days of receiving a grant award,
                the applicant must submit to the Department a written
                [[Page 14200]]
                agreement (e.g., Memorandum of Understanding), signed by officials
                authorized to sign on behalf of the charter school and each partnering
                traditional public school or school district, that--
                 (1) Identifies and describes each member of the collaboration;
                 (2) States the purpose and duration of the collaboration;
                 (3) Describes the roles and responsibilities of each member of the
                collaboration, including key staff responsible for completing specific
                tasks;
                 (4) Describes how the collaboration will benefit each member,
                including how it will benefit students and families affiliated with
                each member and lead to increased educational opportunities and
                improved student outcomes, and specific and measurable, if applicable,
                goals;
                 (5) Describes the resources each member of the collaboration will
                contribute; and
                 (6) Contains any other relevant information.
                 Types of Priorities:
                 When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
                priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
                competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
                Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
                 Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
                applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
                 Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
                priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
                awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
                application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
                selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
                comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
                75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
                 Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
                particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
                However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
                preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
                Proposed Application Requirements
                 Background: The ESEA requires SE Grant, CMO Grant, and Developer
                Grant applications to include specific information. In particular, SE
                Grant applications must address the application requirements in section
                4303(f) of the ESEA, CMO Grant applications must address the
                application requirements in section 4305(b)(3) of the ESEA, and
                Developer Grant applications must address relevant application
                requirements in section 4303(f) of the ESEA. In addition to these
                statutory application requirements, we established additional
                application requirements for CMO Grants and Developer Grants in the CMO
                NFP and Developer NFP, respectively.
                 As a supplement to the application requirements in the ESEA, CMO
                NFP, and Developer NFP, the Department proposes new application
                requirements and assurances to help ensure the creation of new charter
                schools, and the replication and expansion of high-quality charter
                schools, that are: (1) Racially and socio-economically diverse; (2)
                driven by the needs of students and families in the community in which
                the charter school is or will be located; and (3) fiscally responsible
                and transparent, particularly with respect to contractual relationships
                with for-profit management organizations (also referred to as education
                management organizations (EMOs)). We reiterate that a charter school
                is, by definition, ``a public school that . . . is operated under
                public supervision and direction,'' and for-profit entities are
                ineligible to receive funding as a CSP project grantee or subgrantee
                (see section 4310(2)(B), (3), (4), and (5) of the ESEA). It is also a
                violation of CSP requirements for a grantee or subgrantee to relinquish
                full or substantial control of the charter school (and, thereby, the
                CSP project) to a for-profit management organization or other for-
                profit entity because, among other things, a grantee or subgrantee
                receiving CSP funds must establish and maintain proper internal
                controls and directly administer or supervise the administration of the
                project. See 2 CFR 200.302-303; and 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701. A grantee
                or subgrantee that enters into a contract for goods or services must
                comply with the Federal procurement standards at 2 CFR 200.317-200.327,
                and applicable conflict of interest requirements, including that no
                employee, officer, or agent of the charter school may participate in
                the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by
                Federal funds if he or she has a real or apparent conflict of interest.
                 Generally, the Department believes, based on experience
                administering the CSP, that the proposed application requirements and
                assurances would help facilitate the proper review and evaluation of
                CSP grant applications, thereby increasing the likelihood of successful
                grant and subgrant implementation. These proposed requirements and
                assurances would also help ensure that all students have access to
                high-quality, diverse, and equitable learning opportunities in their
                communities, which should be a goal of all public schools.
                 High-performing charter school authorizers generally require
                applicants for a charter (i.e., to create a charter school) to present
                data on the academic achievement, demographics, and enrollment and
                retention rates of students in all surrounding public schools. These
                data help with assessing the extent to which the proposed charter
                school will meet the needs of, and enroll students that are
                representative of, the students in the community. Consistent with this
                part of the charter application process, we propose to require
                applicants for CMO Grants, Developer Grants, and subgrants under the SE
                Grant program to conduct a community impact analysis to inform the
                need, number, and types of charter schools to be created in a given
                community. The community impact analysis must describe how the plan for
                the proposed charter school takes into account the student demographics
                of the schools from which students are, or would be, drawn to attend
                the charter school. The community impact analysis must also describe
                the steps the charter school has taken or will take to ensure that the
                proposed charter school would not hamper, delay, or in any manner
                negatively affect any desegregation efforts in the public school
                districts from which students are, or would be, drawn or in which the
                charter school is or would be located, including efforts to comply with
                a court order, statutory obligation, or voluntary efforts to create and
                maintain desegregated public schools, and that it would not otherwise
                increase racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in the
                schools from which the students are, or would be, drawn to attend the
                charter school. The focus of the community impact analysis on racial
                and socio-economic diversity builds on existing statutory and
                regulatory provisions that give priority to applicants that plan to
                operate or manage high-quality charter schools with racially and socio-
                economically diverse student bodies (see section 4305(b)(5)(A) of the
                ESEA; CMO NFP at 61542; and Developer NFP at 31734). Please note that
                an applicant that proposes to operate or manage a charter school in a
                racially or socio-economically segregated or isolated community still
                would be eligible to apply for funding, even if the student body of the
                charter school would be racially or socio-economically segregated or
                isolated due to community
                [[Page 14201]]
                demographics. Such an applicant, like all other applicants, would be
                required to provide a community impact analysis describing how the plan
                for the proposed charter school takes into account the student
                demographics of the schools from which students are, or would be, drawn
                to attend the charter school, and the steps the applicant has taken or
                will take to ensure that the proposed charter school would not increase
                racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in those schools.
                 Further, as autonomous public schools that create their
                operational, curricular, and policy procedures, charter schools are
                well positioned to draw on the knowledge and expertise of families and
                other stakeholders in the community to help shape school practices. As
                with Proposed Priority 1, the proposed community impact analysis
                requirements are designed to ensure that families play an active role
                in informing decision-making regarding the need for charter schools in
                a specific community and to strengthen requirements regarding how the
                community is engaged and integrated in the charter school planning and
                approval process.
                 Under section 4310(2)(B) of the ESEA, charter schools receiving CSP
                funds must be created by a developer as a public school or adapted by a
                developer from an existing public school and operated under public
                supervision and direction. While for-profit organizations are
                ineligible to apply for direct grants or subgrants under the CSP, some
                charter schools enter into contracts with for-profit EMOs for services.
                It is the responsibility of the grantee or subgrantee to ensure that
                such an agreement with an EMO is a contract, and not a subaward or
                subgrant, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.331. Arrangements under which a
                for-profit EMO, including a non-profit CMO operated by or on behalf of
                a for-profit entity, exercises full or substantial administrative
                control over the charter school (and, thereby, the CSP project) or over
                programmatic decisions are not permissible under CSP-funded projects,
                pursuant to 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701, which require grantees and
                subgrantees, respectively, to directly administer or supervise the
                administration of their projects. EMOs provide a variety of services to
                charter schools--from limited management and financial support services
                to whole-school package offerings. Some examples of impermissible
                delegations of administrative control include situations in which the
                EMO controls all or a substantial portion of grant or subgrant funds
                and expenditures, including making programmatic decisions (also
                referred to as ``sweeps contracts''); the EMO employs the school
                principal and a large proportion of the teachers; or the EMO makes
                decisions about curricula and instructional practices.
                 We propose application requirements designed to ensure that any
                charter school that receives CSP funds and enters, or plans to enter,
                into a contract with an EMO complies with all statutory and regulatory
                requirements, including applicable Federal procurement and conflict of
                interest standards in 2 CFR 200.317-200.327, and Federal regulations
                requiring grantees and subgrantees to establish and maintain effective
                internal and administrative control over the Federal award (2 CFR
                200.303; and 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701). The proposed application
                requirements also are designed to ensure fiscal transparency
                surrounding these contracts by requiring applicants to address whether
                they have entered or plan to enter into a contract with a for-profit
                management organization and, if so, to provide detailed information
                regarding the terms of the contract. This includes the amount of any
                CSP funding that would be used to pay for services under the contract
                and information about the governing board members, individuals who have
                a financial interest in the management organization, and any perceived
                or actual conflicts of interests. Applicants would also address how the
                applicant will ensure that it makes all programmatic decisions,
                maintains control over all program funds, directly administers or
                supervises the administration of the grant or subgrant in accordance
                with 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701, and complies with the conflict of
                interest standards in 2 CFR 200.317-200.327.
                 Under section 4310(6) of the ESEA, an eligible applicant is defined
                as a charter school developer that has (1) applied to an authorized
                public chartering agency to operate a charter school and (2) provided
                adequate and timely notice to that authority. As noted above, eligible
                applicants in States that do not have an active SE Grant may apply to
                the Department for a direct grant under the Developer Grant program.
                Non-profit CMOs are the only eligible entities under the CMO Grant
                program and usually serve as the developer and apply for the charter on
                behalf of the charter schools that they fund through their grant.
                Because an applicant need not have received a charter to be eligible to
                apply for a CSP grant, there is inherent risk of an applicant receiving
                a CSP grant but ultimately not having its charter application approved.
                Given this risk, we propose requirements to better inform the
                Department of these situations, including by providing the expected
                timeline from the authorized public chartering agency to provide a
                final decision on the charter application and identifying any planning
                costs expected to be incurred before such decision. This information
                can, in turn, be used by the Department to establish guardrails, such
                as through grant conditions, to minimize risk.
                 Finally, to reinforce the proposed application requirements, we
                also propose assurances related to charter schools' contracts with
                EMOs; subgrant awards; reporting requirements; racial and socio-
                economic diversity of students and teachers in the charter school, and
                the impact of the charter school on racial and socio-economic diversity
                in the public school district and schools from which students are, or
                will be, drawn to attend the charter school; and ensuring that CSP
                funding for implementation of a charter school is provided only when a
                charter has been approved and a school facility has been secured.
                 We propose to apply one or more of the following application
                requirements in any year in which a competition is held under one or
                more of the following CSP grant programs: SE Grants, CMO Grants, or
                Developer Grants. We identify the program applicability for each
                proposed application requirement.
                 Proposed Requirements Applicable to CMO Grants and Developer
                Grants.
                 Proposed Requirement 1 for CMO Grants and Developer Grants:
                 Each applicant must provide a community impact analysis that
                demonstrates that there is sufficient demand for the proposed project
                and that the proposed project would serve the interests and meet the
                needs of students and families in the community or communities from
                which students are, or will be, drawn to attend the charter school, and
                that includes the following:
                 (a) Descriptions of the community support and unmet demand for the
                charter school, including any over-enrollment of existing public
                schools or other information that demonstrates demand for the charter
                school, such as evidence of demand for specialized instructional
                approaches.
                 (b) Descriptions of the targeted student and staff demographics and
                how the applicant plans to establish and maintain racially and socio-
                economically diverse student and staff populations, including proposed
                strategies (that are consistent with applicable legal requirements) to
                recruit,
                [[Page 14202]]
                enroll, and retain a diverse student body and to recruit, hire,
                develop, and retain a diverse staff and talent pipeline at all levels
                (including leadership positions).
                 (c) Analyses of publicly available information and data, including
                citations and sources, on academic achievement, demographics, and
                enrollment trends of students in the public schools and school
                districts from which students are, or will be, drawn to attend the
                charter school, and an explanation of how the area from which the
                proposed charter school would reasonably expect to draw students was
                determined.
                 (d) An analysis of the proposed charter school's demographic
                projections and a comparison of such projections with the demographics
                of public schools and school districts from which students are, or will
                be, drawn to attend the charter school.
                 (e) Evidence that demonstrates that the number of charter schools
                proposed to be opened, replicated, or expanded under the grant does not
                exceed the number of public schools needed to accommodate the demand in
                the community, including projected enrollment for the charter schools
                based on analysis of community needs and unmet demand and any
                supporting documents for the methodology and calculations used to
                determine the number of schools proposed to be opened, replicated, or
                expanded.
                 (f) A robust family and community engagement plan designed to
                ensure the active participation of families and the community and that
                includes the following:
                 (1) How families and the community are or were engaged in
                determining the vision and design for the charter school, including
                specific examples of how families' and the community's input was, or is
                expected to be, incorporated into the vision and design for the charter
                school.
                 (2) How the charter school will meaningfully engage with both
                families and the community to create strong and ongoing partnerships.
                 (3) How the charter school will foster a collaborative culture that
                involves the families of all students, including underserved students,
                in school decision-making on an ongoing basis.
                 (4) How the charter school's enrollment and recruitment process
                will engage and accommodate families from various backgrounds,
                including by holding enrollment and recruitment events on weekends or
                during non-standard work hours, making translators available, and
                providing enrollment and recruitment information in widely accessible
                formats (e.g., hard copy and online in multiple languages, large print
                or braille for visually-impaired individuals) through widely available
                and transparent means (e.g., online and at community locations).\11\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \11\ Please note that all public schools are obligated under
                Federal civil rights laws to ensure meaningful communication with
                limited English proficient parents and effective communication with
                individuals with disabilities. 28 CFR 35.160. See generally Lau v.
                Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974); 34 CFR part 100.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 (5) How the charter school has engaged or will engage families and
                the community to develop an instructional model that will serve the
                targeted diverse student population and their families effectively.
                 (g) How the plans for the operation of the charter school will
                support and reflect the needs of students and families in the
                community, including considerations for how the school's location, or
                anticipated location if a facility has not been secured, will
                facilitate access for the targeted diverse student population (e.g.,
                access to public transportation or other transportation options, the
                demographics of neighborhoods within walking distance of the school,
                and transportation plans and costs for students who are not able to
                walk or use public transportation to access the school).
                 (h) A description of the steps the applicant has taken or will take
                to ensure that the proposed charter school would not hamper, delay, or
                in any manner negatively affect any desegregation efforts in the public
                school districts from which students are, or would be, drawn to attend
                the charter school, including efforts to comply with a court order,
                statutory obligation, or voluntary efforts to create and maintain
                desegregated public schools, and that it would not otherwise increase
                racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in the schools from
                which the students are, or would be, drawn to attend the charter
                school.
                 Proposed Requirement 2 for CMO Grants and Developer Grants:
                 For any existing or proposed contract with a for-profit management
                organization (including a non-profit management organization operated
                by or on behalf of a for-profit entity), without regard to whether the
                management organization exercises full or substantial administrative
                control over the charter school or the CSP project, the applicant must
                include--
                 (a) The name and contact information of the management
                organization;
                 (b) A detailed description of the terms of the contract, including
                the cost (i.e., fixed costs and estimates of any ongoing costs or fees)
                and percentage such cost represents of the school's total funding,
                amount of CSP funds proposed to be used towards such cost (with an
                explanation of why such cost is reasonable), duration, roles and
                responsibilities of the management organization, and steps the
                applicant will take to ensure that it pays fair market value for any
                services or other items purchased or leased from the management
                organization, makes all programmatic decisions, maintains control over
                all CSP funds, and directly administers or supervises the
                administration of the grant in accordance with 34 CFR 75.701;
                 (c) A description of any business or financial relationship between
                the charter school developer and the management organization, including
                payments, contract terms, and any property owned, operated, or
                controlled by the management organization or related individuals or
                entities that will be used by the charter school;
                 (d) The name and contact information for each member of the
                governing board of the proposed charter school;
                 (e) A list of all individuals who have a financial interest in the
                management organization, including--
                 (1) Descriptions of any affiliations or conflicts of interest for
                charter school staff, board members, and management organization staff;
                 (2) A list of all related individuals or entities providing
                contractual services to the charter school and the nature of those
                services; and
                 (3) Detailed descriptions of any actual or perceived conflicts of
                interest, the steps the applicant took or will take to avoid any actual
                or perceived conflicts of interest, and how the applicant resolved or
                will resolve any actual or perceived conflicts of interest to ensure
                compliance with 2 CFR 200.318(c);
                 (f) An explanation of how the applicant will ensure that the
                management contract is severable, severing the management contract will
                not cause the proposed charter school to close, the duration of the
                management contract will not extend beyond the expiration date of the
                school's charter, and renewal of the management contract will not occur
                without approval and affirmative action by the governing board of the
                charter school; and
                 (g) A description of the steps the applicant will take to ensure
                that it maintains control over all student records and has a process in
                place to provide those records to another public school or school
                district in a timely manner upon the transfer of a student from the
                charter school to another public school, including due to closure
                [[Page 14203]]
                of the charter school, in accordance with section 4308 of the ESEA.
                 Proposed Requirement 3 for CMO Grants and Developer Grants:
                 An applicant that has applied to an authorized public chartering
                agency to operate a new, expanded, or replicated charter school, and
                has not yet received approval, must provide--
                 (a) A signed and dated copy of its application to the authorized
                public chartering agency;
                 (b) Documentation that it has provided notice to the authorized
                public chartering agency that it has applied for a CSP grant;
                 (c) A timeline from the authorized public chartering agency for
                providing a final decision on the charter application; and
                 (d) Any planning costs in its proposed budget that are expected to
                be incurred prior to the date the authorized public chartering agency
                expects to issue a decision on the applicant's charter application.
                 Proposed Requirements Applicable to SE Grants:
                 Background: Applicants for subgrants under the CSP SE Grant program
                are required to provide, as part of their subgrant application, a
                description of the roles and responsibilities of eligible applicants,
                partner organizations, and CMOs, including the administrative and
                contractual roles and responsibilities of such partners (section
                4303(f)(1)(C)(i)(II) of the ESEA). Another goal of these proposed
                requirements is to ensure that CSP SE grantees are well positioned to
                oversee a high-quality peer review process as they make subgrant awards
                in their respective States to support opening new charter schools and
                replicating and expanding high-quality charter schools. Also, we want
                to ensure that, after making subgrant awards in their States, SE
                grantees fulfill their responsibility to monitor charter school
                subgrant award recipients, as required under 2 CFR 200.332(d). SEs are
                required to provide descriptions of how the SE will review applications
                from eligible applicants (section 4303(f)(1)(C)(ii) of the ESEA) as
                well as its plan to adequately monitor subgrant recipients under the
                SE's program (section 4303(g)(1)(D)(i) of the ESEA). The CSP SE Grant
                program supports many charter schools nationally, and the proposed new
                requirements for SE applicants to create subgrant application review
                and subgrantee monitoring plans present an opportunity for peer
                reviewers to evaluate the quality of these plans not only to inform
                funding decisions, but also to enhance the quality of charter schools
                in the areas of transparency, oversight, and accountability.
                 The proposed application requirements, which would supplement
                existing statutory requirements for SEs, would: Require subgrant
                applicants to provide a community impact analysis and submit more
                detailed information regarding the nature of any management contracts
                with for-profit EMOs, including non-profit CMOs operated by or on
                behalf of for-profit entities, as we are proposing to require of
                applicants for CMO Grants and Developer Grants; require SEs to give
                priority in making subgrants to charter schools that are educator-led
                and community-centered or that participate in collaborations among
                charter schools and traditional public schools or school districts
                (charter-traditional-district collaborations), as with the above
                priorities for CMO and Developer; require SEs to provide justification
                and supporting evidence for the planned number of subgrants and
                subgrant award amounts to ensure proposed projects are reasonable; and,
                as discussed in the previous paragraph, strengthen the requirements
                related to SEs' review of subgrant applications and monitoring of
                subgrants in their States.
                 Proposed Requirement 1 for SE Grants:
                 Each subgrant applicant must provide a community impact analysis
                that demonstrates that there is sufficient demand for the proposed
                project and that the proposed project would serve the interests and
                meet the needs of students and families in the community or communities
                from which the students are, or will be, drawn to attend the charter
                school, and that includes the following:
                 (a) Descriptions of the community support and unmet demand for the
                charter school, including any over-enrollment of existing public
                schools or other information that demonstrates demand for the charter
                school, such as evidence of demand for specialized instructional
                approaches.
                 (b) Descriptions of the targeted student and staff demographics and
                how the applicant plans to establish and maintain racially and socio-
                economically diverse student and staff populations, including proposed
                strategies (consistent with applicable legal requirements) to recruit,
                enroll, and retain a diverse student body and to recruit, hire,
                develop, and retain a diverse staff and talent pipeline at all levels
                (including leadership positions).
                 (c) Analyses of publicly available information and data on student
                academic achievement, demographics, and enrollment trends of students
                in schools in the public school district and schools from which
                students are, or will be, drawn or in which the charter school is or
                will be located, including citations and sources and an explanation of
                how the area from which the proposed charter school would reasonably
                expect to draw students was determined.
                 (d) An analysis of the proposed charter school's demographic
                projections and a comparison of such projections with the demographics
                of public schools and school districts from which students are, or will
                be, drawn to attend the charter school.
                 (e) Evidence that demonstrates that the number of charter schools
                proposed to be opened, replicated, or expanded under the grant does not
                exceed the number of public schools needed to accommodate the demand in
                the community, including projected enrollment for the charter schools
                based on analysis of community needs and unmet demand and any
                supporting documents for the methodology and calculations used to
                determine the number of schools proposed to be opened, replicated, or
                expanded.
                 (f) A robust family and community engagement plan designed to
                ensure the active participation of families and the community that
                includes the following:
                 (1) How families and the community are or were engaged in
                determining the vision and design for the charter school, including
                specific examples of how families' and the community's input was, or is
                expected to be, incorporated into the vision and design for the charter
                school.
                 (2) How the charter school will meaningfully engage with both
                families and the community to create strong and ongoing partnerships.
                 (3) How the charter school will foster a collaborative culture that
                involves the families of all students, including underserved students,
                in school decision-making on an ongoing basis.
                 (4) How the charter school's enrollment and recruitment processes
                will engage and accommodate families from various backgrounds,
                including by holding enrollment and recruitment events on weekends or
                non-standard work hours, making translators available, and providing
                enrollment and recruitment information in widely accessible formats
                (e.g., hard copy and online in multiple languages, large print or
                braille for visually-impaired individuals) through widely available and
                transparent means (e.g., online and at community locations).\12\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \12\ Please note that all public schools are obligated under
                Federal civil rights laws to ensure meaningful communication with
                limited English proficient parents and effective communication with
                individuals with disabilities. 28 CFR 35.160. See generally Lau v.
                Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974); 34 CFR part 100.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                [[Page 14204]]
                 (5) How the charter school has engaged or will engage families and
                the community to develop an instructional model to best serve the
                targeted diverse student population and their families.
                 (g) How the plans for the operation of the charter school will
                support and reflect the needs of students and families in the
                community, including considerations for how the school's location, or
                anticipated location if a facility has not been secured, will
                facilitate access for the targeted diverse student population (e.g.,
                access to public transportation or other transportation options, the
                demographics of neighborhoods within walking distance of the school,
                and transportation plans and costs for students who are not able to
                walk or use public transportation to access the school).
                 (h) A description of the steps the applicant has taken or will take
                to ensure that the proposed charter school would not hamper, delay, or
                in any manner negatively affect any desegregation efforts in the public
                school districts from which students are, or would be, drawn to attend
                the charter school, including efforts to comply with a court order,
                statutory obligation, or voluntary efforts to create and maintain
                desegregated public schools, and that it would not otherwise increase
                racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in the schools from
                which the students are, or would be, drawn to attend the charter
                school.
                 Proposed Requirement 2 for SE Grants:
                 For any existing or proposed contract with a for-profit management
                organization (including a non-profit management organization operated
                by or on behalf of a for-profit entity), without regard to whether the
                management organization exercises full or substantial administrative
                control over the charter school or the CSP project, the subgrant
                applicant must include--
                 (a) The name and contact information of the management
                organization;
                 (b) A detailed description of the terms of the contract, including
                the cost (i.e., fixed costs and estimates of any ongoing costs or fees)
                and percentage such cost represents of the school's total funding,
                amount of CSP funds proposed to be used towards such cost (with an
                explanation of why such cost is reasonable), duration, roles and
                responsibilities of the management organization, and steps the
                applicant will take to ensure that it pays fair market value for any
                services or other items purchased or leased from the management
                organization, makes all programmatic decisions, maintains control over
                all CSP funds, and directly administers or supervises the
                administration of the subgrant in accordance with 34 CFR 76.701;
                 (c) A description of any business or financial relationship between
                the charter school developer and the management organization, including
                payments, contract terms, and any property owned, operated, or
                controlled by the management organization or related individuals or
                entities to be used by the charter school;
                 (d) The name and contact information for each member of the
                governing board of the proposed charter school;
                 (e) A list of all individuals who have a financial interest in the
                management organization, including--
                 (1) Descriptions of any affiliations or conflicts of interest for
                charter school staff, board members, and management organization staff;
                 (2) A list of all related individuals or entities providing
                contractual services to the charter school and the nature of those
                services; and
                 (3) Detailed descriptions of any actual or perceived conflicts of
                interest, the steps the applicant took or will take to avoid any actual
                or perceived conflicts of interest, and how the applicant resolved or
                will resolve any actual or perceived conflicts of interest to ensure
                compliance with 2 CFR 200.318(c);
                 (f) An explanation of how the applicant will ensure that the
                management contract is severable, severing the management contract will
                not cause the proposed charter school to close, the duration of the
                management contract will not extend beyond the expiration date of the
                school's charter, and renewal of the management contract will not occur
                without approval and affirmative action by the governing board of the
                charter school; and
                 (g) A description of the steps the applicant will take to ensure
                that it maintains control over all student records and has a process in
                place to provide those records to another public school or school
                district in a timely manner upon the transfer of a student from the
                charter school to another public school in accordance with section 4308
                of the ESEA.
                 Proposed Requirement 3 for SE Grants:
                 Each SE applicant must provide a detailed description of how it
                will review applications from eligible applicants, including--
                 (a) How eligibility will be determined;
                 (b) How peer reviewers will be recruited and selected, including
                efforts the applicant will make to recruit peer reviewers from diverse
                backgrounds and underrepresented groups;
                 (c) How subgrant applications will be reviewed and evaluated;
                 (d) How cost analyses and budget reviews will be conducted to
                ensure that costs are necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the
                subgrant;
                 (e) How applicants will be assessed for risk (i.e., fiscal,
                programmatic, compliance); and
                 (f) How funding decisions will be made.
                 Proposed Requirement 4 for SE Grants:
                 Each SE applicant must provide a detailed description, including a
                timeline, of how the SE will monitor and report on subgrant performance
                in accordance with 2 CFR 200.329, and address and mitigate subgrantee
                risk, including--
                 (a) How subgrantees will be selected for in-depth monitoring,
                including factors that indicate higher risk (e.g., charter schools that
                have management contracts with for-profit EMOs, virtual charter
                schools, and charter schools with a history of poor performance);
                 (b) How identified subgrantee risk will be addressed;
                 (c) How subgrantee expenditures will be monitored;
                 (d) How monitoring for progress and compliance will be conducted
                and who will conduct the monitoring;
                 (e) How monitors will be trained;
                 (f) How monitoring findings will be shared with subgrantees;
                 (g) How corrective action plans will be used to resolve monitoring
                findings; and
                 (h) How the SE will ensure transparency so that monitoring findings
                and corrective action plans are available to families and the public.
                 Proposed Requirement 5 for SE Grants:
                 Each SE applicant must provide explanations and supporting
                documents for the methodology and calculations used to determine the
                number of proposed subgrant awards and the average subgrant award
                amount.
                 Proposed Requirement 6 for SE Grants:
                 Each SE applicant must describe how the SE will give priority in
                awarding subgrants to eligible applicants that propose projects that
                include one or more of the following:
                 (a) A community-centered approach that informs the planning,
                design, and implementation of the charter school and includes--
                [[Page 14205]]
                 (1) An assessment of community assets;
                 (2) Meaningful and ongoing engagement with families, educators, and
                other members of the community, including in areas related to board
                governance and school-level decision-making related to curriculum and
                instruction; and
                 (3) The implementation of protocols and practices designed to
                ensure that the charter school will use and interact with community
                assets on an ongoing basis to create and maintain strong community
                ties.
                 (b) A collaboration with at least one traditional public school or
                school district in an activity that is designed to benefit students and
                families served by each member of the collaboration, designed to lead
                to increased educational opportunities and improved student outcomes,
                and includes implementation of--
                 (1) One or more of the following services and resources:
                 (i) Curricular and instructional resources or academic course
                offerings.
                 (ii) Professional development opportunities for teachers and
                leaders, which may include professional learning communities,
                opportunities for teachers to earn additional certifications, such as
                in a high need area or National Board Certification, and partnerships
                with educator preparation programs to support teaching residencies.
                 (iii) Evidence-based (as defined in section 8101 of the ESEA)
                practices to improve academic performance for underserved students.
                 (iv) Policies and practices to create safe, supportive, and
                inclusive learning environments, including systems of positive
                behavioral intervention and support; and
                 (2) One or more of the following initiatives:
                 (i) Common enrollment and retention practices that include, as part
                of the enrollment process, disclosure of policies or requirements
                (e.g., discipline policies, purchasing and wearing specific uniforms
                and other fees, or caregiver participation), and any services that are
                or are not provided, that could impact a family's ability to enroll or
                remain enrolled (e.g., transportation services or participation in the
                National School Lunch Program).
                 (ii) A shared transportation plan and system that reduces
                transportation costs for partners in the collaboration and takes into
                consideration various transportation options, including public
                transportation and district-provided or shared transportation options,
                cost-sharing or free or reduced-cost fare options, and any distance
                considerations for prioritized bus services.
                 (iii) Other collaborations designed to address a significant
                barrier or challenge faced by both charter schools and traditional
                public schools and improve student outcomes.
                Proposed Assurances
                 Background: The ESEA requires CSP SE Grant, CMO Grant, and
                Developer Grant applications to include applicable assurances from
                section 4303(f)(2) of the ESEA. In addition, CMO Grant applications
                must include the assurance required under section 4305(b)(3)(C) of the
                ESEA.
                 As discussed in the background for the Proposed Application
                Requirements section, for-profit EMOs are ineligible to apply for
                direct grants or subgrants under the CSP. The Department is aware,
                however, that some charter schools enter into contracts with EMOs.
                Under these circumstances, it is the responsibility of the grantee or
                subgrantee to ensure that an agreement with an EMO is a contract, and
                not a subaward or subgrant as per 2 CFR 200.331. In addition, a
                contract for goods or services with a for-profit entity must comply
                with the Federal procurement standards at 2 CFR 200.317-327, and
                applicable conflict of interest requirements, including that no
                employee, officer, or agent of the charter school may participate in
                the selection, award, or administration of any contract supported by
                Federal funds if a real or apparent conflict of interest exists. EMOs
                provide a variety of services to charter schools--from supplemental
                management and financial support services to whole-school package
                offerings. Under these management contracts between charter schools and
                EMOs, the EMO often exercises full administrative control over the
                charter school project, which, as noted above, violates CSP
                requirements. Examples of impermissible delegations of administrative
                control include situations where the EMO controls all or a substantial
                portion of subgrant funds and expenditures, including making
                programmatic decisions (also referred to as ``sweeps contracts''); the
                EMO employs the school principal and a large proportion of the
                teachers; or the EMO makes decisions about curricula and instructional
                practices. Such arrangements under which a for-profit EMO, including a
                non-profit management organization operated by or on behalf of a for-
                profit entity, exercises full administrative control over the charter
                school (and, thereby, the CSP project) are not permissible under CSP-
                funded projects, pursuant to 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701, which require
                that the grantee or subgrantee directly administer or supervise the
                administration of the project; and 2 CFR 200.303, which requires that
                the grantee or subgrantee establish and maintain proper internal
                control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that
                the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with
                Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the
                grant. See also 2 CFR 200.302 (financial management).
                 Consistent with the proposed application requirements for CMO
                Grants and Developer Grants, and for subgrants under the SE Grant
                program, we propose assurances to ensure that any charter school that
                receives CSP funds and enters, or plans to enter, into a contract with
                an EMO, including a non-profit CMO operated by or on behalf of a for-
                profit entity, complies with all relevant statutory and regulatory
                requirements, including applicable Federal procurement standards in 2
                CFR 200.317-327, Federal regulations governing conflicts of interest,
                and Department regulations requiring grantees and subgrantees to
                directly administer or supervise the administration of the project and
                retain control over programmatic decisions. The proposed assurances
                also are designed to ensure transparency, including fiscal
                transparency, surrounding these contracts.
                 In addition, CSP applicants (including CSP SE subgrant applicants)
                may receive CSP funds for planning a charter school before receiving an
                approved charter or securing a facility--factors that may prevent a
                charter school from ever opening. Accordingly, we are also proposing
                assurances to provide greater public transparency with CSP funding
                decisions and to address the risk of CSP implementation funds
                supporting grantees and subgrantees that are unable to open the charter
                school or secure a facility for the charter school in a timely manner.
                 Also, we are proposing an assurance relating to transparency in
                admission and enrollment policies, such as requirements for uniforms,
                volunteer hours, fees, or other obligations, that may create barriers
                that impact a family's ability to enroll or remain enrolled in the
                charter school. This assurance is designed to ensure that families are
                aware of financial and other obligations prior to enrolling in the
                charter school.
                [[Page 14206]]
                 Proposed Assurances Applicable to SE Grants, CMO Grants, and
                Developer Grants:
                 (a) Each charter school receiving CSP funding must provide an
                assurance that it has not and will not enter into a contract with a
                for-profit management organization, including a non-profit management
                organization operated by or on behalf of a for-profit entity, under
                which the management organization exercises full or substantial
                administrative control over the charter school and, thereby, the CSP
                project.
                 (b) Each charter school receiving CSP funding must provide an
                assurance that any management contract between the charter school and a
                for-profit management organization, including a non-profit CMO operated
                by or on behalf of a for-profit entity, guarantees or will guarantee
                that--
                 (1) The charter school maintains control over all CSP funds, makes
                all programmatic decisions, and directly administers or supervises the
                administration of the grant or subgrant;
                 (2) The management organization does not exercise full or
                substantial administrative control over the charter school (and,
                thereby, the CSP project), except that this does not limit the ability
                of a charter school to enter into a contract with a management
                organization for the provision of services that do not constitute full
                or substantial control of the charter school project funded under the
                CSP (e.g., food services or payroll services) and that otherwise comply
                with statutory and regulatory requirements;
                 (3) The charter school's governing board has access to financial
                and other data pertaining to the charter school, the EMO, and any
                related entities; and
                 (4) The charter school is in compliance with applicable Federal and
                State laws and regulations governing conflicts of interest, and there
                are no actual or perceived conflicts of interest between the charter
                school and the management organization.
                 (c) Each SE or CMO that has provided CSP funding to a charter
                school, and each charter school receiving CSP funding, must provide an
                assurance that it will post on its website, on an annual basis, a copy
                of any management contract between the charter school and a for-profit
                management organization, including a non-profit CMO operated by or on
                behalf of a for-profit entity, and report information on such contract
                to the Department (or, in the case of a charter school that receives
                CSP funding through an SE Grant, to the SE), including--
                 (1) The name and contact information of the management
                organization;
                 (2) A detailed description of the terms of the contract, including
                the cost and percentage such cost represents of the charter school's
                total funding, amount of CSP funds proposed to be used towards such
                cost (with an explanation of why such cost is reasonable), duration,
                roles and responsibilities of the management organization, and the
                steps the charter school is taking to ensure that it makes all
                programmatic decisions, maintains control over all CSP funds, and
                directly administers or supervises the administration of the grant or
                subgrant in accordance with 34 CFR 75.701 and 76.701;
                 (3) A description of any business or financial relationship between
                the charter school developer or CMO and the management organization,
                including payments, contract terms, and any property owned, operated,
                or controlled by the management organization or related individuals or
                entities to be used by the charter school;
                 (4) The names and contact information of members of the boards of
                directors of the charter school;
                 (5) A list of all individuals who have a financial interest in the
                management organization, including descriptions of any affiliations or
                conflicts of interest for charter school staff, board members, and
                management organization staff, and a list of all related individuals or
                entities providing contractual services to the charter school and the
                nature of those services;
                 (6) A detailed description of any actual or perceived conflicts of
                interest, the steps the charter school took or will take to avoid any
                actual or perceived conflicts of interest, and how the charter school
                resolved or will resolve any actual or perceived conflicts of interest
                to ensure compliance with 2 CFR 200.318(c); and
                 (7) A description of how the charter school ensured that such
                contract is severable and that a change in management companies will
                not cause the proposed charter school to close.
                 (d) Each charter school receiving CSP funding must provide an
                assurance that it will disclose, as part of the enrollment process, any
                policies or requirements (e.g., purchasing and wearing specific
                uniforms and other fees, or requirements for family participation), and
                any services that are or are not provided, that could impact a family's
                ability to enroll or remain enrolled (e.g., transportation services or
                participation in the National School Lunch Program).
                 (e) Each applicant for a CMO Grant, Developer Grant, or subgrant
                under the SE Grant program, without regard to whether there are any
                desegregation efforts in the public school districts in the surrounding
                area, must provide an assurance that it (or, in the case of an
                applicant for a CMO Grant, each charter school it proposes to fund)
                will hold or participate in a public hearing in the school districts or
                communities in which the proposed charter school will be located to
                obtain information and feedback regarding the potential impact of the
                charter school, including the steps the charter school has taken or
                will take to ensure that the proposed charter school would not hamper,
                delay, or in any manner negatively affect any desegregation efforts in
                the public school districts from which students are, or would be, drawn
                to attend the charter school, including efforts to comply with a court
                order, statutory obligation, or voluntary efforts to create and
                maintain desegregated public schools, and that it would not otherwise
                increase racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in the
                schools from which the students are, or would be, drawn to attend the
                charter school. Applicants must ensure that the hearing (and notice
                thereof) is accessible to individuals with disabilities and limited
                English proficient individuals as required by law, actively solicit
                participation in the hearing (i.e., provide widespread and timely
                notice of the hearing), make good faith efforts to accommodate as many
                people as possible (e.g., hold the hearing at a convenient time for
                families and provide virtual participation options), and submit a
                summary of the comments received as part of the application.
                 (f) Each applicant for an SE Grant or subgrant, CMO Grant, or
                Developer Grant must provide an assurance that it will not use or
                provide implementation funds for a charter school until after the
                charter school has received a charter from an authorized public
                chartering agency and has a contract, lease, mortgage, or other
                documentation indicating that it has a facility in which to operate.
                 Proposed Assurances Applicable to CSP SE Grants and CMO Grants:
                 Each applicant must provide an assurance that, within 30 days of
                the date of the grant award notification (GAN), or the date of the
                subgrant award notification for SE Grants, the grantee or subgrantee
                will post on its website a list of the charter schools slated to
                receive CSP funds, including the following for each school:
                 (a) The name, address, and grades served.
                 (b) A description of the educational model.
                 (c) If the charter school has contracted with a for-profit
                management organization, the name of the
                [[Page 14207]]
                management organization, the amount of CSP funding the management
                organization will receive from the school, and a description of the
                services to be provided.
                 (d) The grant or subgrant award amount, including any funding that
                has been approved for the current year and any additional years of the
                CSP grant for which the school will receive support.
                 (e) The grant or subgrant application (redacted as necessary).
                 (f) The peer review materials, including reviewer comments and
                scores (redacted as necessary) from the grant or subgrant competition.
                Proposed Definitions
                 In addition to the definitions in section 4310 of the ESEA, the CMO
                NFP, and the Developer NFP, we propose the following definitions for
                CSP SE Grants, CMO Grants, and Developer Grants. We may apply one or
                more of these definitions in any year in which a competition for new
                awards is held under one of these programs.
                 Background: In order to ensure a common understanding of the
                proposed priorities and requirements, we propose definitions that are
                critical to the policies and statutory purposes of the CSP SE Grant,
                Developer Grant, and CMO Grant programs, including proposed definitions
                for ``disconnected youth,'' ``educator,'' and ``underserved student''
                that are based on definitions of those terms from the Secretary's
                Supplemental Priorities published in the Federal Register on December
                10, 2021 (86 FR 70612). We propose these definitions to clarify
                expectations for eligible entities applying for SE Grants, Developer
                Grants, and CMO Grants, and to ensure that the review process for
                applications for such grants is as transparent as possible.
                 Proposed Definitions Applicable to SE Grants, CMO Grants, and
                Developer Grants:
                 Community assets means resources that can be identified and
                mobilized to improve conditions in the charter school and community.
                These assets may include--
                 (1) Human assets, including capacities, skills, knowledge base, and
                abilities of individuals within a community;
                 (2) Social assets, including networks, organizations, businesses,
                and institutions that exist among and within groups and communities;
                and
                 (3) Political assets, such as a group's ability to influence the
                distribution of resources, financial and otherwise.
                 Disconnected youth means an individual, between the ages 14 and 24,
                who may be from a low-income background, experiences homelessness, is
                in foster care, is involved in the justice system, or is not working or
                not enrolled in (or at risk of dropping out of) an educational
                institution.
                 Educator means an individual who is an early learning educator,
                teacher, principal or other school leader, specialized instructional
                support personnel (e.g., school psychologist, counselor, school social
                worker, early intervention service personnel), paraprofessional, or
                faculty.
                 Underserved student means a student in one or more of the following
                subgroups:
                 (a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools with
                high concentrations of students living in poverty.
                 (b) A student of color.
                 (c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian
                Tribe.
                 (d) An English learner (as defined in section 8101 of the ESEA).
                 (e) A child or student with a disability (as defined in section
                8101 of the ESEA).
                 (f) A disconnected youth.
                 (g) A migrant student.
                 (h) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.
                 (i) A student who is in foster care.
                 (j) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.
                 (k) A student impacted by the justice system, including a formerly
                incarcerated student.
                 (l) A student performing significantly below grade level.
                 Proposed Definition Applicable to SE Grants:
                 Background: In addition to the proposed definitions for SE Grants,
                CMO Grants, and Developer Grants, we propose the following definition
                for CSP SE Grants only. We may apply this definition in any year in
                which a competition for new awards is held under the SE Grant program.
                 We are proposing to adopt the definition of ``educationally
                disadvantaged student'' established in the CMO NFP and Developer NFP
                for use in the CSP SE Grants program. The proposed definition for
                ``educationally disadvantaged student'' is based on section 1115(c)(2)
                of the ESEA.
                 Proposed Definition:
                 Educationally disadvantaged student means a student in one or more
                of the categories described in section 1115(c)(2) of the ESEA, which
                include children who are economically disadvantaged, children with
                disabilities, migrant students, English learners, neglected or
                delinquent students, homeless students, and students who are in foster
                care.
                Proposed Selection Criteria
                 Background: We propose selection criteria that align with the
                proposed requirements and assurances, identify for peer reviewers the
                factors considered to be essential to conducting a high-quality peer
                review, and are designed to aid in identifying the applicants most
                likely to succeed with implementing high-quality charter schools that
                are driven by the needs of families and their communities. These
                selection criteria would be used in addition to selection criteria in
                sections 4303(g)(1) and 4305(b)(4) of the ESEA, the CMO NFP, the
                Developer NFP, and 34 CFR 75.210, as appropriate. We may apply one or
                more of these proposed selection criteria to applicable grant
                competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2022 and later years. In the notices
                inviting applications we will announce the maximum possible points
                assigned to each criterion.
                 Proposed Selection Criteria for CMO Grants and Developer Grants:
                 (a) Quality of the Community Impact Analysis. The Secretary
                considers the quality of the community impact analysis for the proposed
                project. In determining the quality of the community impact analysis,
                the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:
                 (1) The extent to which the community impact analysis demonstrates
                that the proposed charter school will address the needs of all students
                and families in the community, including underserved students; will
                ensure equitable access to diverse learning opportunities; and will not
                otherwise increase racial or socio-economic segregation or isolation in
                the schools from which the students are, or would be, drawn to attend
                the charter school.
                 (2) The extent to which the community impact analysis demonstrates
                that the proposed charter school has considered and mitigated, whenever
                possible, potential barriers to application, enrollment, and retention
                of students and families from diverse backgrounds.
                 (3) The extent to which the proposed charter school is supported by
                families and the community, including the extent to which parents and
                other members of the community were engaged in determining the need and
                vision for the school and will continue to be engaged on an ongoing
                basis in school decision-making, including the academic, financial,
                organizational, and operational performance of the charter school.
                 (b) Quality of the Charter School's Management Plan. The Secretary
                [[Page 14208]]
                considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
                In determining the quality of the management plan, the Secretary
                considers one or more of the following factors:
                 (1) The adequacy of the applicant's plan to maintain control over
                all CSP grant funds.
                 (2) The adequacy of the applicant's plan to make all programmatic
                decisions.
                 (3) The adequacy of the applicant's plan to administer or supervise
                the administration of the grant and maintain significant management or
                oversight responsibilities over the grant.
                 Proposed Selection Criterion for SE Grants:
                 (a) Quality of the Project Design. The Secretary considers the
                quality of the project design for the proposed project. In determining
                the quality of the project design for the proposed project, the
                Secretary considers the quality of the SE's process for awarding
                subgrants, including--
                 (1) The extent to which the number of subgrant awards anticipated
                for each grant project year is supported by evidence of demand and
                need; and
                 (2) The extent to which the proposed average subgrant award amount
                is supported by evidence of the need of applicants.
                 Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection
                Criteria:
                 We will announce the final priorities, requirements, definitions,
                and selection criteria in a document in the Federal Register. We will
                determine the final priorities, requirements, definitions, and
                selection criteria after considering responses to this document and
                other information available to the Department. This document does not
                preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements,
                definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable
                rulemaking requirements.
                 Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year
                in which we choose to use one or more of these proposed priorities,
                requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, we invite
                applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
                Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
                Regulatory Impact Analysis
                 Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this
                regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the
                requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office
                of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
                defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to
                result in a rule that may--
                 (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
                or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
                jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or
                Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
                as an ``economically significant'' rule);
                 (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
                action taken or planned by another agency;
                 (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
                user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
                thereof; or
                 (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
                mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
                Executive order.
                 This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
                action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
                12866.
                 We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
                Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
                principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
                established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
                Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
                 (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
                that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
                and costs are difficult to quantify);
                 (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
                consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
                account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
                cumulative regulations;
                 (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
                those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
                economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
                advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
                 (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
                than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
                adopt; and
                 (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
                regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
                marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
                information that enables the public to make choices.
                 Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
                available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
                benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
                Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
                techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
                that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
                behavioral changes.''
                 We are issuing these proposed priorities, requirements,
                definitions, and selection criteria only on a reasoned determination
                that their benefits would justify their costs. In choosing among
                alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that
                would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the
                Department believes that this regulatory action is consistent with the
                principles in Executive Order 13563.
                 We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
                unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
                exercise of their governmental functions.
                 In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
                assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
                qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
                resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
                necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
                 We believe that the benefits of this regulatory action outweigh any
                associated costs, which we believe would generally be minimal. While
                this action would impose cost-bearing application requirements on
                participating SE Grant, Developer Grant, and CMO Grant applicants and
                on SE subgrant applicants, we expect that applicants would include
                requests for funds to cover such costs in their proposed project
                budgets. We believe this regulatory action would strengthen
                accountability for the use of Federal funds by helping to ensure that
                CSP grants and subgrants are awarded to the entities that are most
                capable of expanding the number of high-quality charter schools
                available to our Nation's students.
                 We estimate costs associated with information collection
                requirements in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this document.
                Paperwork Reduction Act
                 As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
                burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies
                with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections
                of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
                (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that: the public
                understands the Department's collection instructions,
                [[Page 14209]]
                respondents can provide the requested data in the desired format,
                reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized,
                collection instruments are clearly understood, and the Department can
                properly assess the impact of collection requirements on respondents.
                 The proposed application requirements and selection criteria
                relating to a community impact analysis, management contracts, and
                management plans contain information collection requirements. The
                Department is requesting paperwork clearance on the OMB 1810-NEW data
                collection associated with these proposed application requirements and
                selection criteria. That request will account for all burden hours and
                costs discussed within this section. Under the PRA, the Department has
                submitted these requirements to OMB for its review.
                 A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of
                information unless OMB approves the collection under the PRA and the
                corresponding information collection instrument displays a currently
                valid OMB control number. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
                no person is required to comply with, or is subject to penalty for
                failure to comply with, a collection of information if the collection
                instrument does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
                 In the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and
                selection criteria we will display the control numbers assigned by OMB
                to any information collection requirements proposed in this NPP and
                adopted in the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions,
                and selection criteria.
                 For the years that the Department holds SE Grant, CMO Grant, and
                Developer Grant competitions and that SEs hold subgrant competitions,
                we estimate that 365 applicants will apply and submit an application.
                We estimate that it will take each applicant 60 hours to complete and
                submit the application, including time for reviewing instructions,
                searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
                needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The
                total burden hour estimate for this collection is 21,900 hours. At
                $97.28 per hour (using mean wages for Education and Childcare
                Administrators \13\ and assuming the total cost of labor, including
                benefits and overhead, is equal to 200 percent of the mean wage rate),
                the total estimated cost for 365 applicants to complete a SE grant
                application, CMO grant application, Developer grant application, or SE
                subgrant application is approximately $2,130,432.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \13\ See www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Consistent with 5 CFR 1320.8(d), the Department is soliciting
                comments on the information collection through this document. Between
                30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal
                Register, OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collections
                of information contained in these proposed priorities, requirements,
                definitions, and selection criteria. Therefore, to ensure that OMB
                gives your comments full consideration, it is important that OMB
                receives your comments on these Information Collection Requests by
                April 13, 2022. Comments related to the information collection
                requirements for these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions,
                and selection criteria must be submitted electronically through the
                Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov by selecting the
                Docket ID number ED-2022-OESE-0006 or via postal mail, commercial
                delivery, or hand delivery by referencing the docket ID number and the
                title of the information collection request at the top of your comment.
                Comments submitted by postal mail or delivery should be addressed to
                the PRA Coordinator of the Strategic Collections and Clearance
                Governance and Strategy Division, U.S. Department of Education, 400
                Maryland Ave. SW, LBJ, Room 6W208D, Washington, DC 20202-8240.
                 Note: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in OMB and
                the Department review all comments related to the information
                collections requirements posted at www.regulations.gov.
                Collection of Information
                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Estimated Total Estimated cost
                 Information collection activity number of Hours per estimated at an hourly
                 responses response burden hours rate of $97.28
                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Application................................. 365 60 21,900 $2,130,432
                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 We consider your comments on these proposed collections of
                information in--
                 Deciding whether the proposed collections are necessary
                for the proper performance of our functions, including whether the
                information will have practical use;
                 Evaluating the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of
                the proposed collections, including the validity of our methodology and
                assumptions;
                 Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
                information we collect; and
                 Minimizing the burden on those who must respond. This
                includes exploring the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
                mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.
                 Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification:
                 The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would
                not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
                entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
                proprietary institutions as small businesses if they are independently
                owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and
                have total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
                defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated
                and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions are
                defined as small organizations if they are operated by a government
                overseeing a population below 50,000.
                 The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would
                affect are charter schools, including charter schools that operate as
                LEAs under State law; and public or private nonprofit organizations. We
                believe that the costs imposed on an applicant by the proposed
                priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria would be
                limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application and
                that the benefits of these proposed priorities, requirements,
                definitions, and selection criteria would outweigh any costs incurred
                by the applicant.
                 Participation in the CSP is voluntary. For this reason, the
                proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria
                would impose no burden on small entities unless they applied for
                funding under the program. We expect
                [[Page 14210]]
                that in determining whether to apply for CSP funds, an eligible entity
                would evaluate the requirements of preparing an application and any
                associated costs and weigh them against the benefits likely to be
                achieved by receiving CSP grant. An eligible entity will probably apply
                only if it determines that the likely benefits exceed the costs of
                preparing an application.
                 The proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
                criteria would impose some additional burden on a small entity applying
                for a grant relative to the burden the entity would face in the absence
                of the proposed action.
                 This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant
                economic impact on a small entity once it receives a grant because it
                would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided
                under this program. We invite comments from small entities as to
                whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a
                significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to
                support that belief.
                 Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
                Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
                objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
                partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
                on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
                and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
                 This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
                actions for this program.
                 Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
                under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
                can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will
                provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich
                Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file,
                braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or another accessible
                format.
                 Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
                document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
                access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
                Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
                document, as well as all other documents of this Department published
                in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
                use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
                the site.
                 You may also access documents of the Department published in the
                Federal Register by using the article search feature at
                www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
                feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
                by the Department.
                Ruth E. Ryder,
                Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Programs, Office of
                Elementary and Secondary Education.
                [FR Doc. 2022-05463 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
                BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
                

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT