6005 Westview Dr. | Houston, Texas | 77055-5419 | 713-696-0700 | 1-866-696-4233

Application and Funding

---

eGrants Application Process

Adult education eligible providers submit applications directly to Texas Education Agency (TEA) in accordance with established standard procedures and instructions. Eligible providers apply directly to the state education agency (TEA) for Federal funds to provide services to a school district region, to multiple school district regions, to a county, to a portion of a country, or to multiple counties.

Section 231 (a) of Adult Education and Family Literacy Act of 1998 (AEFLA) requires TEA to award multiyear grants or contracts on a competitive basis. TEA will award three year competitive grants or contracts.

What is eGrants?

The eGrants application is a comprehensive web portal which provides online submission, tracking, review and processing of K through 12 and adult education grant applications. TEA envisions eGrants to be the one easy, efficient, and effective online grant management system for all discretionary and formula grants. The following outlines eGrants capabilities:

• Posting of available formula and discretionary grant monies to the public and/or targeted groups or entities
• Applicant initiation, preparation and submission of completed grant application packages through web portal
• Expenditure reporting
• Progress/Evaluation reporting
• Amendment processing
• Viewing approved applications and amendments

Additional information on eGrants and how the eGrants process works.

Evaluation of Applications

Applications are reviewed by TEA staff and external reviewers, as appropriate, for programmatic as well as fiscal criteria that State and Federal guidelines require. If two or more applicants are competing for funds allocated to the same geographic area, external reviewers will include at least one representative from each category of applicants who are competing and may include representatives from other agencies with an interest in the Federal adult education and literacy program. Competing applications are ranked in descending order from highest average total score received. An application is not approved until all requirements are addressed satisfactorily.

Applications must achieve on overall criterion score of at least 70 to be considered for funding. More than one applicant may be funded in each region based on funds available provided that adequate coordination procedures are employed to avoid duplication of services and wasted resources. Special emphasis is placed in the review process to ensure that applicants place priority on recruiting and serving educationally disadvantaged adults.

Review of Competitive Applications

Competitive applications received by the established deadline date and time will be reviewed by a committee composed of TEA staff, educators, parents (where appropriate), and members of the business community who represent broad and diverse backgrounds. Review of applications will begin as soon as practical after receipt. This process is performed electronically unless otherwise noted. The applicants receiving the most favorable ratings during the first round of selection may be asked to send a representative to Austin, Texas, at a time and place to be arranged for oral presentation of applications. Applications may be rated again following presentations.

The recommendations of the review panel will be assembled and presented to the Commissioner of Education who will, as authorized by the State Board:

• approve the application in whole or in part;
• disapprove the application; or
• defer action on the application for further review.

TEA will notify each applicant in writing of the selection or non-selection for funding. In the case of an application selected for funding, notification to the grantee will include the contractual conditions, which the applicant must accept in accordance with federal and/or state law.

Review Criteria for Competitive Grants

Each application will be reviewed to determine the capability of the applicant to implement its proposed program. Applicants for competitive grants and continuation grants that have previously received discretionary grants from TEA must have a positive record in successfully managing the program(s) in order to be considered for funding. A "positive record" includes being in compliance with all requirements and conditions of those grants and implementing the grant programs according to the timelines and descriptions proposed in the grant applications.

All required components of this application must be addressed to be considered for funding. In reviewing the information submitted, and in recommending competitive applications for funding, the review committee and TEA staff will consider the following criteria:

A. Need for the Proposed Project

(1) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the proposed project.

(2) The extent to which specific gaps, barriers, or weaknesses have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project.

B. Quality of the Project Design

(1) The extent to which the objectives, strategies, activities, and desired results of the project are clearly specified and measurable.

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

(3) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the grant period.

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

(5) The extent to which the proposed project represents an exceptional approach for meeting the statutory purposes and requirements.

C. Quality of Project Services

(1) The quality and sufficiency of strategies and activities for ensuring equitable access and participation among all eligible program participants.

(2) The quality and sufficiency of strategies and activities for ensuring accomplishment of the goals and objectives of the project.

D. Quality of Management Plan

(1) Quality of project personnel, including qualifications, experience, and certifications of employees, and qualifications and experience of external consultants.

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

(3) The adequacy of the procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project through ongoing monitoring of the project.

(4) The extent to which existing resources and facilities will be utilized and managed to maximize the effectiveness of grant funds.

(5) The extent to which the proposed project will be coordinated with similar or related efforts, and with other appropriate community, state, and federal resources.

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

E. Quality of Project Evaluation

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

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

F. Quality and Reasonableness of Budget

(1) The extent to which project costs are reasonable in relation to expected outcomes:

(a) the amount requested might realistically be expected to have an impact on the stated needs, and

(b) the expected outcomes are sufficient to justify the amounts requested.

(2) the program will identify and coordinate funding from several sources.

(3) all expenditures are pertinent to and appropriate for the objectives/activities stated.

For specific point assignments for each criterion, and for any additional criteria that may be applicable to a specific application, see Application Guidelines – Part 2: Program Guidelines. In addition, the review committee and TEA staff will consider clarity, completeness, conciseness, and organization of the information submitted, as well as the ability of the applicant to follow written directions.

Selection of Competitive Applications for Funding

Awards for competitive grants will be considered on the basis of total points. Awards are contingent upon availability of funds. In some cases, only applications receiving 70 points or greater will be considered for funding. Grant awards will be made starting with the highest scoring application and continue to the next highest score until funds are exhausted or until the applications with a final score of 70 or higher are funded, whichever is the case. For specific point assignments for this RFA, see Application Guidelines – Part 2: Program Guidelines.

It is important that a diversity of students and districts be represented in the operation of these programs. Therefore, after all applications have received a final score (usually from 0 to 100), additional factors may be considered prior to selection of the programs recommended for funding.

In general, projects will be selected to establish programs that:

(a) are cost effective (i.e., total grant amount divided by total number of students served equals cost per student);

(b) establish programs that may be replicable in districts with similar demographics; establish programs that are diverse with respect to size of districts (i.e., small, medium, and large);

(c) establish programs that are diverse with respect to geographic location in Texas (i.e., education service center region or quadrant of the state); and

(d) establish programs in districts/campuses that demonstrate greatest need.

To ensure applications that are most advantageous to the project are selected for funding, applications may be re-ordered to fund projects that represent a greater diversity of students and districts in the operation of these programs.

Required Programmatic Reports

(a) Activity/Progress Reports

The grantee agrees to submit activity/progress reports through the eGrants system during the project in the format requested by the Agency. Each activity/progress report is due to the Texas Education Agency within fifteen (15) days after the close of the reporting period. These reports will be used by the project administrator to determine if modifications or adjustments to the program are indicated. Refer to Application Guidelines Part 2: Program Guidelines for due dates of program activity/progress reports.

Activity/Progress reports and the final evaluation report must be submitted through the eGrants system to the Texas Education Agency program office responsible for the administration of the grant program.

(b) Final Evaluation Report

The applicant agrees to provide a final evaluation report through the eGrants system in the format requested by the Agency (refer to the Instructions pertaining to PS3300 Narrative: Performance Assessment and Evaluation) to TEA within 30 days after the end of the project. The grantee is not in compliance with grant conditions and requirements until such time as this report is received by the Texas Education Agency Project Administrator. Final payment may be withheld pending receipt of the report. Eligibility of grantee to receive future grants, including continuation grants, from TEA may be impacted by such noncompliance. Upon receipt of the written final expenditure report and other required documents, such as the final evaluation report, TEA will enter the final cumulative expenditures and make the final payment to the grantee.

---

Previous | Table of Contents | Next