Request for Proposals for New FY17Projects

Performance Incentive Fund Grant Program

Guidelines

The “Big Three” Completion Plan: Boost College Completion Rates, Close Achievement Gaps, Attract and Graduate more Students from Underserved Populations

  1. Overview

The Massachusetts Department of Higher Education (DHE) is issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for new Performance Incentive Fund (PIF) projects for the second half of FY17. Budget uncertainties and staff transitions at the DHE have resulted in a truncated timeline for this RFP, and we are seeking planning grants and/or tightly-focused projects with very specific measurable outcomes. Proposals that extend existing work in the areas outlined in this RFP will also be considered.

With a continued focus on the overarching goals of boosting completion rates, closing achievement gaps, and attracting and graduating more students from underserved populations (the “Big Three”), the new funds will support initiatives and activities that are designed to increase the college-going and completion rates for Massachusetts residents with a specific focus on under-represented, under-served, low-income, and first-generation to college students.

For FY17, the DHE will fund consortiumgrants in the amount of $200,000 that focus on either Early College Programming or Competency-Based Pathways in Early Education. Individual grants in the amount of $125,000 will be awarded to strengthen the implementation of the Commonwealth Commitment or to support the design and implementation of Co-requisite Models to reduce remediation.

Eligible Applicants

The PIF is intended to support activities within all three segments of public higher education. Thus, the five UMass campuses, nine state universities, and fifteen community colleges are all eligible for funding. All proposals from individual campuses must be submitted by the President or Chancellor to the Commissioner on behalf of the institution or UMass campus. Each campus is limited to one such proposal. Consortium grants involving more than one campus need to be submitted jointly by the Presidents/Chancellors of the participating campuses.

  1. Focus of Proposals

ConsortiumGrants: Early College Programming or Competency-based Pathways in Early Education and Care

Early College Programming

With a focus on closing achievement gaps for disadvantaged and under-represented students, proposals should focus on early college programming that provides underserved high school students with a college experience (e.g.100 Males to College) Proposals should concentrate efforts on (1) increasing academic preparation of students so that they are prepared to enter and succeed in college and (2) increasing the persistence of students in college by providing them with education and support at key transition points.

Proposals should focus on how the participating college or university, in collaboration with district leaders, will join with external partners (i.e., local school districts, industry partners, local employers, community-based organizations, and the regional Workforce Development Board) to increase the likelihood of under-represented students earning post-secondary credentials.

Proposals should include information onthe partner high school’s readiness to serve as a partner in the implementation of early college programming, including student need (demographic and achievement profile); outline topics that the planning team will cover as it develops a plan for the early college program; establish pathways that allow high school students to earn college credits by high school graduation; and outline a sustainable funding model for the program that includes a memorandum of understanding between participating partners. Proposals that extend existing work in this area will also be considered.

Competency-based Pathways in Early Education and Care

Competency-based strategies provide flexibility in the way that credit can be earned and awarded. [1] There are several approaches to competency-based education and these programs provide an affordable and innovative pathway to degree completion. Proposals should be based on the 2015 National Academies of Sciences recommendations in Chapter 12 of the report, Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth through Age 8: a Unifying Foundation[2],and on the 2014 Massachusetts definition of Building the Foundations of Future Success for Children from Birth through Grade 3

Proposals should focus on how the participating institution’s early childhood education certificate and degree program faculty, will develop systems for achieving competencies that provide foundational experiences leading to positive outcomes for children’s learning; develop a paradigm for strengthening the achievement of competencies and competency-based evaluation and assessment of professional practice for early-educator-students who work with children from birth through grade 3. Proposals should provide details on how lead institutions will work in collaboration with early childhood faculty at other public institutions in the region and the Early Education and Care department’s Educator-Provider Support network, as all offer pathways to early childhood certificates and degrees. Proposals must include one NAEYC accredited non-profit, public school, or Head Start program partner. Proposals should also focus on how strengthening competency-based achievement and evaluation of student early educators, across age ranges or for subsets of age groups (such as infant, toddler, preschool, kindergarten or primary grades), could have particular application as prior learning assessment related to training and credit-based delivery systems; how strengthening competency-based assessments will address the linguistic and cultural diversity of early-educator students in the workforce.

Individual Campus Grants: Commonwealth Commitment or Co-requisite at Scale

Commonwealth Commitment

Massachusetts public colleges and universities are midway through a pilot program, the Commonwealth Commitment, which aims to lower costs and boost college completion rates for students who embark on a “2+2” (associate to bachelor’s) degree pathway through MassTransfer.

Proposals to strengthen campus implementation of the Commonwealth Commitment should show how institutions plan to expand or improve student advising in Fall 2017 to support enrollment in and completion of the program. Additionally, proposals should provide innovative solutions that address some of the obstacles that impact a student’s ability to take advantage of the Commonwealth Commitment (e.g. the inability to attend college fulltime). Proposals should include information on the current student enrollment in the program, a description of the challenges the campus has faced in communicating with students about the many facets of the program, how funds to strengthen advising could improve student enrollment in the program and also have lasting value for the institution when the Commonwealth Commitment program ends, and innovative solutions to obstacles that students face in taking advantage of this new program.

Proposals should include a description of how the campus will assess the effectiveness of student advising in assuring transfer and degree completion through the Commonwealth Commitment program. An assessment plan for the effectiveness of programming and support mechanisms to mitigate obstacles faced by students in enrolling and succeeding in the program should also be included.

Co-requisite at Scale

The co-requisite course model jointly enrolls college students in developmental and credit-bearing courses in the same subject at the same time. These courses allow students to complete college-level gateway math and/or English courses within one academic year.

Proposals should show how institutions will adopt or scale one of the following models in either English and/or math: single semester co-requisite models, one-year course pathways, math pathways to include development or refinement of alternatives to College Algebra as the default college-level gateway course. If the institutions has not yet adopted the co-requisite model, then their proposal should include a plan for scale. Proposals should include information on current enrollment in developmental education courses and success rates (enroll in a college-level course within two years). Campuses should demonstrate a commitment to decreasing the number of students who are unnecessarily placed into developmental education courses and reducing the amount of time students who require remediation spend completing non-credit bearing coursework.

Proposals should also include information on how they will assess college readiness based on the most recent alternative placement pilot guidelines (Pilot A1 Standard: 2.7 GPA or above, Pilot A2 Standard: 2.7 GPA and a "B" or higher in Algebra II, Pilot A3 Standard: 2.7 GPA and four years of high school math).

  1. Grant Program Conditions

A successful grant proposal must be well prepared, thoughtfully planned, and concisely packaged. Sufficient information should be provided to enable reviewers to evaluate the proposed initiative’s potential to achieve its goals. Proposals should specify how they will address the “Big Three” strategic area(s) and the five overarching goals of the BHE. As in the past, we will attach positive value to submissions that promise to demonstrate innovative and scalable approaches.

Key Considerations:

  1. Consortium Grants. Consortium grants are intended to support collaborative relationships focused on shared goals. Campuses are encouraged to consider collaborating with local early-childhood or high-need K-12 schools or districts, not-for-profit or community-based organizations, and/or local workforce investment organizations—in addition to considering collaborations with their fellow public institutions of higher education. Applications should provide evidence of external, cross-sector collaborations by including a signed letter of support from each additional partner stating their intended role orcontribution and commitment to the partnership’s work.
  1. Data and Evaluation. Projects should present evidence-based approaches supported by data, and should include detailed information about how the targeted interventions will address college participation, college completion, and/or closing the achievement gaps. Projects must include a plan for a strong evaluation and a data collection component, allowing partners to measure outcomes and reflect on practices. Relevant student indicators, baseline information, and targets for future performance should be included in the proposal.
  1. The DHE and the Board of Higher Education have made closing the gaps in college attainment and achievement and eliminating disparities among different groups of students a central priority, particularly for subgroups of students for whom the gaps in college access and success are most prevalent.Where applicable, preference will be given to projects with a demonstrated focus on increasing college preparation, participation, retention, and completion among underrepresented students, which may include first-generation college students (defined as those whose parents’ highest completed level of education is a high school diploma or less), low-income students, and students of color.
  2. Reporting Requirements. The DHE will require one final reports detailing the progress made and the work completed with PIF funding. The final report is due by October 1, 2017. Report templates will be shared with campuses in the Spring of 2017.
  1. Partnership Visits. The DHE will request an opportunity for a staff visit in order to learn more about the work of the partnership, and to provide support as necessary.
  1. Duration of Grants and Sustainability of Projects. Funding for grants awarded in FY17 cannot be assumed to continue into FY18 or beyond. Should future state budgets include funding for PIF grants, partnerships may have an opportunity to apply for continuation grants. The criteria for continuation grant consideration may include: compliance with program requirements and timely reporting on progress and expenditures; demonstrated effectiveness and focus on strategic areas; functionality as a partnership; promising practices and potential for growth, and sustainable practices.
  1. DHE Process for Reviewing Submissions

PIF submissions will be evaluated by an internal committee of DHE staff. This committee will make recommendations to the Commissioner, who will then make the final decision regarding awards.

  1. Funding Timetable

The project cycle for the grant will be February 10, 2017 through August 31, 2017.

Announcement of awards will be made the last week of January. Projects will commence upon approval of the Interagency Service Agreement. Disbursement of funds is contingent upon a fully executed Interagency Service Agreement.

PIF Grant Program Timetable

Description / Date
PIF Application Guidelines Released / December 7, 2016
Proposal Due Date / January 13, 2017
Announcement of Awards / Week of January 30, 2017
Commencement of Activities / February 10, 2017
Completion of Activities / August 31, 2017
  1. Submission Instructions

Proposals must be submitted in hard copy and electronically, no later than 5:00 p.m. on January 13, 2017. All proposals should be sent via email as one single PDF file of the entire proposal to: Keith Connors ().

  • Applications must be submitted in the format/forms provided (including the Proposal form, Budget form and narrative, and Program Evaluation plan.)
  • Applications should not exceed eight (8) pages, including cover sheet and attachments.
  • 12 point font, Calibri or Arial type font, double-spaced. (Information in the Cover Page, Implementation Plan, and Budget Narrative can be 10 point font, single-spaced.)
  • Hard copy proposals should be double-sided so that the total number of individual pages will not exceed four (4) pages, or a total of eight (8) sides.
  • Consortium grant proposals must include letters of agreement from all participating parties. Proposals submitted without these letters will not be considered.

Please mail one hard copy of the proposal to:

Massachusetts Department of Higher Education
Attn: Keith Connors/PIF

One Ashburton Place, Room 1401
Boston, MA 02108

New FY17 PIF Projects, RFP

Page 1

Request for Proposals for New FY16 PIF Projects

COVER PAGE

Project Title:
Program Partners (list all): / Projected number of students served upon implementation:
Target population:
Authorizing Agent:
Name: ______
Title: ______
Telephone:______
Fax:______
E-mail:______ / Institution:
______
Mailing Address:
______
______
______
Total Funds Requested: / Total Matching Funds (30%): / Total Project Cost:
Please indicate the type of grant for which you are applying:
Consortium Grants
_____Early College Programming
_____Competency-Based Pathways in Early Education
Individual Campus Grants
_____Commonwealth Commitment
_____Co-requisite models to reduce remediation

I certify that the information reported herein is accurate and complete.

Authorized Agent Signature: ______

Date: ______

  1. ABSTRACT

Write a one-page abstract (approximately 300 words) that describes the following: (a) the Big Three strategic area(s) that will be addressed, (b) principal objectives, (c) target population (e.g., ethnicity, gender, socio-economic status, educational/workforce levels) and community(ies) to be impacted by the project (as applicable), including projected number of individuals to be served upon implementation; and (d) proposed project activities and services to increase college participation and completion, particularly of underserved populations.

  1. PROPOSAL PROJECT NARRATIVE

The project narrative serves as a comprehensive overview of your project. The project narrative should not exceed 6 single-spaced pages. This is the maximum length permitted; shorter, more concise narratives are encouraged.

Provide a detailed description of the proposed project which addresses the following:

  • Statement of the need for the project;
  • Project objectives and proposed outcome measures
  • For projects that are an extension of existing work: major project activities/services with specific details showing how each is designed to meet the PIFprogram goals and objectives. For planning grants: A detailed description of the planning process, proposed deliverables, and a planning timeline.
  • A description of the target population – please provide a demographic breakdown (e.g., ethnicity, gender, socio-economic status, workforce status, etc.). Describe your choice or target community(ies) and/or populations to be served and the factors that informed your partnership’s decision. Proposals that build upon existing work should include projected number of individuals to be served.
  • A description of previous experience in implementing successful and collaborative activities that promote the “Big Three” areas that you propose to address: college participation, college completion, and closing the achievement gaps;
  • If applicable, describe the non-higher education partners with whom you will work to impact the strategic area(s) of your proposal. (What role will they play? How or why you decided to include them.)
  • A description of how funds through this program will be used to scale up or increase the reach and impact of activities.
  1. Expected Impact and Project Evaluation

Provide details on your intended evaluation plan to determine program impact. Please describe:

  • How this project will increase your “Big Three” area(s) of focus;
  • How the project will be evaluated to determine whether or not the stated goals and objectives are met;
  • Who will be responsible for tracking data, and what system will be in place to ensure the partnership is gathering, reviewing, and evaluating outcomes.
  1. Implementation Plan

Describe the plan for implementation should you receive funding, including:

  • Roles and responsibilities of project personnel; how the project director will make performance information available to the DHE and stakeholders;
  • A timetable indicating the implementation and completion dates of all proposed activities and related services. You may use the suggested table below and add or delete rows as needed.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Table. Using the suggested table below, describe specific anticipated tasks, activities, outcomes and timeline as applicable. When discussing outcome/results, include benchmark data. The table should reflect stated activities, goals, and strategies as described above. Feel free to adjust the table to share additional information or better illustrate your implementation strategy.
Activities/Services
[Actions] / Current Benchmark Data / Anticipated Outcome
[Results] / Total Anticipated Beneficiaries / Timeline
(when you will implement activity)
  1. Budget and Narrative

Partnerships are required to demonstrate a minimum 30% combined match of the total project costs, and must demonstrate sufficient match resources to sustain the outcomes of the partnership. Institutions cannot count previous year(s) of PIF funding as matching dollars, but may include in-kind resources dedicated to the proposed project.