This document provides information about Round 9 of the California Department of Education's EETT Competitive grant program. Key details include:
- The grant is for districts or charter schools serving grades 4-8 that meet poverty and technology access criteria.
- Funding amounts range from $25,000 to $300,000 depending on student population and prior funding levels have been significantly reduced.
- Applications will be scored on a 100 point scale across criteria including programs for students and teachers, access, evaluation, and sustainability. A minimum 50 point score is required.
From Afton Partners, April 2013. An overview of NGLC financial and operational expectations, spending trends from 12/2011 – 09/2012 for 8 K-12 Breakthrough Models in their first year vs. national benchmarks, and software usage. This analysis was meant to provide information to
applicants for NGLC's "Wave IV: Breakthrough School Models" grant opportunity, as they finalized their financial and operating plans.
A presentation by emeritus professor and author William Massy at the Southern New Hampshire University about how to be Mission Centered, Market Smart, and Margin Conscious.
Strong Workforce Task Force Overview - December 2015Strong Workforce
Learn about the Task Force on Workforce, Job Creation and a Strong Economy and the recommendations made to enhance career technical education and workforce training to meet the demands of the economy and the labor market, thus benefitting individuals, communities, and the entire state.
Preparing Libraries as per NAAC’s Revised Accreditation FrameworkSantosh C. Hulagabali
UGC's NAAC introduced Revised Accreditation Framework (RAF) on 27th July, 2017. This presentation introduces the RAF and focuses more on how the Libraries need to prepare to address the requirements/guidelines specified in the RAF.
From Afton Partners, April 2013. An overview of NGLC financial and operational expectations, spending trends from 12/2011 – 09/2012 for 8 K-12 Breakthrough Models in their first year vs. national benchmarks, and software usage. This analysis was meant to provide information to
applicants for NGLC's "Wave IV: Breakthrough School Models" grant opportunity, as they finalized their financial and operating plans.
A presentation by emeritus professor and author William Massy at the Southern New Hampshire University about how to be Mission Centered, Market Smart, and Margin Conscious.
Strong Workforce Task Force Overview - December 2015Strong Workforce
Learn about the Task Force on Workforce, Job Creation and a Strong Economy and the recommendations made to enhance career technical education and workforce training to meet the demands of the economy and the labor market, thus benefitting individuals, communities, and the entire state.
Preparing Libraries as per NAAC’s Revised Accreditation FrameworkSantosh C. Hulagabali
UGC's NAAC introduced Revised Accreditation Framework (RAF) on 27th July, 2017. This presentation introduces the RAF and focuses more on how the Libraries need to prepare to address the requirements/guidelines specified in the RAF.
Skin is a dynamic organ that requires care and attention. At every stage in the life cycle there are challenges posed, both environmental and genetic, to our skin. This presentation gives an overview of the needs of childhood and adult skin at different stages. Skin care routines, including moisturizers, sunscreens and cosmetic products and techniques covered.
http://www.summitmedicalgroup.com/
Another common pitfall we see is the treatment of blended learning as a standalone education program instead of integrated into the costs associated with day-to-day instruction.
Assessing cost trade offs within the ongoing instructional budget will allow blended learning to be both scalable and sustainable.
With generous support from AT&T, America’s Promise will invest in two states and three communities to support more young people toward the critical milestone of high school graduation.
Submission deadline is November 8th, 2017
Acetabularia Information For Class 9 .docxvaibhavrinwa19
Acetabularia acetabulum is a single-celled green alga that in its vegetative state is morphologically differentiated into a basal rhizoid and an axially elongated stalk, which bears whorls of branching hairs. The single diploid nucleus resides in the rhizoid.
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp NetworkTechSoup
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
2. Similar to other rounds
◦ District or direct funded charter that serves grades 4-8
◦ Rank within the top 1/3 percentage or number of
students in the state living below the poverty line (http://
www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/ )
◦ Current CDE approved technology plan
And...
3. 1 or more schools identified for improvement or
corrective action under No Child Left Behind
or
Technology poverty defined as 10:1 student to
computer –to-multimedia computer ratio or
greater, or less that 50% of the classrooms
connected to the Internet.
Eligiblility List
http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/r5/eettc10rfa.asp
4. Significantly reduced from prior fiscal years 5.
Awards based on $300 per 4th-8th grade
◦ See Eligible Schools List
http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fo/r5/eettc10rfa.asp
Projected funding for Regions is approximately $500,000
◦ Minimum district award is 25,000
◦ Max award about 300,000 (With no more than 60% of
the regional funds allocated to that LEAs region.)
5. File an annual report for each year on performance
goals, objectives and benchmarks identified on form 3
Edtech Profile pre and post test for each teacher
participating in the professional development program
Use of funds
6. Increasing teacher effectiveness and addressing inequities in the
distribution of effective teachers through high-quality professional
development
Using advanced technology systems to collect, manage, and analyze
data in order to track student progress
Implementing technology-enhanced strategies that support rigorous
college- and career-ready, internationally benchmarked standards,
supplemented with high-quality assessments that are valid and reliable
for all students
7. Districts that submitted the 2009 ARRA EETT C grant
in Oct. 2009 may choose to substitute that score from
that application for use in this Round 9 Grant
◦ LEAs will be required to submit Form 1-Application title Page
and will be required to revise forms 2a, 3, 4, 5, and 6 if
funded.
8. Category Max Score
A. Application Presentation 0
1. Program for Students 15
2. Professional Development 15
3. Expanded Access 15
4. Communication & Collaboration 15
5. Evaluation & Project Mangagement 20
6. Program Sustainability 10
7. Projected Budget Narative 10
Total Score 100
9. Minimum of 50 points
Grouped into decile bands from scoring rubric
◦ (100-90, 89-80, 79-70, 69-60, 59-50)
Ranking within decile by score
Small school districts will be provided priority
ranking at the top of the percentage range in the
decile they scored
10. Answer all project narrative questions in RFA
Write to the “Strong” column of Appendix G
◦ Follow format
Write to the rubric
11. 3 installments
◦ 40% after CDE receives grant award acceptance letter
◦ 40% after CDE receives LEAs Certification of Expenditure
report and filling all required EETT C program performance
reports
◦ 20% after CDE receives LEAs End of Period Expenditure
Report certifying that the grant award was obligated or
expended in compliance with the grant conditions.
12. Determine Target schools, teachers, and students
Calculate total EETT C budget and set aside 25% for
professional development
Review and select hardware, peripherals, electronic
learning resources and productivity resources, and
data collection tools needed to support the program
◦ Resources to help: http://ctap8.org/(administrator resources)
13. Assemble a planning/writing team
Review RFA and Scoring criteria
Contact private schools in district to participate
Set Curriculum Goals
Set timeline and divide responsibilities
◦ Deadline Feb. 1, 2011 on or before 5:00 PM (in Sacramento)
14. Identify curricular focus area(s)
Gather baseline data
◦ Design a research-based EETT C program that will bridge the
gap from where you are to where you want to be.
◦ Set S.M.A.R.T goals to be obtained
15. Form 1: Application Title Page
Form 2: Project Summary (Best done last)
Form 2a: Program Profile & School data
Form 2b: Small School District Addendum (if applicable)
Project Narrative: 6 sections-25 page max, line
numbers (not to exceed 36 lines per page) and pages
must be numbered
Optional: Bibliography /Citation page
16. Form 3: Goals and Objectives and Data Collection
Form 4: Strategies and Timeline
Form 5: Projected Budget and Narrative
Form 6: Priority List of Schools
Form 7: Consortium and/or Partnership Applicants &
signed letters of support
Form 8: Competitive Application Checklist
19. Program Goals, Objectives, Benchmarks and Data Collection
◦Goals: CDE defined vision-not measured
◦Objectives: CDE defined measure-applicant defined growth
target during a specified timeframe. Growth targets may not be
modified.
◦Benchmarks: Applicants annual baseline data plus growth
target equals end of year growth projection.
20. Can not be modified after the application is approved
for funding.
EETT-C follow-up grant eligibility is contingent on
meeting 70% of district set growth targets for each
objective. (set realistic growth targets for each
objective)
21. Goals 1 and 2:
LEA programs focus on the same target students or teachers
in Year One and Year Two have two years to meet their
identified growth targets.
LEA programs focusing on different target students or
teachers in Year One and Year Two must meet their identified
growth targets annually and add text to form 3 to clarify.
22. Use data to establish baseline percentages, projected
growth targets, and define end of year percentages on
Form 3
Write down formula used to determine growth %
Establish consistent data instruments, items, and calculation
methods for each objective
Data for objectives measured by multiple instruments must be
collected and aggregated to determine baseline figures and
subsequent growth
23. Collect:
Baseline data that needs to be collected:
Target Students’ Tech Literacy Data -www.edtechprofile.com (student survey)
Target Students’ Achievement Data - Benchmark assessment or Approved textbook benchmark
assessments
Target Teachers’ Tech Literacy Data - www.edtechprofile.com
Target Teachers’ Curriculum Integration Data/C3
Target Classroom Observation Data/C3
Target Classroom Student to Computer Ratios- Previously from California State Technology
Survey or a simple spreadsheet
Communication & Collaboration Data - enter your own measurable objective (Aeries, SIS, % of
teachers posting grades online, etc)
Data for any additional objectives applicant includes
24. Form 4: Strategies & Timelines
List specific strategies or actions that will be
implemented to achieve each of the performance
goals, objectives, and benchmarks specified on Form 3
and in the project narrative.
Include beginning and ending dates for the strategies
or actions
List the title of the person responsible
25. 2 Year budget ($300 multiplied by 2008 4-8 CBEDS
at all schools listed of form 6)
◦ Funding will not exceed 60% or approximately $300,000.
Specify program budget for Year 1 and Year 2.
10% or more change in spending requires LEA to submit a
Budget Modification to the CDE for approval
26. Report the amount to be expended and describe in detail how
the funds will be allocated in each category.
Include leveraged funding, if applicable
A minimum of 25% of the total 2 year grant must go to
high-quality professional development that is relevant to
the program.
27. Costs for teacher stipends for attending professional development outside of contract
hours.
Costs for substitute teachers
Costs for salaries and benefits, stipends, or contracts for PD trainers, facilitators, and
mentors
Costs for professional development workshops and conferences specified in the LEAs
grant application.
Costs for materials and supplies necessary to carry out the professional development
may be charged, consistent with established LEA policies and practices
28. Hardware
Infrastructure
Technical Support
CLRN reviewed Electronic Learning Resources
Supplies and Materials
Expenses related to fostering communication among parents,
students, teachers, and community
Grant management, coordination, evaluation,
and reporting
29. If partially funded, CDE will fund schools per order on
form 6
Rank eligible applicant schools in order for funding
30.
31. The CDE Encourages mutually beneficial program
partnerships.
Identify LEA partnerships
◦ If consortium appication list other LEAs and direct funded charter schools int eh
consortium.
Include a partnership letter on partner’s letterhead
32. Partnership applications are encouraged and receive a
competitive advantage in application scoring
Partnerships Requirements:
Proven experience with technology literacy and curriculum
integration
Evidence the partnership will have a positive impact on
student academic achievement
Work, products, strategies or services are aligned with or
based upon relevant research.
33. A consortium is a group of school districts and/or direct-
funded charter schools.
A minimum of one school district or direct funded
charter within the consortium must be eligible to apply
for the EETT C Grant and be the designated lead
agency.
Only students in grades 4-8 at eligible districts and
direct funded charters within a consortium are funded at
$300 per student.
34. Brief partnership letter (1 page) includes:
written on partner’s letter head,
summarizes the role of the partnership
includes how the partnership supports the program
states how the partnership is mutually beneficial to the partner and
LEA
Must be signed by the lead contact (consortiums identify the lead
school district and all school districts and/or direct-funded charter
schools within the consortium)
35. The Project Narrative describes the research-based
program, strategies, resources, evaluation and
timelines outlined in the application forms.
◦ Provide a concise narrative description of the comprehensive
EETT program you propose
Site research to support the basis
Number each Project Narrative page
Maximum of 25 pages
Pages must include line numbers
No more than 36 lines per page.
36. Describe the LEA’s research-based Program for
Students. Include relevant research citations.
Describe the technology literacy and academic
learning needs of target students.
Describe how the LEA’s research-based Program for
Students will meet the students’ identified learning
needs.
Must include all six sections under separate headings
and subheadings that match the rubric Scoring
Criteria.
37. Six Sections of the Project Narrative
1. Program for Students
2. Professional Development Program for Teachers
3. Expand Access to Technology and Provide Technology Support
4. Communication and Collaboration Among Home, School, and
Community.
5. Evaluation and Program Management
6. Follow-up Grant & Sustainability
38. Describe the LEA’s research-based Program for
Students. Include relevant research citations.
Describe the technology literacy and academic learing
needs of target students
Describe how the LEA’s research-based Program for
Students will meet the students’ identified learning
needs.
39. LEA designs their own program for students using
research-based strategies and State Board of Education
approved publisher or CLRN reviewed electronic
learning resources.
LEA partners with an organization such as CTAP to
develop a comprehensive program suited to the
specific learning needs of targeted students.
40. All Electronic Learning Resources purchased with
EETT C funds must either be:
California Learning Resource Network (CLRN) reviewed
electronic learning resources that meet state standards
Curriculum-based electronic learning resources that are part of
an State Board of Education approved K-8 program
41. LEA partners with an established research-based student
program such as:
GenYes
ISTE NETS Aligned Programs
Tech4Learning
NetTrekker
42. Describe the LEA’s research-based Program for Teachers. Include
relevant research citations.
Describe the technology literacy and curriculum integration learning
needs of the teachers in the target group(s).
Describe how the LEA’s research-based Professional Development
Program will meet the target teachers’ identified learning needs.
LEA designs their own Professional Development program using
research-based strategies.
LEA partners with an organization such as CTAP to develop a
comprehensive Ed Tech integration program suited to their needs.
43. Identify the current student-to-computer ratio used by the students
and teachers in the target group.
Identify the new electronic learning resources, infrastructure,
hardware and peripherals to be acquired and describe how the new
resources will support the comprehensive program.
Describe how technology resources, either currently existing or to
be acquired, will be used to support data-driven decision-making.
Describe how adequate technical support will be provided to
support the district’s EETT Competitive program.
44. Describe how technology will be used to establish or improve
communication and collaboration among home, school and
community.
Describe how students’ learning needs will be supported through the
use of technology for communication and collaboration.
Possible areas to establish or improve on:
E-mail accounts, expanded web access for teachers, students, parents, and community promote
communication and sharing.
Developing communication channels for partners and stakeholders to support learning opportunities
Using multiple media for school / class communications…i.e., school web postings, student grades and
attendance online, informational e-mails, voice-mail, newsletters.
Sponsoring parent/community events that promote involvement in student learning and technology
45. Describe the LEA’s evaluation plan.
Who? What? When? Why? and How? will the LEA measure, collect,
analyze, evaluate, and report on every required and optional objective on
Form 3? Reference SETDA’s Common Data Elements.
Describe the LEA’s program management or advisory group by job title,
roles, and responsibilities. How often will advisory group meet and how will
ongoing communications with stakeholders take place?
Describe the continuous data-driven
improvement process for monitoring the impact
the comprehensive program is having on all goals.
46. Collected program data is used in Semi-annual and
Annual Performance Reports to the CDE.
Purpose: to evaluate progress in meeting annual benchmarks and
program impact. Share outcomes with stakeholders.
Submitted to CDE twice a year during both implementation years.
The CDE will post the EETT C Round 8 semi-annual and annual
reports on the CDE website by July 2009. Expected to be similar to
Round 6 Performance Reports.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/et/ft/eettcomp.asp
47. Describe how the Follow-Up grant ($45 per student based on
original grant award) will be used to help sustain or expand the
EETT Competitive Round 8 program.
Describe other funding sources or partnerships that may contribute
to the sustainability or expansion of the EETT Competitive Round
8 program, at the conclusion of the two-year grant program.
49. Must submit
One signed (blue ink), unbound original print copy of
application
Three stapled print copies (must lay flat -no binders)
One digital copy in MS Word or PDF format on CD labeled
with LEA name (no signatures required)
50. Submit in print, single sided, 8 1/2 X 11 paper, portrait
orientation (except forms), 1 inch margin, 12-point font.
Submit all required forms, assurances and certifications,
check for signatures. (Complete and include form 8
checklist)
◦ Project narrative pages must be numbered (Max 25 pages)
with heading and subheadings for the 6 sections.
◦ Pages must include line numbers (max 36 lines)
Original copy signed in blue ink
51. A signed copy of the Certification Regarding
Lobbying, Debartment, Suspension, and other
Responsibility Matters, and Drug-Free Workplace
Requirements
Review and sign the EETT C Grant Conditions and
Assurances
Submit one original unbound, 3 print copies, and one
e-copy of application on CD
52. Due: February 1, 2011 by 5 PM
Possibility of later submittal date upon release of RFA
California Department of Education
Education Technology Office
EETT-C Round 9 Application
1430 N Street, Suite 6308
Sacramento, CA 95814
Confirmation of delivery or receipt with date/time of
delivery form mail or courier service recommended.
Grants will not be excepted after deadline.
The amount of available funding for each region has been calculated based on CBEDS using grades four through eight enrollments in eligible schools within each region. Per AB 2706 (Berg), each region will be allocated a minimum of $500,000 or two percent of the available EETT C grant funds, whichever is greater. \nSo. . . \nSelect the number of eligible schools to include in the application and develop the program budget accordingly. \n
\n
\n
2009 ARRA EETT C applicants: An eligible applicant who submitted an application for the ARRA EETT C in October of 2009 may choose to substitute that score from that application for use in Round 9 of the EETT C. The scores from the October 2009 ARRA EETT C applications and the scores from new Round 9 applicants will be merged for ranking and awarding purposes. \n \nLEAs opting to use their October 2009 ARRA EETT C score are only required to submit Form 1- Application Title Page. If the LEA is awarded an EETT C grant, the LEA will be required to revise the following forms and file them along with the Grant Award Notification: \n \nForm 2a: Program Profile & School Data\nForm 3: Program Goals, Objectives, Benchmarks, and Data Collection\nForm 4: Strategies and Timeline\nForm 5: Projected Budget and Budget Narrative \nForm 6: Priority List of LEAs Applicant Schools \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Resources: Sets projects\n C3\n
Writing team: District Stakeholders, Curriculum coordinator, Data collection person, categorical program coordinators, staff development coordinator, technology director, administrator & teacher from eligible 4-8 schools, private schools in district, \n
Goals 1, 2, and 3: Applicants enter the projected growth target for each objective and the annual benchmark data. The language has changed since Round 6- here they are asking for an average percentage (read objective 1a and b)\n\nGoal 4: Applicants enter their own measurable performance objective(s) and annual benchmarks as well as enter the projected growth target for the objective(s) and the annual benchmark data.\n.\nSet challenging yet realistic growth targets. The CDE will compare the projected LEA growth targets on Form 3 against the actual program growth reported in semi-annual and annual program performance reports. In order to qualify for a year three Follow-up EETT C grant award, LEAs must meet 70 percent of the projected growth targets* for each program objective as identified on Form 3. LEA programs focusing on the same target students or teachers in Year One and Year Two (e.g., fifth grade students in Year One and the same fifth grade students as sixth graders in Year Two) have two years to meet identified growth targets. LEA programs focusing on different target students or teachers in Year One and Year Two (e.g., eighth grade students in Year One and new incoming eighth grade students in Year Two) must meet identified growth targets annually. \n*(NOTE: Growth targets are defined as the difference between the baseline percentages and outcome percentages as stated in the benchmarks on Form 3.)\nThe LEA may need to add text to Form 3 to clarify a required objective or benchmark but LEAs may not change the original text or intent of the form. The example that follows indicates when and how text would need to be added to Form 3 to clarify a required objective. \nFOR EXAMPLE:\nIf the LEA chooses to focus on grades four and five during the two year EETT C program, the target students will be different in Year Two of the program. Specifically, the Year One fifth graders will no longer be included in the program targeting grades four and five in Year Two because they will be sixth graders in Year Two and new incoming fourth grade students will become part of the program in Year Two. \nIn cases such as this, you will need to add text to the Form 3, Goal 1 objectives. The underlined text in the example below indicates the additional text that would need to be added to the Form 3, Goal 1 objectives and benchmarks in the aforementioned scenario.\nRequired Program Objective 1a to be achieved by 6/30/10: Target students participating in the program for two years will increase grade-level technology literacy** by an average of 90% as specified in the standards-aligned Program for Students \nYear 1 Benchmark: 4th grade students in year one will increase from 2008 baseline of 10% to 70% proficient by June 30, 2009\nYear 2 Benchmark: Last year’s 4th grade students - now 5th grade students will increase from 2009 baseline of 70% to 100% proficient by June 30, 2010.\nAdditional Required Program Objective 1a to be achieved by 6/30/10: Target students* participating in the program for one year will increase grade-level proficiency with technology literacy** by an average of 60% as specified in the standards-aligned Program for Students.\nYear 1 Benchmark: 5th grade students in year one will increase from 2008 baseline of 10% to 70% proficient by June 30, 2009\nYear 2 Benchmark: Incoming 4th grade students in year two will increase from 2009 baseline of 10% to 70% proficient by June 30, 2010.\nX *Check here if the Year 2 Target Group is different from the Year 1 Target Group for this Objective.\nFor each objective listed under the EETT C goals, list the data collection information and instruments that will be used. \n(NOTE: On Form 3, the required objectives for Goals 1, 2, and 3 contain required data elements that cannot be altered. However, additional data collection information and instruments can be identified for each objective.)\nIf the LEA chooses to add any optional goals or objectives to the program, there must be a corresponding data instrument and collection schedule on Form 3 and in the Evaluation and Program Management Plan section of the Project Narrative. In addition, if the LEA chooses to add optional goals or objectives, they must be related to the required performance goals and to the purpose of the comprehensive EETT C program. Follow the existing Form 3 format to add any additional performance goals, objectives, benchmarks, and data elements as needed. \nForm 3 will be considered in the Scoring Criteria (Appendix F, page 71), but does not count as part of the 25-page Project Narrative maximum. \n
\n
\n
For Goals 1 and 2: \nLEA programs focusing on the same target students or teachers in Year One and Year Two have two years to meet identified growth targets. (e.g., fifth grade students in Year One and the same fifth grade students as sixth graders in Year Two) \n\nLEA programs focusing on different target students or teachers in Year One and Year Two must meet identified growth targets annually and add text to Form 3 to clarify. (e.g., eighth grade students in Year One and new incoming eighth grade students in Year Two) \n\nThe CDE will compare the projected LEA growth targets on Form 3 against the actual program growth reported in semi-annual and annual program performance reports. In order to qualify for a year three Follow-up EETT C grant award, LEAs must meet 70 percent of the projected growth targets* for each program objective as identified on Form 3. \n\nIf the LEA chooses to add any optional goals or objectives to the program, there must be a corresponding data instrument and collection schedule on Form 3 and in the Evaluation and Program Management Plan section of the Project Narrative. In addition, if the LEA chooses to add optional goals or objectives, they must be related to the required performance goals and to the purpose of the comprehensive EETT C program. Follow the existing Form 3 format to add any additional performance goals, objectives, benchmarks, and data elements as needed. \n\nForm 3 will be considered in the Scoring Criteria (Appendix F, page 71), but does not count as part of the 25-page Project Narrative maximum. \n
\n
Form 3 is a summary of the project narrative section 5: Evaluation and program management So.. the two areas must be aligned (RFA pg 29)\n
\n
Base the program budget on $300 multiplied by the 2008-20019 CBEDS for grades four through eight at the eligible schools you list on the Priority List of LEA’s Applicant Schools (Form 6). Do not exceed 60% of regional allocation\nInclude, as appropriate, salaries, benefits, books, materials, supplies, contracts and services, travel, capital outlay, and other operating expenditures, to be acquired with grant funding. If indirect costs are taken, use the state-approved rate (http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/ac/ic/). \nThe budget does not have to be expended equally in each of the two years (see Payment Schedule on page 13 for additional details). However, the rationale for the allocation of the budget between year one and year two must be aligned to the program implementation plan stated in the Project Narrative. \n.\n\n\nIn the Budget Narrative, provide a description of each Object of Expenditure in sufficient detail to give grant readers a complete picture of how funds will be allocated for each category for each year (See Budget Narrative examples attached to Form 5). In other words, relate what you are spending, when, and why. Include leveraged funding amounts, if applicable. A minimum of 25 percent of the total amount of the grant award must be allocated for high-quality professional development. In each applicable Object Code in the budget narrative, explain what expenditures will be allocated for the 25 percent minimum professional development requirement. \n
In the Budget Narrative, provide a description of each Object of Expenditure in sufficient detail to give grant readers a complete picture of how funds will be allocated for each category for each year (See Budget Narrative examples attached to Form 5). In other words, relate what you are spending, when, and why. \n
\n
\n
List eligible applicant schools in rank order for funding.\n(NOTE: This is a one-time implementation grant for eligible schools in a district. Therefore, if an individual school has received full funding in a prior EETT C Round, that school will not be funded in this EETT C Round)\n\nUse the 4-8 2008 CBEDS at schools listed on Form 6 to determine the program budget.\nIf the LEA’s application is partially funded or the LEA’s funded application exceeds 60 percent of the regional allotment, the CDE will fund schools in the order in which the LEA prioritizes them on Form 6.\n\nThe following information is required on Form 6: \nLEA CDS Code\nLEA name\nAn LEA ranked priority list of grant funding for eligible applicant schools \nApplicant schools’ CDS Codes\nApplicant schools’ names\nDistrict funded charter school identification (if applicable)\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
The Project narrative and application Forms should be aligned where appropriate…\n\nCitations should be incorporated to provide evidence that the district’s EETT C program is based on relevant research. If a bibliography is included, it will not count as part of the 25-page maximum for the narrative. \n
The Project narrative and application Forms should be aligned where appropriate…\n\nCitations should be incorporated to provide evidence that the district’s EETT C program is based on relevant research. If a bibliography is included, it will not count as part of the 25-page maximum for the narrative. \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Why all this evaluation & data???\n\nCollected program data is used in Semi-annual and Annual Performance Report to the CDE…. \nPurpose: to evaluate progress in meeting annual benchmarks and program impact. Share outcomes with stakeholders.(federal, state, and local) … tech enhances academic achievement…\nDisseminate best practices…\n\nSubmitted to CDE twice a year during both implementation years.\n
\n
If an application is incomplete not correctly formatted, it will not be read.\n\nIf you have more than 25 pages of narrative, anything past 25 won’t be read. You CAN include a bibliography page that will not count as part of the 25-page maximum.\n\nIf you have more than 36 lines on a page, the extra lines will be marked out and not read. \n\nIf any of the forms are missing, the application will not be read at all. \n\nUse the specified headings and sub headings in the Project Narrative section to make it easy for the readers to find the required information\n\n If charts, tables, or graphs are included, the number or lines of text on the page must be decreased to provide room for the charts, tables or graphs. Additionally, any charts or tables may not increase the word count for the page to exceed the number typically found on a page with 36 lines of text.\nAll six sections of Project Narrative must be addressed under separate headings.\n
\n
If an application is incomplete not correctly formatted, it will not be read.\n\nIf you have more than 25 pages of narrative, anything past 25 won’t be read. You CAN include a bibliography page that will not count as part of the 25-page maximum.\n\nIf you have more than 36 lines on a page, the extra lines will be marked out and not read. \n\nIf any of the forms are missing, the application will not be read at all. \n\nUse the specified headings and sub headings in the Project Narrative section to make it easy for the readers to find the required information\n\nKeep it neat and readable– one inch margins, 12 point font recommended.\nAll application pages must be submitted in print format on 8 ½ x 11 inch white paper, printed only on a single side, with one inch margins.\nAll eight required forms must be completed and included in the application set.\n\nIf the applicant lists partnerships on the Partnership and/or Consortium Applicants (Form 7), signed partnership support letters for each identified partner must be attached at the end of the application. Letters from Consortium members are not required.\nThe Project Narrative pages must be numbered and may be no more than 25 pages, including any appropriate charts, tables, or graphs, but excluding all required forms. A bibliography can be included and it will not count as part of the 25-page maximum. \nAll Project Narrative pages must include line numbers. Pages must be individually lined numbered with the first line on each page beginning with line one. \nAll Project Narrative pages may not contain more than 36 lines per page. If charts, tables, or graphs are included, the number or lines of text on the page must be decreased to provide room for the charts, tables or graphs. Additionally, any charts or tables may not increase the word count for the page to exceed the number typically found on a page with 36 lines of text.\nAll six sections of Project Narrative must be addressed under separate headings.\n\nLast year a district thought they sent it next day air, but it was sent two day air and NOT READ because it arrived one day late! \nSubmit the correct documents – have several individuals review the submission package – take the checklist in hand and check off each item\nGet it in on time – it has to be in Sacramento May 27th, not postmarked like many grants\n
\n
Recommend a minimum of 5 days for snail mail and 1-2 days for Fed Ex/UPS\n