Applications for New Awards; Developing Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The DHSI Program provides grants to eligible institutions of higher education (IHEs) to expand educational opportunities for, and improve the academic attainment of, Hispanic students; and expand and enhance the academic offerings, program quality, and institutional stability of colleges and universities that are educating the majority of Hispanic college students and helping large numbers of Hispanic students and other low-income individuals complete postsecondary degrees.

Priorities: This notice contains two competitive preference priorities and one invitational priority. The competitive preference priorities are from the Administrative Priorities for Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2020 (85 FR 13640) (Administrative Priorities).

Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2025 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an additional 20 points to an application, depending on how well the application meets one or more of these priorities; the total possible points for each competitive preference priority are noted in parentheses.

These priorities are:

Competitive Preference Priority 1: Rural Applicants (10 points).

Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate the following:

(a) The applicant is an IHE with a rural campus setting, or the applicant proposes to serve a campus with a rural setting. Rural settings include any of the following: Town-Fringe, Town-Distant, Town-Remote, Rural Fringe, Rural-Distant, Rural-Remote, as defined by the NCES College Navigator search tool.

Note: Any rural campus served under this priority must be an eligible HSI (as defined in this notice).

Competitive Preference Priority 2: Applications from New Potential Grantees (10 points).

Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate the following:

(a) The applicant has not had an active discretionary grant under the program from which it seeks funds, including through membership in a group application submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-75.129, in the following number of years before the deadline date for submission of applications under the program.

(i) Five years

Invitational Priority: For FY 2025 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an invitational priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not give an application that meets the invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications.

The priority is:

Invitational Priority: Expanding access to distance education, workforce-based options, or shortened time-to-degree models, or recognized credentials. Applicants should demonstrate how their projects, institutions, or proposals are designed to promote education choice in one or more of the following ways: Expand access to postsecondary distance education, competency-based or skills-based education, pre-apprenticeships, apprenticeships, part-time coursework and career preparation, work-based learning or shortened time-to-degree models, and programs or coursework that lead to high-wage, high-skilled, or ( printed page 23521) in-demand, industry recognized credentials.

Definitions: The following definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1 and apply to the priorities and selection criteria in this notice:

Baseline means the starting point from which performance is measured and targets are set.

Budget period means an interval of time into which a project period is divided for budgetary purposes.

Demonstrates a rationale means that there is a key project component included in the project's logic model that is supported by citations of high-quality research or evaluation findings that suggest that the project component is likely to significantly improve relevant outcomes.

Department means the U.S. Department of Education.

Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by promising evidence or evidence that demonstrates a rationale.

Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group that does not. Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending on their design and implementation ( e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbooks:

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group).

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being evaluated using a measured variable ( e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of outcomes.

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case ( e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the treatment.

Fiscal year means the Federal fiscal year—a period beginning on October 1 and ending on the following September 30.

Grant period means the period for which funds have been awarded.

Grantee means the legal entity to which a grant is awarded and that is accountable to the Federal Government for the use of the funds provided. The grantee is the entire legal entity even if only a particular component of the entity is designated in the grant award notice (GAN). For example, a GAN may name as the grantee one school or campus of a university. In this case, the granting agency usually intends, or actually intends, that the named component assume primary or sole responsibility for administering the grant-assisted project or program. Nevertheless, the naming of a component of a legal entity as the grantee in a grant award document shall not be construed as relieving the whole legal entity from accountability to the Federal Government for the use of the funds provided. (This definition is not intended to affect the eligibility provision of grant programs in which eligibility is limited to organizations that may be only components of a legal entity.) The term “grantee” does not include any secondary recipients, such as subgrantees and contractors, that may receive funds from a grantee pursuant to a subgrant or contract.

Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project ( i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes.

Note: In developing logic models, applicants may want to use resources such as the Pacific Education Laboratory's Logic Model Application ( www.ies.ed.gov/​ncee/​edlabs/​regions/​pacific/​elm.asp).

Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or metric used to gauge program or project performance.

Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant would seek to meet during the course of a project or as a result of a project.

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of project components ( e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).

Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC reporting “strong evidence”, “moderate evidence”, or “promising evidence” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting “Tier 1 strong evidence” of effectiveness, or “Tier 2 moderate evidence” of effectiveness, or “Tier 3 promising evidence” of effectiveness, or a “positive effect,” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome, with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that—

(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (such as a study using regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group); and

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive ( i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome; and

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report.

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation ( e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks.

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program.

Subgrant means an award of financial assistance in the form of money, or property in lieu of money, made under a grant by a grantee to an eligible subgrantee. The term includes financial assistance when provided by contractual or any other form of legal agreement, but does not include ( printed page 23522) procurement purchases, nor does it include any form of assistance that is excluded from the definition of “grant or award” in this part (see 2 CFR 200.92, “Subaward”).

What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks (WWC Handbooks) means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 5.0, or in the WWC Standards Handbook, Version 4.0 or 4.1, or in the WWC Procedures Handbook, Version 4.0 or 4.1, the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (all incorporated by reference; see § 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the WWC Handbooks documentation.

Program Authority:20 U.S.C. 1101-1101d and 1103-1103g.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 606. (e) The Administrative Priorities.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. Five-year Individual Development Grants only. Cooperative Arrangement Grants and Planning Grants will not be awarded in FY 2025.

Estimated Available Funds: $66,944,786.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in subsequent years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards: $500,000-$600,000.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $575,000.

Maximum Awards: We will not make an award exceeding $600,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 116.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information and Supplemental Requirements

1. Eligible Applicants: (a) Institutions of higher education (IHEs) that qualify as eligible HSIs are eligible to apply for new Individual Development Grants under the DHSI Program. To be an eligible HSI, an IHE must—

(i) Have an enrollment of needy students, as defined in section 502(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 as amended (HEA) (section 502(a)(2)(A)(i) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(2)(A)(i));

(ii) Have, except as provided in section 522(b) of the HEA, average education and general expenditures that are low, per full-time equivalent (FTE) undergraduate student, in comparison with the average education and general expenditures per FTE undergraduate student of institutions that offer similar instruction (section 502(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(2)(A)(ii));

Note: To demonstrate an enrollment of needy students and low average education and general expenditures per FTE undergraduate student, an IHE must be designated as an “eligible institution” in accordance with 34 CFR 606.2 through 606.5 and the notice inviting applications for designation as an eligible institution for the fiscal year for which the grant competition is being conducted.

Note: The notice announcing the FY 2025 process for designation of eligible institutions, and inviting applications for waiver of eligibility requirements, was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2025 (90 FR 11408). Only institutions that the Department determines are eligible, or are granted a waiver, may apply for a grant in this program.

(iii) Be accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association that the Secretary has determined to be a reliable authority as to the quality of education or training offered, or making reasonable progress toward accreditation, according to such an agency or association (section 502(a)(2)(A)(iv) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(2)(A)(iv));

(iv) Be legally authorized to provide, and provides within the State, an education program for which the institution awards a bachelor's degree (section 502(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(2)(A)(iii)), or be a junior or community college (section 502(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(2)(A)(iii));

(v) Have an enrollment of undergraduate FTE students that is at least 25 percent Hispanic students at the end of the award year immediately preceding the date of application (section 502(a)(5)(B) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101a(a)(5)(B)); and

(vi) Provide, as an attachment to the application, the documentation the IHE relied upon in determining that at least 25 percent of the IHE's undergraduate FTE students are Hispanic. The 25 percent requirement applies only to undergraduate Hispanic students and is calculated based upon FTE students as defined in section 502(a)(4) of the HEA. Instructions for formatting and submitting the verification documentation to Grants.gov are in the application package for this competition.

(b) For this program, the “end of the award year immediately preceding the date of application” refers to the end of the fiscal year prior to the application due date. For purposes of this competition, the data that we will use to determine percent enrollment is for academic year 2023-2024.

(c) In considering applications for grants under this program, the Department will compare the data and documentation the institution relied on in its application with data reported to the Department's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the IHE's State-reported enrollment data, and the institutional annual report. If different percentages or data are reported in these various sources, the institution must, as part of the 25 percent assurance verification, explain the reason for the differences. If the IPEDS data show that less than 25 percent of the institution's undergraduate FTE students are Hispanic, the burden is on the institution to show that the IPEDS data are inaccurate. If the IPEDS data indicate that the institution has an undergraduate FTE less than 25 percent, and the institution fails to demonstrate that the IPEDS data are inaccurate, the institution will be considered ineligible.

(d) A grantee under the DHSI Program, which is authorized by title V of the HEA, may not receive a grant under any HEA, title III, part A or part B program (section 505 of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101d). The title III, part A programs include the Strengthening Institutions Program, the American Indian Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Program, the Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving ( printed page 23523) Institutions Programs, the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions Program, the Predominantly Black Institutions Program, and the Native American-Serving Non-Tribal Institutions Program. The title III, part B programs include the Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities program and the Strengthening Historically Black Graduate Institutions Program. Furthermore, a current DHSI Program grantee may not give up its HSI grant in order to receive a grant under any title III, part A program (34 CFR 606.2(c)(1)).

(e) An eligible HSI may only submit one Individual Development Grant application.

(f) Nothing in this notice alters a grantee's obligations to comply with nondiscrimination requirements in Federal civil rights laws, including nondiscrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, among others.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching unless the grantee uses a portion of its grant for establishing or improving an endowment fund. If a grantee uses a portion of its grant for endowment fund purposes, it must match or exceed those grant funds with non-Federal funds (section 503(c)(2) of the HEA; 20 U.S.C. 1101b(c)(2)).

b. Supplement-Not-Supplant: This program involves supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. Grant funds must be used so that they supplement and, to the extent practical, increase the funds that would otherwise be available for the activities to be carried out under the grant and in no case supplant those funds. (34 CFR 606.30(b)).

c. Indirect Cost Rate Information: A grantee may not use an indirect cost rate to determine allowable costs under its grant.

d. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may award subgrants—to directly carry out project activities described in its application—to the following types of entities: local educational agencies; State educational agencies; IHEs; nonprofit organizations. The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application or that it selects through a competition under procedures established by the grantee.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2024 (89 FR 104528) and available at www.federalregister.gov/​documents/​2024/​12/​23/​2024-30488/​common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on December 7, 2022.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the DHSI Program, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended).

Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

3. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to intergovernmental review under Executive Order 12372. Information about this process is in the application package.

4. Funding Restrictions: We specify unallowable costs in 34 CFR 606.10(c).

5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 55 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger, and no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.

The recommended page limit applies to the Project Narrative, which is your complete response to the selection criteria, and any responses to the priorities, if applicable. However, the page limit does not apply to the Application for Federal Assistance form (SF-424); the ED SF-424 Supplement form; the Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs form (ED 524); the assurances and certifications; or the one-page project abstract, the program profile form, and supporting narrative.

6. Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to review grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number of applicants that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of their intent to submit an application. To do so, please email the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT with the subject line “Intent to Apply,” and include the applicant's name and a contact person's name and email address. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information provided.

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210, 606.8, and 606.22. Applicants should address each of the following selection criteria separately for each proposed activity. We will award up to 100 points to an application under the selection criteria and up to 20 additional points to an application under the competitive preference priorities, for a total score of up to 120 points. The maximum score for each criterion is noted in parentheses.

(a) Quality of the applicant's comprehensive development plan. (Up to 25 points)

The Secretary evaluates each application for a development grant based on the extent to which—

(1) The strengths, weaknesses, and significant problems of the institution's academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are clearly and comprehensively analyzed and result from a process that involved major constituencies of the institution (Up to 5 points); ( printed page 23524)

(2) The goals for the institution's academic programs, institutional management, and fiscal stability are realistic and based on comprehensive analysis (Up to 5 points);

(3) The objectives stated in the plan are measurable, related to institutional goals, and, if achieved, will contribute to the growth and self-sufficiency of the institution (Up to 5 points);

(4) The plan clearly and comprehensively describes the methods and resources the institution will use to institutionalize practice and improvements developed under the proposed project, including, in particular, how operational costs for personnel, maintenance, and upgrades of equipment will be paid with institutional resources (Up to 5 points); and

(5) The five-year plan describes how the applicant will improve its services to Hispanic and other low-income students (Up to 5 points).

Note: Under 34 CFR 606.8(a), a comprehensive development plan is an institution's strategy for achieving growth and self-sufficiency by strengthening its—

(1) Academic programs;

(2) Institutional management; and

(3) Fiscal stability.

(b) Quality of the project design. (Up to 15 points)

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following:

(1) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in this notice) that is aligned with the purposes of the grant program (Up to 10 points); and

(2) The extent to which the proposed project is supported by promising evidence (as defined in this notice) (Up to 5 points).

Note: To establish that their projects “demonstrate a rationale,” applicants must use a logic model (as defined in this notice) and identify research or evaluation findings suggesting that a key project component is likely to improve a relevant outcome. To establish that their projects are supported by “promising evidence,” applicants should cite the supporting study or studies that meet the conditions in the definition of “promising evidence” and attach the study(ies) as part of the application attachments. In addressing “promising evidence,” applicants are encouraged to align the direct student services proposed in this application to evidence-based practices identified in the selected studies. Note that the research cited to address the “promising evidence” criterion can be the same research provided to demonstrate a rationale, but only applications that include logic models can receive full points under the “demonstrates a rationale” selection factor.

(c) Quality of activity objectives. (Up to 10 points)

The extent to which the objectives for each activity are—

(1) Realistic and defined in terms of measurable results (Up to 5 points); and

(2) Directly related to the problems to be solved and to the goals of the comprehensive development plan (Up to 5 points).

(d) Quality of implementation strategy. (Up to 20 points)

The extent to which—

(1) The implementation strategy for each activity is comprehensive (Up to 10 points);

(2) The rationale for the implementation strategy for each activity is clearly described and is supported by the results of relevant studies or projects (Up to 5 points); and

(3) The timetable for each activity is realistic and likely to be attained (Up to 5 points).

(e) Quality of the project management plan. (Up to 10 points)

The extent to which—

(1) Procedures for managing the project are likely to ensure efficient and effective project implementation (Up to 5 points); and

(2) The project coordinator and activity directors have sufficient authority to conduct the project effectively, including access to the president or chief executive officer (Up to 3 points).

(3) Procedures for fiscal control and fund accounting procedures are likely to ensure proper disbursement of and accounting for funds made available to the applicant (Up to 2 points).

(f) Quality of key personnel. (Up to 5 points)

The extent to which—

(1) The past experience and training of key professional personnel are directly related to the stated activity objectives (Up to 2 points); and

(2) The time commitment of key personnel is realistic (Up to 3 points).

(g) Quality of evaluation plan. (Up to 10 points)

The extent to which—

(1) The data elements and the data collection procedures are clearly described and appropriate to measure the attainment of activity objectives and to measure the success of the project in achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan (Up to 5 points); and

(2) The data analysis procedures are clearly described and are likely to produce formative and summative results on attaining activity objectives and measuring the success of the project on achieving the goals of the comprehensive development plan (Up to 5 points).

(h) Budget. (Up to 5 points)

The extent to which the proposed costs are necessary and reasonable in relation to the project's objectives and scope.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

A panel of three non-Federal reviewers will review and score each application in accordance with the selection criteria in this notice, as well as the competitive preference priorities. A rank order funding slate will be made from this review. Awards will be made in rank order according to the average score received from the peer review.

In tie-breaking situations for development grants described in 34 CFR 606.23(b), the DHSI Program regulations in 34 CFR part 606, subpart C require that we award additional points to an application from an IHE that:

(1) Has an endowment fund of which the current market value, per FTE enrolled student, is less than the average current market value of the endowment funds, per FTE enrolled student, at comparable institutions that offer similar instruction (1 point);

(2) Has expenditures for library materials per FTE enrolled student that are less than the average expenditures for library materials per FTE enrolled student at comparable institutions that offer similar instruction (1 point); or

(3) Proposes to carry out one or more of the following activities—

(i) Faculty development (1 point);

(ii) Funds and administrative management (1 point);

(iii) Development and improvement of academic programs (2 points); ( printed page 23525)

(iv) Acquisition of equipment for use in strengthening management and academic programs (1 point);

(v) Joint use of facilities (2 points); or

(vi) Student services (2 points).

If a tie remains after applying the tiebreaker mechanism above, priority will be given to applicants that addressed the priority in section 521(d) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1103): the Secretary gives priority to an application that contains satisfactory evidence that the Hispanic-Serving Institution has entered or will enter into a collaborative arrangement with at least one local educational agency or community-based organization to provide such agency or organization with assistance (from funds other than funds provided under title 20 of the U.S. Code) in reducing dropout rates for Hispanic students, improving rates of academic achievement for Hispanic students, and increasing the rates at which Hispanic secondary school graduates enroll in higher education.

If a tie still remains after applying the additional point(s) and the statutory priority, we will determine the ranking of applicants based on the applicant that scores the highest under the selection criterion “Quality of the applicant's comprehensive development plan,” followed by “Quality of implementation strategy.”

If a tie still remains, we will select the applicant with the lowest endowment per FTE enrolled student.

3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Before awarding grants under this program, the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. The Secretary may impose specific conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

4. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $250,000), we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

If the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review these requirements if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

5.

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional information on the open licensing requirements, please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements should you receive funding under this competition. This does not apply if you have an exception.

(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports. For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/​fund/​grant/​apply/​appforms/​appforms.html.

(c) The Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case, the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

5. Performance Measures: The Secretary has established the following key performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of the DHSI Program under 34 CFR 75.110:

(a) The annual rate of degree or certificate completion for all students, and specifically for Hispanic students, at DHSI grantee institutions.

(b) The annual persistence rate at DHSI grantee institutions for all students, and for Hispanic students in particular, from one year to the next.

(c) The percentage of all students, and of Hispanic students in particular, who transfer from a two-year HSI to a four-year institution.

(d) The number of all students, and the number of Hispanic students in particular, served by any direct student service supported by the grant.

(e) The Federal cost per undergraduate and graduate degree at institutions in the DHSI program.

6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, whether the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the performance targets in the grantee's approved application, or whether the continuation of the project is in the best interest of the Federal Government. ( printed page 23526)

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department.

VII. Other Information

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format ( e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

Signing Authority

This document of the U.S. Department of Education was signed on May 20, 2025, by Christopher J. McCaghren, ED.D, Acting Assistant Secretary Office of Postsecondary Education. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by the U.S. Department of Education. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned has been authorized to sign the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the U.S. Department of Education. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .