GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT
FOR
CONTINUATION FUNDING
FY 2010
Office of Special Education Programs
U.S. Department of Education
With thanks to NECTAC & Christy Kavulic
Annual Grant Performance Report
O S E P
An annual report of your activities and
performance in meeting the approved
objectives of the project
Required for all active grants, including those
in no cost extension
OSEP reviews the report to determine if
substantial progress has been in order to
receive continued funding
Overview
O S E P
Recognize strong project objectives that can
be associated with high quality performance
measures
Develop high-quality, measurable
performance measures that maximize the
potential for meaningful data reporting
Complete the ED Grant Performance Report
(ED 524B)
Why Is This Important?
O S E P
High quality objectives and measures …
 Make it easier for you to measure your
progress
 Allow you to report progress easily and
quantitatively
 Allow OSEP staff to gather evidence of
program effectiveness
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Goal – Objectives - Measures
O S E P
Program Goal
Project Objectives
What your project is doing to support the overall program goal
(Found in your application)
Performance Measures
How you measure your progress toward meeting your objectives
(Program/GPRA, Project)
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Project Objectives
O S E P
What are you trying to
accomplish?
High Quality Project Objectives
O S E P
 Relevance
 How relevant is the project objective to the
overall goal of the program and/or the goal of
your project?
 Applicability
 How applicable is the project objective to the
specific activities that are being conducted
through your particular project?
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
High Quality Project Objectives
O S E P
Focus
 How focused is the project objective?
Measurability
 Are there concepts in the project objective that
lend themselves to measurement? If so, is
measurement feasible?
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Project Objectives -- Examples
O S E P
Establish a licensure program which will
recruit, enroll, support, and assist
paraprofessionals currently employed in an
urban school district to meet state
certification requirements in special
education
Implement a high-quality professional
development program to help LEAs
implement a multi-tiered system for behavior
and academics
Project Objectives - Examples
O S E P
Provide training that enables personnel to
work with and involve parents in their child’s
education, including parents of low income and
limited English proficient children with
disabilities
Performance Measures
O S E P
How are you measuring your progress
in meeting your objectives?
Performance Measures
O S E P
Measurable indicator used to determine how
well objectives are being met.
 How will progress be assessed?
 How much progress will constitute
success?
 How will it be known if an objective or
part of an objective has been achieved?
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Performance Measures
O S E P
Project Objective
1
Performance Measure
1a
Performance Measure
1b
Performance Measure
1c
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Types of Performance Measures
O S E P
 Program
 Measures established by OSEP for the SPDG
program. These include measures established
for reporting to Congress under the
Government Performance and Results Act
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
SPDG PROGRAM Performance Measures
• Measure 1.1 – Evidence-Based Practices (Personnel): The percent of
personnel receiving professional development through the SPDG based
on scientific- or evidence-based instructional practices.
• Measure 1.2 – State Performance Plan (SPP) Alignment: The percent
of SPDG projects that implement personnel development/training
activities that are aligned with improvement strategies identified in their
SPP.
• Measure 2.1 – Evidence-Based Practices (Training): The percentage
of professional development/training activities provided through the
SPDG based on scientific- or evidence-based instructional/behavioral
practices.
O S E P
• Measure 2.2 – Sustained Practices: The percentage of
professional development/training activities based on scientificor evidence-based instructional/behavioral practices, provided
through the SPDG program, that are sustained through on-going
and comprehensive practices. (Long-term)
• Measure 3.1 – Teacher Retention: In states with SPDG
projects that have special education teacher retention as a goal,
the statewide percentage of highly qualified special education
teachers in state identified professional disciplines (e.g., teachers
of children with emotional disturbance, deafness, etc.) who
remain teaching after the first two years of employment.
•Measure 4.1 – Scale-up Scientific- or Evidence-Based Practices:
The percentage of SPDG projects that successfully replicate the
use of scientific- or evidence-based instructional/behavioral
practice in schools. (Long-term)
Types of Performance Measures
O S E P
 Project
 Measures that the grantee establishes to meet
their project objectives
Project performance measures can address
both the process of working towards an
objective and the outcome related to meeting
the objective
Ensure a mix of both process and outcome
measures
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
High Quality Performance
Measures
O S E P
High quality performance measures show
What will change
How much change you expect
Who will achieve the change
When the change will take place
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Project Performance Measure
Examples
O S E P
Process measure (e.g.)
Project staff (who) will hold 4 (how much)
training sessions with mentors (what ) during
the first and third years of the grant (when)
Project Performance Measure
Examples
O S E P
Outcome measure (e.g.)
Inquiries from potential special education
teachers (who) about teaching in our state
(what) will increase 20% from the number
recorded in 2006 (how much) by the third year
of the grant (when)
Project Performance Measure
Examples
O S E P
Outcome measure (e.g.)
At the end of their third year of training (when),
90% of partner schools (who) will have
implemented tertiary-level literacy supports
(what) by meeting benchmark (80%) on an
implementation fidelity measure (how much)
Project Performance Measure
Example
O S E P
Outcome measure
Of the 200 schools implementing SWPBIS
(who) assessed each spring (when), 80% (how
much) of them will implement with fidelity
(what).
Project Performance Measure
Example
O S E P
Outcome measure (e.g.)
100% (how much) of paraprofessionals
supported by the SPDG in a certification
program (who) will become highly qualified
special education teachers in an urban school
district (what) by the completion of the grant
performance period (when).
Common Problems
 Activities are NOT performance measures
O S E P
 If the best response is “Yes, we did that,” it
is likely an activity (not a performance
measure)
 Activities:
 Establish a mentoring program
 Hold an advisory board meeting
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Common Problems
O S E P
Performance measures need to be
measurable
 Not measurable
 Collaborative partnerships will be maintained
 Evaluation will gauge students’ content
proficiency and project effectiveness
 To increase the sustainability of the professional
development model
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Summary
O S E P
 Projects should have a few clear objectives
that explain what the project is doing to
support the overall goal
 Each objective should have a few, specific
performance measures to demonstrate how
progress toward meeting the objective will
be measured
Taken from the Center for Evaluation & Educational Policy (CEEP) at Indiana University
Completing the 524B
O S E P
The ED 524B is a required reporting form
with specific instructions.
 The form is used by all ED grants and has
been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Project
Directors must follow the directions listed in
the Dear Colleague letter and ED 524B
Instructions provided by OSEP
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS
Reporting Period:
For first year grants, the date is the beginning of the project year to 30 days before
the due date.
For grants in years 2-4, it is the date from the end of the previous reporting period
to 30 days before the due date.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS
Budget Expenditures:
Report the expenditures during the “Reporting Period.” Must be data or
information from the business or grants office.
ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS
Performance Measure Status:
This will be checked “No” since OSEP is asking for data for the reporting period,
not for the budget period.
The date entered here will be the due date for your Final Performance
Report; which is 90 days after the end of the grant.
Signatory must have authority to sign on behalf of the
institution since the grant is from the Department to the
institution and not to an individual.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHEET
U.S. Department of Education
Grant Performance Report (ED 524B)
Executive Summary
OMB No. 1890-0004
Exp. 10-31-2007
PR/ Number # (11 characters)_______
(See Instructions)
*** Provide highlights of the project's activities and the extent to which the expected outcomes
and performance measures were achieved during the reporting period. Do NOT include the
project abstract.
ED 524B
Page 2 of 11
PROJECT STATUS CHART
PROJECT STATUS CHART
Enter one of the project’s objectives; on subsequent pages, you will enter
additional project objectives as submitted in your grant application.
PROJECT STATUS CHART
Enter your PROJECT performance measures that show you are
measuring progress toward meeting the objective.
In addition, enter PROGRAM performance measures that align with the
objective.
PROJECT STATUS CHART
Here you identify if the performance measure is a project measure,
“PROJ,” or a program measure, “PRGM.”
Note:
Program Measures refer to OSEP Measures required in all personnel
development grants. Project Measures are unique to your grant.
PROJECT STATUS CHART
QUANTITATIVE DATA
Depending on your measure, enter either a raw number or a ratio and percentage.
In this area of the page, enter information to explain the quantitative data, as well
as activities the project engaged in to meet the objective.
PROJECT STATUS CHART
QUALITATIVE DATA
If measure requires the collection of qualitative data, then enter “N/A” under
the Raw Number and Percentage columns.
N/A
N/A N/A
In this area of the page, report qualitative data along with other information
you wish to report regarding the identified objective.
N/A
Implement a high-quality professional development program to help LEAs implement a multi-tiered system for behavior /academics
.
1.a. Performance Measure
Measure Type
The percentage of professional
development/training activities provided
through the SPDG based on scientific- or
evidence-based instructional/behavioral
practices.
PROG
1.b. Performance Measure
Quantitative Data
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
Actual Performance Data
%
Raw
Number
/
Ratio
%
25/25
100
Quantitative Data
Measure Type
90 % of low performing schools receiving
training in PBIS will meet the benchmark for
a positive school climate, as demonstrated
by the Climate Staff Survey, by year 3 of
their PBIS training.
PROJ
1.c. Performance Measure
Measure Type
90% of low performing schools receiving
training in PBIS will decrease the number of
suspensions of students with disabilities by
20% or more by year 3 of their PBIS
training.
PROJ
Target
Raw
Number
Ratio
18 /20
Actual Performance Data
%
Raw
Number
90
Ratio
12/20
%
60
Quantitative Data
Target
Raw
Number
Actual Performance Data
Ratio
%
18/20
90
Raw
Number
Ratio
10/20
%
50%
Implement a high-quality professional development program to help LEAs implement a multi-tiered system for behavior /academics
Explanation of Progress (Include Qualitative Data and Data Collection Information)
(1a) The multi-tiered models of support trainings have been based on the best research available regarding (1) evidence-based
practices in professional development and follow-up activities (e.g., coaching) (provide citations), (2) evidence-based practices in
school-wide positive behavior support (provide citations), (3) evidence-based practices in intensive behavior support (provide
citations), (4) evidence-based practices in school-wide literacy and math instruction, assessment, and decision making (provide
citations), and (5) evidence-based practices in intensive literacy and math support (provide citations). The 25 activities (describe more
fully) have all been built based on these evidence bases.
(1b) There is a promising evidence base that links improvements in school climate with the full implementation of PBIS (citations).
Although this is only the second year of implementation for the low performing schools, for the 8 schools that did not meet the
benchmark set for the climate measure, interviews have been set up with one or more of the school staff to determine greater levels of
assistance that may be needed from project staff.
(1c) The is a moderate evidence base that links the full implementation of PBIS with decreases in the number of students with
disabilities who are suspended. The 10 schools that have not decreased suspension by 20% will participate in interviews to help
determine support needs.
Final Page of the Report
Section B: Refer to the instructions for Section B in the ED 524B
Instructions
Section C: Include additional information (recruitment material,
syllabi, evaluation instruments, journal articles)
Section B – Budget Information
O S E P
A. Actual Expenditures for Reporting Period (e.g., May
1, 2009 – March 31, 2010: $836,750.
B. Provide explanation if you are not expending funds
at the expected rate: A final cohort of
paraprofessionals was not added due to withdrawal
of one of the participating LEAs. This means that
$100,000 was not spent that was planned to be
spent during this period. We will have twice the
number of paraprofessionals than had been
planned in the next cohort. Accordingly we plan to
spend these funds in the next year of the project.
Section B – Budget Information
O S E P
C. Describe any changes to your budget that affected
your ability to achieve your approved project
activities and/or project objectives. The DOE has
decided to use IDEA Part B funds to support ---activity, thus we will spend $90,000 for the activity,
instead of $180,000. However, we will be able to
reach the objectives set out in our grant application
for this activity.
D. Describe any significant changes to your budget
resulting from modifications of project activities. We
have added 5 new facilitators to the professional
development team that serves 5 LEAs. We are
using $90,000 to pay for these facilitators*.
Section B – Budget Information
O S E P
E. Do you expect to have any unexpended funds at
the end of the current budget period? (Explain
why, provide an estimate, and indicate how you
plan to use the unexpended funds (carryover) in the
next budget period.) As explained above, we will
be carrying over $100,000 which we will spend on
our paraprofessional activities next year.
F. Describe any anticipated changes in your budget
for the next budget period that require prior
approval from the Department. All of the changes
described above have been discussed and
approved by our Project Officer.
Section C – Additional Informaiton
O S E P
•
If applicable, please provide a list of current
partners on your grant and indicate if any partners
changed during the reporting period. Please indicate if
you anticipate any change in partners during the next
budget period. If any of your partners changed during
the reporting period, please describe whether this
impacted your ability to achieve your approved project
objectives and/or project activities.
•
If instructed by your program office, please
report on any statutory reporting requirements for this
grant program.
•
Describe any changes that you wish to make in the grant’s
activities for the next budget period that are consistent with the
scope and objectives of your approved application.
O S E P
•
If you are requesting changes to the approved Project
Director listed in Block 3 of your GAN and/or to other approved
key personnel listed in Block 4 with a proposed effective date
during the remainder of the current budget period or the next
budget period, please indicate the name, title and percentage of
time of the requested key personnel. Please indicate whether the
proposed Project Director or other key personnel change would be
effective during the current or next budget period. Additionally,
please attach a resume or curriculum vitae for the proposed key
personnel when you submit your performance report.
Note: Do not report on any key personnel changes that were already
made during the current or previous budget period(s). Departmental
approval must be requested and received prior to making key personnel
changes.
•
O S E P
•Provide any other appropriate
information about the status of your
project including any unanticipated
outcomes or benefits from your
project.
Submitting the 524B
O S E P
Submit the 524B at http://e-Grants.ed.gov
Signed ED 524B Cover Sheet must be faxed
to Kimberly Savoy-Brown at 202-245-7635
Two conditions require hard copy or email
submission rather than submission through eGrants –
 Grants in no-cost extension
 Grants that have been forward funded
Submitting the 524B
O S E P
Regular postal service:
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs
Attn: Kimberly Savoy-Brown, PCP – Room 5060
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202
Hand delivery or parcel service:
U.S. Department of Education
Attn: Kimberly Savoy-Brown, Mail Stop 255
LBJ Basement Level 1
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202
Program Measures: Things to
Think about
O S E P
Measure 1.1 – Evidence-Based Practices (Personnel): The
percent of personnel receiving professional development
through the SPDG based on scientific- or evidence-based
instructional practices.
•Describe the PD activities conducted by the project and the
number of personnel trained in each activity.
•Provide evidence through citations and explanations.
•Metric: # of personnel who received SPDG PD based on
EBPs divided by the total # of personnel who received PD
from the SPDG
Measure 1.2 – State Performance Plan (SPP) Alignment: The percent of
SPDG projects that implement personnel development/training activities
that are aligned with improvement strategies identified in their SPP.
O S E P
• Provide a description of each professional
development activity provided by the SPDG
that is aligned with SPP improvement
strategies.
•The reviewers will make the decision as a
result of what is available in your continuation
report.
•You do not need to connect to every indicator.
Measure 2.1 – Evidence-Based Practices (Training): The
percentage of professional development/training activities
provided through the SPDG based on scientific- or
evidence-based instructional/behavioral practices.
O S E P
•Provide descriptions of your professional
development activities.
•Provide evidence that these are evidencebased practices (EBPs)
•Metric: # of PD activities that are based on
scientific or EBPs divided by the Total # of PD
training activities provided by the SPDG
project.
Measure 2.2 – Sustained Practices: The percentage of
professional development/training activities based on
scientific- or evidence-based instructional/behavioral practices,
provided through the SPDG program, that are sustained
through on-going and comprehensive practices. (Long-term)
O S E P
• Taken from the final performance report.
•The final report must provide detailed documentation
on how PD provided by the project was sustained,
including a description of on-going and comprehensive
practices being conducted by the project (e.g.,
mentoring, coaching, structured guidance).
•Metric: # of PD initiatives based on scientific or
evidence-based instructional practices that have been
sustained divided by the Total # of PD training
initiatives provided by the SPDG program.
O S E P
Measure 3.1 – Teacher Retention: In states with
SPDG projects that have special education teacher
retention as a goal, the statewide percentage of
highly qualified special education teachers in state
identified professional disciplines (e.g., teachers of
children with emotional disturbance, deafness, etc.)
who remain teaching after the first two years of
employment.
•State identified professional disciplines
Measure 4.1 – Scale-up Scientific- or Evidence-Based Practices: The
percentage of SPDG projects that successfully replicate the use of
•scientific- or evidence-based instructional/behavioral practice in
schools. (Long-term)
•
O S E P
• Taken from your final performance report.
•Choose one or more of your
initiatives/evidence-based practices
• Provide the number of schools where the
practice has been implemented with fidelity as
a result of the SPDG activities
Contact your OSEP Project Officer
with any questions!
Due Date: April 30, 2010
Thank You!