Project Compass:
Project Implementation Year 4
Request for Proposals
Part One: Overview
Introduction
This Request for Proposals (RFP) invites each of the four institutions awarded Project
Compass Year 3 implementation grants to apply for continuation funding for the final year of
the implementation phase of the initiative.
The proposal will provide institutions an opportunity to discuss the types of information
yielded during three years of implementation and ongoing assessment, specifically in
relation to: (1) effectiveness of each of the funded interventions, and (2) understandings
about the particular cohort of students served and the assets most critical to their college
success. It is expected that this knowledge will inform appropriate ongoing modifications to
interventions for Year 4.
After one year of planning and three years of implementation work, each of the funded
campuses is asked to describe efforts to refine the funded interventions, with clear attention
given to data-based observations that: (1) substantiate the effectiveness of these efforts
over the past three years; (2) document how these efforts will be modified based on
findings from Year 3 work; and, (3) explain ways in which the implementation of these
interventions as well as the work of the campus community of practice has contributed to
campus-wide change efforts supporting the success of the target population identified in the
initial proposal. As in Year 3, campuses are asked to explain how institutional matching
funds indicate an assumption of responsibility for institutionalizing programs, policies,
and/or practices which have proven effective in retaining underserved students over the
past three years of funding. Campuses are encouraged to describe campus initiatives that
are complementary to, but not funded by, Project Compass, and the ways that they
represent a vigorous, longstanding commitment to the success of all students.
Theory of Change for Project Compass
The Project Compass theory of change presumes that underserved students will experience
higher levels of retention, success, and graduation if institutions develop programs and
services systemically that result from:



The collaboration of leaders from campus stakeholder groups (including
administrators, faculty, students, and community members);
Examining local data and current literature on retention, persistence, academic
success, and graduation; and,
Aligning the implementation of new programs and services for underserved students
with current campus policies, practices, and procedures that support academic
success.
Project Compass is also committed to fostering a variety of ways that participating
institutions approach, develop, and implement projects that result in retention, success, and
graduation of underserved students; as such, Project Compass is dedicated to building a
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 1 of 9
learning community of institutions engaged in systemic change to better support outcomes
for underserved students across New England.
The theory of change is grounded in six assumptions:
1. Underserved students are an asset and present opportunities for broad-based
institutional change in policy and practice, benefiting all students.
2. Sustained, institution-level change supporting increased success and retention of
underserved students requires ongoing collaboration from across the college—
including executive leadership and students—and can benefit from external
engagement with the community.
3. In and of themselves, “islands of excellence,” which retain underserved students in
larger numbers but which exist at the margins of the institution, will not result in
broad-based cultural change unless they are scaled up, both in scope and function
and connected to other institutional change initiatives.
4. Change in institutional culture—including practices, policies, and other conditions—
supporting the success and retention of underserved students must be supported by
extant research in the field.
5. An ongoing culture of evidence and inquiry where quantitative and qualitative data
from both internal and external sources are collected, interpreted, and analyzed is
essential to the formulation, implementation, and ongoing improvement of practices
and policies supporting underserved students.
6. Colleges and universities committed to institutional change to better serve
underserved students will benefit from ongoing collaborative relationships with peer
institutions possessing like commitments.
Required Activities
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Project Strategies
Institutional Community of Practice
Learning Community
Technical Assistance
Awards
Reporting
Project Evaluation
1. Project Strategies
Using the logic model format from previous Project Compass proposals, campuses
are asked to outline strategies proposed for implementation for Year 4 of the project,
including: (1) the audience which will benefit from the proposed activity (i.e., for
whom?); (2) core assumptions on which the activity is based (six core assumptions
for the Project Compass initiative); (3) project strategies; (4) project outcomes; (5)
measures of success; and (6) long-term impacts.
Campuses are expected to demonstrate a coherent connection between the strategies of the
previous three years and the proposed strategies for Year 4. The report narrative should
make clear the connections between what was learned from assessing Year 3 strategies, the
changes proposed for Year 4, and the continued commitment to the long-term retention of
underserved students on campus.
Institutions awarded Year 4 implementation grants will be expected to implement their Year
4 logic model strategies at two levels:
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 2 of 9
1. As a team-based community of practice within their institution; and,
2. As part of a cross-institutional learning community comprising all of the funded
Project Compass institutions.
2. Institutional Community of Practice
Each funded institution will convene its community of practice to:


Oversee the implementation of the proposed work for Year 4 and assess ongoing
progress using locally generated data.
Focus on institution-wide change supporting the retention, success, and graduation
rates of the targeted underserved population of students.
In the final year of funded work, each campus is strongly encouraged to evaluate the
current membership of its existing community of practice so that participants in Year 4 are
(1) well-suited to contribute to documenting the progress which the campus has made, and
(2) strategically positioned to contribute to institutionalization of the gains achieved through
the course of the project. This team should include key agents of institutional change as
well as those who are instrumental to implementing the interventions specific to Project
Compass funding. To institutionalize Project Compass work, campus communities of practice
may include: the president, chief academic officer, chief student affairs officer, chief
financial officer, the director of institutional research, faculty, students, and board and
community members. An ongoing record of community of practice proceedings is required.
Each community of practice at funded institutions will:
1. Convene a one- to two-day planning meeting at the beginning of the project year.
This initial planning meeting will result in an action plan coordinated across the
intervention areas and corresponding to the strategies documented in the Year 4
logic model and proposal narrative. The action plan will include a timeline of
activities required to advance each of the interventions toward the outcomes
established in the logic model.
2. Convene a series of three to six extended meetings, scheduled over the course of
the project year. The purpose of these meetings is to facilitate review of the
progress of funded work, including efforts to institutionalize change and sustain
project benefits once funding has ended.
3. In addition to the required meetings outlined in #1 and #2 above, members of each
community of practice are encouraged to take part—either as convenors or
participants—in two to four campus meetings which relate to sustaining institutional
efforts to support the success of underserved students.
4. Monitor and interpret data related to the interventions which it has proposed,
refining them as necessary.
5. Address the issue of sustainability and institutionalization of programs, practices,
and policies related to the retention of underserved students.
3. Learning Community
The Project Compass learning community comprises all the funded institutional communities
of practice. Each community of practice will participate in two, two-day regional meetings.
It is expected that the designated chair of each community of practice, along with a
consistent core of the team, will attend both meetings. The learning community allows
communities of practice from funded institutions as well as other area campuses to meet in
a structured environment designed to maximize learning from their collective experience
and address change issues from a broader context, offering additional opportunities for
technical assistance, problem solving, and collaboration.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 3 of 9
4. Technical Assistance
As the Nellie Mae Education Foundation’s intermediary for Project Compass, the New
England Resource Center for Higher Education (NERCHE) will provide technical assistance
related to the implementation of each participating grantee’s proposal through in-person
and virtual communication. Communities of practice at each funded institution will work
collaboratively with NERCHE throughout all phases of their work. Prior to the beginning of
Year 4, the community of practice and the NERCHE liaison should review the proposed work
and decide together on possible areas of support that would most benefit the purposes of
the Project as a whole as well as the proposed campus work. It may be particularly useful
to orient technical assistance to the efforts at sustaining and institutionalizing the gains
achieved over the duration of the project. As the intermediary for the Foundation, NERCHE
staff will be required to attend and contribute to each of the scheduled community of
practice meetings.
5. Awards
For Year 4, the award amount will be 25% less than the Year 3 funding level, with the
institution covering the difference (25%) between the grant award and the total project
budget. Continuation funding for Year 4 is contingent on the sponsoring institution’s
commitment to assuming responsibility for sustaining and institutionalizing the initiative,
using its own funds.
6. Reporting
Funded institutions will update NERCHE and the Nellie Mae Education Foundation regularly
on their progress by providing the following information:
a. A detailed plan for the use of implementation funds over the course of the year,
including an activity calendar resulting from the initial one- to two-day planning
meeting;
b. A revised logic model indicating any proposed changes in the institution’s
initiative;
c. A set of proceedings from each community of practice meeting;
d. Two self-assessment reports. The first report will include a year-to-date budget,
noting expenditures and balances as of the due date of the proposal. The second
(and final) report will include a comprehensive, data-based summary of the
institution’s efforts to increase retention, success, and graduation of the
institution’s cohort of underserved students during the five years of funding. This
proposal will also include a summary budget report for Year 4 activity.
7. Project Evaluation
The Foundation has engaged the Center for Youth and Communities at Brandeis University
to conduct an evaluation of the Project Compass initiative. All funded campuses are required
to cooperate fully with this external evaluation team in providing requested data.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 4 of 9
Part Two: Instructions for Submission of Self-Assessment Report/
Proposal for Continuation of Funding
DEADLINE:
Proposals must be submitted electronically to projectcompass@umb.edu as a single PDF
document no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT, June 3, 2011.
Section
Title
Page Limit
---
Cover Page (including project abstract)
1
I. Logic Model
I.
Year 4 Logic Model
As needed
II. Self-Assessment/Proposal Narrative
II.A
Discussion of Progress and Proposed Changes
30-40
II.B
Summary of Plans for Year 4
2-3
II.C
Sustainability
3-5
III. Community of Practice
III.A
III.B
Community of Practice Membership (template
provided)
Changes to Directory of Community of Practice
Members (same template as III.A)
IV.
1
Budget and Budget Narrative
IV.A
Year 4 Proposal Budget (template provided)
IV.B
Year 4 Proposal Budget Narrative (template provided)
V.
2-3
1
5-8
Selected Evidence
V.A
Proceedings from Community of Practice Meetings
20-25
V.B
Other Selected Evidence (campuses may provide
additional evidence, beyond the 50 pages, by
referencing relevant websites.)
50
Cover Page
The cover page should include:




The name of the institution;
The title of the project;
The contact information for the community of practice leader(s);
A one-paragraph abstract (150 words) that summarizes the goals and related
activities for Year 4 suitable for posting on the Project Compass website; the number
of students in the project cohort and their demographic information; and the number
of total students, with a general summary of related demographic descriptors.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 5 of 9
I. Logic Model
I. Year 4 Logic Model
Create a detailed Year 4 logic model using your Year 3 logic model as a template; include
sections for Assumptions, Problem Statement, Strategies, Outcomes, Measures of Success,
and Long-Term Impacts. Include here only those interventions or aspects of interventions
that are funded through Project Compass; activities which complement Project Compass,
but which have separate funding sources, may be discussed in the sustainability section of
the narrative. The logic model documents only strategies and outcomes for which
institutions are accountable to Project Compass and the Nellie Mae Education Foundation.
This logic model should include:




Strategies and outcomes proposed for Year 4 in the narrative;
Professional development strategies that will disseminate learning from the
project and build capacity in priority areas;
Appropriate measures of success for each outcome, aligned with any baseline
measures set and adjusted in Years 1-3; and,
Strategies for deepening understanding of the complexity of the student
cohort and of the nature of the retention problem(s) (e.g., structures for
continued research such as focus groups or longitudinal studies).
II. Self-Assessment Report/Proposal Narrative
II.A. Discussion of Progress and Proposed Changes
In this section, you will discuss in greater detail your interpretation of available Year 3 data
related to (a) measuring the effectiveness of Year 3 strategies to achieve outcomes, and (b)
implications of these results for Year 4 program design.
Follow the structure provided to discuss strategies as a group, proceeding in turn through
each intervention area.
Intervention Area I: [insert name as it appears on the logic model]
The strategies for this intervention area are: [list exactly as they appear in the
logic model]
1. What progress has been made over the course of the entire project period in
accomplishing the outcomes associated with this set of strategies, as articulated in
the logic model? Substantiate progress by referencing the appropriate data in the
Selected Evidence section and by explaining how the data relate to the established
measures of success. Pay particular attention to the explanation of cases where the
outcomes did not meet the stated target for success.
2. Based on your assessment of what is working and what needs to change, explain any
significant adjustments to this cluster of strategies/interventions for Year 4.
3. Discuss what you have learned, through this intervention, about the students in your
Project Compass cohort. For example, what further information do you have about
barriers to their persistence at your campus or the kinds of assets that are most
linked to persistence? What discoveries about student behaviors have affected your
outreach and engagement efforts? How are these kinds of learning integrated into
plans for Year 4?
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 6 of 9
II.B. Summary of Plans for Year 4
Discuss how lessons learned in Year 3 about how best to support the campus’ Project
Compass student cohort inform your priorities and plans for Year 4.
1. Review earlier iterations of the logic models for previous years, and then explain the
rationale for Year 4 interventions. Summarize how the project has evolved to your
current plan, organizing your summary by each of the major interventions that are
proposed. Which elements of the original logic model have remained? Which have
changed?
2. Discuss any new strategies not already discussed in section II.A. What is the
rationale for adding these strategies? How do they align with your data on the
underlying factors affecting persistence and success of the cohort, acquired through
implementation of strategies in previous years? Explain the challenges to
implementing proposed interventions and the assets you will mobilize to address
these challenges.
II.C. Sustainability
Assess the potential for sustaining Project Compass work beyond June 30, 2012, the end of
the funding period for Project Compass; consider current and anticipated changes both
within the institution and the external environment of which it is a part.
Discuss each of the following areas:






Key examples of any recent organizational changes (e.g., changes in structures,
policies, and culture) and their implications for sustaining current Project Compass
strategies. Include newly funded initiatives and how they support Project Compass
accomplishments and ongoing linkages with other campus and/or community
initiatives that support the work of the Project.
The status of integrating implementation strategies within core institutional activities
(e.g., data collection and analysis, pedagogy, faculty development).
Strategies and structures that will support opportunities for professional
development and capacity building around issues of supporting underserved
students—opportunities that would continue after Year 4 of the project.
Changes in structure, policies, and culture that are likely to facilitate the ongoing
assessment of institutional efforts supporting the persistence to success of
underserved students, grounding decision-making through available data collection
and analysis.
Status of efforts on the capacity to sustain cross-campus discussions so that key
stakeholders can continue to contribute to ongoing change efforts.
Ways in which the institution will ensure sustainability of interventions and meet the
requirements for institutional matching funds in Year 4—i.e., a 25% reduction of
total annual funds granted for Year 3 with the institution covering the difference
(25%) between the grant award and the total project.
III. Community of Practice
III.A. Community of Practice Membership
Use the template provided to list members of the Year 4 community of practice and provide
a rationale for the group membership as it is proposed.
III.B. Changes to Directory of Community of Practice Members
Using the same template as above (III.A), please list any members who will be leaving the
community of practice in Year 4, and provide a brief rationale for the change.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 7 of 9
IV. Budget and Budget Narrative
IV.A. Year 4 Proposal Budget
Use the budget template provided to note how requested funds will support the applicant’s
participation in required activities during Year 4 of implementation funding (July 1, 2011 to
June 30, 2012.
Proposed budgets should outline the following costs:
1. Any costs related to personnel participation (release time) in three to six community
of practice meetings held at the institution. The initial planning meeting will last one
to two days; each of the subsequent meetings will be extended sessions. Stipends
and/or honoraria to support participation in the community of practice may be
included in this category.
2. If funds are requested for full- or part-time staff, the budget narrative must explain
how costs for such staff will be assumed fully by the institution by the end of Year 4
of funding.
3. Travel costs for the community of practice to attend the two required two-day
learning community meetings, to be conducted in a location in central New England;
budget estimates should anticipate lodging and ground transportation to the meeting.
Each meeting will start mid-morning on day 1 and conclude in the late afternoon on
day 2. Meals during this period will be provided by Project Compass, not by
individual grantee budgets. Other travel expenses may include travel expenses to
attend relevant conferences and/or workshops.
4. Professional development resources should focus on institutionalizing the learning of
the community of practice through publication and presentation, within and outside
the campus. Strategies to facilitate this expansion of learning may include stipends
for attending conferences/workshops contingent on presenting to colleagues at
appropriate venues, sponsoring campus-based seminars and presentations, and
stipends for revising and presenting curricula. Other authorized expenses in this
category include electronic and/or print resources and speaker fees. Supplies may
include office supplies and food/beverage related to community of practice meetings.
5. Other expenses may include institutional strategies which are deemed essential to
the effectiveness of the institution’s Project Compass community of practice.
Capital improvements and the purchase of equipment, including computers and computer
software, are not permitted. Also, project budgets cannot include indirect costs to the
institution.
IV.B. Year 4 Proposal Budget Narrative
Using the provided template for the budget narrative for Year 4, briefly explain intended
uses for requested funds, the institutional cost-share, and the calculations used to
determine amounts requested as well as the cost-share.
V. Selected Evidence
V.A. Proceedings from Community of Practice Meetings
This section should include a set of agendas and notes from each of the six to eight
community of practice meetings held during Year 3.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 8 of 9
V.B. Data reports and other relevant supporting documents
Include here all the documents that support the discussion of progress during Year 3 in the
narrative. All outcomes and measures of success established on the Year 3 logic model
should have corresponding sets of data or an explanation of the absence of data related to
the outcome.
Based in Quincy, Massachusetts, the Nellie Mae Education Foundation is the largest
philanthropy in New England that focuses exclusively on promoting access, quality and
effectiveness of education. Established in 1998, the Foundation provides grants and other
support to education programs in New England that are designed to improve low-income
and underserved students' academic achievement and access to higher education. The
Foundation also funds research that examines critical educational opportunity issues
affecting underserved students, adults and families. It convenes educators, policymakers
and community members to discuss and influence pivotal education issues. Since 1998, the
Foundation has awarded nearly $72 million in grants and support to education programs in
the region. For more information, visit www.nmefdn.org.
Affiliated with the College of Education and Human Development at the University of
Massachusetts, Boston, the New England Resource Center for Higher Education (NERCHE) is
a center for inquiry, applied research, and policy. NERCHE is committed to facilitating
collaborative change processes in higher education to address social justice in a diverse
democracy. Since its inception in 1988, NERCHE has supported administrators, faculty, and
staff across the region in becoming more effective practitioners and leaders as they
navigate the complexities of institutional innovation and change. NERCHE’s research
projects, programs, and activities draw upon the practitioner perspective to improve
practice and to inform and influence policy, moving from the local to regional and national
levels. For more information, visit www.nerche.org.
Project Compass. Year 4 Implementation RFP.
Page 9 of 9