Overview
Title
Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Education made new rules for people who want to get money for projects. These rules say to use computers and AI carefully, send papers in a special way, and that they might have to wait a little after signing up before they can send their forms.
Summary AI
The Department of Education published updated common instructions for individuals applying for funds from its discretionary grant programs. These new instructions replace those published on December 7, 2022. The changes make the instructions clearer and more straightforward, with added guidance on using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in grant applications. The Department also highlights the importance of responsible AI use and refers applicants to resources for ensuring ethical AI practices in education.
Abstract
On December 7, 2022, the Department of Education (Department) published a revised set of common instructions for applicants seeking funds under a Department discretionary grant competition. In this notice, the Department is publishing a revised version of the common instructions that supersedes the version published on December 7, 2022.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Department of Education has published a revised set of instructions for applicants seeking discretionary grant funds. These instructions, dated December 23, 2024, update previous guidelines issued on December 7, 2022. They aim to provide more clarity and directness to applicants while including new considerations for using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in grant applications.
General Summary
The document from the Department of Education describes the updated procedures for individuals and organizations applying for discretionary grants. The guidelines offer a detailed look into the requirements for submission, including application packaging, formatting needs, and the importance of proper registration with government systems like the System for Award Management (SAM). New considerations around AI's use in application preparation are also noteworthy, encouraging applicants to employ responsible AI practices.
Significant Issues and Concerns
There are several important issues within the new instructions. Firstly, while the document introduces guidelines about AI's role in applications, it places full responsibility on the applicants for ensuring their content's integrity without offering substantial support or guidelines to manage associated risks such as bias or plagiarism. Additionally, the guidance on what to do in case of technical issues while using Grants.gov is limited only to issues within that system, offering little support for problems external to it, like local internet outages. This could leave some applicants at a disadvantage.
Furthermore, the requirement to submit documents only after converting them into read-only flattened PDFs could prove problematic for applicants not familiar with this technical process. The Department's encouragement to handle such technical details may unintentionally disqualify otherwise eligible applicants. Similarly, there is ambiguity around how soon applicants can submit applications after updating SAM.gov registration, potentially complicating their submission planning.
Impact on the Public
On a broad scale, these guidelines are designed to streamline and clarify the application process for discretionary grants, which are vital for various educational initiatives. Clearer instructions might improve application quality and reduce confusion among potential applicants. However, the stringent technical requirements and registration updates may pose challenges for applicants, particularly smaller entities or individuals who may not have dedicated administrative support.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For larger organizations, like universities or educational consortia, the updated instructions might represent an improved and more navigable process, given that such entities typically have robust administrative mechanisms to handle detailed application requirements.
Conversely, smaller educational entities or individuals might find themselves burdened by stringent technical requirements, which could be a hurdle. These entities often lack the resources to easily navigate process complexities, including requirements for PDF formatting and frequent registration updates, which might disproportionately affect their ability to compete for grants. Additionally, those using or considering using AI would need to navigate the responsibility for any inadvertent outcomes from AI-assisted proposals, potentially requiring additional oversight or consultancy to remain compliant with stipulations.
Overall, while the revisions aim to increase transparency and efficiency, close attention to resource availability and potential barriers for smaller stakeholders will be essential for ensuring the revised instructions achieve their intended inclusivity and accessibility.
Issues
• The document mentions that applicants are responsible for ensuring the integrity of application materials if using AI, including risks of bias, inaccuracy, falsification, and plagiarism. This places a significant burden of responsibility on the applicants without clear guidelines or mechanisms provided by the Department for managing these risks.
• The document advises submission through Grants.gov but does not provide contingency plans for applicants who might face technical problems beyond the Grants.gov system, such as local internet outages.
• The use of language such as 'do not email them unless explicitly allowed in a competition NIA' could potentially create confusion if the process for obtaining such explicit allowance is not clearly defined or communicated.
• The necessity of converting all submissions into read-only flattened PDFs is a technical requirement that not all applicants may be familiar with or equipped to handle, leading to potential unintentional disqualification.
• There is ambiguity in how long after SAM.gov registration becomes active a person can access and submit applications through Grants.gov, stated as '24 to 48 hours', which may lead to planning difficulties for applicants.
• The instructions for submitting paper applications seem to discourage them without providing a robust alternative for those who face significant barriers to electronic submission, such as lack of access to reliable internet.
• The document requires applicants to annually update their SAM registration but doesn't provide a clear process or reminder system to help applicants comply with this requirement.
• While the document discusses accommodating disabilities in the application process, it lacks clarity on specific steps or available resources to ensure submissions remain competitive, given potential challenges.