CC Program 2026 Grant Competition Content Centers Pre-Application Webinar for Prospective Applicants

Welcome to the pre-application webinar for prospective applicants for the Comprehensive Centers Program 2026 Grant Competition for the Content Centers. My name is Dr. Michelle Daly. I serve as a group leader for the Comprehensive Centers Program and the Office of Program and Grantee Support Services at the U.S. Department of Education. I will be joined today by my colleague, Ernst Keltz, who serves as the Competition Manager for the 2026 Grant Competition for the Comprehensive Centers Program. The Department is accepting applications through June 30, 2026 for proposals to establish comprehensive centers under separate application notices and instruction through this competition. The Department may award, may make awards for a National Comprehensive Center, Regional Comprehensive Centers, three types of content centers, one emerging need centers focusing on projects or proposals that are designed to strengthen core instruction through creating and supporting principals and other school leaders in implementing strategic staffing models. At least two field-initiated centers with preference given to applicants submitting proposals to establish centers focused on evidence-based literacy instruction are strengthening core instruction through improving mathematic instruction, and one national center on improving literacy for students with disabilities. Each center type has its own absolute priority, competitive preference priority, and application requirements. Because these are very distinct priorities, applicants must review the relevant application notice and instruction, or ANI, for each center type they are interested in. If an applicant intends to compete for more than one comprehensive center, whether it's a national center, regional centers, or content centers, they must submit a standalone application for each center they wish to operate. Applicants can review recorded webinars viewing the specific requirements for each center type on the U.S. Department of Education YouTube channel. This webinar will provide information for prospective applicants for a content center grant award. During this webinar, we will review details for the application notice and instruction, or ANI, including the priorities, program, application eligibility requirements, and selection criteria that applies to applications for a content center. Next, we will go over submission procedures and the application review process, and finally, we will close with a reminder of the competition resources available to prospective applicants. As a result of reviewing this webinar, applicants should be able to identify the application requirements and expectations outlined in the application notice and instruction, or ANI, including, for example, the priorities, application requirements, due dates, and review process for the 2026 content center grant competition. Understand the process for submitting the grant application on Grants.gov, including how to use the online submission platform, submission methods, and required forms. The funding opportunity number associated with this competition is ED-GRANTS-05826001. The assistance listing number, or ALN, for this program is 84.283b. The funding opportunity listed on Grants.gov contains the full application notice and instruction for this competition. The application notice and instruction serves as the official announcement for this competition. Applicants should not rely solely on this webinar for information and guidance, should only use this presentation as a resource in conjunction with the official instruction in the ANI. Before applying for this grant, interested applicants should thoroughly review the ANI, which includes the application package instruction available on Grants.gov. Applicants may also review resources available on the Applicant Information page on the Comprehensive Centers Program website at ED.gov. To support clarity throughout the presentation, this slide provides a list of acronyms that are referenced throughout this webinar. Eligibility for this program is established in Section 203b of the Education Technical Assistance Act, or ETAA. Applicants eligible for this grant include research organizations, institutions, agencies, institutions of higher education, or partnerships amongst those entities, or individuals with a demonstrated ability or capacity to carry out the activities described in the ANI. A group of eligible entities may also apply as a consortium in accordance with the requirements in 34 CFR Part 75, Subpart C. The Comprehensive Center Network, or CC Network, is comprised of three types of comprehensive centers, including National Comprehensive Center, or National Center, Regional Comprehensive Centers, or Regional Centers, and Content Centers. Together, these centers form a network to provide capacity building and support to educational agencies and schools that improve instruction, expand opportunity, and close achievement gaps for all students, especially those with the greatest needs. The National Center coordinates client-driven technical assistance to address State Educational Agencies, or SEAs, Regional Educational Agencies, or REAs, Tribal Education Agencies, or TEAs, and Local Education Agencies, LEAs, priorities related to evidence use and implementation of evidence-based practices to improve student outcomes nationally. Each regional center provides intensive, client-driven technical assistance aligned to State and local priorities and needs. These services help States select, implement, and sustain evidence-based program practices and interventions in support of improved educational practices and student outcomes, especially in math and literacy. Content centers provide technical assistance on a specific topic of national or regional importance reflected across State and local needs priorities. All centers are expected to coordinate services, consult each other, and provide services to clients. The National Center helps facilitate collaborations across centers and support dissemination of products, resources, and information from the CC Network through the CC Network website, newsletter, and media. Funded by the Institute of Education Science, the Nation's 10 Regional Education Laboratories, or RELs, partner with educators and policymakers nationwide. REL work is change-oriented, supporting meaningful local, regional, and State decisions about education policies, programs, and practices designed to improve learner outcomes. RELs collaborate with State Departments of Education, school district leaders, and classroom educators, and other education stakeholders to address their most pressing problems of education policies and practice. Their work includes high-quality applied research, training, coaching, and technical support to educators and policymakers, and sharing information about what works to improve learner outcomes. Content centers, importantly, partner with the RELs to disseminate the products of centers to regionally diverse SCAs, LEAs, REAs, and schools. So what are learning agendas? A learning agenda is a strategic, multi-year plan to identify and address priority policy questions using data and evidence. Learning agendas serve to identify high-priority questions that matter most for improving programs, policies, and outcomes. Guide research, evaluation, and data collection activities in a coordinated way. Support evidence-based decision-making to improve effectiveness and efficiency, and promote transparency and collaboration through engagement with internal and external stakeholders. State learning agendas document an individual State's most pressing problems of educational policy and practice, and the researchable questions that, if answered, could dramatically accelerate State's progress towards addressing those problems. In 2026, the National Comprehensive Center, in partnership with the regional centers and the RELs, invited SCAs in each region to participate in a pilot of a standardized learning agenda development process. The goal is to develop a process complete with templates, protocols, and other supporting resources that all SCAs can use as they develop their own learning agenda. A learning agenda complements an SCA's strategic plan and should be developed in tandem to ensure alignment. A strategic plan supports the vision and the mission of the organization and typically describes agency priorities, strategies, and milestones. Learning agendas help States go deeper to align their priorities across programs and initiatives and use data and evidence more strategically to make sure that their strategies result in better outcomes. The Department envisions a partnership between SCAs, regional centers, and RELs to support SCAs in their development and implementation of learning agendas and to, in turn, align RELs and CT plans with learning agenda priorities. The Department expects the National Center to support RELs and regional centers in working with their States to develop learning agendas, such as by producing and adapting tools and resources, providing additional expertise as needed, sharing examples of modeled learning agendas, or convening States across regions as needed. Through the State Learning Agenda Initiative, the Department is funding the National Center to develop learning agenda tools and processes tested and refined with the eight pilot States that all centers and RELs will be able to use to support States in this activity starting in 2027. When States set their own agendas, RELs and comprehensive centers can more effectively work together to advance work driven by State-defined priorities and promote coherent and strategic use of program resources. We will now review the funding opportunity description for this competition, starting with the priorities for applications for Emerging Needs Content Centers. The Department invites applications for one Emerging Needs Content Center. Applications to operate the Emerging Needs Content Center must respond to two absolute priorities, both absolute priority one, Emerging Needs Content Center, and absolute priority two, meaningful learning opportunities, strategic staffing, which establishes the focus area of this content center. The first absolute priority establishes the type of content center, which is The second absolute priority establishes the specific topic of the emerging national or regional needs for the center, which in this competition is meaningful learning opportunities, strategic staffing. The competition preference priority for the Emerging Needs Content Center is returning education to the State. Qualifying proposals may receive 10 additional points for this priority. Applicants should review the ANI for specific information on how to meet the and competitive preference priorities for this content center. We will begin by reviewing the absolute priorities for the Emerging Needs Content Center. To meet the absolute priority, applicants must submit projects that propose to establish and operate a content center to provide technical assistance on a specific topic of national or regional importance reflected across state and local needs and priorities. Applications are required to address the identified topic areas in order to be considered for funding under this focus area. The services provided must be of high quality, useful, and relevant client-driven targeted and universal capacity building services to FEA, REA, PEA, and LEA clients that are designed to build state and local capacity and improve educational opportunities, educator practice, and student outcomes. Content centers must, as needed, provide subject matter expertise to strengthen the intensive capacity building delivered by regional centers or to design universal or targeted capacity building services that address identified client needs. Proposals to establish an Emerging Needs Center must clearly explain how the center will address the established topic, present data in demonstrating the technical assistance needs of the CC clients, and outline an approach for delivering capacity building services in response to those specific topic needs. The Emerging Needs Content Center must provide high quality, useful, and relevant targeted and universal capacity building services in the designated content area of expertise to FEA, REA, PEA, and LEA clients. The services must be designed to improve educational opportunities, educator practice, and student outcomes as described in Section 203F of the ETAA. In addition, the center must identify, synthesize, and share evidence-based practices to build the capacity of practitioners, education system leaders, schools, LEAs, and FEAs to use evidence within the designated content area. Applicants for the Emerging Needs Center must respond to both Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2. For Absolute Priority 2, the applicants for the center must propose projects that focus on strengthening core instruction through efforts that develop principals and other school leaders to implementing strategic staffing models, establishing instructional leadership roles, or developing models for teachers and paraprofessional advancement that incentivize high-performing educators in innovative ways to better support student learning and achievement. There is one competitive preference priority in this competition for the Emerging Needs Content Center. To ensure that proposals for the comprehensive centers are responsive to the needs of states served, the department has included Competitive Preference 1, Returning Education to the State. In this competition, the department will award 10 additional CPP points to projects that will be carried out by state education agencies, tribal education agencies, entities identified, designated, or endorsed by a governor or chief state education official or a consortia of such entities. This means the applicants for the award must meet at least one of these criteria to qualify for the 10 competitive preference points. Any application that the department determines meets one or more of these four criteria will be awarded the competitive preference points. Applicants will not be awarded more points for meeting more of the criteria. To meet the criterion for entities identified, designated, or endorsed by a governor or chief state education official, applicants must include specific evidence that a governor or chief state official has identified, designated, or endorsed a project. Specific evidence could include a letter of endorsement on official letterhead signed by the governor or chief state education official and should be included in the application at the time of submission. The letter should clearly indicate the state's support for the proposal. States may choose to endorse more than one proposal for any given competition that they believe would meet their needs. Applicants need at least one state endorsement to qualify under this criterion. Please note, if the department is unable to clearly identify an identification, designation, or endorsement by a governor or chief state education official, the department may determine that the application does not meet the CPP under this criterion and points would not be awarded. Applicants should clearly review the ANI for detailed guidance on meeting all absolute and competitive preference priority requirements. The second type of content center in this competition is the field-initiated content centers. There is one absolute priority and three competitive preference priorities for field-initiated centers. The absolute priority for this competition is field-initiated content centers. There are three competitive preference priorities, CPP-2, Returning Education to the States, and CPP-3, Promoting Evidence-Based Literacy, or CPP-4, Meaningful Learning Opportunities in Mathematics. Applicants for the field-initiated content centers may receive 10 competitive preference points under CPP-2, Returning Education to the States, and up to 5 additional points for projects or proposals under either Competitive Preference Priority-3, Evidence-Based Literacy, or CPP-4, Meaningful Learning Opportunities in Mathematics. Applicants should review the ANI for specific information on how to meet the absolute and competitive preference priorities for the field-initiated content centers. First, we will review the absolute priority for field-initiated content centers. As part of the Department's objective to return education to the states, field-initiated content centers allow applicants to identify potential areas of need in addition to those identified by the Department. To meet the absolute priority, applicants must submit projects that propose to establish and operate a content center to provide technical assistance to CPP clients on an education topic of significant national or regional need as identified by states and other CPP clients. Centers must provide high-quality, useful, and relevant client-driven, targeted, and universal capacity building services to SDA, REA, CEA, and LEA clients designed to build state and local capacity and improve educational opportunities, educator practice, and student outcomes, as described in Section 203F of the ETA, related to their specified topic area. They must also support regional centers, as needed, with subject matter expertise to strengthen the intensive capacity building services provided by the regional centers. The proposals must clearly identify the topic of the project that it will focus on and provide evidence of state and local educational data need analysis to demonstrate national need for the proposed center. As a reminder, applicants should read the ANI in its entirety for a comprehensive description of each priority. Finally, topics for field-initiated content centers must be based on national or cross-regional needs expressed by more than one region. These topics should be aligned to the statutory purpose of the Comprehensive Centers Program, as articulated in Section 203F of the ETA, and may include, but are not limited to, proposals that focus on specific educational needs, such as improving math and literacy achievement, college and career readiness, closing achievement gaps, or encouraging and sustaining school improvement. Proposals will be evaluated specifically for their alignment in the allowable purposes of the Comprehensive Centers Program defined in the ETAA. These purposes focus on supporting implementation of Elementary and Secondary Education Act programs and specifically focus on supporting the needs of schools identified for improvement under Title I of the ESEA. Please refer specifically to Section 203F of the ETAA, which identifies priority areas for this program. Proposals that do not align intended statutory purposes of the Comprehensive Centers Program will not be funded. Applicants should be able to describe how they identify the needs for their proposal, The common cross-regional or national needs should be publicly documented, such as in state learning agendas or another similar public identification of needs and priorities set forth by SEAs, REAs, TEAs, or LEAs from more than one region. The Department notes that many states may not have learning agendas and encourages applicants to consider other data sources of SEA, REA, TEA, or LEA identifications of needs and priorities from more than one region. Applicants should clearly document the sources referenced in determining the needs for their proposal. Applicants may also refer to the needs and priorities identified in the Department's most recent Regional Advisory Committee, or RAC, report published in 2023. These reports are available on the Department's website and are also linked here. There are three optional competitive preference priorities that apply to applications for field-initiated content centers. To ensure that proposals for Comprehensive Centers are responsive to the needs of the states they serve, the Department has included Competitive Preference Priority 1, Returning Education to the State. In this competition, the Department will award 10 Competitive Preference points to projects or proposals that will be carried out by state educational agencies, tribal educational agencies, entities identified, designated, or endorsed by a government of chief state education officials or a consortia of states. This means the applicant for the award must meet at least one of these criteria to qualify for the Competitive Preference. Any application that the Department determines meets one or more of these four criteria will be awarded the full Competitive Preference. Applicants will not be awarded more points for meeting more of the criteria. To meet the criterion for entities identified, designated, or endorsed by a governor or chief state education official, applicants must include specific evidence that a governor or chief state official has identified, designated, or endorsed the project. Specific evidence could include a letter of endorsement, an official letterhead signed by the governor or chief state education official, and should be included with the application at the time of submission. The letter should clearly indicate the state's support for the proposal. States may choose to endorse more than one proposal for any given competition that they believe would meet their needs. Applicants need at least one state endorsement to qualify under this criterion. Please note that if the Department is unable to clearly identify an identification, designation, or endorsement by a governor or chief state education official, the Department may determine that the application does not meet the CPP under this criterion and points would not be awarded. Applicants should carefully review the ANI for detailed guidance on meeting all absolute and Competitive Preference priority requirements. Applicants for a field-initiated content center are invited to propose projects that respond to Competitive Preference Priority 3, Promoting Evidence-Based Literacy. To meet this CPP, an applicant must propose a content center design to do one or more of the following. A. Advance, increase, or expand evidence-based literacy instruction, as defined in this notice. Or B. Focus on evidence-based literacy instruction, as defined in this notice. Proposals that meet this CPP may receive five Competitive Preference. The CPP for Meaningful Learning Opportunities Mathematics is the second optional CPP. To receive points for this CPP, the applicant must propose projects or proposals designed to strengthen core instruction through improving mathematics instruction to promote student achievement through assisting states in developing comprehensive statewide plans to raise mathematics achievement that align with mathematics instruction based on strong, moderate, or promising evidence, as defined in 34 CFR 77.1. Proposals that meet this CPP for Meaningful Learning Opportunities Mathematics will receive five additional. Next, we will review the program requirements that apply to content centers under this program. The program requirements are established in the Comprehensive Centers Program Final Priorities Requirements and Definitions published in the Federal Register on May 8, 2026. Program requirements generally describe requirements of grantees under this program. They are addressed after grant award and are further detailed in a cooperative agreement between the grantee and the department. There are five general program requirements that apply to all centers and four program requirements that only apply to content centers. Applicants should be aware of the program requirements and should consider how they would meet these requirements if they receive the award to operate a content center. There are five program requirements for all centers. Under these requirements, grantees must, one, develop annual service plans that clearly reflect state-identified needs and priorities. Plans must include high-leverage problems, client needs, proposed capacity-building services, short-, mid-, and long-term outcomes, responsible personnel, key partners, milestones, output, and dissemination approaches, and fidelity measures. Plans must show how services will prioritize students and communities with the greatest needs, consistent with EETAA requirements. Two, design and deliver capacity-building services that are streamlined, responsive, and tailored to specific state and local needs. Services must be developed in partnership with beneficiaries and aligned to desired outcomes. This ensures that clients drive the priorities and work of the centers and that center work is responsive to client needs. Three, demonstrate that clients were actively engaged in defining proposed services. Centers must secure and document client and partner commitments to the annual service plan. Implement a performance management and evaluation system that supports continuous improvement. Systems must track progress towards agreed-upon short-, mid-, and long-term outcomes, outputs and milestones, reach, use, and impact of services, client satisfaction, and changes in state context that may influence record success. Centers must also measure and report undefined program performance measures, which are listed in the ANI. Finally, centers are required to participate in the department's national evaluation of the Comprehensive Centers Program, which is required in the EETAA. In addition to the program requirements for all centers, there are four additional program requirements for content centers. First, in developing the annual service plan, content centers must consult and integrate feedback from state, DC clients, the department, national and regional centers, and other department funded centers that support the center's identified focus area. The feedback must meaningfully inform the tools, resources, and technical assistance to ensure services reflect priority needs across stakeholders. Seven, centers must partner with the national center and regional centers as needed to support states in developing and implementing state learning agendas, addressing state requests for assistance within each region, and strengthen regional center staff capacity regarding evidence based practices aligned to the content center's focus area. Eight, centers must establish formal partnership agreements with the national center, regional centers, and relevant department funded TA providers. Agreements must outline processes for the meeting Comprehensive Center Program requirements and must be submitted to the department after award. Finally, based on the complex relationship driven nature of the work, Comprehensive Center grantees are required to demonstrate dedicated leadership with the capacity to effectively manage all aspects of the center's operation. The project director must be able to manage all aspects of the center at a minimum of 0.5 STE, ensuring sufficient time and capacity to oversee program implementation, coordination, and results. Alternatively, the center may appoint two co-project directors or a director and deputy who together must serve at a minimum of 0.75 STE collectively. Applicants should describe the proposed leadership structure for the center and their application and explain how the organizational leadership will effectively manage the project according to the needs of the program. As a reminder, these are requirements that grantees must meet post-award. Applicants should consider how they will meet these requirements if awarded a content center grant. Please refer to the ANI for comprehensive text of the program requirements for content centers. We will now review the application requirements, which are requirements that applicants must address in their application for a content center grant award. Application requirements are established in the Comprehensive Center's program, Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definition on Grants.gov, May 8, 2026. Application requirements describe requirements of applicants on this program. They must be addressed in the grant application. There are seven general application requirements that apply to all centers and three application requirements only apply to content centers. Applicants should carefully review the application requirements in the ANI and make sure their application narrative addresses each application requirement. The application requirements correspond to the selection criteria that will be used to evaluate your proposal. There are seven general application requirements for all centers. Please refer to the ANI for the comprehensive description of each application requirement. There are seven general application requirements that will be required for your application. The first one is applicants must clearly describe their approach to capacity building service supported by a logic model, evidence-based, and well-defined strategies. The application must demonstrate expertise in past success delivering effective capacity building services, qualification of key personnel, expected impact on SEAs, REAs, TEAs, LEAs in schools, and how impact will be measured and how services will address the needs of students with greatest needs as defined in Section 203E of the Education Technical Assistance Act or ETAA. Number two, applicants must outline a process for working in partnership with CC clients to identify the most urgent education challenges. This process must ensure challenges are supported by data and evidence and reflect state and local priorities. Applicants must describe how they will measure and monitor client progress in addressing identified challenges. This includes, again, using data and evidence to assess outcome across universal, targeted, and intensive capacity building services. Number four, applicants must show strong expertise in delivering high-quality technical assistance, including knowledge of adult learning principles, coaching models, and implementation science. Applicants must provide a budget narrative explaining the estimated cost for intensive, targeted, and universal capacity building services. The narrative must address cost effectiveness, showing alignment between proposed costs and market expectations for similar services. Please refer to the ANI for the full description of the application requirements for all centers. Applicants must also describe the proposed leadership structure for the center and how the organizational leadership will effectively manage the project accordingly to the needs of the program. The structure must demonstrate the organization's ability to effectively manage all aspects of the project, including strategic oversight, coordination, and compliance with the program requirements. As a reminder, this is the applicant's opportunity to discuss how they will meet the full-time equivalency requirement for the project leadership. Applicants must include in a budget line item for an annual set-aside of 5% of the grant amount to support emerging needs that align with the project-intended outcomes. Applicants can incorporate this 5% set-aside in the way they choose and should describe their approach in the budget narrative. There are three additional application requirements for the content center. Applicants for the content center must propose a clear approach for delivering capacity-building services that respond to client-identified needs and priorities. The approach must show how the center will amplify the use of evidence-based practices, products, and tools across practitioners and educational system leaders, elementary and secondary schools, and LEAs, REAs, TEAs, and SEAs. The emphasis is on ensuring that evidence-based tools are adopted, used effectively, and aligned to the needs of diverse educational contexts. Applicants must describe how the center will provide universal capacity-building services that are accessible to all states and stakeholders. This includes developing high-quality, evidence-based products and tools, widening dissemination of these services to practitioners, leaders, and policymakers, ensuring that all resources are high-quality, accessible, understandable, and actionable, identifying intended beneficiaries for each product, and demonstrating that services are driven by client needs and co-developed with client input. Please see the definition in the ANI for a complete definition of universal capacity-building services. Note, universal services should align with the broader CC-network goal, making evidence-based resources publicly available and easy usable across regions. Applicants must clearly identify the specific educational challenges the project intends to address. Challenges must be aligned with the priorities aligned in Section 203-F1 of the ETAA, which focuses on improving educational opportunities and outcomes for students with the greatest needs. This is especially important for applicants for the field-initiated centers. The description must be supported by national, regional, and state and local educational data. Applicants must use these data sources to show the scope and severity of identified challenges, why these challenges require capacity-building support, and how these needs are shared across multiple states or regions. The identified challenges must be consistent with state and local needs and priorities, including those that appear across regions. Applicants must also demonstrate how the needs identified can be addressed through the proposed capacity-building strategies to implement and scale up evidence-based programs, practices, and interventions. Now that we've reviewed the requirements for what each application should include, let's review the criteria that peer reviewers will use to evaluate and score each application. The selection criteria for this competition are described in the ANI. There are three overall selection criteria and within each sub-criteria that are scored individually. The three selection criteria are significant, quality of project design, quality of the management plan, and as a reminder, the application narrative responds to the priorities and the selection criteria found in the ANI and should follow the order of the selection criteria. The maximum possible score for addressing all selection criteria is 100 points for content centers. Please note this is the maximum score possible before applying any competitive preference points. The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses following the title of the specific selection criteria. Each criterion also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion. The criteria are defined for each center. We will provide an abbreviated overview of the criteria here. And for complete definitions of each criterion, please reference the ANI. The first selection criteria is significant. In determining the overall quality of the significance of the proposed project, the secretary considers the following factors. A, first, the data presented including a comparison to local, state, regional, national, or international data that demonstrates the issue challenge or opportunity to be addressed for the proposed project. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is 15 points. Two, the extent to which the proposed project is likely to build local, state, regional, or national capacity to provide, improve, sustain, or expand the training or services that address the needs of the underserved population. The maximum score for this sub-criteria is 15 points. Note, in responding to the selection criteria factor A2 under significance, applicants are encouraged to define underserved population in the context. I'll have to edit it, Michelle. I totally lost. Something moved on the screen. The maximum score for these criteria is 30 points. Note, in responding to the selection criteria factor A2 under significance, applications are encouraged to define underserved population in the context of students identified for prioritization under the ETA, namely those from low-income families and students attending school implementing comprehensive support and improved or targeted additional targeted support and improvement activities under ESEA section 111B. The second selection criterion is the quality of project design for the proposed project. There are five sub-criteria. The Secretary considers the following factors. One, the extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified, measurable, and ambitious, yet achievable within the project period and align with the purposes of the grant program. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is 15 points. Two, the adequacy of plans for ensuring the use of quantitative and qualitative data, including meaningful community members and partner input to inform continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is five points. Next, the extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to build recipient and project capacity in ways that lead to improvement in practice among the recipients of those services. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is 10 points. Four, the extent to which the proposed project will include coordination with other federal investments as well as appropriate agencies and organizations providing similar services to the target population. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is five points. The fifth factor is the extent to which the proposed project is supported by the target population that is intended to serve. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is five points. The maximum score for the quality of project design criterion is 40 points in total. The third and final selection criteria is the quality of management plan. There are four sub-criteria. The sub-criteria are one, the feasibility of the management plan to achieve project objectives and goals on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is 10 points. The extent to which the key personnel in the project, when hired, have the qualifications required for the proposed project, including formal training or work experience in fields related to the objectives of the project, and represented or have lived experience of the target population in responding to the selection criteria factor C3 under quality of the management plan. Applicants are encouraged to define target population in the context of the universe i.e., FEAs, REAs, LEAs, and schools identified for support under the ETAA to be served by the applicant. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is 10 points. Next, the third factor is the qualifications, including relevant training and experience of project consultants or subcontractors. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is five points. Four, the extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project and the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project. The maximum score for this sub-criterion is five points. The maximum score for the quality of management plan is 30 points. On behalf of the U.S. Department of Education, thank you for participating in today's free application webinar for prospective applicants to the 2026 Comprehensive Centers grant competition. For information about application instructions and submission procedures for all of the 2026 Comprehensive Centers grant competitions, please visit the application resource webinar on the Comprehensive Centers Program website at ed.gov. In addition, for pre-application webinars for other 2026 grant competitions under this program, please visit the Comprehensive Centers website at ed.gov.