| (a) General Information. The program, as it applies
to this section:
(1) Name--Nursing, Allied Health and Other Health-related
Education Grant Program.
(2) Purpose--To provide funding to eligible institutions
of higher education to establish or support academic instruction and
training programs on public health issues specific to nursing, allied
health and other health-related education.
(3) Authority--Texas Education Code, §§63.201
- 63.203.
(4) Eligible institutions--Public institutions of higher
education that offer upper-level academic instruction and training
in the fields of nursing, allied health, or other health-related education.
Institutions or components identified under Texas Education Code, §63.002(c),
and §§63.101 - 63.102 are not eligible to receive funding
through the grant program.
(5) Eligible programs--Nursing, allied health or other
health-related educational initiatives, including those that expand
existing academic programs, and develop other new or existing activities
and projects, that are not funded by state appropriation during the
funding period.
(6) Application requirements--Applications shall be
submitted to the Board in the format and at the time specified by
the Board.
(7) General Selection Criteria--Competitive. The Program
is designed to award grants that provide the best overall value to
the state. Selection criteria shall be based on:
(A) Program quality as determined by reviewers;
(B) Impact the grant award shall have on academic instruction
and training in public health-related education in the state;
(C) Cost of the proposed program; and
(D) Other factors to be considered by the Board, including
financial ability to perform program, state and regional needs and
priorities, ability to continue program after grant period, and past
performance.
(8) Minimum award--$15,000 per award in any fiscal
year.
(9) Maximum award--30 percent of the estimated available
funding per award in any fiscal year.
(10) Maximum award length--A program is eligible to
receive funding for up to three years within a grant period. Previously
funded programs may reapply to receive funding for one additional
grant period.
(b) Review Criteria.
(1) The Board shall use peer and Board staff reviewers
to evaluate the quality of applications.
(2) The Commissioner shall select qualified individuals
to serve as reviewers. Reviewers shall demonstrate appropriate credentials
to evaluate grant applications in health education. Reviewers shall
not evaluate any applications for which they have a conflict of interest.
(3) The Board staff shall provide written instructions
and training for reviewers.
(4) The reviewers shall score each application according
to these award criteria and weights:
(A) Significance of instruction or training program.
The reviewers shall consider issues such as: How relevant and timely
is this topic to public health issues for the particular discipline?
Is the program unique and important or unique and important for a
geographic area? Will the program be useful to or later replicated
at other institutions in the state? Will the program provide an advancement
of knowledge that may result in positive changes in patient care,
education or health care policy? How many people will benefit directly
from the program? Maximum points: 30
(B) Resources to perform program. The reviewers shall
consider issues such as: What new personnel, equipment and facility
resources are needed for the program? What existing resources can
be used? What are the professional credentials and experience of the
program's key personnel? Maximum points: 15
(C) Program design. The reviewers shall consider issues
such as: Is the program well defined? Is it a discrete program which
can be completed in the grant period? Are the goals and objectives
realistic? How well has the proposal described the program development
process and the nature of analysis to be carried out? Maximum points:
25
(D) Cost sharing. The reviewers shall consider issues
such as: What level of local funding, if any, is available to share
in the cost of the program? Maximum points: 5
(E) Cost effectiveness. The reviewers shall consider
issues such as: How appropriate are the chosen equipment, staffing
and service providers for the program given the cost of the program?
Is the budget realistic? Does the proposal make effective use of the
grant funds? Maximum points: 25.
(F) Evaluation and expected outcomes. The reviewers
shall consider issues such as: How well has the proposal described
the methodology to evaluate and estimate the outcomes from the program?
Is the evaluation methodology appropriate and effective? Are the outcomes
realistic? Maximum points: 30
(5) Award criteria and weights may be adjusted to best
fulfill the purpose of an individual grant competition, if those adjusted
award criteria and weights are first included in the Request for Proposal
for the grant competition.
(c) Application and Review Process.
(1) The Commissioner may solicit recommendations from
an advisory committee or other group of qualified individuals on funding
priorities for each grant period, and the administration of the application
and review process.
(2) The Board staff shall review applications to determine
if they adhere to the grant program requirements and the funding priorities
contained in the Request for Proposal. An application must meet the
requirements of the Request for Proposal and be submitted with proper
authorization before or on the day specified by the Board to qualify
for further consideration. Qualified applications shall be forwarded
to the reviewers for evaluation. Board staff shall notify applicants
eliminated through the screening process within 30 days of the submission
deadline.
(3) Reviewers shall evaluate applications and assign
scores based on award criteria. All evaluations and scores of the
review committee are final.
(4) Board staff shall rank each application based on
points assigned by reviewers, and then may request that individuals
representing the most highly-ranked applications make oral presentations
on their applications to the reviewers and other Board staff. The
Board staff may consider reviewer comments from the oral presentations
in recommending a priority ranked list of applications to the Board
for approval.
(d) Funding Decisions.
(1) Applications for grant funding shall be evaluated
only upon the information provided in the written application.
(2) The Board shall approve grants upon the recommendation
of the panel of reviewers and Board staff. The Commissioner shall
report approved grants to the Board for each biennial grant period.
(3) Funding recommendations to the Board shall consist
of the most highly ranked and recommended applications up to the limit
of available funds. If available funds are insufficient to fund a
proposal after the higher-ranking and recommended applications have
been funded, staff shall negotiate with the applicant to determine
if a lesser amount would be acceptable. If the applicant does not
agree to the lesser amount, the staff shall negotiate with the next
applicant on the ranked list. The process shall be continued until
all grant funds are awarded to the most highly ranked and recommended
applications.
(e) Contract. Following approval of grant awards by
the Board, the successful applicants must sign a contract issued by
Board staff and based on the information contained in the application.
(f) Cancellation or Suspension of Grants. The Board
has the right to reject all applications and cancel a grant solicitation
at any point before a contract is signed.
(g) Request for Proposal. The full text of the administrative
regulations and budget guidelines for this program are contained in
the official Request for Proposal (RFP) available upon request from
the Board.
(h) This subsection pertains to the 2020-2021 and 2022-2023
biennia only (rules are effective only through August 31, 2023).
(1) Funds available to the program will be distributed
as grants in proportions determined by the Board through one or more
programs that are based on:
(A) a competitive, peer- or staff-reviewed process
for eligible institutions proposing to address the shortage of registered
nurses and nursing faculty, as described in subsections (a) - (g)
of this section unless amended in paragraph (2) of this subsection;
(B) a staff-reviewed process for eligible institutions,
as amended in paragraph (2) of this subsection; or
(C) a criteria-based, funding formula for eligible
institutions, as amended in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(2) In subsection (a)(4) of this section, eligible
institutions, as they pertain to paragraph (1) of this subsection,
are public institutions of higher education, private or independent
institutions of higher education and hospitals that offer nursing
programs that prepare students for initial licensure as registered
nurses or that prepare qualified faculty for such nursing programs.
|
| Source Note: The provisions of this §6.73 adopted to be effective May 29, 2003, 28 TexReg 4130; amended to be effective December 3, 2003, 28 TexReg 10754; amended to be effective August 11, 2004, 29 TexReg 7672; amended to be effective August 25, 2008, 33 TexReg 6811; amended to be effective February 23, 2011, 36 TexReg 920; amended to be effective November 29, 2011, 36 TexReg 8012; amended to be effective November 25, 2015, 40 TexReg 8205; amended to be effective February 26, 2020, 45 TexReg 1222 |
