4000-01-U
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter VI
[Docket ID ED-2024-OPE-0065]
Research and Development Infrastructure Grant
AGENCY:

Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of

Education.
ACTION:

Final priorities, requirements, and definitions.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Education (Department) issues

priorities, requirements, and definitions for use in the
Research and Development Infrastructure (RDI) grant
program.

The Department may use one or more of these

priorities, requirements, and definitions for competitions
in fiscal year (FY) 2024 and later years.

We intend for

these priorities, requirements, and definitions to help
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),
Tribal Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs), and
Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) implement
transformational investments in research infrastructure,
including research productivity, faculty expertise,
graduate programs, physical infrastructure, human capital
development, and partnerships leading to increases in
external funding.
DATES:

These priorities, requirements, and definitions are

effective [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN
THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jason Cottrell, Ph.D.,

U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, room
5C122, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
7530.

Email:

Telephone: (202) 453-

Jason.Cottrell@ed.gov.

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability and wish to access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program:

The RDI grant program is designed to

provide HBCUs, TCCUs, and MSIs, including Asian American
and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions
(AANAPISIs), Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving
Institutions (ANNH), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs),
Native American Serving Non-Tribal Institutions (NASNTIs),
and Predominantly Black Institutions (PBIs), and consortia
led by an eligible institution of higher education, with
funds to implement transformational investments in research
infrastructure, including research productivity, faculty
expertise, graduate programs, physical infrastructure,
human capital development, and partnerships leading to
increases in external and sustained funding.
Assistance Listing Number:
Program Authority:

84.116H.

20 U.S.C. 1138-1138d.

We published a notice of proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions in the Federal Register on
May 17, 2024 (89 FR 43352) (NPP).

That document contained

background information and the Department’s reasons for
proposing the particular priorities, requirements, and
definitions.

There is one substantive difference between

the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions and
these final priorities, requirements, and definitions.
We have added Priority 5, as described below.
Public Comment:

In response to our invitation in the NPP,

six parties submitted comments on the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions.

Generally, we do not

address technical and other minor changes, or suggested
changes that the law does not authorize us to make under
applicable statutory authority.

In addition, we do not

address general comments that raised concerns not directly
related to the proposed priorities, requirements, or
definitions.
Analysis of Comments and Changes:

An analysis of the

comments and of any changes in the priorities,
requirements, and definitions since publication of the NPP
follows.
Priorities:
Comments:

One commenter suggested that we modify Proposed

Priority 1 to support schools that demonstrate intention
and realistic capacity to move from any research status
under the American Council on Education’s Carnegie
Classification System to classification as a Research
College and University (RCU) or a Doctoral University with

High Research Activity (R2), rather than limiting support
to RCU and R2 institutions seeking to move up to
classification as R2 or Doctoral University with Very High
Research Activity (R1), respectively.

The commenter

suggested that, if an applicant can demonstrate a realistic
prospect of movement into R1, it already has a substantial
level of research and development infrastructure and
financial capacity.
Discussion:

The purpose of the RDI grant program is to

support institutions that have limited resources and
diverse student enrollments — as the eligible entities,
HBCUs, TCCUs, and MSIs, do — with funds to implement
transformational investments in research infrastructure to
move into R2 or R1 status.

Attaining R2 or R1 status

assists institutions with recruiting top students and
faculty, funding top-of-the-line facilities to conduct
research, and producing and disseminating cutting-edge
knowledge.

While we recognize that a wide range of

institutions, regardless of Carnegie classification, could
benefit from additional investments in research and
development (R&D) infrastructure, the Department believes
that these limited funds have the greatest potential to
transform R&D infrastructure at institutions if they are
targeted to support institutions in making steps towards R2
and R1 status under the Carnegie Classification System.
The funding is designed to help institutions move towards

R2 or R1 status, regardless of how close they are to
achieving it.
Changes:

None.

Comments:

One commenter proposed amending Proposed

Priority 4 to align the Pell Grant recipient threshold from
the proposed 50 percent of undergraduate students to the
current Department of Education Office of Postsecondary
Education standards for Title III and Title V grant
programs.

The commenter stated that this change would, by

aligning requirements across Department programs, ease
administrative burden on institutions.
Discussion:

The 50 percent Pell recipient threshold in

Priority 4 is a higher bar than either of the metrics used
for eligibility for titles III and V programs.

To be

designated as eligible to apply under the titles III and V
programs, institutions must demonstrate high enrollment of
needy students by meeting either of the following two
criteria: (1) at least 50 percent of its degree-seeking
students received financial assistance under the Federal
Pell Grant, Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity
Grant (FSEOG), or Federal Work Study (FWS) programs; or (2)
the percentage of its undergraduate degree-seeking students
who were enrolled on at least a half-time basis and
received Federal Pell Grants exceeded the median percentage
of undergraduate degree students who were enrolled on at
least a half-time basis and received Federal Pell Grants at

comparable institutions that offer similar instruction.
For purposes of this priority, we believe this higher
standard is appropriate because the explanatory statement
originally authorizing funding for this program, contained
within Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2023 (Pub. L. 117-328), specified that these grants are
intended to provide “transformational” investments to
improve institutions’ R&D infrastructure.

The Department

believes these funds have the highest potential to
transform an institution’s R&D infrastructure if they are
targeted to the institutions with the fewest resources that
enroll the highest percentages of needy students.

We do

not believe that this metric imposes any burden upon
applicants because the Department will use administrative
data to calculate the Pell percentage for applicant
institutions.
Changes:

None.

Comments:
Discussion:

None.
As we stated in the NPP, TCCUs currently have

their own Carnegie classification and are not included in
the R1, R2, or RCU classifications.

Accordingly, we

proposed Priority 2 for TCCUs, which uses an alternative
measure of their R&D infrastructure.

Since publication of

the NPP, the American Council on Education announced that
starting in 2025, TCCUs will be included in the same
classification system as HBCUs, MSIs, and other

institutions.1

Therefore, we are adding a priority for

TCCUs that mirrors the priorities for HBCUs and MSIs for
use following the change to the Carnegie classifications,
while maintaining Priority 2 so that the grant program can
support TCCUs until such change occurs.
Changes:

We have added Priority 5 to support projects

proposed by TCCUs to implement high-quality transformative
research capacity initiatives designed to move the
institution from R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2, research
activity status.
Requirements:
Comments:

Three commenters suggested changes to the match

and waiver requirements.

Two commenters proposed

eliminating the match and waiver requirements, and another
commenter suggested that schools applying under Priorities
2 or 4 should be exempt automatically from the match
requirement.
Discussion:

We believe that a match requirement will help

ensure that there is sufficient institutional investment in
the work supported by the grant to achieve and sustain a
transformational impact.

We recognize that some applicants

will have fewer resources, which is the reason we include
the exceptions.

Rather than creating exceptions for some

types of institutions, we think it is simpler to have a

2025 Research Designations FAQs - CARNEGIE CLASSIFICATION OF INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
EDUCATION (acenet.edu)
general matching requirement and allow low-resourced
schools to qualify for a waiver.
Changes:

None.

Comments:

One commenter suggested that we revise Proposed

Requirement 1, Use of Funds, to include “humanities” under
allowable activity 1 and that we further specify that
faculty development under activity 14 must improve or
enhance faculty capacity to manage R&D projects in fields
of research for which funds have been awarded under this
program.
Discussion:

Under activity 1, grantees may use funds to

improve infrastructure relating to the enumerated fields,
as well as “other disciplines.”

The humanities would

constitute another discipline under this allowable use of
funds, and, accordingly, no change is required.

We

designed activity 14 relating to faculty professional
development to allow for broad support, based on the
specific needs of the faculty in the context of the
particular project.

We do not think that being more

prescriptive would benefit grantees.
Changes:

None.

Comments:

One commenter recommended not restricting the

indirect cost rate.
Discussion:

The indirect cost reimbursement is limited to

8 percent of a modified total direct cost base.

The

Department proposed this limitation in order to maximize

the Federal resources that support direct costs associated
with the project.
Changes:

None.

Definitions:
Comments:

One commenter suggested that the definition for

Research Colleges and Universities (RCUs) should include an
option to use data from an institution’s annual financial
statements instead of data from the National Science
Foundation (NSF) Higher Education Research and Development
(HERD) survey.
Discussion:

To ensure that the program is supporting

transformational investments in R&D infrastructure,
consistent with the Explanatory Statement for this program,
the Department is using the Carnegie Classifications for
Institutional Research to determine an institution’s
current level of research activity.

We believe this is the

best measure because of the standardization for doctoral
degree production and the measures of institutional dollars
expended by the institution annually.

Because Carnegie

classifications are based on data from the NSF HERD survey,
using this measure ensures consistency in how we assess
institutional research activity.
Changes:

None.

Final Priorities
The Secretary establishes the following priorities for
use in the RDI grant program.

Priority 1:

Funding for Historically Black Colleges

and Universities’ Research and Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by HBCUs to implement high-quality
transformative research capacity initiatives and designed
to move the institution from R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2,
research activity status.
Priority 2:

Funding for Tribal Controlled Colleges

and Universities’ Research and Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by TCCUs to improve their research
and development activities, including infrastructure,
faculty development, and academic programs.
Priority 3:

Funding for Minority-Serving

Institutions’ Research and Development Infrastructure.
Projects proposed by MSIs to implement high-quality
transformative research capacity initiatives and designed
to move the institution from R2 to R1, or from RCU to R2,
research activity status.
Priority 4:

MSI Pell Grant Percentage.

Projects proposed by lead applicants with an
enrollment of Pell Grant recipients that accounts for 50
percent or higher of their undergraduate student
enrollment, as measured by the Department using the most
recent data available in the Integrated Postsecondary
Education Data System (IPEDS).
Priority 5:

Funding for Tribal Controlled Colleges

and Universities’ Research And Development Infrastructure.

Projects proposed by TCCUs to implement high-quality
transformative research capacity initiatives and designed
to move the institution from R2 to R1, or from
RCU to R2, research activity status.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one
or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority
as absolute, competitive preference, or invitational
through a notice in the Federal Register.

The effect of

each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority:

Under an absolute priority, we

consider only applications that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:

Under a competitive

preference priority, we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional points, depending on
the extent to which the application meets the priority (34
CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that
meets the priority over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority:

Under an invitational

priority, we are particularly interested in applications
that meet the priority.

However, we do not give an

application that meets the priority a preference over other
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Final Requirements:
The Secretary establishes the following requirements
for use in the RDI grant program.
Requirement 1 - Use of Funds.

Grantees must conduct

one or more of the following activities:
(1)

Providing for the improvement of infrastructure

existing on the date of the grant award, including deferred
maintenance, or the establishment of new physical
infrastructure, including instructional program spaces,
laboratories, and research facilities relating to the
fields of science, technology, engineering, the arts,
mathematics, health, agriculture, education, medicine, law,
and other disciplines.
(2)

Hiring and retaining faculty, students, research-

related staff, or other personnel, including research
personnel skilled in operating, using, or applying
technology, equipment, or devices to conduct or support
research.
(3)

Supporting research internships and fellowships

for students, including undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral positions, which may include providing direct
student financial assistance and other supports to such
students.
(4)

Creating new, or expanding existing, academic

positions, including internships, fellowships, and postdoctoral positions, in fields of research for which

research and development infrastructure funds have been
awarded to the grantee under this program.
(5)

Creating and supporting inter- and intra-

institutional research centers (including formal and
informal communities of practice) in fields of research for
which research and development infrastructure funds have
been awarded to the grantee under this program, including
hiring staff, purchasing supplies and equipment, and
funding travel to relevant conferences and seminars to
support the work of such centers.
(6)

Building new institutional support structures and

departments that help faculty learn about, and increase
faculty and student access to, Federal research and
development grant funds and non-Federal academic research
grants.
(7)

Building data and collaboration infrastructure so

that early findings and research can be securely shared to
facilitate peer review and other appropriate collaboration.
(8)

Providing programs of study and courses in fields

of research for which research and development
infrastructure funds have been awarded to the grantee under
this program.
(9)

Paying operating and administrative expenses for,

and coordinating project partnerships with members of, the
consortium on behalf of which the eligible institution has
received a grant under this program, provided that grantees

may not pay for the expenses of any R1 institutions that
are members of the consortia.
(10)

Installing or extending the life and usability

of basic systems and components of campus facilities
related to research, including high-speed broadband
internet infrastructure sufficient to support digital and
technology-based learning.
(11)

Expanding, remodeling, renovating, or altering

biomedical and behavioral research facilities existing on
the date of the grant award that received support under
section 404I of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
283k).
(12)

Acquiring and installing furniture, fixtures,

and instructional research-related equipment and technology
for academic instruction in campus facilities in fields of
research for which research and development infrastructure
funds have been awarded to the grantee under this program.
(13)

Providing increased funding to programs that

support research and development at the eligible
institution that are funded by the National Institutes of
Health, including through their Path to Excellence and
Innovation program.
(14)

Faculty professional development.

(15)

Planning purposes.

Requirement 2 - Indirect Cost Rate Information.

A

grantee’s indirect cost reimbursement is limited to 8
percent of a modified total direct cost base.

For more

information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a
negotiated indirect cost rate, please see
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
Requirement 3 – Matching Requirements and Exceptions.
Grantees must provide a 1:1 match, which can include inkind donations.

The Secretary may waive the matching

requirement on a case-by-case basis upon a showing of any
of the following exceptional circumstances:
(i) The difficulty of raising matching funds for a
program to serve an area with high rates of poverty in the
lead applicant's geographic location, defined as a Census
tract, a set of contiguous Census tracts, an American
Indian Reservation, Oklahoma Tribal Statistical Area (as
defined by the U.S. Census Bureau), Alaska Native Village
Statistical Area or Alaska Native Regional Corporation
Area, Native Hawaiian Homeland Area, or other Tribal land
or county that has a poverty rate of at least 25 percent as
determined every 5 years using American Community Survey 5Year data;
(ii) Serving a significant population of students from
low-income backgrounds at the lead applicant location,
defined as at least 50 percent (or the eligibility
threshold for the appropriate institutional sector

available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/idues/
eligibility.html#app) of degree-seeking enrolled students

receiving need-based grant aid under Title IV of the HEA;
(iii) Significant economic hardship as demonstrated by
low average educational and general expenditures per fulltime equivalent undergraduate student at the lead applicant
institution, in comparison with the average educational and
general expenditures per full-time equivalent undergraduate
student of institutions that offer similar instruction
without need of a waiver, as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with the annual process for designation of
eligible Titles III and V institutions; or
(iv) Information that otherwise demonstrates a
commitment to the long-term sustainability of the
applicant's projects, such as evidence of a consortium
relationship with an R1 institution, a State bond, State
matching, planning documents such as a campus plan, multiyear faculty hiring plan, support of industry, Federal
grants received, or a demonstration of institutional
commitment that may include commitment from the
institution's board.
Requirement 4:

Limitation on Grant Awards.

The

Department will only make awards to applicants that are not
the individual or lead applicant in a current active grant
from the RDI grant program.
Final Definitions:

The Secretary establishes the following definitions
for use in the RDI grant program.
Research 1: Very High Research Spending and Doctorate
Production (R1) means that an institution has spent at
least $50 million in total research and development (R&D)
in a year, as reported to the National Science Foundation
(NSF) Higher Education Research and Development (HERD)
Survey, and awarded at least 70 research/scholarship
doctorates in a year, as reported to IPEDS.
Research 2: High Research Spending and Doctorate
Production (R2) means that an institution has spent at
least $5 million in total R&D in a year, as reported to the
NSF HERD Survey, and awarded at least 20
research/scholarship doctorates in a year, as reported to
IPEDS.

It does not include institutions designated R1.

Research Colleges and Universities (RCU) means that an
institution has spent at least $2.5 million in total R&D in
a year, as reported to the NSF HERD Survey.

It does not

include institutions designated R1 or R2.
Historically Black College or University means an
institution that meets the eligibility requirements under
section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended (HEA).
Minority-Serving Institution means an institution that
is eligible to receive assistance under sections 317

through 320 of part A of title III, or under title V of the
HEA.
Tribal Controlled Colleges or Universities has the
meaning ascribed it in section 316(b)(3) of the HEA.
Underrepresented students means students enrolled in
postsecondary, career, or technical education who are in
one or more of the following subgroups:
a low-income background.

(ii)

(i) A student from

A student who is American

Indian, Alaska Native, Asian American, Black, Hispanic or
Latino, Native Hawaiian, and/or Pacific Islander.
This document does not preclude us from proposing
additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or
selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note:

This document does not solicit applications.

In any

year in which we choose to use any of these priorities,
requirements, or definitions, we invite applications
through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) determines whether this regulatory action
is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review
by OMB.

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended

by Executive Order 14094, defines a “significant regulatory
action” as an action likely to result in a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $200
million or more (adjusted every three years by the
Administrator of Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) for changes in gross domestic product); or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local,
territorial, or Tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or planned by another
agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized
review would meaningfully further the President’s
priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive
order, as specifically authorized in a timely manner by the
Administrator of OIRA in each case.
This final regulatory action is not a significant
regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive
Order 14094.

We have also reviewed this final regulatory action
under Executive Order 13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and
definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563
requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned
determination that their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to
quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden
on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives
and taking into account—among other things and to the
extent practicable—the costs of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, select those approaches that maximize net
benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of
compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to
direct regulation, including economic incentives—such as

user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired
behavior, or provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use
the best available techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as accurately as
possible.”

The Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these techniques may
include “identifying changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.”
We are issuing these final priorities, requirements,
and definitions only on a reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs.

In choosing among

alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.

Based on the

analysis that follows, the Department believes that this
regulatory action is consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
The potential costs associated with these priorities,
requirements, and definitions are minimal, while the
potential benefits are significant.

The Department

believes that this final regulatory action will not impose
significant costs on eligible entities.

Participation in

this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on
applicants by this regulatory action will be limited to

paperwork burden related to preparing an application.

The

potential benefits of implementing the program will
outweigh the costs incurred by applicants, and the costs of
carrying out activities associated with the application
will be paid for with program funds.

For these reasons, we

have determined that the costs of implementation will not
be burdensome for eligible applicants, including small
entities.
We also have determined that this regulatory action
does not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their governmental
functions.
In accordance with these Executive orders, the
Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits,
both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory
action.

The potential costs are those resulting from

statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department’s programs and
activities.
Intergovernmental Review:

This program is subject to

Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part
79.

One of the objectives of the Executive order is to

foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened
federalism.

The Executive order relies on processes

developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of Federal financial assistance.

This document provides early notification of our
specific plans and actions for this program.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that these final priorities,
requirements, and definitions will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The small entities that this final regulatory action
will affect are IHEs that meet the eligibility requirements
described in section 241(1) of the HEA.

The Secretary

believes that the costs imposed on applicants by the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions will be limited
to paperwork burden related to preparing an application and
that the benefits will outweigh any costs incurred by
applicants.
Participation in this program is voluntary.

For this

reason, the final priorities, requirements, and definitions
will impose no burden on small entities unless they applied
for funding under the program.

We expect that in

determining whether to apply for RDI grant program funds,
an eligible applicant would evaluate the requirements of
preparing an application and any associated costs, and
weigh them against the benefits likely to be achieved by
receiving a grant.

Eligible applicants most likely would

apply only if they determine that the likely benefits
exceed the costs of preparing an application.

The likely

benefits include the potential receipt of a grant as well

as other benefits that may accrue to an entity through its
development of an application, such as the use of that
application to seek funding from other sources to address
the institution’s R&D infrastructure needs.
This final regulatory action will not have a
significant economic impact on a small entity once it
receives a grant because it will be able to meet the costs
of compliance using the funds provided under this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These final priorities, requirements, and definitions
do not contain any information collection requirements.
Accessible Format:

On request to the program contact

person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format.

The Department will provide the

requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an
MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, compact disc, or
other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document:

The official version

of this document is the document published in the Federal
Register.

You may access the official edition of the

Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov.

At this site you can view this document,

as well as all other Department documents published in the
Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format

(PDF).

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader,

which is available free at the site.
You may also access Department documents published in
the Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov.

Specifically, through the

advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your
search to documents published by
the Department.

Nasser Paydar,
Assistant Secretary for
Postsecondary Education.

[FR Doc. 2024-15537 Filed: 7/17/2024 8:45 am; Publication Date: 7/18/2024]