NCAA 25 Awareness Rating Explained: GEAR UP Program Overview

The Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) is a discretionary grant program designed to increase the number of low-income students who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education. GEAR UP provides six-year or seven years grants to states and partnerships to provide services at high-poverty middle and high schools. GEAR UP grantees serve an entire cohort of students beginning no later than the seventh grade and follow the cohort through high school. GEAR UP funds are also used to provide college scholarships to low-income students. This article delves into the intricacies of the GEAR UP program, drawing upon publicly available information and frequently asked questions to provide a comprehensive understanding.

Understanding GEAR UP: Mission and Objectives

GEAR UP encourages applicants to provide support and maintain a commitment to eligible low-income students, including students with disabilities, to assist the students in obtaining a secondary school diploma and preparing for and succeeding in postsecondary education. GEAR UP does not have standardized objectives. For more information, please consult the "Purpose of Program" section of the GEAR UP NIAs.

Types of GEAR UP Projects

GEAR UP offers state and partnership grants.

State Grants

State grants are competitive six-year matching grants that must include both an early intervention component designed to increase college attendance and success and raise the expectations of low-income students and a scholarship component. 1003(20)), which includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Freely Associated States.

The Governor of a State must designate which State agency applies for, and administers, a State grant under GEAR UP. 1070a-21 to 1070a-28)

Read also: Your Guide to Nursing Internships

Partnership Grants

Partnership grants consist of:

One or more local educational agencies; and
One or more degree granting institutions of higher education; and
Which may include not less than two other community organizations or entities, such as businesses, professional organizations, State agencies, institutions or agencies sponsoring programs authorized under subpart 4, or other public or private agencies or organizations.

Application Timeline and Submission

Current GEAR UP State competition: FY 2025Application Deadline: June 25, 2025Current GEAR UP Partnership competition: FY 2025Application Deadline: June 25, 2025

GEAR UP applications for FY 2025 must be submitted electronically using Grants.gov.

Key Components and Requirements

Grant Performance Period

GEAR UP has two authorized grant performance periods: six years (72 months) or seven years (84 months). An applicant can only implement a seven-year grant if the project is designed to provide services through the students' first year of attending an institution of higher education (IHE).

Matching Requirement

Applicants are required to match the Federal contribution dollar-for-dollar. Specifically, the non-Federal contribution must equal at least 50 percent of the total project costs. For instance, if an applicant requests a total of $3 million in Federal funds, the matching contribution is an additional $3 million. The applicant is the fiscal agent and is responsible for documenting all matching contributions for the entire grant period. Matching may be provided in cash or in-kind and may be accrued over the full duration of the grant award period. §1070a - 23(b)). Partnership grants are eligible to request a waiver of part of the matching requirement; State grants are not eligible to waive the matching requirement. Note: Applicants will be held to the matching commitment proposed in the application for funding, even if the proposed match is higher than the percent required by statute. No points will be awarded for match exceeding the 50 percent level required by statute.

Budget Allocation

All applicants must fill out the Project Budget Summary Form in the GEAR UP Application Package. Applicants must also provide a detailed budget narrative for the first year of the grant performance period. The narrative must address Federal expenditures and matching contributions.

In completing the Federal section of the Project Budget Summary Form, the total requested amounts in years two through seven should not exceed the total requested amount in the first year. For example, if an applicant requests $3 million in the first year, they cannot request more than $3 million in any subsequent year. Applicants must keep this in mind if they are planning to implement a feeder pattern cohort because funding will not increase each year an applicant subsequently picks up or adds new grades.

An applicant starts with 1,000 7th graders and allocates $800,000 for the first year (remember, the maximum amount a partnership applicant can request per year is $800 per student). If an applicant follows the single cohort with fidelity, the funding in subsequent years ultimately decreases after students leave the originating school and the number of students decrease. Applicants should estimate the possible student decline based on past data. For example, if a project is implementing a single cohort model that started with 7th graders, the requested funds when students are 9th graders in high school should be less.

Indirect Cost Rate

Yes. Applicants must have an approved restricted indirect cost rate if indirect costs will be charged to the GEAR UP grant. Under 34 CFR § 694.11, all grant recipients are limited to a maximum restricted indirect cost rate of eight percent of a modified total direct cost or the amount permitted by its negotiated indirect cost rate agreement, whichever is less. Even if an applicant does not have an approved indirect cost rate at the time of application, applicants are allowed to include indirect costs in the proposed budget if they have started the process of acquiring or renewing an indirect cost rate agreement. However, the grantee must submit an indirect cost proposal to its cognizant agency within 90 days after the grant is awarded or it may not continue to charge indirect costs. For more information, see 34 CFR § 75.560.

Required Services

All applicants must address the required services in the application. Projects should provide comprehensive mentoring, outreach, and supportive services, including a) providing information regarding financial aid for postsecondary education for participating students; b) encouraging student enrollment in rigorous or challenging curricula and coursework, in order to reduce the need for remedial coursework at the postsecondary level; c) increasing the number of participating students who obtain a secondary school diploma and complete applications for, and enroll in, a program of postsecondary education; and d) providing GEAR UP scholarships, if the application is for a State grant. § 1070a - 24(a)).

Implementation Models

GEAR UP has two implementation models: cohort model and priority student model. State applicants can implement either model. Partnership applicants can only implement the cohort model.

Cohort Model

The cohort model has two approaches: the whole-grade approach and the public housing approach. § 1437a(b)(1)).Th…

Scholarship Component

Partnerships may, but are not required, to award scholarships to eligible students. (1) Section 404E scholarship awards for grantees whose initial GEAR UP grant awards were made prior to August 14, 2008. (2) Election to use § 694.14 requirements. (c) Section 404E scholarship awards for grantees whose initial GEAR UP grant awards were made on or after August 14, 2008.

Scholarships must be made to all students who are eligible under the definition in paragraph (b) of this section.

A grantee must provide comprehensive mentoring, outreach, and supportive services to students participating in the GEAR UP program.

Consistent with their approved applications and § 694.20, a grantee may provide any services to students in their first year of attendance at an institution of higher education that will help those students succeed in school, and that do not duplicate services otherwise available to them.

Health Disparities and Socioeconomic Factors

Health care disparities are differences in treatment, morbidity, mortality, and health care outcomes that exist between one group and others. 1 Groups are not mutually exclusive; individuals can be part of multiple categories, and even move in and out of them, depending on their behaviors and self-identification (eg, smoking cessation, health insurance loss, or relocation to a different area). Although discussions of disparity commonly focus on race and disadvantaged groups, health care disparity can exist in any group of people. 2 Simply put, they determine into which at-risk group a patient belongs to and to what extent they are affected by disparities.

Many diseases disproportionately affect racial minorities and the socioeconomically disadvantaged. Hypertension affects the health and wellness of more 67 million people in America, and contributes to the deaths of 348,000 every year. 11 The so-called “Stroke Belt” of the United States covers the southeastern states from Maryland to Texas, where the population of African Americans is highest in the country. The diagnosis of hypertension in this population is hampered by the lack of symptoms in many, compounded by the lack of primary care access for this population and leads to later diagnosis and a greater burden of hypertensive consequences.

“John Henryism” is a term coined to describe the belief, held by African American men of high SES, that workplace barriers can be overcome with hard work and determination. This increased work and stress level may explain the increased health risk in this group. A major contributor to poor hypertension control rates is non-adherence to therapy. 17 In a study of 1063 hypertensive African Americans, participants were surveyed for perceived racism, stress and depression along with medication adherence behavior. 19 Furthermore, ‘racism related vigilance’ or rather the fear of encountering racism or micro-aggressions, and the modification in daily activities to avoid these encounters increases the stress level of both Blacks and Hispanics. 20 Thus, addressing poor control of hypertension in Blacks requires changing systemic racism as well as coping with individual provider racial bias.

Cardiovascular disease, renal failure, neuropathy, loss of mobility, and blindness are major consequences leading to high morbidity and mortality related to diabetes. 25 An interesting paradox is that, in underdeveloped areas such as Bangladesh, the incidence of diabetes is associated with higher SES while in the United States, the incidence is highest in people with low SES. 26 In the United States, the leading risk factor for diabetes is overweight. However, the tide may shift in the future because the incidence of obesity has slowed over the past decade, even though prevalence in unchanged. For ethnic minority populations, the early onset of diabetes is particularly problematic as it leads to other chronic health conditions later in life. Ethnic minority populations are more likely to reside in less healthy neighborhoods, many of which are designated as a “food desert” and with fewer facilities for exercise.

Higher SES and White ethnicity tend to be positively related to better health care outcomes. However, this association is not always true in cancer disease states. 31 In particular the disparity was greatest in cancers of the lung, bronchus, colon and prostate among Black men compared with all other men. 31 While the average mortality rate of Whites with cancer is lower than African Americans, those of low SES and poor access to care have similar mortality. Health care disparity does not uniquely affect ethnic minorities. Heath insurance is also a factor affecting health outcomes of cancer patients. It is well-established that early screening improves survival of many cancers such as breast, prostate and cervical cancer; however, screening of these common cancers differs significantly by race and ethnicity.

Breast cancer incidence is higher in non-Hispanic White women compared with African American women (13.3% vs 11.1% respectively); yet, mortality in African American women is 3.3% compared with 2.7% among White women. 39 In cervical cancer, the incidence rate is higher in Hispanics, African Americans and American Indians/Alaska Natives (10, 10, and 9.4, respectively) compared with non-Hispanic Whites and Asians/Pacific Islanders (7.1 and 6.3, respectively). Yet the mortality from cervical cancer rate is nearly double in African Americans and American Indian/Alaska Natives (4.0 and 3.5, respectively) compared with the mortality rate for non- Hispanic Whites, Hispanics and Asian and Pacific Islanders (2.7, 2.0 and 1.8, respectively). 40 Thus, reducing disparities requires large-scale, as well as individual, approaches to changes in behavior. 42 Hispanics and especially Black men are disproportionately incarcerated.

Long-term depression can affect a person’s mental and physical health in many ways. 45 The links between depression and suicide are well-established, but have paradoxical relationships in many communities. For example, non-Hispanic Blacks have one of the highest rates of depression, but a relatively low rate of suicide. 45 These counterintuitive relationships between suicide and depression highlight the importance of further research to delineate the risk factors for suicide in different groups. The diversity of beliefs and behaviors among different communities may make interventions to prevent suicide difficult. Techniques successful in one age group or ethnicity may be ineffective in another.

The infant mortality rate is a commonly utilized metric to gauge the success of a nation’s health care system. Infant mortality rate (IMR) is a measure of all infants that die in early life, not including stillbirths and miscarriages. 52 Within the United States, there is a vast discrepancy in IMRs based on socioeconomic backgrounds. 54 Despite the fact that socioeconomically disadvantaged groups have high IMRs on average, Hispanics have a paradoxically low rate. Adding to the paradox is the fact that Hispanics have a teen pregnancy rate higher than any other racial community in the United States, and although total teen pregnancy rates have been dropping since 1991, Blacks and Hispanics still have significantly higher rates than other groups. 55 These risks put young mothers and their children who are already challenged at greater disadvantage. 57 Contrary to all expectations, IMR is lowest among Hispanic teenage mothers (6.4%) compared with Black (12.6%) and White teen mothers (8.9%).

Determinants of health disparities or rather, factors that set the stage for health disparities to occur, are the best targets for improving outcomes. 41 Poor adherence to treatment is a major barrier to adequate mental health care. However, these individuals have reduced mental health because of a double jeopardy scenario. African Americans are the group most affected by health disparities. Although a large body of research reports that health disparities exist in African Americans, less is known about the etiology. A common denominator for many diseases seems to be a preponderance of obesity in the Black community. Americans, in general, struggle with maintaining their weight, as 34.9% of US adults are obese. However, 56% of Black women and 37% of Black men are obese. Obesity is highly related to cardiac disease, type 2 diabetes, and hypertension, and while genetic predisposition and low SES play a large role in the morbidity of these diseases in the Black community, obesity rates far above the national average are important points for the health community to address.

Walking a mile or more on foot means at least a 30-minute time expenditure for individuals wanting to purchase healthy foods, and in neighborhoods with high crime rates, is unreasonable after dark. These areas are considered bereft of affordable grocery stores with fresh food options; yet, they also tend to contain an abundance of fast food restaurants that offer inexpensive food options with excess salt, fat, cholesterol and calories. The term food security is used to describe consistent access to affordable and healthy foods. Food insecurity is when an individual does not have the same type of access.

Physicians serving these food insecure areas should consider their patients’ ability to access healthy food when developing treatment plans. 70 The first example was previously described in the low IMR rates for young Hispanic women. 72 While mortality is important, morbidity from these diseases remains a major determinant of further disparity, as it limits the ability to maintain productive lives of these individuals. This paradox remains unexplained but it may relate to lifestyles common to Hispanic culture. More research is needed to fully explain the health paradox in this community.

Communication is an essential component in excellent patient care. Cultural background and language have significant effects on communication skills and patterns. 73 It is important to understand the role of culture and history in understanding the best approaches to African Americans, who may mistrust health care providers based on historical events of mistreatment and abuse (eg, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment). In addition, the role of family and religion is prominent among African Americans. A provider’s communication style may easily be perceived as condescending if complex medical terminology is used without clarification and if open-ended questions are asked about the patient’s beliefs and experiences.74 In US Latino patients, the diversity of countries of origin has significant bearing on the challenges in the approach to cultural effects on health care. Some unifying cultural values among Hispanic patients include: personalized interaction; reciprocal respect; paternalism; fatalism; and machismo. These values color the perception of provider communication styles. A common challenge for many Hispanic patients and other immigrant patients is that of language since many are non-English speaking. The use of translating services is recommended.75 In a patient survey on their perception of physicians, both Latinos and African Americans placed higher value on provider respect, concern, courtesy, and education on prevention than on the amount of time spent by the physician.

Enhancing Health Equity: Strategies and Considerations

Reducing disparities in care requires greater focus in medical training and continuing education to improve health care provider communication with patients of all ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Even as medical advances improve our capability to prevent and treat disease, a fundamental lack of access continues to plague America’s poor and minorities. Health disparities present a serious threat to the health and wellness of millions of Americans. Steps forward are being made in the fight to equalize the health care of all Americans, but on the individual level, combating health disparities may seem frustratingly difficult to health care providers. However, research has shown that simple changes to clinical practices and increased knowledge of disparities can improve outcomes for at-risk patients. 84 An important factor in that success may be that the community health workers focused the approaches to fit the appropriate goals for the local community given the available resources.

Understanding culture is another way in which providers can augment their clinical toolbox. 85 In doing so, the narrative may change from “what is wrong with minority communities?” to “what is right with these communities and how can we do more of it?” In our nation’s changing racial and cultural demographics, the meaning of cultural sensitivity is changing. Implicit bias affects far more than ethnic minorities in health care. 87 Therefore, cultural sensitivity, a greater awareness of implicit bias, and explicit bias among health care providers may improve the overall status of health in the United States.

The charge of improving health care disparity in the United States will need to be a multi-faceted approach. This must include unique approaches to health education and screening, improved access to care, cultural sensitivity training for professionals, community engagement, and utilizing the positive attributes of patient cultures to improve health outcomes. 1) Patient education and comprehension levels affect the engagement with health care providers. 2) Taking steps to understand the culture and some medical terminology in the language of your patients is an important method of improving your delivery of care. 3) One of the key features of the paradoxical relationship between health and Hispanic ethnicity (and other immi… Brenda D.

Proprioception, Balance, and Body Awareness

Introduction: This pilot study examined the relationships among lower extremity proprioception, balance ability, and perception of body awareness. Methods: Eighteen participants (F = 11, M = 7) completed the initial testing, with eight (F = 4, M = 4) repeating the mLEPT one week later. Participant characteristics and mBARQ data were collected using an online survey. Results: For the mLEPT, good reliability was noted for the dominant leg 22 cm distance between trials 1 and 2 for all 18 participants (ICC = 0.83). Moderate test-retest reliability was observed when comparing the averages of day 1 to day 2 for the dominant leg 22 cm distance (ICC = 0.53), and for the overall error when collapsing across conditions (ICC = 0.63). Moderate reliability was also observed for the mBARQ (α = 0.76). Strong inverse relationships between proprioception error and directional control scores were observed, indicating an association between dynamic balance and lower extremity proprioception (r = -0.55-0.54, p = 0.02). Sex, sports participation, leg dominance, and previous ankle injury also influenced proprioception performance. Females displayed better lower extremity proprioception and balance control than males. Conclusions: Both the mLEPT and mBARQ appear to have moderate reliability. mLEPT performance was strongly associated with dynamic balance measures. In addition, lower mBARQ scale scores in those with previous ankle injury were strongly associated with poorer proprioception.

tags: #NCAA #25 #awareness #rating #explained