[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 125 (Monday, June 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35322-35326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-17059]



[[Page 35321]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part IV





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Final Priority 
and FY 1997 New Awards Applications; Notices

  Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 1997 / 
Notices  

[[Page 35322]]



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Notice 
of Final Priority

AGENCY: Department of Education.

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces a final priority for programs 
administered by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services (OSERS) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 
(IDEA). The Secretary may use this priority in Fiscal Year 1997 and 
subsequent years. The Secretary takes this action to focus Federal 
assistance on identified needs to improve results for children with 
disabilities. This final priority is intended to ensure wide and 
effective use of program funds.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This priority takes effect on July 30, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this final 
priority contact the Grants and Contracts Services Team, 600 
Independence Avenue, S.W., room 3317, Switzer Building, Washington, 
D.C. 20202-2641. The preferred method for requesting information is to 
FAX your request to: (202) 205-8717. Telephone: (202) 260-9182.
    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the TDD number: (202) 205-9860. Individuals with disabilities 
may obtain a copy of this notice in an alternate format (e.g. Braille, 
large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the 
Department as listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains one final priority 
authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This 
final priority supports the National Education Goals by helping to 
improve results for children with disabilities.
    On March 24, 1997, the Secretary published a notice of proposed 
priorities in the Federal Register (62 FR 13972).
    The publication of this final priority does not preclude the 
Secretary from proposing additional priorities, nor does it limit the 
Secretary to funding only this priority, subject to meeting applicable 
rulemaking requirements. Funding of particular projects depends on the 
availability of funds, and the quality of the applications received.

    Note: This notice of final priority does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under this competition 
is published in a separate notice in this issue of the Federal 
Register.

Analysis of Comments and Changes

    In response to the Secretary's invitation in the notice of proposed 
priorities, twelve parties submitted comments. An analysis of the 
comments and of the changes in the proposed priority follows. Technical 
and other minor changes--as well as suggested changes the Secretary is 
not legally authorized to make under the applicable statutory 
authority--are not addressed.

Priority--Directed Research Projects

Focus 1--Beacons of Excellence.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that Focus 1 be operated as a 
five-year institute with sufficient funding to investigate both general 
education and special education change.
    Discussion: The Secretary notes that Focus 1 requires projects to 
study schools achieving exemplary results for students with 
disabilities in the context of efforts to achieve exemplary results for 
all students. The Secretary anticipates that applicants would need to 
investigate both the general education and special education practices 
associated with achieving exemplary results for students with 
disabilities. Decisions concerning the number of projects to fund, 
project funding levels, and project durations are based on a 
determination of the time and funding needed to carry out the intent of 
a particular focus. The Secretary believes it is possible that some, 
but not necessarily all, applicants may need more than three years to 
complete project activities. However, the Secretary prefers, given the 
diversity of approaches and of schools achieving exemplary results, to 
fund multiple projects, rather than extend the project's duration in 
this focus.
    Changes: The phrase ``During the third year'' in the last sentence 
of Focus 1 has been replaced with ``During the final year'' to allow 
project periods to exceed three years if the extended time period is 
justified.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that Focus 1 support one project 
to study reform at middle and high school levels, asserting that the 
need for information is greater at these levels than at the elementary 
level, where greater progress in reform has been made.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that middle and high school levels 
should be studied, and notes that Focus 1 allows projects to focus on 
either secondary or elementary levels, or both. Further, the Secretary 
believes it would be beneficial to support at least one project at both 
the elementary and secondary school level. However, the Secretary does 
not believe that it is necessary to have one project that includes both 
levels.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to reflect the Secretary's 
plan to support at least one project at the elementary level and at 
least one project at the secondary level.
    Comment: One commenter asked if projects were required to study 
multiple schools, or if a project could propose to study only one 
school.
    Discussion: It may be possible for an applicant to propose a 
technically sound project involving the study of just one exemplary 
school.
    Changes: The phrase ``one or more'' has been added to the first 
sentence to indicate that a project may propose to study just one 
exemplary school.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that Focus 1 require applicants to 
identify in their proposals the exemplary schools they will study so 
that reviewers can assess school quality as part of the proposal 
evaluation focus and so that OSEP is assured that exemplary schools 
agree to participate in the project.
    Discussion: The Secretary is confident that researchers will 
include criteria in their applications that will result in the 
identification of exemplary schools, but that it is unlikely that many 
applicants will be able to identify exemplary schools with sufficient 
rigor prior to receiving funding. The commenter's suggested approach 
could potentially weaken the competition and reduce the overall quality 
of the projects funded under this focus.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that OSEP clarify whether Focus 1 
includes ``promising'' practices as well as practices that have been 
proven effective. The commenter further suggested that promising and 
proven practices should be reported as separate categories.
    Discussion: The distinction between ``promising'' and ``proven'' is 
a relatively complex issue, as is the exact definition of ``practice,'' 
and the Secretary believes these issues go beyond the central purpose 
of Focus 1. The projects must identify and study factors contributing 
to exemplary learning results, not necessarily promising or proven 
practices.
    Changes: None.
Focus 2--Prevention and Early Intervention Services for Children With 
Emotional and Behavioral Problems
    Comment: One commenter expressed confusion as to the purpose of 
Focus 2, and recommended that projects be required to identify factors 
that prevent children from developing emotional and

[[Page 35323]]

behavioral problems, identify program factors designed to prevent the 
problems, and describe the results of the intervention in terms of 
outcomes for children.
    Discussion: Focus 2 is broadly stated, intentionally, to welcome a 
diversity of research foci that examine specific factors that 
contribute to effectiveness. The only specific requirement for every 
research project is that, in some way, each research project must 
include an evaluation of the collaboration and coordination of 
prevention and early intervention services. The areas of investigation 
recommended by the commenter are permissible under Focus 2, as long as 
the proposed research also includes an evaluation of collaboration and 
coordination of prevention and early intervention services.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that Focus 2 specifically 
identify the child's primary health care provider or medical home 
provider as one of the service providers to be included in evaluating 
the effectiveness of collaborative, community-based services.
    Discussion: Focus 2 states that primary care and mental health 
programs, where available, are additional programs appropriate for 
study. Given the vast array of service providers applicants could 
propose to study, the Secretary does not believe it is possible to 
provide an all inclusive list and prefers to retain the broad language 
of Focus 2.
    Changes: None.
Focus 4--The Sustainability of Promising Innovations
    Comment: Two commenters wrote in support of the importance of 
allowing, as an integral component of Focus 4, the development of 
approaches to build internal site capacity for maintaining effective 
innovations beyond the term of external implementation support.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the development of site-based 
approaches to build internal capacity to sustain promising and 
effective innovations is a desirable outcome. However, the Secretary 
emphasizes that the primary purpose of Focus 4 is to study the 
sustainability of promising innovations and that, as such, any proposed 
approach to site based capacity building should be an integral part of 
the research design.
    Change: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested expanding Focus 4 to include the 
study of sustaining innovations designed to prevent inappropriate 
referrals to and placement in special education.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter on the 
importance of effective approaches for preventing inappropriate 
referrals to and placement in special education. The Secretary notes 
that Focus 4 is primarily interested in issues of sustainability of 
innovations that hold positive results for children with disabilities 
within a school restructuring/reform context. This broad focus does not 
preclude projects from including the study of inappropriate referrals 
and placement as a component of a research plan.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that Focus 4 should consider the 
interrelationships between the innovations being studied and the 
overall educational system where they are used.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the importance of studying 
the interrelationships among a variety of factors across different 
levels of the system. The Secretary notes, however, that Focus 4 does 
not preclude the study of interrelationships among factors, in fact 
Focus 4 encourages that study. For example, Focus 4 projects may 
address the extent of consonance or dissonance between critical 
features of the innovations and existing (and emerging) school and 
district practices and policies.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended Focus 4 specify that promising 
innovations may include policy implementation research as well as 
practice-based research and model demonstrations.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that policy implementation 
research is important, but believes that Focus 4 does not preclude 
those studies. The Secretary notes that, among the factors that may be 
studied, item (f) includes school policy requirements and item (g) 
includes school and district practices and policies.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the 
documentation of ongoing program effectiveness. One commenter asked if 
the sustainability of programs or the effectiveness of programs is the 
area of concentration. Another commenter recommended including 
sustained changes in student results as part of the research design.
    Discussion: The purpose of Focus 4 is to study the sustainability 
of innovations that have documented positive results for children with 
disabilities and, in doing so, requires the ongoing documentation of 
results for children with disabilities as a component of the research 
plan.
    Changes: Focus 4 has been revised to clarify that sustained changes 
in student results is part of the research design.
    Comment: One commenter suggested the phrase ``results for students 
with disabilities'' as used in Focus 4 be expanded to include factors 
such as more substantial and ongoing parent involvement in individual 
education plan (IEP) development that are important aspects of 
providing an appropriate education for students with disabilities.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that innovative approaches to 
improving interactions among professionals and families and 
facilitating least restrictive environment (LRE) placements are 
important aspects of providing an appropriate education for children 
with disabilities. The Secretary believes, however, that the ultimate 
measure of the effectiveness of these approaches is the extent to which 
they lead to positive results for children with disabilities. The 
Secretary believes that the phrase ``positive results for students with 
disabilities'' is inclusive of a wide range of possible important 
results for students with disabilities including the attainment of 
relevant and appropriate academic, social, behavioral, and functional 
goals and objectives.
    Changes: None.

General Comments

    Comment: One commenter requested that all research focus areas 
include the need for research in early intervention and school based 
therapeutic interventions to meet the educational needs of children 
with disabilities.
    Discussion: The Secretary acknowledges that early intervention and 
school based therapeutic interventions are often important elements in 
improving results for children with disabilities. However, these 
interventions are not pertinent to all of the focus areas. The various 
focus areas do not preclude an applicant from proposing early 
intervention and school based therapeutic interventions, where 
appropriate. The Secretary believes it would be impossible to provide a 
comprehensive list of potential intervention strategies in any focus 
area. The Secretary prefers to maintain the broad language of the focus 
areas, and allow applicants to propose and justify their particular 
strategy.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that all research projects 
should be capped at some reasonable indirect rate, and stated that an 
indirect

[[Page 35324]]

cost rate between 8 to 12 percent is more than adequate.
    Discussion: The subject of indirect cost rates for research 
projects is beyond the scope of comments sought in the notice of 
proposed priorities. Indirect cost rates are addressed in the Education 
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), which are 
currently under review.
    Changes: None.

Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The 
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet 
this absolute priority:

Absolute Priority--Directed Research Projects

Background
    The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has, in prior 
years, announced priorities for the support of research projects under 
several of the programs authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act. Separate research priorities (competitions) have been 
announced under the Early Education Program for Children with 
Disabilities, Program for Children with Severe Disabilities, Secondary 
Education and Transitional Services for Youth with Disabilities 
Program, Program for Children and Youth with Serious Emotional 
Disturbance, and the Research in Education of Individuals with 
Disabilities Program. The purpose of this priority is to group all 
priorities for directed research and apply a single set of requirements 
among the various competitions. By consolidating multiple priorities 
and announcements into one priority, OSEP endeavors to avoid 
unnecessary duplication and provide consistent information for all 
research competitions. The program authority for each focus is listed 
following each focus statement.

Priority

    This priority provides support for projects that advance and 
improve the knowledge base and improve the practice of professionals, 
parents, and others providing early intervention, special education, 
and related services, including professionals who work with children 
with disabilities in regular education environments, to provide such 
children effective instruction and enable them to learn successfully. 
Under this priority, projects must support innovation, development, 
exchange, and use of advancements in knowledge and practice designed to 
contribute to the improvement of early intervention, instruction, and 
learning of infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
    A research project must address one of the following focus areas:
    Focus 1--Beacons of excellence. Research projects supported under 
focus 1 must identify and study one or more schools achieving exemplary 
results for students with disabilities in the context of efforts to 
achieve exemplary results for all students. Projects must develop and 
apply procedures and criteria to identify such schools, and to identify 
factors contributing to exemplary learning results, and examine how 
those factors and other factors relate to achieving exemplary learning 
results for students with disabilities. Projects may focus on either 
secondary or elementary levels, or both. The Secretary intends to award 
at least one project at the elementary level and at least one project 
at the secondary level. During the final year of the project, the 
Secretary will determine whether or not to fund an optional six-month 
period for extended dissemination activities arranged with OSEP.

    Program Authority: Research in Education of Individuals with 
Disabilities Program, 20 U.S.C. 1441.

    Focus 2--Prevention and early intervention services for children 
with emotional and behavioral problems. Many young children with 
emotional and behavioral problems experience years of repeated 
preschool and school failure, permanent damage to their self-esteem, 
and escalation of their problems, before they receive appropriate 
services. Research projects supported under this focus must identify, 
examine, and document information about the specific factors that 
contribute to effectiveness in collaborative, community-based, 
prevention and early intervention services to prevent children with 
emotional and behavioral problems from developing serious emotional 
disturbance. The target population for these projects includes children 
in preschool, kindergarten, and the primary grades (1-4), and their 
families.
    The research may focus, for example, on child find, screening, 
early identification, assessment, pre-referral strategies, child and 
family intervention and prevention services, and results. Research must 
include but is not limited to services and programs funded under the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Additional programs with 
collaborative, community-based services appropriate for study may 
include, where available, Head Start and Early Head Start programs, 
other early childhood service programs, primary care and mental health 
programs, child care center programs, and public and private preschools 
and elementary school programs. Each research project must include an 
evaluation of the collaboration and coordination of prevention and 
early intervention services across multiple service providers and 
agencies working with these children and their families.

    Program Authority: Program for Children and Youth with Serious 
Emotional Disturbance, 20 U.S.C. 1426.

    Focus 3--Students approaching graduation and the supplemental 
security income program. Many children and youth with disabilities 
receiving special education services also receive Supplemental Security 
Income (SSI). Administered by the Social Security Administration, the 
SSI program provides cash assistance, Medicaid eligibility, and work 
incentives such as the Impairment-Related Work Expense incentive and 
the Plan for Achieving Self-Support. National data indicate that these 
work incentives are under-utilized and that most working-age SSI 
recipients are unemployed. To address this problem, the National 
Academy of Social Insurance (1996) recommended that information about 
the SSI work incentives should be incorporated in the transition 
planning process required by the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act. The SSI work incentives may therefore enhance the 
employment results of transitioning youth with disabilities.
    The purpose of focus 3 is to develop and test innovative strategies 
for increasing the utilization of the SSI work incentives. Projects 
must: (a) Examine the barriers to employment for young adults with 
disabilities who are receiving SSI benefits; (b) develop innovative 
strategies and materials for promoting the utilization of work 
incentives through the transition planning process; and (c) apply 
qualitative and quantitative research methods to determine the relative 
efficacy of technical assistance strategies, toward improving work 
incentive utilization developed under (b).

    Program Authority: Secondary Education and Transitional Services 
for Youth with Disabilities Program, 20 U.S.C. 1425.

    Focus 4--The sustainability of promising innovations. A growing 
body of practice-based research and model demonstration work in schools 
and local districts, including projects

[[Page 35325]]

supported by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), has 
focussed on meeting the needs of, and improving the results for, 
students with disabilities in schools and districts involved in reform 
and restructuring initiatives. Some of this work is yielding promising 
positive results for students with disabilities. However, little is 
known about the extent to which the innovations developed and 
implemented in these efforts are sustained in project sites beyond the 
term of time-limited external support and assistance.
    Focus 4 is designed to study the implementation of practices that 
have been found to be effective in meeting the needs of students with 
disabilities in reform/restructuring initiatives in local and district 
schools. The practices must have been included as part of projects 
designed to implement such practices. The study must address: (1) The 
extent to which such practices have been sustained beyond the term of 
the projects; and (2) factors that influence the determined level of 
sustainability. Factors to be studied may include, but are not limited 
to: (a) The nature of the innovations and the extent to which the 
innovations have undergone adaptation or alteration over time; (b) the 
type and extent of support strategies employed during initial 
implementation stages and over time; (c) planned and unplanned changes 
in school organizational and/or structural contexts; (d) the level of 
penetration of the innovation; (e) the actual and perceived costs and 
benefits for participants; (f) constancy of site leadership, school 
staff, and school policy requirements; (g) the extent of consonance or 
dissonance between critical features of the innovations and existing 
(and emerging) school and district practices and policies; and (h) 
resource access and allocation. Within focus 4, projects must provide 
comprehensive descriptions of the targeted effective practices to be 
studied, and convincing documentation of resulting positive results for 
students with disabilities. Projects must focus research on issues of 
sustainability and must incorporate in their research design the 
continuing documentation of results for students with disabilities. 
Within focus 4, the Secretary particularly encourages an in-depth case 
study research design where the sites to be studied are the cases.

    Program Authority: Research in Education of Individuals with 
Disabilities Program, 20 U.S.C. 1441.

    Focus 5--Educating children with severe disabilities in inclusive 
settings. Focus 5 supports research projects to (a) identify new or 
improved strategies to address the educational and related service 
needs of children and youth with severe disabilities in inclusive 
general education settings and extracurricular activities, and (b) 
describe how the school inclusion strategies as identified in (a) are 
aligned with systemic reform and school improvement strategies for all 
students.
    Additional research is needed to identify, describe, and examine: 
(1) The efficacy and linkages of existing systemic reform and school 
inclusion strategies, (2) how school systems provide supports and 
collaborative teaming to meet the needs of students with severe 
disabilities, and other diverse learners; (3) how standards and 
authentic assessment practices are implemented for students with severe 
disabilities and their impact on inclusive and systemic reform efforts, 
(4) social support strategies that promote positive interactions among 
students with severe disabilities and other students, and their same-
aged peers to foster cohesive school and classroom communities; and (5) 
the types of peer-mediated strategies that actively involve all 
students, including students with severe disabilities, in inclusive 
educational programs.
    To be considered for funding under focus 5, a research project 
must--
    (a) Identify specific interventions or strategies to be 
investigated;
    (b) Design the research activities in a manner that is likely to 
improve services for all students in inclusive classrooms, including 
students with severe disabilities;
    (c) Conduct the research in schools pursuing systemic education 
reform and school inclusion; and
    (d) Use methodological procedures designed to produce findings 
useful to program implementers and policy makers regarding the impact 
and interaction effects of systemic reform and school inclusion 
strategies in State and local contexts.
    All projects funded under focus 5 must identify and describe how 
these inclusion efforts benefit students with severe disabilities 
including the reciprocal benefits of inclusive schooling for all 
students.

    Program Authority: Program for Children with Severe 
Disabilities, 20 U.S.C. 1424.

Requirements for All Directed Research Projects

    In addition to addressing focus (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above, 
projects must:
    (a) Apply rigorous research methods (qualitative and/or 
quantitative) to identify approaches contributing to improved results 
for children with disabilities;
    (b) Provide a conceptual framework, based on extant research and 
theory to serve as a basis for the issues to be studied, the research 
design, and the target population;
    (c) Prepare dissemination materials for both researcher and 
practitioner audiences and develop linkages with U.S. Department of 
Education dissemination and technical assistance providers, in 
particular those supported under the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act, to communicate research findings and distribute 
products; and
    (d) Budget for two trips annually to Washington, D.C., for: (1) a 
two-day Research to Practice Division Project Directors' meeting; and 
(2) another meeting to collaborate with the Research to Practice 
Division project officer and the other projects funded under this 
priority, and to share information and discuss findings and methods of 
dissemination.

Selection Criteria for Evaluating Applications Under the Absolute 
Priority--Directed Research Projects

    The Secretary will use the following criteria to evaluate 
applications under the absolute priority--Directed Research Projects. 
The maximum score for all the criteria is 100 points.
    (a) Importance (10 points). The Secretary reviews each application 
to determine the importance of the project in leading to the 
understanding of, remediation of, or compensation for, the problem or 
issue that relates to the early intervention with or special education 
of infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
    (b) Technical soundness (40 points). The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine the technical soundness of the research, 
including--
    (1) The design;
    (2) The proposed sample;
    (3) Instrumentation; and
    (4) Data analysis procedures.
    (c) Plan of operation (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the quality 
of the plan of operation for the project.
    (2) The Secretary looks for--
    (i) High quality in the design of the project;
    (ii) An effective plan of management that insures proper and 
efficient administration of the project;
    (iii) A clear description of how the objectives of the project 
relate to the purpose of the program; and
    (iv) The way the applicant plans to use its resources and personnel 
to achieve each objective.
    (3) The quality of the evaluation plan for the project including 
the extent to

[[Page 35326]]

which the methods of evaluation are appropriate for the project and, to 
the extent possible, are objective and produce data that are 
quantifiable.

(Cross Reference: 34 CFR 75.590, Evaluation by the grantee.)
    (d) Quality of key personnel (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine the 
qualifications of the key personnel that the applicant plans to use on 
the project.
    (2) The Secretary considers--
    (i) The qualifications of the project director (if one is to be 
used); and,
    (ii) The qualifications of each of the other key personnel to be 
used in the project; and
    (iii) The time that each person referred to in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) 
and (ii) of this section will commit to the project.
    (3) To determine personnel qualifications, the Secretary considers 
experience and training in fields related to the objectives of the 
project, as well as other evidence that the applicant provides.
    (e) Underrepresented populations (10 points). The Secretary reviews 
each application for information that shows the extent to which the 
applicant, as part of its nondiscriminatory employment practices, 
employs members of underrepresented populations as project staff. The 
Secretary looks for--
    (1) Employees who are members of underrepresented populations, 
including members of racial or ethnic minority groups and individuals 
with disabilities; and
    (2) Procedures to provide training and other necessary support to 
retain and advance qualified personnel from underrepresented 
populations.
    (f) Adequacy of resources (5 points).
    (1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine if the 
applicant plans to devote adequate resources to the project.
    (2) The Secretary considers the extent to which--
    (i) The facilities that the applicant plans to use are adequate; 
and
    (ii) The equipment and supplies that the applicant plans to use are 
adequate.
    (g) Impact (5 points). The Secretary reviews each application to 
determine the probable impact of the proposed research and development 
products and the extent to which those products can be expected to have 
a direct influence on infants, toddlers, children, and youth with 
disabilities or personnel responsible for their education or early 
intervention services.
    (h) Organizational capability (5 points). The Secretary considers--
    (1) The applicant's experience in special education or early 
intervention services; and
    (2) The ability of the applicant to disseminate the findings of the 
project to appropriate groups to ensure that they can be used 
effectively.
    (i) Budget and cost effectiveness. (5 points)
    (1) The Secretary reviews each application to determine if the 
project has an adequate budget and is cost effective.
    (2) The Secretary considers the extent to which--
    (i) The budget for the project is adequate to support the project 
activities; and
    (ii) Costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives of the 
project.

Intergovernmental Review

    Except for Focus areas 1 and 4 in this priority, all other focus 
areas included in this notice are subject to the requirements of 
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. The 
objective of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental 
partnership and a strengthened federalism by relying on processes 
developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of 
proposed Federal financial assistance.
    In accordance with the order, this document is intended to provide 
early notification of the Department's specific plans and actions for 
this program.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: Research in 
Education of Individuals with Disabilities Program, 84.023; Program 
for Children with Severe Disabilities, 84.086; Program for Children 
and Youth with Serious Emotional Disturbance, 84.238; and Secondary 
Education and Transitional Services for Youth with Disabilities 
Program, 84.158)

    Dated: June 24, 1997.

Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 97-17059 Filed 6-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P