[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 85 (Monday, May 4, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24724-24731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11720]



[[Page 24723]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part VIII





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



Office of Special Education and Office of Rehabilitative Services; 
Notice of Final Priorities and Notice Inviting Applications for New 
Awards for Fiscal Year 1998; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices  

[[Page 24724]]



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


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

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final priorities for two programs 
administered by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services (OSERS) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 
(IDEA), as amended. The Secretary may use these priorities to support 
grants in Fiscal Year 1998 and subsequent years. The Secretary takes 
this action to focus Federal assistance on identified needs to improve 
results for children with disabilities. These final priorities are 
intended to ensure wide and effective use of program funds.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on June 3, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Department address and telephone 
number to contact for information on each final priority is listed 
under the appropriate priority.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains three final priorities 
under two Special Education programs authorized by the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act: Technical Assistance and Dissemination to 
Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities (two 
proposed priorities); and Research and Innovation to Improve Services 
and Results for Children with Disabilities (one proposed priority).
    On February 19, 1998, the Secretary published a notice of proposed 
priorities for these programs in the Federal Register (63 FR 8530).
    These final priorities support the National Education Goals by 
improving understanding of how to enable children and youth with 
disabilities to reach higher levels of academic achievement.
    The publication of these priorities does not preclude the Secretary 
from proposing additional priorities, nor does it limit the Secretary 
to funding only these priorities, 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 priorities does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under these 
competitions 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, six parties submitted comments. An analysis of the comments 
and of the changes in the proposed priorities 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 1--Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

    Comment: One commenter recommended that the priority use the exact, 
broad, language of IDEA, i.e. ``strategies, including positive 
behavioral interventions and supports'', rather than the term 
``positive behavioral support'', which the commenter believed would 
narrow the scope of interventions, strategies and supports that can be 
studied by the Center.
    Discussion: It is the Secretary's intent to support a broad view of 
possible interventions. The language in the priority has been changed 
to be consistent with this intent.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to refer to positive 
behavioral interventions and supports throughout.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the State policies, which the 
Center must evaluate, should include policies that support family 
involvement in the provision of services.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter that family 
participation in the development and implementation of behavioral 
supports is important. The proposed priority would not have precluded 
projects from addressing this issue. Paragraph (a) purposely does not 
delineate the specific areas of State and local policy on school-wide 
positive behavioral supports and interventions that the Center must 
address. Applicants have the discretion to identify and evaluate the 
critical areas.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the coordinated network under 
paragraph (b) be broadened to include, ``related services and other 
mental health professionals'', to ensure that the priority did not 
exclude contributions made to the mental health of children by school 
psychologists, school social workers, and other related services 
personnel.
    Discussion: The term mental health professional as used in the 
proposed priority was not intended to exclude related services 
personnel who provide mental health services. The Secretary agrees that 
referring to ``related services professionals'' as part of the 
coordinated network would add further clarity.
    Changes: The proposed priority has been revised to include related 
services professionals under paragraph (b).
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the list of agencies with 
which the Center may conduct outreach activities under paragraph (b) 
include Child Mental Health Services and Maternal and Child Health at 
the Department of Health and Human Services since both programs fund 
demonstration projects and sponsor school health clinics.
    Discussion: The priority lists some of the relevant agencies and 
federally supported technical assistance and information agencies and 
projects with which the Center may conduct outreach activities. While 
the list is not meant to be exhaustive, and applicants may identify 
additional collaborative agencies, the Secretary agrees that the two 
agencies identified by the commenter should be included among those 
listed in the priority.
    Changes: The proposed priority has been revised to include OHS'' 
Child Mental Health Services, and Maternal and Child Health.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that information exchanges under 
paragraph (c) involve an array or menu of methods for reporting 
positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports.
    Discussion: It is the Secretary's intent to provide for a range of 
methods for exchanging information. While the proposed priority did not 
preclude such a range, the Secretary agrees that an array of methods 
should be required.
    Changes: Paragraph (c) of the proposed priority has been revised to 
require that informational exchanges include an array of methods for 
sharing information.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the information 
dissemination efforts described in paragraph (e) include steps toward 
implementation, methods to sustain efforts, and mechanisms for ensuring 
increased replication and effective dissemination.
    Discussion: The priority is intended to promote awareness of the 
value of school-wide positive behavioral supports and interventions and 
to build the necessary knowledge base, momentum, and resource network 
to encourage their widespread application. To the extent the Center 
acquires information regarding replication of supports and 
interventions, it may share that information with the field. However, 
requiring the Center to develop guidelines for replication are beyond 
the work scope of the priority. Implementation, on the other hand, will 
be conducted by the coordinated network under paragraph (b).
    Changes: None.

[[Page 24725]]

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the blueprint described in 
paragraph (f) include underlying components necessary to institute an 
effective program.
    Discussion: Paragraph (f) is intended to support the development of 
a blueprint that the Secretary may use to provide future technical 
assistance to LEAs and SEAs in implementing positive behavioral 
interventions and support programs. The components of the blueprint are 
left to the discretion and expertise of the Center.
    Changes: The priority has been modified to clarify that the 
blueprint developed under paragraph (f) shall be submitted to the 
Secretary for purposes of providing future technical assistance on 
positive behavioral interventions and supports.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that the focus of the results-
based evaluation under paragraph (h) be clarified.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the proposed priority did not 
sufficiently identify the focus of the results-based evaluation and has 
clarified the language.
    Changes: Paragraph (h) has been revised to clarify that the 
results-based evaluation must be supported by evaluation data gathered 
from the project of the technical assistance provided under paragraphs 
(b), (c), (d), and (e) of the proposed priority.

Priority 2--National Center on Dispute Resolution

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority include 
additional clarification regarding expectations associated with 
specific tasks, especially those with fiscal implications.
    Discussion: The Secretary prefers to afford applicants the 
discretion to determine how best to accomplish the activities specified 
in the priority, including how (or if) to budget for certain tasks. 
Moreover, the Secretary believes it would be inappropriate to specify 
additional estimated costs in the priority.
    Change: None.
Priority--Directed Research Projects
Focus 1--Beacons of Excellence
    Comment: One commenter suggested that Focus 1--Beacons of 
Excellence under the proposed Directed Research Projects priority be 
changed to make explicit that the prime criterion for a beacon school 
is student performance measured in a valid and reliable manner.
    Discussion: The priority as proposed required that projects 
``identify and study schools or programs achieving exemplary results 
for students with disabilities.'' The commenter's suggested change may 
strengthen the emphasis on student results that are measured in a 
rigorous manner.
    Changes: The priority has been changed to require that schools or 
programs be identified on the basis of valid and reliable measures of 
student results.

Focus 2--The Sustainability of Promising Innovations

    Comment: One commenter suggested that Focus 2 be broadened to 
include research documenting the effectiveness of applying assistive 
technology to help students benefit from their educational experience.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter that research 
documenting the extent to which assistive technology benefits students 
with disabilities is important, however, Focus 2 is primarily 
interested in issues of sustainability of innovations that hold 
positive results for children with disabilities within a school 
restructuring/reform context. OSEP supports research related to 
assistive technology under the Special Education--Technology and Media 
Services for Individuals with Disabilities program. The closing date 
for applications under that program for the fiscal year 1998 
competition for the Steppingstones of Technology Innovations for 
Students with Disabilities priority, is May 8, 1998.
    Changes: None.

Focus 6--Synthesize and Communicate a Professional Knowledge Base: 
Contributions to Research and Practice

    Comment: One commenter suggested that the syntheses areas included 
in paragraphs (a)-(f) be rewritten to address the ``Method and effects 
of interventions on * * *'', so that the syntheses projects will not 
only identify and synthesize positive outcomes, but will also identify 
and synthesize those ``things'' which lead to positive outcomes. The 
commenter further suggested that the project assess what the field 
currently knows regarding self-determination and develop an agenda of 
future research questions.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the concerns of the 
commenter are taken into account when rigorous research methods are 
applied in the design and execution of the meta-analysis for the 
synthesis project. With regard to the commenter's suggestion that the 
project assess what the field currently knows regarding self-
determination and develop an agenda of future research questions, the 
Secretary emphasizes that it is the purpose of the synthesis project to 
assess what is known from research and report the findings. However, it 
is not the intent of this priority to develop an agenda of future 
research questions.
    Change: None.

Focus 8--Educating Children with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings

    Comment: One commenter suggested that assistive technology be 
listed as a systems change strategy worthy of investigation under Focus 
8.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter that assistive 
technology is a strategy worthy of investigation under this priority. 
As Focus 8 is written, there is nothing that precludes an applicant 
from using assistive technology as a strategy to promote access and 
inclusion of students with disabilities in regular classrooms.
    Change: None.

Special Education--Technical Assistance and Dissemination To 
Improve Services and Results For Children With Disabilities

Purpose of Program

    The purpose of this program is to provide technical assistance and 
information through such mechanisms as institutes, regional resource 
centers, clearinghouses, and programs that support States and local 
entities in building capacity, to improve early intervention, 
educational, and transitional services and results for children with 
disabilities and their families, and to address systemic-change goals 
and priorities.

Priorities

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet one of the following priorities. 
The Secretary will fund under these competitions only applications that 
meet one of these absolute priorities:

Absolute Priority 1--Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and 
Supports

Background
    Problem behaviors are one of the most common reasons children with 
disabilities are excluded from school, community, and work. Research on 
positive behavioral interventions and supports is rapidly developing 
and demonstrates how school-wide approaches to these interventions and 
supports can enable students with disabilities who exhibit problem 
behaviors to achieve independence and become participants and 
contributing

[[Page 24726]]

members in school, community, and work.
    Despite this growing body of knowledge, however, awareness of the 
value of these approaches and their use in the educational environment 
remains limited. There is clearly a need to develop a greater awareness 
on the part of educators and others of the important contribution that 
positive behavioral interventions and supports can make in achieving 
successful results for children with disabilities who exhibit 
challenging problem behaviors and for improving the overall climate of 
schools.
    Part B of IDEA includes provisions intended to guide and assist 
schools in cases in which the behavior of a child with a disability 
impedes learning. For example, the Act specifies that teams developing 
individualized education programs (IEPs) consider, when appropriate, 
positive behavioral interventions and supports and other strategies to 
address behavior problems. The following priority is intended to assist 
schools in designing and implementing effective school-wide positive 
behavioral intervention and support programs by creating a greater 
awareness of these research-based approaches, including identifying 
effective State and local policies which support the approaches, and by 
building the necessary knowledge base, momentum, and resource network 
to encourage their widespread application.
Priority
    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority for the purpose of 
supporting a Center for Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports 
that builds awareness and motivation for schools to design and 
implement school-wide support for children with disabilities who 
exhibit challenging problem behaviors. The Center must, at a minimum:
    (a) Evaluate the state of policy and practice regarding school-wide 
positive behavioral interventions and supports, including relevant 
State and local policies and guidelines, and financing and cross-agency 
coordination strategies for supporting behavioral intervention and 
support services. Develop and apply criteria for identifying exemplary 
programs of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. 
Identify and publicize schools implementing such programs.
    (b) Establish a coordinated network of researchers, educators, 
parents, related services, and mental health professionals, and policy 
makers who will serve as resources to schools and each other in 
designing and implementing school-wide positive behavioral intervention 
and support programs. Conduct outreach activities with relevant 
federally supported technical assistance and information activities and 
projects (e.g., the National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation 
Research programs, the Federal Resource Center, Regional Resource 
Centers, the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), the 
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education's Safe and Drug Free 
Schools program, the Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice 
and Delinquency Prevention, the Department of Health and Human 
Services' Child Mental Health Services and Maternal and Child Health 
programs), State and local organizations, and other relevant 
organizations and projects to promote public awareness of positive 
behavioral intervention and support practices and the availability of 
information, supports, and services.
    (c) Provide for information exchanges between researchers and 
practitioners who direct exemplary behavioral intervention and support 
programs and educators who seek to design and implement effective 
school-wide programs. Information must be exchanged through an array of 
methods, including, but not limited to, two regional forums during each 
of the first four years of the project, and a national forum in the 
fifth year. The forums must be designed to expand the coordinated 
network, develop awareness of research-based practices, and create a 
dialogue about school-wide positive behavioral intervention and support 
programs. The forums must include examples and descriptions of 
exemplary school-wide programs and effective State and local policies, 
and may include other appropriate activities such as visits to 
exemplary sites.
    (d) Provide information to the national information center for 
children with disabilities. Collaborate with the national information 
center for children with disabilities on the development and 
dissemination of materials on positive behavioral interventions and 
supports. Establish linkages with the national information center for 
children with disabilities to ensure timely and accurate dissemination 
of information to customers.
    (e) Organize, synthesize, and report information to teachers, 
administrators, parents, and other interested parties regarding 
research, policy, and practice advances on positive behavioral 
interventions and supports. Develop and disseminate products that are 
easy to use and accessible (e.g., print and electronic formats). 
Respond to written and telephone inquiries with research-based 
information.
    (f) Develop, and submit to the Secretary, a blueprint for providing 
further technical assistance to local educational agencies (LEAs) and 
State educational agencies (SEAs), which includes alternative designs 
of effective school-wide positive behavioral intervention and support 
programs and alternative approaches to delivering technical assistance 
in their implementation. Identify barriers to assisting school 
districts across the country in developing and implementing school-wide 
positive behavioral interventions and support programs and develop 
strategies for overcoming these barriers.
    (g) Budget for two trips annually to Washington, D.C., for: (1) A 
two-day Research to Practice Division Project Directors' meeting; and 
(2) a meeting to collaborate with the Research to Practice Division 
project officer and the other related projects, and to share 
information and discuss findings and methods of dissemination.
    (h) Conduct, every two years, a results-based evaluation supported 
by evaluation data gathered from the project of the technical 
assistance provided under activities (b), (c), (d), and (e). Such an 
evaluation must be conducted by a review team consisting of three 
experts approved by the Secretary, and must measure elements such as--
    (1) The type of technical assistance provided and the perception of 
its quality by the target audience;
    (2) The changes that occurred as a result of the technical 
assistance provided; and
    (3) The review team will examine the progress that the Center has 
made with respect to the objectives in its application.
    The services of the review team, including a two-day site visit to 
the Center is to be performed during the last half of the Center's 
second and fourth years and may be included in that year's evaluation 
required under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the services to be 
performed by the review team must also be included in the Center's 
budget for years two and four. These costs are estimated to be 
approximately $4,000 for each evaluation cycle.
    Under this priority, the Secretary will make one award for 
cooperative agreements with a project period of up to 60 months subject 
to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards. In 
determining whether to continue the center for the fourth and fifth 
years of the project

[[Page 24727]]

period, the Secretary, in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), will consider--
    (a) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
Center; and
    (b) The degree to which the Center's design and methodology 
demonstrates the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.

Absolute Priority 2--National Center on Dispute Resolution

Background
    Disputes within the education community affect systemic change and 
results for children with disabilities. An alternative dispute 
resolution process such as mediation is less costly to schools and 
families, can help to minimize adverse effects on a child's progress in 
school, and is more apt to foster positive relationships between 
families and educators than would litigation. Technical assistance that 
focuses primarily on alternative dispute resolution procedures would 
assist State educational agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies 
(LEAs), and families to resolve their differences in a less adversarial 
and more responsive manner than through standard due process hearing 
procedures, while enabling State and local entities to achieve systemic 
change and promoting improved early intervention, educational, and 
transitional results for children with disabilities. This priority 
would support a national center to provide technical assistance to 
SEAs, LEAs, and families on resolving their differences. The center 
would provide technical assistance on mediation and other effective 
dispute resolution procedures that do not impede parental rights under 
IDEA or otherwise conflict with the statute. As such, the center would 
provide technical assistance as needed in order to facilitate the 
effective use of due process procedures. The chief aim of the center, 
however, would be to provide needed technical assistance to enable 
parties to effectively resolve their disputes through more expedient 
and less confrontational means, including mediation.
Priority
    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority to support a 
national technical assistance center on dispute resolution procedures, 
including mediation. The center must--
    (a) Provide technical assistance on dispute resolution procedures 
(with an emphasis on procedures other than due process hearings) to all 
States, outlying areas, and the freely associated States (to the extent 
such States participate in Parts B or C of IDEA), and the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs. At a minimum, the center must--
    (1) Conduct annual needs assessments;
    (2) Develop technical assistance agreements with each entity; and
    (3) Provide technical assistance, training, and on-going 
consultation based on the technical assistance agreements (including 
technical assistance, training, and on-going consultation at the local 
level, as appropriate).
    (b) Coordinate with the existing technical assistance to parent 
project to provide technical assistance to all parent training and 
information centers and community parent resource centers on dispute 
resolution procedures;
    (c) Develop informational exchanges about dispute resolution 
procedures between the center and other technical assistance and 
information dissemination systems;
    (d) Establish an advisory group of persons with complementary 
expertise on dispute resolution procedures to advise the center on its 
technical assistance activities;
    (e) Collect information on the use and effectiveness of mediation 
and other dispute resolution procedures. The effectiveness of any such 
procedure would be based on the degree to which all parties feel 
satisfied with the result and agree that an efficient and expeditious 
process has been followed;
    (f) Identify, and disseminate information on, best practices in 
dispute resolution;
    (g) Maintain an information data base that includes: (1) State 
practices on dispute resolution, including information on mediator 
training and the implementation of the mediation requirements in Parts 
B and C of IDEA; and (2) research, literature, and products about 
dispute resolution procedures.
    (h) Examine the effectiveness of State efforts regarding mediation 
and other dispute resolution proceedings. Analyze information on the 
number of due process hearings, mediation sessions, and other dispute 
resolution proceedings conducted and on the outcome of each such 
hearing, session, or proceeding;
    (i) Collaborate with the national information center on children 
with disabilities regarding the dissemination of information to respond 
to information needs. Establish linkages with the national information 
center on children with disabilities to ensure timely and accurate 
dissemination of information to customers;
    (j) Serve as a clearinghouse for information on dispute resolution 
procedures;
    (k) Conduct an annual forum each year of the project that 
identifies the unique features of dispute resolution procedures, the 
strengths of the procedures, and the potential for adopting the 
procedures. At least one forum must address the specific needs of 
underrepresented and underserved populations; another must address 
dispute resolution procedures (including mediator training issues) in 
the context of general education reform;
    (l) Evaluate the impact of the center's technical assistance system 
and its components relative to the--
    (1) Assessed needs of States and jurisdictions;
    (2) Needs of parents; and
    (3) Linkages with other technical assistance and information 
dissemination systems; and
    (m) Budget for two trips annually to Washington, D.C., for: (1) a 
two-day Research to Practice Division Project Directors' meeting; and 
(2) a meeting to collaborate with the Research to Practice Division 
project officer and the other related projects to share information, 
and to discuss findings and methods of dissemination.
    (n) Conduct, every two years, a results-based evaluation of the 
technical assistance provided. Such an evaluation must be conducted by 
a review team consisting of three experts approved by the Secretary and 
must measure elements such as--
    (1) The type of technical assistance provided and the perception of 
its quality by the target audience; and
    (2) The changes that occurred as a result of the technical 
assistance provided; and
    (3) The progress that the center has made with respect to the 
objectives in its application.
    The services of the review team, including a two-day site visit to 
the center, are to be performed during the last half of the center's 
second year and may be included in that year's evaluation required 
under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the services to be performed 
by the review team must also be included in the center's budget for 
year two. These costs are estimated to be approximately $4,000.
    Under this priority, the Secretary will make one award for a 
cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 60 months subject 
to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards. In 
determining whether to

[[Page 24728]]

continue the center for the fourth and fifth years of the project 
period, the Secretary, in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), will consider--
    (a) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
center.
    (b) The degree to which the center's design and methodology 
demonstrates the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.

For Further Information Contact: For further information on the 
priorities under the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve 
Services and Results for Children with Disabilities Program contact the 
U.S. Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., room 3527, 
Switzer Building, Washington, DC 20202-2641. Telephone: (202) 205-8038. 
FAX: (202) 205-8105. Internet: Debra__S[email protected]
    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the TDD number: (202) 205-8953.
    Program Authority: Section 685 of IDEA.

Special Education--Research and Innovation To Improve Services and 
Results For Children With Disabilities

Purpose of Program

    To produce, and advance the use of, knowledge to: (1) Improve 
services provided under IDEA, including the practices of professionals 
and others involved in providing those services to children with 
disabilities; and (2) improve educational and early intervention 
results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.

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

    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 and natural 
environments, to provide those children effective instruction and 
interventions that enable them to learn and develop successfully. Under 
this priority, projects must support innovation, development, exchange 
of information, and use of advancements in knowledge and practice 
designed to contribute to the improvement of early intervention, 
instruction, and learning of infants, toddlers, and children with 
disabilities.
    A research project must address one of the following focus areas, 
and the Secretary intends to award at least one project in each focus 
area:
Focus 1--Beacons of Excellence
    Research projects supported under Focus 1 must identify and study 
schools or programs 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 these schools or programs on the basis of valid and 
reliable measures of student results. Projects must also identify 
factors contributing to exemplary learning or developmental results, 
and examine how those factors and other factors relate to achieving 
exemplary learning or developmental results for children with 
disabilities. Projects may focus on early intervention, preschool, 
elementary, or secondary levels, or a combination of levels. Following 
the second year of the project, the Secretary may fund an optional six-
month period for additional dissemination activities.
Focus 2--The Sustainability of Promising Innovations
    A growing body of practice-based research and model demonstration 
work in schools, local districts, and early intervention programs, 
including projects supported by the Office of Special Education 
Programs (OSEP), has focused on meeting the needs of, and improving 
results for, children with disabilities in schools, districts, or early 
intervention programs involved in reform and restructuring initiatives. 
Some of this work is yielding promising positive results for children 
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 2 supports projects to study the implementation of practices 
that have been found to be effective in meeting the needs of children 
with disabilities by reform and restructuring initiatives in local and 
district schools, or early intervention programs. The study must 
address: (a) The extent to which practices that have been shown to be 
effective have been sustained beyond the existence of the projects; and 
(b) factors that influence the 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 agency, school organizational or 
structural contexts, or both; (d) the level of penetration of the 
innovation; (e) the actual or perceived, or both, cost and benefit for 
participants; (f) constancy of site leadership, staff, and policy 
requirements; (g) the extent of consonance or dissonance between 
critical features of the innovations and existing (and emerging) school 
and district or agency practices and policies; and (h) resource access 
and allocation. Projects must provide comprehensive descriptions of the 
targeted effective practices to be studied, and evidence of positive 
results for children with disabilities. In addition, projects must 
dedicate the bulk of support requested to research on the issues of 
sustainability including the ability to sustain the project results 
beyond the life of the project. The Secretary particularly encourages 
an in-depth case study research design where the site or sites to be 
studied is the case (unit of analysis).
Focus 3--Research on Improving Reading Comprehension Results for 
Children with Learning Disabilities
    In recent years, research has advanced our understanding of how 
skilled readers comprehend and instructional strategies that support 
children with learning disabilities to comprehend text. Comprehension 
is not merely a text-based process where meaning resides in the text 
and the role of the reader is to get the meaning. Meaning comes from 
both the text and the reader. Many children with learning disabilities 
need an instructional program that: (a) Teaches them how to access 
prior knowledge (e.g., strategies such as story grammar elements, 
semantic mapping, or think aloud sheets); (b) motivates and supports 
persistence on a task (e.g., including expressions of a student's own 
thoughts when reading and writing, questioning the expert or inquiry, 
or using technology or grouping practices); and (c) teaches them 
cognitive and metacognitive strategies for reading with understanding, 
including how to monitor one's own progress (e.g., summarizing, 
generating questions, mnemonics, or imagery).

[[Page 24729]]

    Therefore, becoming a skilled reader is not automatic. Teachers 
need to teach reading comprehension, and, in particular, children with 
learning disabilities need effective instructional approaches.
    Under Focus 3, a research project must pursue a systematic program 
of applied research that focuses on one or more issues related to 
improving reading comprehension results of children with learning 
disabilities related to reading. These issues include, but are not 
limited to:
    (a) The extent to which children with learning disabilities need 
differential strategies to comprehend narrative and expository text;
    (b) The types of effective comprehension instruction for children 
with learning disabilities in grades K-2, 3-5, and 6-8 inclusive; the 
components of particularly effective programs for children with 
learning disabilities; the basal materials, supplemental materials, and 
instructional strategies used by teachers; and how families support the 
instructional program;
    (c) The types of effective questioning strategies used by teachers, 
peers, and experts affecting comprehension; and
    (d) The kind of contexts that promote critical analysis and 
evaluation for comprehension and learning, and the grouping practices, 
instructional strategies, and curricula that promote comprehension and 
problem solving.
Focus 4--Studying Models That Bridge the Gap Between Research and 
Practice
    Educational research most often includes the following phases: (1) 
Planning and preparation; (2) information gathering; (3) analysis and 
interpretation; (4) reporting and dissemination; and (5) use of 
findings. In traditional research models, the researcher is solely or 
primarily responsible for all phases but the last. Using research 
findings is seen as a job for the practitioner. However, it has been 
observed that research knowledge rarely translates directly into 
practice.
    In recent years, a variety of promising models have been developed 
to bridge the gap between research and practice by altering the roles 
of researchers and practitioners for one or more phases of the 
research. In some models (e.g., interactive research and development, 
practitioner-researcher, partnership research) researchers and 
practitioners collaborate in all phases of the research process. Some 
of these models include parents on their site-based research teams. In 
other models, practitioners, working individually (e.g., practitioner-
research linkers), in groups (e.g., practitioner study groups), or in 
pairs (e.g., peer coaching) interpret extant research to understand how 
to integrate research into practice. In some models, teachers conduct 
research (e.g., action research, or collegial experimentation). To date 
there have been few systematic examinations of the effectiveness of the 
various models to improve practice in special education or early 
intervention.
    Under Focus 4, research projects must implement and examine a model 
or models for using research knowledge to improve educational practice 
and results for children with disabilities.
    In studying a model or models, projects must apply methodologies 
with the capacity to determine the effectiveness of the model or models 
as implemented in practice settings. The projects must identify the 
knowledge utilization model or models to be studied, specify the 
components of the knowledge utilization model or models selected or 
created, the supports and policies necessary to support the model or 
models, both alterable and unalterable factors affecting practice 
improvement, and the effect of the model or models to improve 
organizational culture, practitioner attitudes and practices, and child 
results. In judging effectiveness, the projects must address 
improvements for researchers, practitioners, and children with 
disabilities.
    The projects must report their findings in a manner which can serve 
as a ``blueprint'' so that practitioners in other school districts or 
agencies can implement the model using research knowledge to improve 
practice in special education or early intervention.
Focus 5--Inclusion of Students With Disabilities in Large-Scale 
Assessment Programs
    IDEA includes a number of provisions to ensure the participation of 
students with disabilities in general State and district-wide 
assessment programs. Students with disabilities must participate in 
large-scale assessment programs if they are to benefit from the 
educational accountability and reforms that are linked to these 
assessments. While much information has been gained from prior efforts 
to include disabled students in assessments such as the National 
Assessment of Educational Progress, applied research is needed to build 
on this base of information in order to provide technical and 
implementation information to guide the effective inclusion of students 
with disabilities in large-scale assessment programs.
    Focus 5 supports projects that pursue systematic programs of 
applied research to determine how State and local educational programs 
can best meet one or more of the following requirements: (a) Including 
students with disabilities in either general State or district-wide 
assessment programs or both;
    (b) Developing and using appropriate accommodations for students 
with disabilities on general State or district-wide assessments, or 
both;
    (c) Developing and using alternate assessments for students with 
disabilities who cannot participate in State and district-wide 
assessment programs;
    (d) Reporting on the participation or performance or both of 
students with disabilities in either general assessment programs, or on 
alternate assessments, or both; and
    (e) Making decisions during the development of individualized 
education programs concerning individual modifications in the 
administration of State or district-wide assessments, or individual 
participation in alternate assessments.
Focus 6--Synthesize and Communicate a Professional Knowledge Base: 
Contributions to Research and Practice
    Traditionally researchers have communicated their findings from 
individual research projects and systematic lines of research through 
journal publications and conference presentations. These findings are 
communicated to other researchers and engage researchers in dialogues. 
These dialogues contribute to innovation and development in special 
education and early intervention. In recent years the OSEP has sought 
to expand these traditional approaches. While continuing to support 
innovation and development, OSEP has established a goal to foster the 
use of a professional knowledge base by professionals who serve 
children with disabilities and parents who are involved in the 
education and development of their children with disabilities.
    Focus 6 supports projects that synthesize and communicate an extant 
professional knowledge base on curricular, instructional, early 
intervention, or organizational strategies and approaches that would 
contribute to professional practice as a means for achieving better 
results for children with disabilities. In past years, the Department 
has supported syntheses on positive behavioral supports of children who 
exhibit challenging behaviors, grouping practices in reading, 
differences between children with learning disabilities and low 
achieving students, instructional approaches for special education 
students who speak English as a second language,

[[Page 24730]]

generalization strategies for using augmentative communication devices, 
interventions for children with learning disabilities, and effects of 
setting on social and academic outcomes. Building upon these previous 
efforts, the Secretary intends to support and fund a limited number of 
new syntheses in other areas such as--
    (a) Effects of self-determination and self-advocacy interventions 
on children with disabilities;
    (b) Effects of interventions on children with disabilities that 
promote generalization of academic or developmental skills;
    (c) Effects of teacher or practitioner efficacy on children with 
disabilities' achievement or development;
    (d) Effects of technology for improving literacy results for 
children with disabilities;
    (e) Effects of school-wide approaches for improving reading results 
of children with disabilities; or
    (f) Effects of school-wide approaches for improving math results of 
children with disabilities.
    Under Focus 6, a synthesis project must--
    (a) Identify the topical focus and the relevant and irrelevant 
concepts under review, and pose hypotheses around which the synthesis 
would be conducted;
    (b) Identify and implement rigorous social science methods for 
synthesizing the professional knowledge base (e.g., integrative reviews 
(Cooper, 1982), best-evidence synthesis (Slavin, 1989), meta-analysis 
(Glass, 1977), multi-vocal approach (Ogawa & Malen, 1991), and National 
Institute of Mental Health consensus development program (Huberman, 
1977));
    (c) Develop hypotheses with input from potential consumers of the 
synthesis to enhance the usability and validity of project efforts. 
Consumers include researchers, technical assistance providers, policy 
makers, educators, other relevant practitioners, individuals with 
disabilities, and parents;
    (d) Develop linkage of synthesis with technical assistance 
providers and disseminators and prepare products for use by 
practitioners, technical assistance providers, and disseminators;
    (e) Implement procedures for locating and organizing the extant 
literature and ensure that these procedures address and guard against 
potential threats to the integrity, including generalization of 
findings;
    (f) Establish criteria and procedures for judging the 
appropriateness of studies;
    (g) Meet with the Office of Special Education Programs to review 
the project's topical focus and methodological approach for conducting 
the synthesis prior to the start of its synthesis;
    (h) Analyze and interpret the professional knowledge base, 
including identification of general trends in the literature, points of 
consensus and conflict among the findings, and areas of evidence where 
the literature base is lacking. The interpretation of the literature 
base must address the contributions of the findings for improving the 
practice of professionals serving children with disabilities; and
    (i) Submit a draft report in the 21st month of the project and, 
based on peer reviews, revise and submit a final report of the 
synthesis in the 24th month. During the second year of the project, the 
Secretary may fund an optional six-month period for additional 
dissemination activities.
    Focus 7--Improving the Delivery of Special Education and Related 
Services or Early Intervention Services to Children who are English 
Language Learners
    Appropriate instruction and intervention for children with 
disabilities who are limited in their English language proficiency can 
be achieved in a variety of ways. Ultimately, the responsibility for 
assuring that the English language learner is receiving appropriate 
access to the curriculum or intervention rests with the school district 
or agency in its provision of necessary training and ongoing support to 
the teachers or practitioners. Providing native speakers of the child's 
language in the classroom or intervention program, including parents, 
may not be sufficient to assure delivery of appropriate education or 
interventions. Limitations of resources and availability of qualified 
bilingual personnel to provide special education, related services, or 
early intervention services throughout the Nation suggest that other 
approaches should be investigated that will enhance the availability 
and assurance of the provision of meaningful education.
    Under Focus 7 projects must pursue a systematic program of applied 
research that focuses on one or more areas related to improved 
approaches to the delivery of special education and related services or 
early intervention services to children who are English language 
learners. These areas may include, for example--
    (a) Examination of early reading practices (K-3) for children with 
learning and behavior issues who are limited in their English 
proficiency;
    (b) Improvement of reading comprehension in content area 
instruction in grades 4-8;
    (c) Examination of alternatives in the delivery of services to 
children with disabilities who are English language learners (e.g., is 
placement optimal in regular classes or programs with support from 
special education resources or is the child better served in placements 
with other children with similar disabilities with support from 
bilingual resources?);
    (d) The role cultural issues play in the provision of services 
(e.g., how do the perceptions of families regarding disabilities and 
services affect delivery of services?);
    (e) The preferred strategies to support the transition from 
bilingual to mainstream English speaking classes or programs (e.g., 
what teaching or intervention strategies are most effective?);
    (f) Examination of specific instructional approaches that promote 
problem solving and comprehension in reading, science, math, and social 
studies;
    (g) Examination of instructional or intervention approaches for 
growth in English language learning for these children;
    (h) Factors that improve the effectiveness of cooperative learning 
and classwide peer tutoring for English language learners;
    (i) The techniques that improve the transfer of proven practices to 
practitioner; and
    (j) The qualitative differences that exist in implementation of 
proven practices with practitioner and children who are English 
language learners who are located in inner-city schools or served 
through inner-city agencies (e.g., what is the involvement of 
families?).
Focus 8--Educating Children With Disabilities in Inclusive Settings
    Focus 8 supports research projects to (a) identify new or improved 
systems change strategies that provide all children with disabilities, 
including children with severe disabilities, effective access to the 
general curriculum in regular classrooms as well as to nonsegregated 
extracurricular activities, and (b) describe how these school inclusion 
efforts as identified in (a) are aligned with systemic reform and 
school improvement strategies for all students.
    Each project will identify, describe, and examine: (1) The efficacy 
and linkages of existing systemic reform and school inclusion 
strategies; (2) how school systems provide administrative and other 
supports in general education

[[Page 24731]]

settings to meet the needs of students with disabilities and other 
diverse learners; (3) how standards established for all children and 
authentic assessment practices are implemented for students with 
disabilities, and (4) social support strategies, including peer 
mediated strategies, that promote positive interactions among students 
with disabilities and their same-aged peers to foster cohesive school 
and classroom communities.
    To be considered for funding under Focus 8, 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 and demonstrate the benefits to 
students including the reciprocal benefits of inclusive schooling for 
all students.
    Program Authority: Section 672 of IDEA.
    Requirements for All Directed Research Projects:
    In addition to addressing one of the above mentioned focus areas, 
projects must--
    (a) Apply rigorous research methods (qualitative or quantitative, 
or both) 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.

    For Further Information Contact: For further information on the 
priority under the Research and Innovation to Improve Services and 
Results for Children with Disabilities Program contact the U.S. 
Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, SW., room 3527, 
Switzer Building, Washington, DC 20202-4641. Telephone: (202) 205-8038. 
FAX: (202) 205-8105. Internet: Debra __ S[email protected]
    Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the TDD number: (202) 205-8953. Individuals with disabilities 
may obtain a copy of this notice in an alternate format (e.g. Braille, 
large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by calling (202) 205-
8113.

Electronic Access to This Document

    Anyone may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or 
portable document format (pdf) on the World Wide Web at either of the 
following sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html

    To use the pdf you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with 
Search, which is available free at either of the previous sites. If you 
have questions about using the pdf, call the U.S. Government Printing 
Office toll free at 1-888-293-6498.
    Anyone may also view these documents in text copy only on an 
electronic bulletin board of the Department. Telephone: (202) 219-1511 
or, toll free, 1-800-222-4922. The documents are located under Option 
G--Files/Announcements, Bulletins, and Press Releases.

    Note: The official version of a document is the document 
published in the Federal Register.

Intergovernmental Review

    The programs (except for the Research and Innovation Projects) 
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 
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.

    Dated: April 28, 1998.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: Research and 
Innovation to Improve Services and Results for Children with 
Disabilities, 84.324; and Technical Assistance and Dissemination to 
Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities, 84.326)
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 98-11720 Filed 5-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P