[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 3, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10352-10363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-5246]



[[Page 10351]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year 1999; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 1999 /  
Notices  

[[Page 10352]]



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year 1999: Special 
Education--Research and Innovation To Improve Services and Results for 
Children With Disabilities; and Special Education--Technical Assistance 
and Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With 
Disabilities

ACTION: Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year 
1999.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice provides closing dates and other information 
regarding the transmittal of applications for fiscal year 1999 
competitions under two programs authorized by the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended. The two programs are: 
(1) Special Education--Research and Innovation To Improve Services and 
Results for Children With Disabilities (five priorities); and (2) 
Special Education--Technical Assistance and Dissemination To Improve 
Services and Results for Children With Disabilities (two priorities).
    This notice supports the National Education Goals by helping to 
improve results for children with disabilities.

Waiver of Rulemaking

    It is generally the practice of the Secretary to offer interested 
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. However, 
section 661(e)(2) of IDEA makes the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) inapplicable to the priorities in this notice.

General Requirements

    (a) Projects funded under this notice must make positive efforts to 
employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with 
disabilities in project activities (see section 606 of IDEA);
    (b) Applicants and grant recipients funded under this notice must 
involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with 
disabilities in planning, implementing, and evaluating the projects 
(see section 661(f)(1)(A) of IDEA);
    (c) Projects funded under these priorities must budget for a two-
day Project Directors' meeting in Washington, DC during each year of 
the project; and
    (d) In a single application, an applicant must address only one 
absolute priority in this notice.

    Note: The Department of Education is not bound by any estimates 
in this notice.

    Information collection resulting from this notice has been 
submitted to OMB for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act and has 
been approved under control number 1820-0028, expiration date July 31, 
2000.

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.
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 
81, 82, 85, and 86; (b) The selection criteria for Absolute Priorities 
1-5 are drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The 
specific selection criteria for each priority are included in the 
funding application packet for the applicable competition.

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of 
higher education only.

    Eligible Applicants: State and local educational agencies, 
institutions of higher education, other public agencies, private 
nonprofit organizations, outlying areas, freely associated States, and 
Indian tribes or tribal organizations.

Priority

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

Absolute Priority 1--National Center on Access to the General 
Curriculum (84.324H)

Background
    The 1997 reauthorization of the Individuals With Disabilities 
Education Act (IDEA) calls for providing the greatest possible access 
to the general curriculum as a means for improving educational results 
for students with disabilities. Access to the general curriculum is 
most readily available by providing services in the regular education 
classroom. Since the 1990-1991 school year, the percentage of students 
with disabilities (ages 6-21) who participate in regular education 
classes, at least 80 percent of the time, has gradually increased from 
33 percent to 46 percent during the 1996-1997 school year. As regular 
classrooms become more inclusive, strategies for providing access to 
the general curriculum are needed so that students with disabilities 
are actively involved in and progress in the general curriculum within 
these classrooms. Furthermore, more students with disabilities need 
access to the general curriculum, regardless of their placement. 
However, a number of issues must be addressed before this goal can be 
achieved.
    First, the research base is disorganized and incomplete regarding 
the best approaches for providing access to the general curriculum. We 
need to broaden our understanding of how curriculum must be designed, 
developed, and taught to be accessible. We need a better understanding 
of the development and application of multiple alternatives that reduce 
barriers to learning, such as universal designs that allow for diverse 
learning needs. Second, the general curriculum tends to undergo 
recurrent analyses and changes that may affect accessibility for 
students with disabilities. We need to increase our awareness of the 
issues and policies, both State and local, that affect general 
curriculum. Third, special education and regular education communities 
have not developed a shared discourse and purpose concerning the 
general curriculum and students with disabilities. We need 
collaborative opportunities to define and develop a vision in public 
education where all students, including students with disabilities, 
actively engage in learning and progress in the general curriculum. 
Access to the general curriculum must not be viewed as exclusively a 
special education concern; it is dependent on factors associated with 
regular education and the general curriculum. Therefore, all students 
benefit when the general education curriculum becomes more accessible.

Priority

    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority for a center to 
provide national leadership in improving results for students with 
disabilities through access to the general curriculum. The center will 
focus on three broad areas: (1) Multiple strategies for access to the 
general education curriculum and for achieving improved results; (2) 
State and local policy and other factors associated with access to the 
general curriculum and achieving improved results; and (3) national 
collaborative efforts for increasing access to the general curriculum. 
The center will address these three areas through research, national 
leadership, and dissemination. The center must apply rigorous, State-
of-the-art techniques in

[[Page 10353]]

its research synthesis, dissemination, and communication, and 
leadership activities.
    Research activities of the Center must include but are not limited 
to:
    (a) Compiling and synthesizing relevant research findings that 
focus on preferred or promising practices that affect access to the 
general education curricula (e.g., universal design for learning, 
supplemental aids, supports, assistive technology, instructional 
methods, collaborative models of teaching); and
    (b) Evaluating the current state of policy regarding access to the 
general education curriculum for students with disabilities. This 
evaluation study should include relevant and existing State and local 
policies; the linkages between standards, assessments, accessible 
curriculum, and results; and other educational reform initiatives that 
affect the general education curriculum.
    National dissemination activities of the Center must include but 
are not limited to:
    (a) Developing partnerships and communicating with leaders and key 
stakeholders in special education and regular education, other OSEP 
research institutes and centers, including the National Outcomes 
Center, policymakers, service providers, school-level administrators, 
and consumer and advocacy organizations such as the Independent Living 
Centers (ILC), Parent Training and Information Centers (PTI), and the 
Protection and Advocacy Organizations (P&A), to increase awareness of 
and use of research-based practices to maximize access to the general 
curriculum for students with disabilities and to achieve good results;
    (b) Planning with regular and special education technical 
assistance providers to collaboratively develop communication and 
dissemination strategies, including strategies to communicate research 
findings and content specific knowledge, to distribute products, and to 
improve the availability of technical assistance on providing access to 
the general curriculum for students with disabilities and to achieve 
improved results;
    (c) Developing information materials intended for all key 
stakeholders and designed to increase awareness of and use of research-
based practices to maximize access to the general curriculum for 
students with disabilities and to achieve good results; and
    (d) Implementing strategies in collaboration with technical 
assistance providers to communicate and to disseminate information and 
advocacy materials to leaders and key stakeholders in special education 
and general education.
    Leadership activities of the Center must include but are not 
limited to:
    (a) Forming one or more advisory group or groups of experts and 
leaders in special education, regular education curriculum, technical 
assistance related to technology, and other relevant fields;
    (b) Conducting consensus building activities on providing access to 
the general education curriculum through relationships with ongoing 
school improvement and innovation efforts and organizations, including 
States and entities involved with the State Improvement Grants Program, 
major professional education associations such as the American 
Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association 
(NEA), Parent Teacher Associations (PTA) and PTIs, institutions of 
higher education, and other relevant research, development and reform 
groups;
    (c) Convening regional or national conferences of special educators 
and regular educators; and
    (d) Funding, as project research assistants, at least three 
doctoral students per year, who have concentrations in special 
education. These students will assist with project facilitation, 
research, and dissemination, and communication activities.
    The Center must also --
    (a) Prepare research findings and products from the project in 
formats that are useful for specific audiences, including educators, 
school administrators, families, students, ILCs, State, and national 
policymakers (See section 661(f)(2)(B) of IDEA);
    (b) Meet with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) 
project officer in the first four months of the project to review the 
program of research and dissemination approaches;
    (c) Budget three trips annually to Washington, DC (two trips to 
meet and collaborate with U.S. Department of Education officials and 
one trip, as specified in the general requirements for all projects, to 
attend the two-day Office of Special Education Programs Research 
Project Director's Conference).
    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. After 
the third year of the project, the Secretary will determine whether to 
continue the Center for the fourth and fifth years of the project 
period and will consider in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a):
    (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 
demonstrate the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $500,000 for any single 
budget period of 12 months. The Secretary may change the maximum amount 
through a notice published in the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 70 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\''  x  
11'' (on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); 
(2) All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Absolute Priority 2--Center for Students With Disabilities Involved 
With and at Risk of Involvement With the Juvenile Justice System 
(84.324J)

Background
    In general, special education services for students with 
disabilities have improved since the passage of Public Law 94-142 in 
1975. However, progress has been limited for children with disabilities 
in the justice system. Although the estimates vary, most researchers 
agree that students with

[[Page 10354]]

disabilities are over-represented in the juvenile justice system. OSEP 
data for 1996 indicate that 15,930 students with disabilities were 
being served in correctional facilities. This count only includes those 
in correctional facilities, not the total number involved in the 
justice system. Of these 15,930 students, 45 percent are classified as 
having a learning disability and 42 percent are classified as 
emotionally disturbed. Theories regarding the disproportionate number 
of students in the juvenile justice system vary but their common 
characteristic is school failure. Over the past several years, the 
number of students with disabilities in correctional facilities has 
risen at over twice the rate of the increase of the overall special 
education population. From 1992-1993 to 1996-1997 the number of 
students ages 6-21 with disabilities increased 13 percent; the number 
in correctional facilities increased 28 percent. This increase is most 
apparent with juveniles with learning disabilities and emotional 
disturbance.
    In order to meet the challenges of serving this population of 
students with disabilities, States need to make significant 
improvements addressing the following areas: prevention, educational 
programming, and reintegration or transition. Research indicates that 
students with significant antisocial behaviors can be identified fairly 
accurately by age 9, with some research indicating even earlier. 
However, students do not typically receive effective interventions 
until they have first been unsuccessful in their current educational 
setting. Research-based prevention strategies need to be implemented 
with at risk children to assist in preventing later involvement with 
the juvenile justice system. Once students are in the justice system, 
coordination and delivery of special education services have 
traditionally been inappropriate and ineffective. Even though promising 
and preferred strategies exist regarding the effective provision of 
educational services to students with disabilities, these strategies 
and practices have not been consistently or effectively applied to 
children with disabilities at risk of involvement in or in the juvenile 
justice system.
    Interagency coordination between education and justice agencies, at 
a minimum, is needed to enhance the knowledge and use of research-based 
strategies and practices in the justice system, consistent with the 
provisions of IDEA. Finally, interagency efforts involving families and 
communities are needed to facilitate the successful reintegration of 
students with disabilities back into their home school and community 
when appropriate. Research has shown that few students, once they are 
involved with the justice system are able to return to their home 
school and later exit school appropriately with the skills needed to be 
successful within their community.
    This priority represents a collaborative effort between the 
Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services, Office of Special Education Programs, Office of Vocational 
and Adult Education, and the Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile 
Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The Office of Special Education 
Programs and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Deliquency Prevention 
held a focus group on students with disabilities in the Justice system. 
Copies of these preceedings can be obtained by contacting Project FORUM 
at the National Association of State Directors of Special Education 
(703) 519-3800.
    This priority is expected to have a significant impact on the 
improvement of services for students with disabilities in the justice 
system. Improvements in the areas of prevention, educational services, 
and reintegration based on a combination of research, training, and 
technical assistance will lead to improved results for children with 
disabilities.

Priority

    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority to support a Center 
for Students With Disabilities Involved With or at Risk of Involvement 
With the Juvenile Justice System that will provide guidance and 
assistance to States, schools, justice programs, families, and 
communities in designing, implementing, and evaluating comprehensive 
educational programs, based on research validated practices, for 
students with disabilities at risk of involvement or involved in the 
juvenile justice system. The Center will focus on three broad areas: 
(1) prevention programs, (2) educational programs, and (3) 
reintegration or transition programs. The Center must address these 
three areas through research, training, and technical assistance and 
dissemination.
    Research activities of the Center must include but are not limited 
to:
    (a) Evaluating the current state of policy and practice regarding 
students with disabilities in the juvenile justice system. This 
evaluation must include relevant State and local policies and 
guidelines, cross-agency and multi-agency coordination strategies, and 
existing research-validated practices;
    (b) Synthesizing relevant research findings focusing on preferred 
or promising practices in prevention of delinquency, educational 
programming for students with disabilities, and reintegration or 
transition to home schools and communities;
    (c) Developing and applying criteria for identifying exemplary 
programs for students with disabilities in the juvenile justice system 
that address the three focus areas of the Center; and
    (d) Producing four white papers, one per year beginning in the 
second year, that address special issues regarding this population of 
students. Two papers will cover the following topics: (1) 
Disproportionate representation of minority youth with disabilities in 
the juvenile justice system; and (2) coordination of services between 
education, justice, and mental health agencies to promote more 
effective services. The two additional topics will be suggested by the 
applicant and subject to approval by the project officer.
    National dissemination and technical assistance activities of the 
Center must, at a minimum:
    (a) Prepare and disseminate information materials designed to 
increase awareness of and use of research validated practices to a 
variety of audiences (e.g., educators, justice personnel, mental health 
personnel, judges, policymakers, families and other service providers).
    (b) Reflect the three broad focus areas of the Center: (1) 
Delinquency prevention, (2) educational programming for students with 
disabilities, and (3) reintegration or transition to home schools and 
communities;
    (c) Establish a coordinated network of researchers, practitioners, 
family members, rehabilitated individuals, associations that represent 
workers in facilities, and policymakers from education, justice, and 
mental health agencies who will serve as resources to States, 
communities, justice programs and schools in designing, implementing, 
and evaluating effective programs; and
    (d) Provide for information exchanges between researchers and 
practitioners who direct model programs and those seeking to design or 
implement model programs. Information must be exchanged through a 
variety of methods, including two regional forums during each of the 
first four years of the project, and a national forum in the fifth 
year. These exchanges must be designed to expand the coordinated 
network, develop awareness of research-based practices, and create a 
dialog about comprehensive services for students

[[Page 10355]]

with disabilities in the juvenile justice system. The forums must 
include examples and descriptions of model programs addressing the 
three focus areas of the Center.
    (e) Produce a model ``blueprint'' that would permit others to 
replicate or implement preferred practices or model programs that 
include alternative approaches to delivery of effective services for 
students with disabilities in the justice system. The ``blueprint'' 
will also identify barriers to effective programming and suggest 
strategies for overcoming these barriers.
    Training activities of the Center must include but are not limited 
to:
    (a) Identifying a common core of knowledge and skills regarding 
students with disabilities in the justice system that are appropriate 
for personnel serving this population including: teachers, 
paraprofessionals, mental health personnel, administrators, justice and 
law enforcement personnel;
    (b) Funding as project research assistants at least three graduate 
students per year who have concentrations in special education or 
criminal justice. These students will assist with project facilitation 
and the center's research, and evaluation of programs; and
    (c) Arranging for two results-based evaluations. The evaluation 
team must consist of three experts approved by the (OSEP) project 
officer. 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 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 $6,000 for each evaluation cycle.
    The Center must also--
    (1) Prepare the research findings and products from the project in 
formats that are useful for specific audiences, including educators, 
school administrators, justice employees, judges, law enforcement 
personnel, public defenders, families, ILCs, PTIs, P&As, and local, 
State, and national policymakers. (See section 661(f)(2)(B) of IDEA);
    (2) Meet with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) 
project officer in the first four months of the project to review the 
program of research and dissemination approaches;
    (3) Budget two trips annually to Washington, DC for (1) a two-day 
Research Project Director's meeting; and (2) another meeting to meet 
and collaborate with the OSEP project officer; and
    (5) Collaborate with other relevant federally supported activities 
and projects sponsored by the Department of Education, Office of 
Special Education Programs, and the Department of Justice, Office of 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Department of 
Health and Human Services, and develop linkages with Education 
Department and Justice Department technical assistance providers to 
communicate research findings and distribute products.
    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 continue the Center for the fourth and fifth 
years of the project period, the Secretary and the Attorney General 
will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and--
    (1) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts 
selected by the Secretary. The services of the review team, including a 
two-day site visit to the grantee, are to be performed during the last 
half of the project'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 project's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be 
approximately $6,000;
    (2) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
Center; and
    (3) The degree to which the Center's design and methodology 
demonstrates the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $750,000 for year one and 
$500,000 for years two through five, for any single budget period of 12 
months. The Secretary may change the maximum amounts through a notice 
published in the Federal Register.

    Note: The projected funding for this project is $750,000 for 
year one and $500,000 for years two through five. Funding is 
contingent upon the availability of funds, including Federal 
interagency support for this project from the Department of 
Education, and the Department of Justice.

    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 70 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\'' x 11'' 
(on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); (2) 
All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Absolute Priority 3--Research Institute To Enhance the Role of Special 
Education and Children With Disabilities in Education Policy Reform 
(84.324P)

    Education reforms are often leveraged through enhanced 
accountability for students outcomes, school improvement, and personnel 
performance. Findings from the Center for Policy Research on the Impact 
of General and Special Education Reform indicate that inclusion of 
students with disabilities in these general accountability efforts is 
one of the major forces shaping reform of special education. IDEA 
reflects an increased emphasis on including students with disabilities 
in accountability systems by requiring participation in general State 
and district-wide assessments. The amendments also require States to 
establish indicators to use in assessing progress toward achieving 
goals that address the performance of children with disabilities on 
assessments, drop-out rates and graduation rates.

Priority

    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority for a research 
institute to study the role of special education and

[[Page 10356]]

children with disabilities in educational policy reform, specifically 
initiatives designed to improve student performance through increased 
accountability. A project funded under this priority must--
    (a) Identify and review critical gaps in the current knowledge in 
the following areas:
    (1) How broad education policy reforms that incorporate high-stakes 
accountability mechanisms include consideration of the special 
education system;
    (2) The criteria for which special education has historically been 
held accountable and how these criteria have been assessed;
    (3) How traditional special education accountability mechanisms at 
both the systems level (e.g., State improvement planning and compliance 
monitoring, due process, and judicial resolution) and the individual 
child or student level (e.g., large-scale assessments provided with 
accommodations, alternate assessments, individualized education 
programs, individualized family services plans) have impacted outcomes 
for children with disabilities;
    (4) How students with disabilities are impacted by the recent 
large-scale, high stakes State and national accountability-based 
education policy reforms (e.g., State and district assessments, 
enhanced graduation and exiting requirements, governance and 
professional preparation and development reforms and other standards-
based reform initiatives), including consideration of developed models 
of inclusive special education accountability (e.g., models developed 
by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education and 
the National Center for Educational Outcomes); and
    (5) How changes and reforms in special education might better align 
with and support such large-scale, high stakes State and national 
accountability-based education policy reforms.
    (b) In consultation with the Office of Special Education Programs 
(OSEP), design and conduct a strategic program of research that 
addresses knowledge gaps identified in paragraph (a) by:
    (1) Conducting a rigorous research program that builds upon recent 
and current research on broad education policy reforms that incorporate 
high-stakes accountability mechanisms, including research by the recent 
Center for Policy Research on the Impact of General and Special 
Education Reform;
    (2) Using a variety of methodologies designed to comprehensively 
examine the breadth of accountability mechanisms;
    (3) Conducting the program of research in such settings to insure 
that the impact of accountability-based education policy reforms on 
disabled minority, immigrant, and migrant populations, will be 
examined; and
    (4) Collaborating with other research institutions and studies and 
evaluations supported under IDEA, including the national assessment of 
special education activities (Section 674(b) of IDEA).
    (c) Design, implement, and evaluate a dissemination approach that 
links research to practice and promotes the use of current knowledge 
and ongoing research findings. This approach must--
    (1) Develop linkages with Education Department technical assistance 
providers to communicate research findings and distribute products; and
    (2) Prepare the research findings and products from the project in 
formats that are useful for specific audiences, including general 
education researchers; and local, State, and national policymakers; as 
well as education practitioners.
    (d) Fund at least three graduate students per year as research 
assistants who have concentrations in either education policy or 
disability issues;
    (e) Meet with the OSEP project officer in the first four months of 
the project to review the program of research and dissemination 
approaches; and
    (f) In addition to the annual two-day Project Directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC listed in the General Requirements section of this 
notice, budget for another annual two-day trip to Washington, DC to 
collaborate with the OSEP project officer by sharing information and 
discussing implementation and dissemination issues.
    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.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $700,000 for any single 
budget period of 12 months. The Secretary may change the maximum 
amounts through a notice published in the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 70 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\'' x 11'' 
(on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); (2) 
All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Absolute Priority 4--Research and Training Center in Service 
Coordination for Part C of IDEA (84.324L)

Background
    Services to infants and toddlers with disabilities and their 
families must be delivered in a timely, comprehensive manner in order 
to enhance the development of the child and to meet the needs of the 
family. Service coordination is a key component in ensuring that 
eligible infants and toddlers and their families receive prompt, 
appropriate, and coordinated services, especially where services are 
provided by multiple providers from various disciplines, through both 
public and private agencies, and in a variety of settings.
    Early research in service coordination resulted in the 
identification of personal characteristics and qualities of good 
service coordinators. Training programs focused on developing skills in 
communication and early intervention techniques. While these continue 
to be important components in training programs for service 
coordinators, changes in social policy and the growth and development 
of Part C systems over the past decade have added new responsibilities 
and role changes for service coordinators.
    There is a lack of empirical evidence defining effective service 
coordination and its components. This information is needed in order to 
identify the activities of and skills needed by a service coordinator 
or service coordinators and

[[Page 10357]]

to develop promising practices for training effective service 
coordinators.
    The purpose of this priority is to (1) establish a research and 
training center to determine the components of effective service 
coordination, (2) identify and disseminate promising practices in 
effective service coordination, (3) prepare effective service 
coordinators and trainers of service coordinators, (4) prepare 
researchers to investigate issues and components of effective service 
coordination and related promising practices, and (5) provide families, 
service coordinators, early interventionists, trainers, researchers, 
and policymakers with empirical evidence of promising practices in and 
the effectiveness of service coordination.

Priority

    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority for the purpose of 
establishing a research and training center to (1) carry out a 
coordinated, integrated, and advanced research program in service 
coordination and (2) provide training in service coordination for 
graduate, pre-service, and in-service practitioners, trainers, and 
researchers.
    The Center must examine the following areas--
    (a) The critical activities and skills required to provide 
effective service coordination;
    (b) Promising practices for improving the quality and acquisition 
of these critical activities and skills for service coordinators;
    (c) Access of families to effective service coordination, with 
particular attention to high density population areas, rural areas, and 
areas of high poverty;
    (d) Family satisfaction with service coordination;
    (e) Quality measures of effective service coordination; and
    (f) Reimbursement issues as they relate to the delivery of service.
    The Center must perform the following activities --
    (a) Disseminate its findings and curriculum for training service 
coordinators to institutions of higher education (IHEs) and to agencies 
that provide training and professional development activities for 
service coordinators. The Center must disseminate information on 
promising practices in service coordination and work with programs that 
train service coordinators and individuals working in the area of early 
intervention;
    (b) Develop, validate, and disseminate a curriculum for training 
service coordinators based on the knowledge gained from the Center's 
research activities;
    (c) Partner with Part C lead agencies; parent training and 
information centers; community parent resource centers; professional 
and advocacy organizations; IHEs including Historically Black Colleges 
and Universities (HBCUs); agencies and organizations involved in 
delivery of services to minority infants and toddlers with disabilities 
including those who are African American, Native American, Hispanic, 
and Asian American; and other agencies and organizations involved in 
providing services to infants and toddlers with disabilities and their 
families, in planning and implementing its research and training;
    (d) Develop and disseminate informational and training materials 
based on knowledge gained from the Center's research activities;
    (e) Provide training and research opportunities for at least three 
graduate students, including students who are from traditionally 
underrepresented groups;
    (f) Meet with the OSEP project officer in the first three months of 
the project to review the program of research and the initial plan for 
training; and
    (g) Prepare the research and disseminate the research findings and 
products from the Center in formats that are useful for specific 
audiences, including families, administrators, early interventionists, 
related service personnel, teachers, and individuals with disabilities 
(See section 661(f)(2)(B) of IDEA).
    Under this priority, the project period is up to 60 months subject 
to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards. In 
determining whether to continue the project for the fourth and fifth 
years of the project period, the Secretary will consider the 
requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and--
    (a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts 
selected by the Secretary. The services of the review team, including a 
two-day site visit to the project, are to be performed during the last 
half of the project'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 project's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be 
approximately $6,000;
    (b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of 
the grant have been or are being met by the project; and
    (c) The degree to which the project's design and methodology 
demonstrates the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $500,000 for any single 
budget period of 12 months. The Secretary may change the maximum amount 
through a notice published in the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 70 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\'' x 11'' 
(on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); (2) 
All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Absolute Priority 5--Improving Post-School Outcomes: Identifying and 
Promoting What Works (84.324W)

Background
    With the passage of the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments 
of 1983, a Federal initiative was begun to assist high school youth 
with disabilities in achieving their goals for adult life, including 
postsecondary education, continuing education, competitive employment, 
and independent living. This process, known as secondary transition, 
has continued to be defined and developed in legislation, research and 
practice; and to a large extent, has been the impetus for the shift in 
special education from an emphasis on process to one of

[[Page 10358]]

achieving better results for children with disabilities. The Office of 
Special Education Programs (OSEP) has funded approximately 500 
secondary transition, postsecondary education, and drop out prevention 
and intervention projects since 1984 to develop, refine, and validate 
effective programs and practices.
    The purpose of this priority is to fund one project that will--
    (a) Synthesize the professional literature on improving academic 
results, secondary transition practice, postsecondary educational 
supports, and dropout prevention and intervention;
    (b) Analyze important features, findings and outcomes of model 
demonstration projects in these areas, including but not limited to, 
projects funded by OSEP, the Rehabilitation Services Administration 
(RSA), and the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation 
Research (NIDRR); and
    (c) Summarize, proactively disseminate, and publicize the results 
of these studies in an effort to inform policy and practice.

Priority

    The Secretary establishes an absolute priority to support a project 
that will identify and promote effective policy and practice that will 
improve results for secondary-aged youth and young adults with 
disabilities. At a minimum, this project must--
    (a) Synthesize the extant professional knowledge base in each of 
four areas:

--improving academic results
--secondary transition practice
--postsecondary educational supports, and
--dropout prevention and intervention, including factors associated 
with early school exit for students with disabilities.
    Each synthesis must:
    (1) Develop a conceptual framework around which research questions 
will be posed and the synthesis conducted. Develop these research 
questions with input from potential consumers of the synthesis to 
enhance the usability and validity of the findings. Consumers include 
technical assistance providers, policymakers, educators, other relevant 
practitioners, individuals with disabilities, and parents;
    (2) Identify and implement rigorous social science methods for 
synthesizing the professional knowledge base (including but not limited 
to, 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));
    (3) Implement procedures for locating and organizing the extant 
literature and ensure that these procedures address and guard against 
potential threats to the integrity of each synthesis, including the 
generalization of findings;
    (4) Establish criteria and procedures for judging the 
appropriateness of each synthesis;
    (5) Meet with OSEP to review the project's methodological approach 
for conducting the synthesis prior to initiating the synthesis;
    (6) 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 
policy, transition practice and drop out prevention and intervention, 
and research priorities in the four focus areas; and
    (7) Submit a draft report of the synthesis in each of the focus 
areas, and based on reviews by OSEP staff and potential consumers, 
revise and submit a final report.
    (b) Conduct an analysis to identify effective approaches and 
practices of the important features, findings and outcomes of model 
demonstration projects (including, but not limited to, projects funded 
by OSEP, RSA, NIDRR, and OPE) in each of four areas:

--improving academic results
--secondary transition practice
--postsecondary educational supports, and
--dropout prevention and intervention, incorporating the following 
activities in each analysis:

    (1) Identify the relevant projects for each analysis. Describe and 
implement procedures for locating and organizing relevant information 
on the individual projects, including sampling techniques, if 
appropriate;
    (2) Articulate a research-based conceptual framework to guide the 
selection of variables to be examined within and across projects, 
including demographics, target population, purpose, activities, 
outcomes, and barriers. Pose research questions around which the 
analysis will be conducted. Develop these research questions with input 
from potential consumers of the information to enhance the usability 
and validity of the research findings. Consumers include technical 
assistance providers, policymakers, educators, other relevant 
practitioners, individuals with disabilities, and parents;
    (3) Identify and implement rigorous methods for conducting each 
analysis;
    (4) Meet with OSEP to review the project's research questions and 
methodological approach for conducting the analysis prior to 
initiation;
    (5) Analyze and interpret the findings of the analysis, including 
similarities and differences among project goals, activities, staffing 
and costs; points of consensus and conflict among the findings or 
outcomes of the demonstrations, and the characteristics of model 
programs that hold significant promise for the field based upon outcome 
data. In addition, the analysis must link to the synthesis on this 
topic and provide direction for future policy formulation, practice 
implementation, and research priorities; and
    (6) Submit a draft report of the analysis in each of the focus 
areas, and based on reviews by OSEP staff and potential consumers, 
revise, and submit a final report.
    (c) Summarize, proactively disseminate, and publicize the results 
of these studies to inform policy and practice, incorporating the 
following activities into the project design:
    (1) Develop and implement a communication plan that includes the 
types of products to be created, proposed audiences, procedures for 
adapting the form and content of the products based upon the audience 
or audiences, vehicles for dissemination, and timelines. In particular, 
address how the project will provide updated information at regular 
intervals to each of the following audiences: OSERS-funded technical 
assistance and dissemination projects, the Parent Training and 
Information Centers; and the State Program Improvement grantees. The 
project may propose collaborative dissemination activities with one or 
more of these projects.
    (2) Meet with OSEP to review the project's communication plan prior 
to implementation.
    In addition to the annual two-day Project Directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC listed in the General Requirements section of this 
notice, projects must budget for another meeting each year in 
Washington, DC with OSEP to share information and discuss project 
implementation issues.
    In deciding whether to continue this project for the fourth and 
fifth years, the Secretary, will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), and--
    (a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts 
selected by the Secretary. The services of the review team, including a 
two-day site visit to the grantee, are to be performed during the last 
half of the project's

[[Page 10359]]

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 project's budget for 
year two. These costs are estimated to be approximately $6,000;
    (b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (c) The degree to which the project's design and methodology 
demonstrates the potential for advancing significant new knowledge.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $500,000 for any single 
budget period of 12 months. The Secretary may change the maximum amount 
through a notice published in the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 60 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\'' x 11'' 
(on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); (2) 
All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Special Education--Technical Assitance 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 address 
systemic-change goals and priorities.
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 
81, 82, 85, and 86; (b) The selection criteria for these priorities are 
drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The specific 
selection criteria for each priority are included in the funding 
application packet for the applicable competition.

    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of 
higher education only.

    Eligible Applicants: State and local educational agencies, 
institutions of higher education, other public agencies, private 
nonprofit organizations, outlying areas, freely associated States, 
Indian tribes or tribal organizations, and for-profit organizations.

Priority

    Under section 685 of IDEA and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), the Secretary 
gives an absolute preference to applications that meet the following 
priorities. The Secretary funds under these competitions only those 
applications that meet one of these absolute priorities:

Absolute Priority 1--Projects for Children and Young Adults Who Are 
Deaf-Blind (84.326C)

Background
    IDEA includes provisions designed to ensure that each child with a 
disability is provided a high-quality individual program of services to 
meet their developmental and educational needs. For children who are 
deaf and blind to receive such services, intensive technical assistance 
must be afforded State and local educational agencies regarding 
appropriate educational placements, accommodations, environmental 
adaptations, support services and other matters. In addition, given the 
severity of deaf-blindness and the low-incidence nature of this 
population, many early intervention programs or local school districts 
lack personnel with the training or experience to serve children who 
are deaf-blind. For these reasons, the following priority supports 
projects that provide specialized technical assistance regarding the 
provision of early intervention, special education, related, and 
transitional services to children who are deaf-blind.

Priority

    This priority supports projects that build the capacity of State 
and local agencies to facilitate the achievement of improved outcomes 
by children who are deaf-blind, and their families. Two specific types 
of projects are supported: State and Multi-State Projects, and Optional 
Match Maker Projects.
    (a) State and Multi State Projects. These projects provide 
technical assistance, information, and training that address the early 
intervention, special education, related services, and transitional 
service needs of children with deaf-blindness and enhance State 
capacity to improve services and outcomes for such children and their 
families. Projects must:
    (1) Identify specific project goals and objectives in providing an 
appropriate array of technical assistance services;
    (2) Facilitate systemic-change goals and school reform;
    (3) Enhance State capacity to improve services and outcomes for 
deaf-blind children and their families;
    (4) Provide technical assistance, information, and training that:
    (i) Focus on implementation of research-based, effective practices 
that result in appropriate assessment, placement, and support services 
to all children who are deaf-blind in the State;
    (ii) Help administrators develop and operate effective State and 
local programs for serving children who are deaf-blind;
    (iii) Ensure that service providers have the necessary skills and 
knowledge to effectively serve children who are deaf-blind; and
    (iv) Address the needs of families of children who are deaf-blind.
    (5) Maintain basic demographic information on children with deaf-
blindness in the State for program planning and evaluation purposes. 
Such data should include hearing, vision, etiology, educational 
placement, living arrangement, and other information necessary to 
ensure a high quality program that meets the needs of the State or 
States served by the project;
    (6) Maintain an assessment of current needs of the State and 
utilize data to determine State-wide priorities for technical 
assistance services across all age ranges;
    (7) Develop and implement procedures to evaluate the impact of 
program activities on services and outcomes for children with deaf-
blindness and their families, and on

[[Page 10360]]

increasing State and local capacity to provide services and facilitate 
improved outcomes. Such procedures must provide for--
    (i) Evaluating project goals and objectives, and the effectiveness 
of project strategies relative to such goals and objectives; and
    (ii) Including measures of change in outcomes for children with 
deaf-blindness and other indicators that document actual benefits of 
conducting the project;
    (8) Facilitate ongoing coordination and collaboration with State 
and local educational agencies, as well as other relevant agencies and 
organizations responsible for providing services to children who are 
deaf-blind by--
    (i) Promoting service integration that enables children with deaf-
blindness to receive services in natural environments and inclusive 
settings, as appropriate; and
    (ii) Encouraging systemic change efforts for addressing the needs 
of children with deaf-blindness by improving education opportunities 
and inter-agency cooperation, and reducing duplication of effort;
    (9) Establish and maintain an advisory committee to assist in 
promoting project activities. Each committee must include at least one 
individual with deaf-blindness, a parent of a child with deaf-
blindness, a representative of each State educational agency and each 
State lead agency under Part C of IDEA in the State (or States) served 
by the project, and a limited number of professionals with training and 
experience in serving children with deaf-blindness; and
    (10) Budget for a three-day Project Directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC during each year of the project.

Additional Requirements Related to State and Multi-State Projects

    (1) The Secretary may make awards under this priority to support 
single or multi-State projects. A State may be served by only one 
supported project.
    (2) The Secretary considers the following factors in determining 
the funding level for each award for a single or multi-State project 
award:
    (i) The total number of children birth through age 21 in the State;
    (ii) The number of children with deaf-blindness in the State;
    (iii) The State per pupil cost; and
    (iv) The quality of the application submitted.
    (3) In making awards under this priority, the Secretary shall 
consider the availability and quality of existing services for children 
with deaf-blindness in different areas of the country, and, to the 
extent practical, will afford different geographic areas the 
opportunity to receive project assistance.
    (4) The project period under this priority is (up to) 48 months 
subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation 
awards. In determining whether to continue the project for the third 
and fourth years of the project period, the Secretary will consider the 
requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and the recommendation of a review 
team consisting of three experts selected by the Secretary. The 
services of the review team, including a two-day site visit to the 
project, are to be performed during the project'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 project's budget for year two. These costs 
are estimated to be approximately $6,000.
    (5) Funds awarded under this priority may not be used for direct 
early intervention, special education, or related services provided 
under Parts B and C of IDEA.
    (b) Optional Match Maker Projects. An applicant for a State and 
Multi-State project may propose to establish a Match Maker project as 
an additional component of its State or Multi-State application. Match 
Maker projects are intended to expand the capacity of State and local 
educational agencies, beyond that supported by the State and Multi-
State project, to effectively serve children who are deaf-blind by 
developing, implementing, evaluating, and disseminating new or improved 
approaches for providing early intervention, special education and 
related services to infants, toddlers, and children who are deaf-blind.
    Only those applications that are approved for a State and Multi-
State project can be considered for possible funding of a Match Maker 
project. Applicants must submit a separate application for the State 
and Multi-State project and for the Match Maker project components. 
Applications for Match Maker projects must include strategies for State 
or local authorities to assume responsibility for supporting the 
project activities beyond the Federally-supported project period.
    Match Maker projects must:
    (1) Develop and implement a model for expanding the capacity of 
SEAs and LEAs to effectively serve children who are deaf-blind that 
includes specific strategies based on current theory, research, or 
evaluation data;
    (2) Evaluate the model in paragraph (a) by using multiple measures 
of results to determine the effectiveness of the model and its 
components. All projects must include measures of individual child 
change and other indicators of the effects of the model (e.g., family 
outcomes, peer outcomes, teacher outcomes), and cost data associated 
with implementing the model;
    (3) Collaborate with families, relevant agencies, service 
providers, and other stakeholders; and
    (4) Produce detailed procedures and materials that would enable 
others to replicate the model.
    The Secretary particularly invites projects that propose to 
provide, under its optional Match Maker component, effective practices 
that address one or more of the following topics:
    (1) Models for providing technical assistance regarding the 
delivery of services, including alternate assessments, to children with 
deaf-blindness in inclusive settings;
    (2) The use of technology to enhance the dissemination of 
information on effective practices for individuals who are deaf-blind;
    (3) Functional behavior assessments used to provide positive 
behavior supports for learners who are deaf-blind; and
    (4) Integrating transition and technical assistance models within 
and across appropriate agencies.
    Federal financial support for a Match Maker project will not exceed 
$50,000 per year for up to four years, and must be matched on a dollar-
for-dollar basis by the applicant. Funding for a Match Maker project is 
in addition to the funding for the State and Multi-State project. Funds 
provided for a Match Maker project may not be used for direct services 
nor to supplant or replace funds awarded under the State and Multi-
State projects.
    Project Period: Up to 48 months.
    Estimated Range: The estimated range of awards for State and Multi-
State projects is $40,000-$550,000.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application for: (1) a State and Multi-State project that proposes a 
budget exceeding $550,000 for any single budget period of 12 months, or 
(2) an optional Match Maker project that proposes a Federally-supported 
budget exceeding $50,000 for any single budget period of 12 months. The 
Secretary may change the maximum amount through a notice published in 
the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of

[[Page 10361]]

no more than 50-double spaced pages or no more than 60-doubled spaced 
pages if the applicant proposes to establish a match maker project, 
using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\''  x  11'' (on 
one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); (2) All 
text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.

Absolute Priority 2--Outreach Services to Minority Entities to Expand 
Research Capacity (84.326M)

Background
    The Congress has found that the Federal government must be 
responsive to the growing needs of an increasingly more diverse society 
and that a more equitable distribution of resources is essential for 
the Federal government to meet its responsibility to provide an equal 
educational opportunity for all individuals.
    The opportunity for full participation in awards for grants, 
cooperative agreements, and contracts by Historically Black Colleges 
and Universities (HBCUs) and other institutions of higher education 
with minority enrollments of at least 25 percent (OMIs) is essential if 
we are to take full advantage of the human resources we have to improve 
results for children with disabilities.
    This priority focuses on assisting HBCUs and OMIs to prepare 
scholars for careers in research on early intervention, special 
education, and related services for infants, toddlers, and children 
with disabilities, consistent with the purposes of the program, 
described in Section 672 of the Act. This preparation must consist of 
engaging both faculty and students at HBCUs and OMIs in special 
education research activities. The activities focus on an area of 
critical need which has material application in today's changing 
environment and will likely be the subject of future research efforts--
the special education of children in urban and high poverty schools. By 
building a cadre of experienced researchers on this important topic, 
the chances for increased participation in awards for grants, 
cooperative agreements and contracts by HBCUs and OMIs will be more 
likely.
    The association between socioeconomic status and enrollment in 
special education has been well documented. Available data from the 
National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) show that 68 percent of 
students in special education live in a household where the income is 
less than $25,000 per year versus 39 percent of the general population 
of youth.
    This association is heightened in urban school districts and, to a 
lesser extent, rural districts. NLTS data reveal that only 34 percent 
of students in special education live in suburban school districts 
compared to 48 percent of all students. Data from the Office for Civil 
Rights indicate that 30 percent of all inner-city students live in 
poverty compared to 18 percent of students in non-inner city areas.
    Urban school districts face a variety of unique challenges in 
meeting the educational needs of their students. Their schools often 
have high per student costs and limited financial resources. Their 
students are disproportionately poor and the population of individuals 
with limited English proficiency is among the fastest growing 
populations with special needs in some of these districts. This 
disproportionate representation of poor children in special education 
is also likely to be uniquely influenced by culturally diverse and 
urban settings, posing both opportunities and problems in the provision 
of special education services.

Priority

    This priority supports a project whose purpose is to increase the 
participation of HBCUs and OMIs in discretionary research and 
development grant activities authorized under IDEA, and to increase the 
capacity of individuals at these institutions to conduct research and 
development activities in early intervention, special education, and 
related services. The project must implement Congress' direction in 
section 661(d)(2)(A)(i) to provide outreach and technical assistance to 
these institutions to increase their participation in competitions for 
research, demonstration and outreach grants, cooperative agreements, 
and contracts funded under the IDEA. Activities must include:
    (a) Conducting research activities at HBCUs and OMIs as explained 
below that link scholars at HBCUs and OMIs with researchers at 
institutions with an established research capacity in a mentoring 
relationship to develop both individual and institutional research 
capacity at those HBCUs and OMIs with a demonstrated need for capacity 
development; and
    (b) Providing linkages between HBCUs and OMIs with a demonstrated 
need for capacity development and institutions with an established 
research capacity to provide opportunities for researchers at those 
HBCUs and OMIs to develop first hand experience in the grants and 
contracts application process.
    (c) Providing outreach and technical assistance to doctoral 
students at HBCUs and OMIs to increase their participation in 
competitions for grant awards to support student-initiated research in 
early intervention, special education, and related services.
    All research activities must be conducted for the purpose of 
capacity building. The research project must include one or more 
components focused on issues related to improving the delivery of 
special education services to, and educational results for, children 
with disabilities in urban and high poverty schools. Other possible 
research topics may include:
    (a) Effective intervention strategies that make a difference in the 
provision of a free appropriate public education to children with 
disabilities;
    (b) Practices to promote the successful inclusion of children with 
disabilities in the least restrictive environment;
    (c) Strategies for establishing high expectations for children with 
disabilities and increasing their participation in the general 
curriculum provided to all children;
    (d) Strategies for promoting effective parental participation in 
the educational process, especially among parents who have difficulty 
in participating due to linguistic, cultural, or economic differences;
    (e) Effective disciplinary approaches, including behavioral 
management strategies, for ensuring a safe and disciplined learning 
environment;
    (f) Strategies to improve educational results for students with 
disabilities in secondary education settings and promote their 
successful transition to postsecondary settings; or

[[Page 10362]]

    (g) Effective practices for promoting the coordination of special 
education services with health and social services for children with 
disabilities and their families.
    The project must ensure that findings are communicated in 
appropriate formats for researchers. The project must also ensure that 
findings of importance to other audiences, such as teachers, 
administrators, and parents, are made available to the Department of 
Education's technical assistance, training and dissemination projects 
for distribution to those audiences.
    The project must demonstrate experience and familiarity in research 
on children with disabilities in urban and high poverty schools with 
predominantly minority enrollments. The project must also demonstrate 
experience in capacity development in special education research, as 
well as a thorough understanding of the strengths and needs of HBCUs 
and OMIs.
    In addition to the annual two day Project Directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC listed in the General Requirements section of this 
notice, the project must budget for another annual two-day trip to 
Washington, DC to collaborate with the Federal project officer and 
other projects funded under this priority by sharing information and 
discussing implementation, and dissemination issues, including the 
carrying out of cross-project dissemination activities.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.
    Maximum Award: The Secretary rejects and does not consider an 
application that proposes a budget exceeding $1,000,000 for any single 
budget period of 12 months to support one cooperative agreement. The 
Secretary may change the maximum amount through a notice published in 
the Federal Register.
    Page Limits: Part III of the application, the application 
narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that 
are used by reviewers in evaluating an application. An applicant must 
limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 75 double-spaced 
pages, using the following standards: (1) A ``page'' is 8\1/2\''  x  
11'' (on one side only) with one-inch margins (top, bottom, and sides); 
(2) All text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in 
charts, tables, figures, and graphs, must be double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch). If using a proportional computer font, 
use no smaller than a 12-point font, and an average character density 
no greater than 18 characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font 
or a typewriter, do not use more than 12 characters to the inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section (including the narrative budget justification); Part 
IV--the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, 
resumes, bibliography, and letters of support. However, all of the 
application narrative must be included in Part III. If an application 
narrative uses a smaller print size, spacing, or margin that would make 
the narrative exceed the equivalent of the page limit, the application 
will not be considered for funding.
    For Applications and General Information Contact: Requests for 
applications and general information should be addressed to the Grants 
and Contracts Services Team, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, room 3317, 
Switzer Building, Washington, DC 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) 205-8953.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of this notice or 
the application packages referred to in this notice in an alternate 
format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by 
contacting the Department as listed above. However, the Department is 
not able to reproduce in an alternate format the standard forms 
included in the application package.

Intergovernmental Review

    The Technical Assistance and Dissemination program in this notice 
is 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 inter-governmental 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.

                                   Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Application Notice for Fiscal Year 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Deadline for                                                              Estimated
        CFDA No. and name          Applications     Application   intergovernmental   Maximum award          Project period            Page    number of
                                     available     deadline date        review        (per year)\1\                                 limit \2\    awards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
84.324H  National Center on               3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99         $500,000  Up to 60 mos.................         70          1
 Accessing the General
 Curriculum.
84.324J  Center for Students              3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99          750,000  Up to 60 mos.................         70          1
 With Disabilities Involved With
 and at Risk of Involvement With
 the Juvenile Justice System.
84.324P  Research Institute to            3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99          700,000  Up to 60 mos.................         70          1
 Enhance the Role of Special
 Education and Children With
 Disabilities in Education
 Policy Reform.
84.324L  Research and Training            3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99          500,000  Up to 60 mos.................         70          1
 Center in Service Coordination
 for Part C of IDEA.

[[Page 10363]]

 
84.324W  Improving Post-School            3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99          500,000  Up to 60 mos.................         60          1
 Outcomes: Identifying and
 Promoting What Works.
84.326C  Project for Children             3/8/99         4/30/99           5/31/99          550,000  Up to 48 mos.................         50         48
 and Young Adults Who are Deaf-
 Blind.
    Optional Match Maker Project          3/8/99         4/30/99           5/31/99           50,000  Up to 48 mos.................         60         10
84.326M  Outreach Services to             3/8/99         4/23/99           5/24/99        1,000,000  Up to 60 mos.................         75          1
 Minority Entities to Expand
 Research Capacity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Secretary rejects and does not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding the amount listed for each priority for any single
  budget period of 12 months, except for the Center for Students with Disabilities Involved with and at Risk of Involvement with the Juvenile Justice
  System priority. For this priority, the Secretary rejects and does not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $750,000 for year one
  and $500,000 for years two through five, for any single budget period of 12 months.
\2\ Applicants must limit the Application Narrative, Part III of the Application, to the page limits noted above. Please refer to the ``Page Limit''
  requirements included under each priority and competition description in this notice. The Secretary rejects and does not consider an application that
  does not adhere to this requirement.

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 at (202) 512-1530 or, 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.

    Dated: February 25, 1999.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 99-5246 Filed 3-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P