[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 31 (Tuesday, February 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7682-7703]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3509]



[[Page 7681]]

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

Part VI





Department of Education





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



Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance; Notice Inviting Applications 
From Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) in Montana and Oklahoma for New 
Awards With Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and FY 2000 Funds Under the Goals 
2000; Educate America Act

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 31 / Tuesday, February 15, 2000 / 
Notices  

[[Page 7682]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA No.: 84.317]


Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance; Notice Inviting 
Applications From Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) in Montana and 
Oklahoma for New Awards With Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 and FY 2000 Funds 
Under the Goals 2000: Educate America Act

    Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package. 
Together with the statute authorizing the program and the Education 
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), the notice 
contains all of the information, application requirements, and 
instructions needed to apply for a grant under this competition.
    Purpose of Program: To assist local educational agencies (LEAs) in 
the development and implementation of comprehensive local improvement 
plans directed at enabling all children to reach challenging academic 
standards.
    Eligible Applicants: LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana are eligible to 
apply for grants. The Secretary is especially interested in receiving 
applications from consortia of LEAs in each State.
    LEAs or consortia of LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana that have 
previously received Goals 2000 funds are eligible to apply for funds 
under this competition. However, in order that other needy districts 
may benefit from Goals 2000 support, the Secretary is particularly 
interested in receiving applications from LEAs or consortia that have 
not previously received Goals 2000 funding.

    Note:
    This competition, authorized by section 304(e) of the Goals 2000: 
Educate America Act, is only for LEAs in Oklahoma and Montana. LEAs in 
other States apply to their respective State educational agency for 
funds under Title III of Goals 2000.

    Applications Available: February 15, 2000.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 15, 2000.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 14, 2000.
    Available Funds: For LEAs in Oklahoma: $5,410,428 in FY 1999; 
$5,376,407 (estimated) in FY 2000; For LEAs in Montana: $1,890,358 in 
FY 1999; $1,878,472 (estimated) in FY 2000.
    In the event that there are an insufficient number of funded 
applications to use all of either State's allotment, the Secretary may 
reallot the remaining funds consistent with the Act.
    The Secretary does not intend to conduct competitions for FY 2000 
funds. Instead, pursuant to 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary intends to 
make continuation awards from the FY 2000 allotments to each grantee 
that has made substantial progress toward meeting the objectives in its 
approved application.
    Project Period: Up to 24 months.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $30,000-$750,000 annually.
    The sizes of the awards requested should be governed by the size of 
the LEA or consortium and the scope of the proposed project. The 
Secretary will consider each applicant's request and the needs of all 
successful applicants in determining the amount of each grant award. 
The Department of Education is not bound by the estimates in this 
notice.
    Estimated Average Size of FY 1999 and FY 2000 Awards: $109,000 
annually.
    Estimated Numbers of Awards: 40 in Oklahoma; 20 in Montana.

    Note:  Consistent with section 309(c) of the Goals 2000 Act, the 
Secretary will award at least 50 percent of each State's available 
allotment to LEAs that have a greater percentage or number of 
disadvantaged children than the statewide average percentages or 
numbers for all LEAs in each respective State. The Department may 
waive this provision if it does not receive a sufficient number of 
applications from such districts.

    Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) as follows:
    (1) 34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs).
    (2) 34 CFR part 77 (Definitions that Apply to Department 
Regulations).
    (3) 34 CFR part 79 (Intergovernmental Review of Department of 
Education Programs and Activities).
    (4) 34 CFR part 80 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants 
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments).
    (5) 34 CFR part 81 (General Education Provisions Act--Enforcement).
    (6) 34 CFR part 82 (New Restrictions on Lobbying).
    (7) 34 CFR part 85 (Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension 
(Nonprocurement) and Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free 
Workplace (Grants)).
    GEPA Section 427 Requirements: In preparing applications, LEAs 
should pay particular attention to the requirements in section 427 of 
the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), as detailed later in this 
notice. Applicants must address the requirements in section 427 in 
order to receive funding under this competition. Section 427 requires 
each applicant to describe the steps it proposes to take to address one 
or more barriers (i.e., gender, race, national origin, color, 
disability, or age) that can impede equitable access to, or 
participation in, the program. A restatement of compliance with civil 
rights requirements is not sufficient to meet the GEPA 427 
requirements.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

(a) Background

    Section 304(e) of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Pub. L. 103-
227) (20 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.) (the Act) authorizes the Secretary to 
award direct grants to LEAs in States that were not participating in 
Goals 2000 as of October 20, 1995, if the applicable SEA approves the 
LEAs' participation in the program. Oklahoma and Montana were not 
participating in Goals 2000 as of that date, and the Oklahoma and 
Montana SEAs have approved LEA participation in this direct grant 
program.
    The Secretary has determined that grants awarded under section 
304(e) will be used to support the development and implementation of 
comprehensive local improvement plans designed to help all children 
reach challenging academic standards. In particular, the Secretary 
encourages LEAs to address in their applications how their reform 
strategies might include enhanced preservice teacher education and 
professional development activities of educators that are directly 
connected to challenging standards.
    Applicants that have already developed comprehensive improvement 
plans may propose activities funded through the grant that are aligned 
with and carry out parts of this plan. Where appropriate, LEAs should 
use funds awarded under this notice to build upon comprehensive reform 
strategies that have already been initiated with federal and other 
resources.

Application Requirements

    The authorizing statute--section 304(e) of the Act--permits the 
Secretary to fund LEA applications that are consistent with the 
provisions of Goals 2000. Grants under this competition will support 
the development and implementation of comprehensive local improvement 
plans to help all students reach challenging academic standards. Local 
improvement plans that are developed or implemented with funds awarded 
under section 304(e) must be consistent with the requirements in 
sections 309(a)(3) (B) through (E) of the Act. Adapted to this direct 
grant

[[Page 7683]]

program, these requirements specify that local plans--
    (1) Describe a process of broad-based community participation in 
the development, implementation, and evaluation of the local 
improvement plan;
    (2) Address districtwide education improvement, directed at 
enabling all students to meet the State content standards and State 
student performance standards, including specific goals and benchmarks; 
reflect the priority of the State improvement plan (if there is a 
comprehensive State improvement plan) and include a strategy for--
    (a) Improving teaching and learning, with strategies such as 
enhanced professional development and preservice education activities 
aligned to the standards;
    (b) Improving governance, management, and accountability for 
performance; and
    (c) Generating, maintaining, and strengthening parental and 
community involvement;
    (3) Promote the flexibility of local schools in developing plans 
that address the particular needs of their school and community and are 
consistent with the local improvement plan; and
    (4) Describe how the LEA will encourage and assist schools to 
develop and implement comprehensive school improvement plans that focus 
on helping all students reach State content standards and student 
performance standards.
    An LEA that applies for funds under this program should indicate 
whether funds are being requested to (a) develop and implement a plan 
in accordance with the requirements of sections 309(a)(3) (B) through 
(E) of the Act; or (b) implement an existing comprehensive improvement 
plan that meets the requirements of sections 309(a)(3) (B) through (E) 
of the Act. (An applicant that received FY 1995 and 1996 funding or FY 
1997 and 1998 funding under the previous two competitions must have 
completed the development of a plan that meets the stated requirements 
in order to be eligible for funding under this competition.)
    An LEA seeking funds to both develop and implement a comprehensive 
plan must demonstrate evidence of a clear process that will result in a 
plan that meets the stated plan requirements. This evidence may include 
a description of how stakeholders will be involved in plan development 
and specific steps and timelines for developing the plan. Successful 
applicants will only be eligible to receive FY 2000 continuation 
funding if they have completed development of a plan that meets the 
plan requirements stated above.
    An LEA that has already developed a comprehensive improvement plan 
may seek FY 1999 and 2000 funds to implement the plan. The applicant 
must demonstrate that its existing plan meets the plan requirements 
listed above. The applicant may do this, for example, by providing a 
description of how its plan addresses these requirements and the 
progress the applicant has made in implementing its plan. In addition, 
the applicant may demonstrate the comprehensiveness of the plan by 
providing evidence that the plan is coordinated with other LEA plans 
that, collectively, provide a framework for how federal and other funds 
are used to achieve the goals and objectives of the district.
    An applicant should clearly explain the strategies that will be 
funded under this award and how these strategies are aligned with the 
comprehensive plan.
    The Secretary recommends that applicants reserve in their budgets 
approximately $2,000 each year for activities that will be designed by 
the Secretary, in conjunction with grantees, to facilitate the sharing 
among grantees of information on successful comprehensive reform 
strategies.

Selection Criteria

    The Secretary will use the following selection criteria and factors 
from 34 CFR 75.210 to evaluate applications under this competition.
    The maximum score for all of the criteria is 100 points. The 
maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parenthesis with the 
criterion. The criteria and factors are as follows:
    (1) Need for the project. (20 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
    (b) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the proposed project will provide services 
to or otherwise address the needs of students at risk of educational 
failure.
    (ii) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, 
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be 
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude 
of those gaps or weaknesses.
    (2) Quality of the project design. (33 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the 
proposed project.
    (b) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a 
comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support 
rigorous academic standards for students.
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed project will be coordinated 
with similar or related efforts, and with other appropriate community, 
State, and Federal resources.
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the period of 
Federal financial assistance.
    (iv) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
    (3) Quality of project services. (15 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be 
provided by the proposed project.
    (b) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by 
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and 
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for 
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (c) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The likelihood that the services to be provided by the proposed 
project will lead to improvements in the achievement of students as 
measured against rigorous academic standards.
    (ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project are focused on those with greatest needs.
    (iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and 
effective practice.
    (4) Quality of project personnel. (5 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will 
carry out the proposed project.
    (b) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (c) In addition, the Secretary considers the qualifications, 
including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.
    (5) Adequacy of resources. (5 points)

[[Page 7684]]

    (a) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
proposed project.
    (b) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization.
    (ii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to 
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed 
project.
    (iii) The potential for the incorporation of project purposes, 
activities, or benefits into the ongoing program of the agency or 
organization at the end of Federal funding.
    (6) Quality of the management plan. (7 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for 
the proposed project.
    (b) In considering the quality of the management plan for the 
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks.
    (ii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
and services from the proposed project.
    (iii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of 
perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed 
project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, 
a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or 
beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.
    (7) Quality of the project evaluation. (15 points)
    (a) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be 
conducted of the proposed project.
    (b) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the 
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and 
qualitative data to the extent possible.
    (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.

(Note: In designing their evaluation plans, applicants are 
encouraged to consider the sample performance measures included in 
this package)

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs:

    This program is subject to the requirements of Executive order 
12372 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs) and the 
regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. The objective of the Executive order is 
to foster an intergovernmental partnership and to strengthen federalism 
by relying on State processes and on State, areawide, regional, and 
local coordination for review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
    Neither Oklahoma nor Montana has adopted State intergovernmental 
review processes. Therefore, State, areawide, regional, and local 
entities may submit comments directly to the Department.
    Any comments submitted pursuant to the executive order must be 
mailed or hand-delivered by the date indicated in this notice to the 
following address: The Secretary, E.O. 12372--CFDA# 84.317, U.S. 
Department of Education, Room 7E200, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, 
Washington, DC 20202-0125.
    Proof of mailing will be determined on the same basis as 
applications (see 34 CFR 75.102). Recommendations or comments may be 
hand-delivered until 4:30 p.m. (EST) on the date indicated in this 
notice.
    PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ABOVE ADDRESS IS NOT THE SAME ADDRESS AS THE 
ONE TO WHICH THE APPLICANT SUBMITS ITS COMPLETED APPLICATION. DO NOT 
SEND APPLICATIONS TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

Instructions for Transmittal of Applications

    (a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant 
must--
    (1) Mail the original and three copies of the application on or 
before the deadline date to: U. S. Department of Education, Application 
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA # 84.317), Washington, DC 20202-4725
    or
    (2) Hand deliver the original and three copies of the application 
by 4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time) on the deadline date to: U.S. 
Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA# 
84.317), Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, 
SW, Washington, DC.
    (b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of 
mailing:
    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the 
U.S. Postal Service.
    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial 
carrier.
    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.
    (c ) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service, 
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of 
mailing:
    (1) A private metered postmark.
    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

    Notes: (1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a 
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should 
check with its local post office.

    (1) The Application Control Center will mail a Grant Application 
Receipt Acknowledgment to each applicant. If an applicant fails to 
receive the notification of application receipt within 15 days from the 
date of mailing the application, the applicant should call the U.S. 
Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 708-9494.
    (2) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and in Item 10 of 
the Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA 
number of the competition under which the application is being 
submitted (CFDA# 84.317).

Application Instructions and Forms

    The appendix to this application is divided into three parts, plus 
a statement regarding estimated public reporting burden and various 
assurances and certifications. These parts and additional materials are 
organized in the same manner that the submitted application should be 
organized. The parts and additional materials are as follows:
    Part I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev. 
4-88)) and instructions.
    Part II: Budget Information--Non-Construction Programs (Standard 
Form 524) and instructions.
    Part III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials

    Estimated Public Reporting Burden. Assurances--Non-Construction 
Programs (Standard Form 424B).
    Certifications regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and Other 
Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (ED 80-
0013).
    Certification regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and 
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED 80-0014, 9/90) 
and instructions.


[[Page 7685]]


(Note: ED 80-0014 is intended for the use of grantees and should not 
be transmitted to the Department)

    Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL) (if 
applicable) and instructions.
    GEPA Section 427 Notice to All Applicants.
    An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the 
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications. 
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications 
must each have an original signature. No grant may be awarded unless a 
completed application form has been received.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia J. Kingman, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202-6400, 
Telephone: (202) 401-0039, FAX: (202) 205-5870. This contact may also 
be reached via e-mail at [email protected]. Individuals who use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 
p.m., Eastern time.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternate format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding 
paragraph.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application 
package in an alternate format, also, by contacting that person. 
However, the Department is not able to reproduce in an alternate format 
the standard forms included in the application package.

Electronic Access To This Document

    You may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe 
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet 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 (GPO), toll free at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC 
area at (202) 512-1530.


    Note:  The official version of this document is the document 
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the 
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal 
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html



    Program Authority: Section 304(e) of the Goals 2000: Educate 
America Act, 20 USC 5884(b).

    Dated: February 9, 2000.
Michael Cohen,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.

BILLING CODE 4000--01--U

[[Page 7686]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.014


[[Page 7687]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.015


[[Page 7688]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.016


[[Page 7689]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.017


[[Page 7690]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.018


[[Page 7691]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.019


[[Page 7692]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.020


[[Page 7693]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.021


[[Page 7694]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.022


[[Page 7695]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.023


[[Page 7696]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.024


[[Page 7697]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.025


[[Page 7698]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15FE00.026

BILLING CODE 4000-01-C

Instructions for Completion of SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying 
Activities

    This disclosure form shall be completed by the reporting entity, 
whether subawardee or prime Federal recipient, at the initiation or 
receipt of a covered Federal action, or a material change to a previous 
filing, pursuant to title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. The filing of a form 
is required for each payment or agreement to make payment to any 
lobbying entity for influencing or attempting to influence an officer 
or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee 
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with 
a covered Federal action. Complete all items that apply for both the 
initial filing and material change report. Refer to the implementing 
guidance published

[[Page 7699]]

by the Office of Management and Budget for additional information.
    1. Identify the type of covered Federal action for which lobbying 
activity is and/or has been secured to influence the outcome of a 
covered Federal action.
    2. Identify the status of the covered Federal action.
    3. Identify the appropriate classification of this report. If this 
is a followup report caused by a material change to the information 
previously reported, enter the year and quarter in which the change 
occurred. Enter the date of the last previously submitted report by 
this reporting entity for this covered Federal action.
    4. Enter the full name, address, city, State and zip code of the 
reporting entity. Include Congressional District, if known. Check the 
appropriate classification of the reporting entity that designates if 
it is, or expects to be, a prime or subaward recipient. Identify the 
tier of the subawardee, e.g., the first subawardee of the prime is the 
1st tier. Subawards include but are not limited to subcontracts, 
subgrants and contract awards under grants.
    5. If the organization filing the report in item 4 checks 
``Subawardee,'' then enter the full name, address, city, State and zip 
code of the prime Federal recipient. Include Congressional District, if 
known.
    6. Enter the name of the federal agency making the award or loan 
commitment. Include at least one organizational level below agency 
name, if known. For example, Department of Transportation, United 
States Coast Guard.
    7. Enter the Federal program name or description for the covered 
Federal action (item 1). If known, enter the full Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number for grants, cooperative agreements, 
loans, and loan commitments.
    8. Enter The most appropriate Federal identifying number available 
for the Federal action identified in item 1 (e.g., Request for Proposal 
(RFP) number; Invitations for Bid (IFB) number; grant announcement 
number; the contract, grant, or loan award number; the application/
proposal control number assigned by the Federal agency). Included 
prefixes, e.g., ``RFP-DE-90-001.''
    9. For a covered federal action where there has been an award or 
loan commitment by the Federal agency, enter the Federal amount of the 
award/loan commitment for the prime entity identified in item 4 or 5.
    10. (a) Enter the full name, address, city, State and zip code of 
the lobbying registrant under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 
engaged by the reporting entity identified in item 4 to influence the 
covered Federal action.
    (b) Enter the full names of the individual(s) performing services, 
and include full address if different from 10(a). Enter Last Name, 
First Name, and Middle Initial (MI).
    11. The certifying official shall sign and date the form, print 
his/her name, title, and telephone number.
    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act, as amended, no persons 
are required to respond to a collection of information unless it 
displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for 
this information collection is OMB No. 0348-0046. Public reporting 
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 
minutes per response, including time for reviewing instructions, 
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data 
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. 
Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this 
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this 
burden, to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction 
Project (0348-0046), Washington, DC 20503.

Notice to All Applicants

    The purpose of this enclosure is to inform you about a new 
provision in the Department of Education's General Education Provisions 
Act (GEPA) that applies to applicants for new grant awards under 
Department programs. This provision is Section 427 of GEPA, enacted as 
part of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-382).

To Whom Does This Provision Apply?

    Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for new grant awards under 
this program. ALL APPLICANTS FOR NEW AWARDS MUST INCLUDE INFORMATION IN 
THEIR APPLICATIONS TO ADDRESS THIS NEW PROVISION IN ORDER TO RECEIVE 
FUNDING UNDER THIS PROGRAM.

(If this program is a State-formula grant program, a State needs to 
provide this description only for projects or activities that it 
carries out with funds reserved for State-level uses. In addition, 
local school districts or other eligible applicants that apply to the 
State for funding need to provide this description in their 
applications to the State for funding. The State would be responsible 
for ensuring that the school district or other local entity has 
submitted a sufficient section 427 statement as described below.)

What Does This Provision Require?

    Section 427 requires each applicant for funds (other than an 
individual person) to include in its application a description of the 
steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure equitable access to, and 
participation in, its Federally-assisted program for students, 
teachers, and other program beneficiaries with special needs. This 
provision allows applicants discretion in developing the required 
description. The statute highlights six types of barriers that can 
impede equitable access or participation: gender, race, national 
origin, color, disability, or age. Based on local circumstances, you 
should determine whether these or other barriers may prevent your 
students, teachers, etc. from such access or participation in, the 
Federally-funded project or activity. The description in your 
application of steps to be taken to overcome these barriers need not be 
lengthy; you may provide a clear and succinct description of how you 
plan to address those barriers that are applicable to your 
circumstances. In addition, the information may be provided in a single 
narrative, or, if appropriate, may be discussed in connection with 
related topics in the application.
    Section 427 is not intended to duplicate the requirements of civil 
rights statutes, but rather to ensure that, in designing their 
projects, applicants for Federal funds address equity concerns that may 
affect the ability of certain potential beneficiaries to fully 
participate in the project and to achieve to high standards. Consistent 
with program requirements and its approved application, an applicant 
may use the Federal funds awarded to it to eliminate barriers it 
identifies.

What Are Examples of How an Applicant Might Satisfy the Requirement of 
This Provision?

    The following examples may help illustrate how an applicant may 
comply with Section 427.
    (1) An applicant that proposes to carry out an adult literacy 
project serving, among others, adults with limited English proficiency, 
might describe in its application how it intends to distribute a 
brochure about the proposed project to such potential participants in 
their native language.
    (2) An applicant that proposes to develop instructional materials 
for classroom use might describe how it will make the materials 
available on

[[Page 7700]]

audio tape or in braille for students who are blind.
    (3) An applicant that proposes to carry out a model science program 
for secondary students and is concerned that girls may be less likely 
than boys to enroll in the course, might indicate how it intends to 
conduct ``outreach'' efforts to girls, to encourage their enrollment.
    We recognize that many applicants may already be implementing 
effective steps to ensure equity of access and participation in their 
grant programs, and we appreciate your cooperation in responding to the 
requirements of this provision.

Estimated Burden Statement for GEPA Requirements

    The time required to complete this information collection is 
estimated to vary from 1 to 3 hours per response, with an average of 
1.5 hours, including the time to review instructions, search existing 
data resources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and 
review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning 
the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this 
form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC 
20202-4651.

Paperwork Burden Statement

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are 
required to respond to a collection of information unless such 
collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control 
number for this information collection is 1810-0594. The time required 
to complete this information collection is estimated to average 30 
hours (or minutes) per response, including the time to review 
instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, 
and complete and review the information collection. If you have any 
comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions 
for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, 
Washington, DC 20202-4651. If you have comments or concerns regarding 
the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly 
to: Goals 2000, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, 
FOB-6 Room 3E213, Washington, DC 20202-6400.

Instructions for Part III: Application Narrative

    Before preparing the Application Narrative, an applicant should 
read carefully the description of the program, the background of the 
program, application requirements, and the selection criteria the 
Secretary will use to evaluate these applications.
    The narrative should encompass each function or activity for which 
funds are being requested and should--
    1. Begin with an Abstract that summarizes the proposed project;
    2. Describe the proposed project in light of the application 
requirements and each of the selection criteria in the order in which 
the criteria are listed in the application; and
    3. Include any other pertinent information that might assist the 
Secretary in reviewing the application.
    The Secretary strongly requests the applicant to limit the 
Application Narrative to no more than 20 pages (double-spaced, typed on 
one-side only, using font no smaller than 11 point). The Department has 
found that successful applications for similar programs generally meet 
this page limit. In addition to the Application Narrative, the 
applicant must include the cover form (SF-424), budget forms and budget 
narrative, assurances, and a statement regarding how the application 
meets the requirements of GEPA 427. Any supplemental attachments should 
be limited to those that are crucial to supporting the integrity of the 
applicant's project and how it has met application requirements.

Performance Measures

    The Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 places 
new management expectations and requirements on Federal departments and 
agencies by creating a framework for more effective planning, 
budgeting, program evaluation, and fiscal accountability for Federal 
programs. The intent of the Act is to improve public confidence by 
holding departments and agencies accountable for achieving program 
results. Departments must set program goals and objectives and measure 
and report on their achievements. One important source of program 
information on successes and lessons learned is the project evaluation 
and other information collected under individual grants.
    The U.S. Department of Education supports the GPRA initiative that 
all agencies be held accountable for program success and is committed 
to forging a partnership with grantees that will ensure accountability 
in the use of Goals 2000 funds. To assist grantees in the process of 
creating an instrument for evaluating program goals and achievements, 
the form titled ``Performance Measures Template'' is included in the 
application package. The Template identifies the key components for 
measuring performance (Performance Objective, Baseline, Source of Data, 
Outcome) and gives an example of each component. Applicants are 
encouraged to incorporate the components of the objectives described in 
their performance plans into the template; applicants may also use 
another similar format. It is important, however, that all applications 
are not only developed to achieve successful project outcomes, but that 
they also include a process to measure progress toward attaining those 
outcomes.
    The performance measures will be used during the life of the grant 
to ensure that project outcomes are achieved. Progress will be assessed 
via regularly scheduled communication, which may include telephone 
calls, letters, and site visits, between Department staff and the 
project director. Where sufficient progress is not being achieved, the 
Department and the grantee will work together to identify strategies 
and resources to overcome challenges and resolve problems. When 
necessary, the Department and the grantee may modify the performance 
measures.

Performance Measures Template

Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance Grant (Goals 2000: Educate 
America Act, Title III)State:------------------------------------------
District:--------------------------------------------------------------
PR#: S317A980----------------------------------------------------------
Consortium members (if applicable):
I1-2-------------------------------------------------------------------
I1-2-------------------------------------------------------------------
I1-2

[[Page 7701]]

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

 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Performance objective               Source of data              Baseline                 Outcome
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teacher Training:
As a result of providing training to   A survey of teachers     25% of district          At least 75% of
 all teachers regarding the use of      will be made to assess   elementary teachers      teachers will provide
 test data to make instructional        teacher proficiency in   surveyed in 1998         instruction, as
 decisions, by the conclusion of the    using test data to       reported that they       indicated in their
 1999-2000 school year, 75% of          inform decisions about   were proficient in       lesson plans, that has
 teachers in the district in the        instruction; teachers'   using test data to       been differentiated
 elementary grades will be proficient   lesson plans will be     inform instructional     according to student
 in using test data to inform           examined for evidence    decision making.         proficiency revealed
 instruction.                           of test data driven                               in the test data.
                                        instruction; and
                                        school administrators
                                        will observe the
                                        implementation of such
                                        instruction in the
                                        classroom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Goals 2000 Comprehensive Local Reform Assistance Q & A

Introduction

    The following questions and answers have been prepared to assist 
local educational agencies (LEAs) as they apply for and use funds 
available under Goals 2000, and as they develop and implement their 
local comprehensive improvement plans. This guidance should be read as 
a supplement to the Application Notice, and does not replace any of the 
information contained in the Notice. Please read the Notice carefully 
to ensure that your application addresses all requirements.
    In 1994, the Goals 2000: Educate America Act was signed into law. 
The purpose of the Act is ``to improve the quality of education for all 
students by improving student learning through a long-term, broad-based 
effort to promote coherent and coordinated improvements in the system 
of education throughout the Nation at the State and local levels.'' 
Through Title III of this Act, states receive funding to develop and 
implement comprehensive plans for improving education and provide 
subgrants to districts to develop and implement plans that are 
coordinated with the state plan. In 1995, the states of Montana and 
Oklahoma elected to not participate in Goals 2000.
    On April 26, 1996, the President signed into law the Omnibus 
Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996, which amended 
portions of Titles II and III of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. 
Under the Goals 2000 amendments, LEAs in a state that was not 
participating in Goals 2000 as of October 25, 1995 may apply directly 
to the Department for a portion of their state's Goals 2000 allotment, 
if the state educational agency (SEA) approves participation of its 
LEAs in the program. The Montana and Oklahoma SEAs have allowed their 
LEAs to participate in the competition for funding. The grants will be 
made for a two-year period.

Application Facts

     Who is eligible to apply for funding?
    Eligible applicants are LEAs as defined in Section 14101(18) of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. In general, if an 
agency is defined as an LEA for funding purposes, it meets the 
requirement of eligibility for this federal grant competition.
     How do eligible LEAs apply for funding?
    The Secretary has published a notice in the Federal Register 
inviting applications from LEAs in Montana and Oklahoma. The 
application deadline for the grant awards is as announced in the 
Federal Register. The grant selection criteria and application 
requirements are detailed in the notice. Funds will be awarded on a 
competitive basis for the development and implementation of 
comprehensive local improvement plans, or implementation of existing 
plans, designed to enable all children to reach challenging academic 
standards.
     How much funding is available for awards?
    For LEAs in Oklahoma, the amounts available from the State's FY 
1999 and 2000 allotments are $5,410,428 and $5,376,407 (estimated), 
respectively. For LEAs in Montana, the amounts are $1,890,358 and 
$1,878,472 (estimated).
     How much funding can applicants request?
    Included in the notice is an estimate of how many awards could be 
made with an estimated average award amount. These are only estimates.
    The funding range provided is based on the allocations made to 
Montana and Oklahoma Goals 2000 grantees in the most recent competition 
(1998). The amount of funding an applicant requests should be related 
to factors such as the number of students in the district(s), the 
number of students in poverty or otherwise educationally disadvantaged 
in the district(s), the needs and proposed activities of the district 
in terms of implementing comprehensive standards-based reform, the 
expected results of such activities, and other factors that create a 
higher need for funds, such as high mobility of the student population 
and extreme isolation from other resources. Please understand that the 
funding provided is not for the purpose of implementing a district's 
entire comprehensive improvement plan. Rather, the funding is 
coordinated with other Federal, State, and local resources to enable 
the district to implement an aligned, standards-based reform plan that 
is designed to raise the achievement levels of all students and 
simultaneously narrow the gap in achievement levels by different 
populations within the district.
     How long should the application be?
    As stated in the notice, the application narrative should not 
exceed 20 pages in length. Attachments, other than those that are 
required, should be kept to only those that are essential.
     How long will it take for the Department to review the 
application? Who will review the applications and how will they be 
reviewed? When will the awards be made?
    The deadline for applications is the date announced in the Federal 
Register. A period of approximately two months is then needed to 
process the applications, conduct a peer review, and make funding 
decisions. The applications will be reviewed by individuals from states 
and districts that are familiar with the purpose of Goals 2000 grants. 
They will score the applications based on the seven selection criteria 
described in the application notice. It is anticipated that awards will 
be made in early June.
     What are the reporting requirements? What are the future 
oversight activities by the federal government for successful 
applicants?
    LEAs are required to submit an annual report each year describing 
their activities and accomplishments. This information must demonstrate 
that the LEA is making substantial progress towards achieving its goals 
and objectives in order to receive second year funding. Applicants that 
needed to complete development of a local comprehensive improvement 
plan in

[[Page 7702]]

order to meet the requirements (as noted in the application) for such 
plan must have a plan that meets the requirements before receiving 
second year funds.
    In addition to report requirements, Department staff may call, 
visit, and/or convene multiple grantees to facilitate the use of best 
practices, learn what strategies are working and aren't working, and 
verify that the grant is being implemented according to the 
application. The applicant is subject to a financial audit, as is the 
case with any grant of federal funds.
     Will new applicants be given a competitive preference over 
applicants that previously received Goals 2000 funding?
    No. However, the Secretary is particularly interested in receiving 
applications from LEAs that have not previously received Goals 2000 
funding. An applicant may not receive funding to develop a local 
comprehensive plan for more than one year. Therefore, applicants that 
have previously received Goals 2000 funds must have developed the 
required local comprehensive plan in order to be eligible for funding 
in this competition. Other applicants can be funded to develop and then 
implement plans that meet the plan requirements.

Writing the Application

     In the application notice, there is the requirement that 
local comprehensive plans ``address districtwide education improvement, 
directed at enabling all students to meet the State content standards 
and State student performance standards, including specific goals and 
benchmarks; reflect the priority of the State improvement plan (if 
there is a comprehensive State improvement plan).'' What does this 
requirement mean within the particular contexts of Montana and 
Oklahoma?

Montana

    The Office of Public Instruction (OPI) is implementing a statewide 
initiative for school improvement in Montana. This initiative lays out 
a framework for how the SEA will support districts and schools as they 
further student learning. The plan consists of five elements: 
Standards, Accreditation, Assessment, Education Profile, and 
Professional Development/Teacher Certification. Applicants should be 
aware of and align with the efforts that the State is taking within 
each of these project components, where appropriate. The State has 
informed us that as part of the standards work, the Montana Board of 
Public Education and OPI, in partnership with various educational 
organizations, has developed content and performance standards in 
Reading, Mathematics, World Language, Technology, Science, Writing, 
Health Enhancement, Speaking and Listening, Media Literacy, and 
Literature. The Board of Education is currently revising and preparing 
content and performance standards in Social Science, Workplace 
Competencies, and Library.
    Pursuant to the application requirement that districts address 
districtwide improvements to meet these standards and Rule 10.55.603 of 
the Montana Standards of Accreditation, OPI plans to provide guidance 
to districts to incorporate the new content and performance standards 
into the curriculum, establish curriculum and assessment development 
processes, and meet the other requirements of the State accreditation 
standards. In the comprehensive improvement plan required through Goals 
2000, an applicant should include other strategies to implement the 
standards, such as through professional development activities that are 
aligned to the standards (see the application notice for the specific 
types of strategies that must be addressed in the plan). Strategies 
such as professional development are critical to helping teachers 
develop instructional approaches to assist students meet the standards, 
demonstrate exemplary performance that meets the standards, and use 
data to determine what instructional approaches are working. The 
funding available through Goals 2000 can assist districts to take these 
critical steps to implement the state standards.

Oklahoma

    The State of Oklahoma requires all districts to develop a 
Comprehensive Local Education Plan (CLEP) to address school 
improvement. In their plans, districts review implementation of the 
state-mandated content standards, Priority Academic Student Skills 
(PASS), and state performance standards as measured through the 
Oklahoma School Testing Program (OSTP).
    Districts should address school reform identified in their CLEP in 
the goals 2000 application and focus on implementation of district 
reform. While the CLEP forms the basis of a school improvement plan, it 
may not fully meet the application requirements contained in the 
notice. (See Application Requirements section.) For example, a plan 
developed under Goals 2000 by a school district would include 
strategies for improving governance and management. Additional 
materials would need to be provided by the applicant to address those 
elements not included in the CLEP.
     How should the local comprehensive plan be related to 
planning requirements for all programs, federal, state, or local?
    The comprehensive plan Goals 2000 supports should be the sole 
comprehensive plan for the district. It is not a plan for use of Goals 
2000 funds; rather, it describes how the district intends to improve 
its schools, using all resources it has available. It is the district's 
framework for reform.
    Other plans the district may have should fit in under the general 
comprehensive plan. For instance, most districts will have consolidated 
plans describing how they will use Federal funds provided by the 
programs included in the consolidation (or individual plans for each of 
the programs). These plans should describe how Federal funds will be 
used to support the comprehensive plan--the Federal contribution. 
Likewise, technology plans could describe, in greater detail, the role 
of technology in the comprehensive plan.
     How should Goals 2000 funds be used in relation to other 
funding sources to support the comprehensive plan?
    The local comprehensive plan should provide direction for how the 
district uses all resources available to it. Goals 2000 resources 
should be focused on plan development and on implementation activities 
for which other funds are not available. Other resources that are 
targeted to a particular strategy should be accounted for first. The 
district can then determine the best use of the limited Goals 2000 
funds. For instance, Title III funds, Technology Literacy Challenge 
Funds (TLCF), are for the purpose of improving the use of technology in 
the classroom. TLCF money could be used to provide professional 
development in teaching standards through the use of instructional 
technology. Goals 2000 funds could be used to help align curriculum 
with the new standards. The alignment of funds creates the potential 
for a greater systemic impact. Districts should consider the best use 
of Goals 2000 funds in the context of the local comprehensive plan, 
State plan/initiatives, and available resources. For instance, in 
Montana, other possible uses of Goals 2000 funds could be to aggregate 
standardized test data at the district level, disaggregate data by 
gender, race, socioeconomic status, etc., and thereby help districts 
develop a means for being eligible for Performance-Based Accreditation.
     The application requires that an applicant have a 
comprehensive

[[Page 7703]]

improvement plan in place in order to implement it. Does this mean that 
no implementation activities can be carried out until a plan is 
completely developed? Do these requirements imply that a plan, once 
developed, is to remain unchanged while it is being implemented? What 
if an LEA has an existing plan that meets some, but not all, of the 
elements required in the legislation?
    If an applicant does not have a comprehensive improvement plan that 
meets all of the plan requirements, its primary focus in the first year 
should be to develop the additional components of its plan to make it 
complete. In addition to these plan development activities, the 
applicant may use funds to implement some of the completed portions of 
its plan that will not be greatly affected by the other portions being 
developed. For instance, a district that has completed development of 
its standards and assessments (or uses those the state has developed) 
may wish to begin professional development of staff in relation to the 
standards while the parent involvement component of its plan is being 
developed.
    Plan development and plan implementation are not intended to be 
entirely distinct activities. Once a plan has been developed that meets 
the plan requirements of Goals 2000, continual revision of this plan 
should be seen as a natural part of implementing the plan. Revisions 
should be informed by data collected on student performance and the 
effectiveness of various strategies. It is anticipated that districts 
may already have plans that address at least some of the requirements 
of Goals 2000. These plans that are already in place should serve as a 
starting point for continued plan development; a district need not 
start from scratch in developing a plan to meet the requirements. When 
applying for Goals 2000 funds, a district should clearly identify the 
status of its plans in relation to the plan requirements and the steps 
it will take to complete its comprehensive plan.
     What should applicants consider in determining whether to 
apply as a member of a consortium of districts rather than as a single 
district?
    By working together with other districts as a consortium, a 
district can make better use of limited resources, improve continuity 
of services for students, or broaden the expertise that contributes to 
developing and implementing a particular set of strategies. A small 
district that does not have a broad base of resources could form a 
consortium with several other districts to create a single plan or 
implement a common component of individual district plans, such as 
professional development activities designed to help teachers create 
and use classroom assessments aligned to the standards. Another 
potentially strong consortium is one between districts that share the 
same students, such as an elementary district that feeds into a high 
school district or two K-12 district where students frequently move 
back and forth between the districts.
    Applying in consortium provides participating districts with an 
opportunity to present a stronger need for funding, have higher quality 
strategies, and have a stronger case to meet other selection criteria 
for this competition. However, the purposes for a consortium, its 
benefit to the districts, and the commitment by participating districts 
should be clear. In order to meet the application requirements, a 
consortium application should state whether a single plan is being 
developed and implemented or whether a common strategy is being 
implemented across plans being developed and implemented within the 
individual districts participating in the consortium. For consortia 
wishing to implement existing plans, each district in a consortium 
should demonstrate that it has a plan to meet the plan requirements of 
Goals law.
     How should an applicant use the Performance Measures 
Template included in the application package?
    Applicants should have clear and appropriate performance objectives 
related to the specific activities proposed in the grant. A process for 
measuring progress towards attaining these objectives should also be 
identified as well as a means for stating outcomes. Applicants are 
encouraged to incorporate the components of the performance measures 
into the template, but they may also use another, similar format. 
(Refer to Performance Measures and Performance Measures Template in 
application package.)
     Are applicants for Goals 2000 funds allowed to use grant 
funds to pay a consultant for writing a grant application?
    No. According to a provision in the Education Department General 
Administrative Regulation (EDGAR, 75.515), grantees are prohibited from 
utilizing grant funds to pay a consultant for writing a grant 
application. Consultants may be used when there is a need in the 
approved project for services that cannot be met by an employee; 
however, paying a consultant to write a grant application does not meet 
this criterion.
     May local funds (other than federal grant funds) be used 
to hire a consultant to develop a grant proposal?
    Yes; however, the local district should be aware that occasionally 
consultants use boilerplate applications. Such applications are 
inconsistent with the aim of Goals 2000 grants which is to support 
local school reform built on assessment, planning, and improvement 
efforts that are tied to individual districts.

Resources For Assistance

U.S. Department of Education: Goals 2000 office
    For assistance with application requirements: Marcia J. Kingman, 
Goals 2000/TLCF, U.S. Department of Education, Phone: (202) 401-3900, 
Fax: (202) 205-5870, e-mail: [email protected].
Districts in Oklahoma
    For assistance with state initiatives: Dr. Katie Dunlap, Assistant 
State Superintendent, Oklahoma State Department of Education, Phone: 
(405) 521-4513, Fax: (405) 521-2971, 
[email protected].
Districts in Montana
    Nancy Coopersmith, Administrator, Department of Curriculum 
Services, Montana Office of Public Instruction, Phone: (406) 444-5541, 
Fax: (406) 444-1373, e-mail: [email protected].
    For assistance with standards-based reform: Dr. Belinda Biscoe, 
Director, Region VII Comprehensive Center, University of Oklahoma, 
College of Continuing Education, Phone: (405) 325-1729, Fax: (405) 325-
1824, e-mail: [email protected]; Rita Hale, Training Associate, 
Northwest Regional Assistance, Phone: (800) 547-6339 , Fax: (503) 275-
9625, e-mail: [email protected].
    For assistance with integrating technology with standards-based 
reform: Dr. Jerry Chafin, Director, South Central Regional Technology 
In Education Consortium, Phone: (785) 864-0699, Fax: (785) 864-0704, e-
mail: [email protected]; Seymour Hanfling, Director, Northwest 
Educational Technology Consortium, Phone: (503) 275-0658, (800) 211-
9435 (voice mail), Fax: (503) 275-0449, e-mail: [email protected].
    For assistance with understanding and linking to other federal 
resources: http://www.ed.gov.

[FR Doc. 00-3509 Filed 2-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U