[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 52 (Thursday, March 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14355-14377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-6141]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA Nos.: 84.133N and 84.133E]


Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National 
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Notice Inviting 
Applications for New Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers and New 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers for Fiscal Year 2000

    Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package. 
Together with the statute authorizing the programs and applicable 
regulations governing the programs, including the Education Department 
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains 
information, application forms, and instructions needed to apply for a 
grant under these competitions.
    These programs support the National Education Goal that calls for 
all Americans to possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete 
in a global economy and exercise the rights and responsibilities of 
citizenship.
    The estimated funding levels in this notice do not bind the 
Department of Education to make awards in any of these categories, or 
to any specific number of awards or funding levels, unless otherwise 
specified in statute.
    Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 34 CFR Parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 
82, 85, and 86; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and 
Centers--34 CFR Part 350, and the Notice of Final Priority published 
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
    Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers in Subpart D; and 
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Special Projects and 
Demonstrations for Model Spinal Cord Injury--34 CFR Part 359 and the 
Notice of Final Priorities published elsewhere in this issue of the 
Federal Register.
    Pre-Application Meetings: Interested parties are invited to 
participate in a pre-application meeting to discuss the funding 
priority for a RERC on Low Vision and Blindness and a Technologies for 
Children with Orthopedic Disabilities and to receive technical 
assistance through individual consultation and information about the 
funding priorities. The pre-application meeting will be held on April 
4, 2000.
    A pre-application meeting for the Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers 
will be held on April 5, 2000 at the Department of Education, Office of 
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Switzer Building, Room 
3065, 330 C St. SW, Washington, DC between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m. 
NIDRR staff will also be available at this location from 1:30 p.m. to 
5:00 p.m. on that same day to provide technical assistance through 
individual consultation and information about the funding priorities. 
NIDRR will make alternate arrangements to accommodate interested 
parties who are unable to attend the pre-application meeting in person. 
For further information contact William Peterson, Switzer Building, 
room 3425, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone 
(202) 205-9192, or Joel Myklebust, Switzer Building, room 3042, 400 
Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone (202) 401-2071. If 
you use a Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), you may call 
(202) 205-4475.

Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities at the Public Meetings

    The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities, 
and a sign

[[Page 14356]]

language interpreter will be available. If you need an auxiliary aid or 
service other than a sign language interpreter in order to participate 
in the meeting (e.g. other interpreting service such as oral, cued 
speech, or tactile interpreter; assistive listening device; or 
materials in alternate format), notify the contact person listed in 
this Notice at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting date. 
Although we will attempt to meet a request we receive after this date, 
we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or 
service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

           Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2000, Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers--CFDA No.84-133N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Estimated                          Project
       Funding priority             Deadline for transmittal of      number of     Award amount (per     Period
                                           applications                awards           year) *         (months)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Spinal Cord Injury        60 Days, May 12, 2000.............          15     $300,000-$375,000         60
 Centers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project
  funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).

    Program Title: Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers.
    CFDA Number: 84.133N.
    Purpose of Program: Model SCI Centers provide assistance to 
establish innovative projects for the delivery, demonstration, and 
evaluation of comprehensive medical, vocational, and other 
rehabilitation services to meet the wide range of needs of individuals 
with SCI.
    Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under 
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit 
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and 
tribal organizations.
    Projects will be funded at varying amounts up to the maximum 
allowed based on individual factors in proposals. Proposed budgets 
should reflect costs associated with data collection, proposed 
research, and administration. Funding will be determined individually 
for each successful applicant up to the maximum allowed based upon 6 
documented workload, the peer review process, and overall budgetary 
limits of the program.

Final Selection Criterion

    The Assistant Secretary will use these selection criteria to 
evaluate applications under this program. The maximum score for all the 
criteria is 100 points; however, the Assistant Secretary also will use 
the following criterion so that up to an additional ten points may be 
earned by an applicant for a total possible score of 110 points:
    The new emphasis on research and NIDRR's Plan, plus the importance 
of the NSCID, require some modifications to the selection criteria for 
this program. The Secretary will redistribute points to reflect the 
increased emphasis on research, and to add references to the Plan and 
NSCID.
    (a) Research Project design (30 points). The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine to what degree--
    (1) There is a clear description of how the objectives of the 
project relate to the purpose of the program and the Plan;
    (2) The research is likely to produce new and useful information;
    (3) The need and target population are adequately defined and are 
sufficient for meaningful research and demonstration;
    (4) The outcomes are likely to benefit the defined target 
population;
    (5) The research hypotheses are sound; and
    (6) The research methodology is sound in the sample design and 
selection, the data collection plan, the measurement instruments, and 
the data analysis plan.
    (b) Service comprehensiveness (20 points). The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine to what degree--
    (1) The services to be provided within the project are 
comprehensive in scope, and include emergency medical services, 
intensive and acute medical care, rehabilitation management, 
psychosocial and community reintegration, and follow up;
    (2) A broad range of vocational and other rehabilitation services 
will be available to individuals with severe disabilities within the 
project; and
    (3) Services will be coordinated with those services provided by 
other appropriate community resources.
    (c) Plan of operation (10 points). The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine to what degree--
    (1) There is an effective plan of operation that ensures proper and 
efficient administration of the project;
    (2) The applicant's planned use of its resources and personnel is 
likely to achieve each objective;
    (3) Collaboration between institutions, if proposed, is likely to 
be effective;
    (4) Participation in the National Spinal Cord Injury Database is 
clearly and adequately described; and
    (5) There is a clear description of how the applicant will include 
eligible project participants who have been traditionally 
underrepresented, such as--
    (i) Members of racial or ethnic minority groups;
    (ii) Women;
    (iii) Individuals with disabilities; and
    (iv) The elderly.
    (d) Quality of key personnel (10 points). The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine to what degree--
    (1) The principal investigator and other key staff have adequate 
training or experience, or both, in spinal cord injury care and 
rehabilitation and demonstrate appropriate potential to conduct the 
proposed research, demonstration, training, development, or 
dissemination activity;
    (2) The principal investigator and other key staff are familiar 
with pertinent literature or methods, or both;
    (3) All the disciplines necessary to establish the 
multidisciplinary system described in Sec. 359.11(a) are effectively 
represented;
    (4) Commitments of staff time are adequate for the project; and
    (5) The applicant is likely, as part of its non-discriminatory 
employment practices, to encourage applications for employment from 
persons who are members of groups that traditionally have been 
underrepresented, such as--
    (i) Members of racial or ethnic minority groups;
    (ii) Women;
    (iii) Individuals with disabilities; and
    (iv) The elderly.
    (e) Adequacy of resources (5 points). The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine to what degree--
    (1) The facilities planned for use are adequate;
    (2) The equipment and supplies planned for use are adequate; and
    (3) The commitment of the applicant to provide administrative and 
other necessary support is evident.

[[Page 14357]]

    (f) Budget/cost effectiveness (5 points). The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine to what degree--
    (1) The budget for the project is adequate to support the 
activities;
    (2) The costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives of the 
project; and
    (3) The budget for subcontracts (if required) is detailed and 
appropriate.
    (g) Dissemination/utilization (10 points). The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine to what degree--
    (1) There is a clearly defined plan for dissemination and 
utilization of project findings;
    (2) The research results are likely to become available to others 
working in the field;
    (3) The means to disseminate and promote utilization by others are 
defined; and
    (4) The utilization approach is likely to address the defined need.
    (h) Evaluation plan (10 points). The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine to what degree--
    (1) There is a mechanism to evaluate plans, progress, and results;
    (2) The evaluation methods and objectives are likely to produce 
data that are quantifiable; and
    (3) The evaluation results, where relevant, are likely to be 
assessed in a service setting.

Final Additional Selection Criterion

    Within the absolute priority (see the notice of final priority 
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register), we will 
give the following competitive preference to applications that are 
otherwise eligible for funding under this priority:
    Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which an application 
includes effective strategies for employing and advancing in employment 
qualified individuals with disabilities in projects awarded under this 
absolute priority. In determining the effectiveness of those 
strategies, we will consider the applicant's success, as described in 
the application, in employing and advancing in employment qualified 
individuals with disabilities in the project.
    For purposes of this competitive preference, applicants can be 
awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under 
the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an 
applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum 
total of 110 points.

      Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2000, Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers--CFDA No. 84-133E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Estimated                        Project
        Funding priority             Deadline for transmittal of       number of     Maximum award       period
                                             applications               awards    amount (per year) *   (months)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
84.133E-1, Low Vision and        May 12, 2000.......................           1             $650,000         60
 Blindness.
84.133E-3, Technologies for      May 12, 2000.......................           1              650,000        60
 Children with Orthopedic
 Disabilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project
  funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).

    Program Title: Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs).
    CFDA Number: 84.133E.
    Purpose of Program: RERCs conduct research, demonstration, and 
training activities regarding rehabilitation technology--including 
rehabilitation engineering, assistive technology devices, and assistive 
technology services, in order to enhance the opportunities to better 
meet the needs of, and address the barriers confronted by, individuals 
with disabilities in all aspects of their lives.
    Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under 
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit 
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and 
tribal organizations.
    Selection Criteria: The Assistant Secretary uses the following 
selection criteria to evaluate applications for RERCs on Engineering 
for Low Vision and Blindness and Technologies for Children with 
Orthopedic Disabilities. (See section 350.54). The maximum score for 
all the criteria is 100 points.
    (a) Importance of the problem (8 points total). (1) The Secretary 
considers the importance of the problem.
    (2) In determining the importance of the problem, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant clearly describes the need 
and target population (3 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed activities address a 
significant need of rehabilitation service providers (2 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed project will have beneficial 
impact on the target population (3 points).
    (b) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (4 points 
total). (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the 
application to an absolute or competitive priority published in the 
Federal Register.
    (2) In determining the application's responsiveness to the absolute 
or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of 
the absolute or competitive priority (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are 
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority 
(2 points).
    (c) Design of research activities (20 points total). (1) The 
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of research 
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of 
the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the research activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained approach to research in the field, including a 
substantial addition to the state-of-the-art (4 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the methodology of each proposed research 
activity is meritorious, including consideration of the extent to 
which--
    (A) The proposed design includes a comprehensive and informed 
review of the current literature, demonstrating knowledge of the state-
of-the-art (3 points);
    (B) Each research hypothesis is theoretically sound and based on 
current knowledge (3 points);
    (C) Each sample population is appropriate and of sufficient size (3 
points);
    (D) The data collection and measurement techniques are appropriate 
and likely to be effective (3 points); and
    (E) The data analysis methods are appropriate (4 points).

[[Page 14358]]

    (d) Design of development activities (20 points total). (1) The 
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of development 
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of 
the project.
    (2) (i) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to 
be effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the 
Secretary considers the following factors--
    (ii) The extent to which the plan for development, clinical 
testing, and evaluation of new devices and technology is likely to 
yield significant products or techniques, including consideration of 
the extent to which--
    (A) The proposed project will use the most effective and 
appropriate technology available in developing the new device or 
technique (3 points);
    (B) The proposed development is based on a sound conceptual model 
that demonstrates an awareness of the state-of-the-art in technology (4 
points);
    (C) The new device or technique will be developed and tested in an 
appropriate environment (3 points);
    (D) The new device or technique is likely to be cost-effective and 
useful (3 points);
    (E) The new device or technique has the potential for commercial or 
private manufacture, marketing, and distribution of the product (4 
points); and
    (F) The proposed development efforts include adequate quality 
controls and, as appropriate, repeated testing of products (3 points).
    (e) Design of training activities (4 points total). (1) The 
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of training 
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of 
the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the type, extent, and quality of the 
proposed clinical and laboratory research experience, including the 
opportunity to participate in advanced-level research, are likely to 
develop highly qualified researchers (4 points).
    (f) Design of dissemination activities (4 points total). (1) The 
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of dissemination 
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of 
the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the materials to be disseminated are likely 
to be effective and usable, including consideration of their quality, 
clarity, variety, and format (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the information to be disseminated will be 
accessible to individuals with disabilities (2 point).
    (g) Design of utilization activities (4 points total). (1) The 
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of utilization 
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of 
the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the potential new users of the 
information or technology have a practical use for the information and 
are likely to adopt the practices or use the information or technology, 
including new devices (4 points).
    (h) Design of technical assistance activities (2 points total). (1) 
The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of technical 
assistance activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the 
objectives of the project.
    (2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be 
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the methods for providing technical 
assistance are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (2 
points).
    (i) Plan of operation (4 points total). (1) The Secretary considers 
the quality of the plan of operation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, and timelines for accomplishing project tasks 
(2 points).
    (ii) The adequacy of the plan of operation to provide for using 
resources, equipment, and personnel to achieve each objective (2 
points).
    (j) Collaboration (4 points total). (1) The Secretary considers the 
quality of collaboration.
    (2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions 
that commit to collaborate with the applicant have the capacity to 
carry out collaborative activities (2 points).
    (k) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (4 points total). (1) 
The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of the 
proposed budget.
    (2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the 
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
proposed project activities (2 point).
    (ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any 
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project 
activities (2 points).
    (1) Plan of evaluation (9 points total). (1) The Secretary 
considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
    (2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the 
Secretary considers the extent to which the plan of evaluation provides 
for periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on 
identified performance measures that--
    (i) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and 
expected impacts on the target population (5 points); and
    (ii) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate 
(4 points).
    (m) Project staff (9 points total). (1) The Secretary considers the 
quality of the project staff.
    (2) In determining the quality of the project staff, 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 (1 point).
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have 
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct 
all proposed activities (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate 
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (2 points).
    (iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about 
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (2 points).
    (iv) The extent to which the project staff includes outstanding 
scientists in the field (2 points).
    (n) Adequacy and accessibility of resources (4 points total). (1) 
The Secretary considers the adequacy and accessibility of the 
applicant's resources to implement the proposed project.

[[Page 14359]]

    (2) In determining the adequacy and accessibility of resources, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the applicant is committed to provide 
adequate facilities, equipment, other resources, including 
administrative support, and laboratories, if appropriate (2 points).
    (ii) The extent to which the applicant has appropriate access to 
clinical populations and organizations representing individuals with 
disabilities to support advanced clinical rehabilitation research (1 
point).
    (iii) The extent to which the facilities, equipment, and other 
resources are appropriately accessible to individuals with disabilities 
who may use the facilities, equipment, and other resources of the 
project (1 point).

Final Additional Selection Criteria

    Within this absolute priority, we will give the following 
competitive preference to applications that are otherwise eligible for 
funding under the notice of final priorities published elsewhere in 
this issue of the Federal Register:
    Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which an application 
includes effective strategies for employing and advancing in employment 
qualified individuals with disabilities in projects awarded under these 
absolute priorities. In determining the effectiveness of those 
strategies, we will consider the applicant's success, as described in 
the application, in employing and advancing in employment qualified 
individuals with disabilities in the project.
    For purposes of this competitive preference, applicants can be 
awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under 
the published selection criteria for these priorities. That is, an 
applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum 
total of 110 points.

Instructions for Application Narrative

    The Assistant Secretary strongly recommends the following:
    (a) A one-page abstract;
    (b) An Application Narrative (i.e., Part III that addresses the 
selection criteria that will be used by reviewers in evaluating 
individual proposals) of no more than 125 pages double-spaced (no more 
than 3 lines per vertical inch) 8\1/2\"x 11"pages (on one side only) 
with one inch margins (top, bottom, and sides). The application 
narrative page limit recommendation does not apply to: Part I--the 
electronically scannable form; Part II--the budget section (including 
the narrative budget justification); and Part IV--the assurances and 
certifications; and
    (c) A font no smaller than a 12-point font and an average character 
density no greater than 14 characters per inch.

Instructions for Transmittal of Applications

    (a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant 
must--
    (1) Mail the original and two copies of the application on or 
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application 
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and 
letter]), Washington, DC 20202-4725, or
    (2) Hand deliver or express mail the original and two copies of the 
application by 4:30 p.m. [Washington, DC time] on or before the 
deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control 
Center, Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and letter]), 
Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, SW., 
Washington, DC 20202.
    (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 Assistant 
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.
    (2) An applicant wishing to know that its application has been 
received by the Department must include with the application a 
stamped self-addressed postcard containing the CFDA number and title 
of this program.
    (3) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not 
provided by the Department--in Item 10 of the Application for 
Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA number--and letter, 
if any--of the competition under which the application is being 
submitted.

Application Forms and Instructions

    The appendix to this application is divided into four parts. These 
parts are organized in the same manner that the submitted application 
should be organized. These parts are as follows:
    PART I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev. 
1/12/1999) and instructions.
    PART II: Budget Form--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 
524A) and instructions.
    PART III: Application Narrative.
Additional Materials
    Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
    Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B).
    Certification Regarding Lobbying, Debarment, Suspension, and Other 
Responsibility Matters: and Drug-Free Work-Place Requirements (ED Form 
80-0013).
    Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and 
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED Form 80-0014) 
and instructions. (NOTE: ED Form GCS-014 is intended for the use of 
primary participants and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
    Certification of Eligibility for Federal Assistance in Certain 
Programs (ED Form 80-0016).
    Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL (if 
applicable) and instructions; and Disclosure Lobbying Activities 
Continuation Sheet (Standard Form LLL-A).
    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 Applications Contact: The Grants and Contracts Service Team 
(GCST), Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue S.W., room 3317, 
Switzer Building, Washington, D.C., (202) 205-8207. Individuals who use 
a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) may call the TDD number 
at (202) 205-9860. The preferred method for requesting information is 
to FAX your request to (202) 205-8717.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application 
package in an alternate format by contacting the GCST. However, the 
Department is not able to reproduce in an alternate format the standard 
forms included in the application package.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., room 3414, Switzer Building, 
Washington, D.C. 20202-2645. Telephone: (202) 205-5880 or TDD (202) 
205-4475. Internet: [email protected]

[[Page 14360]]

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 preceding 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 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


(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 84.133N, Special 
Projects and Demonstrations for Spinal Cord Injuries and 84.133E, 
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers)


    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.


    Dated: March 8, 2000.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Appendix--Application Forms and Instructions

    Applicants are advised to reproduce and complete the application 
forms in this Section. Applicants are required to submit an original 
and two copies of each application as provided in this Section. 
However, applicants are encouraged to submit an original and seven 
copies of each application in order to facilitate the peer review 
process and minimize copying errors.

Frequent Questions

1. Can I Get an Extension of the Due Date?

    No. On rare occasions the Department of Education may extend a 
closing date for all applicants. If that occurs, a notice of the 
revised due date is published in the Federal Register. However, 
there are no extensions or exceptions to the due date made for 
individual applicants.

2. What Should Be Included in the Application?

    The application should include a project narrative, vitae of key 
personnel, and a budget, as well as the Assurances forms included in 
this package. Vitae of staff or consultants should include the 
individual's title and role in the proposed project, and other 
information that is specifically pertinent to this proposed project. 
The budgets for both the first year and all subsequent project years 
should be included.
    If collaboration with another organization is involved in the 
proposed activity, the application should include assurances of 
participation by the other parties, including written agreements or 
assurances of cooperation. It is not useful to include general 
letters of support or endorsement in the application.
    If the applicant proposes to use unique tests or other 
measurement instruments that are not widely known in the field, it 
would be helpful to include the instrument in the application.
    Many applications contain voluminous appendices that are not 
helpful and in many cases cannot even be mailed to the reviewers. It 
is generally not helpful to include such things as brochures, 
general capability statements of collaborating organizations, maps, 
copies of publications, or descriptions of other projects completed 
by the applicant.

3. What Format Should Be Used for the Application?

    NIDRR generally advises applicants that they may organize the 
application to follow the selection criteria that will be used. The 
specific review criteria vary according to the specific program, and 
are contained in this Consolidated Application Package.

4. May I Submit Applications to More Than One NIDRR Program Competition 
or More Than One Application to a Program?

    Yes. You may submit applications to any program for which they 
are responsive to the program requirements. You may submit the same 
application to as many competitions as you believe appropriate. You 
may also submit more than one application in any given competition.

5. What Is the Allowable Indirect Cost Rate?

    The limits on indirect costs vary according to the program and 
the type of application. An applicant for a Rehabilitation Research 
Project should limit indirect charges to the organizations approved 
indirect cost rate. If the organization does not have an approved 
indirect cost rate, the application should include an estimated 
actual rate.

6. Can Profitmaking Businesses Apply for Grants?

    Yes. However, for-profit organizations will not be able to 
collect a fee or profit on the grant, and in some programs will be 
required to share in the costs of the project.

7. Can Individuals Apply for Grants?

    No. Only organizations are eligible to apply for grants under 
NIDRR programs. However, individuals are the only entities eligible 
to apply for fellowships.

8. Can NIDRR Staff Advise Me Whether My Project Is of Interest to NIDRR 
or Likely To Be Funded?

    No. NIDRR staff can advise you of the requirements of the 
program in which you propose to submit your application. However, 
staff cannot advise you of whether your subject area or proposed 
approach is likely to receive approval.

9. How Do I Assure That My Application Will Be Referred to the Most 
Appropriate Panel for Review?

    Applicants should be sure that their applications are referred 
to the correct competition by clearly including the competition 
title and CFDA number, including alphabetical code, on the Standard 
Form 424, and including a project title that describes the project.

10. How Soon After Submitting My Application Can I Find Out if It Will 
Be Funded?

    The time from closing date to grant award date varies from 
program to program. Generally speaking, NIDRR endeavors to have 
awards made within five to six months of the closing date. 
Unsuccessful applicants generally will be notified within that time 
frame as well. For the purpose of estimating a project start date, 
the applicant should estimate approximately six months from the 
closing date, but no later than the following September 30.

11. Can I Call NIDRR To Find Out if My Application Is Being Funded?

    No. When NIDRR is able to release information on the status of 
grant applications, it will notify applicants by letter. The results 
of the peer review cannot be released except through this formal 
notification.

12. If My Application is Successful, Can I Assume I Will Get the 
Requested Budget Amount in Subsequent Years?

    No. Funding in subsequent years is subject to availability of 
funds and project performance.

13. Will All Approved Applications Be Funded?

    No. It often happens that the peer review panels approve for 
funding more applications than NIDRR can fund within available 
resources. Applicants who are approved but not funded are encouraged 
to consider submitting similar applications in future competitions.

BILLING CODE 4000-01-U

[[Page 14361]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.000


[[Page 14362]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.001


[[Page 14363]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.002


[[Page 14364]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.003


[[Page 14365]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.004


[[Page 14366]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.005


[[Page 14367]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.006


[[Page 14368]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.007


[[Page 14369]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.008


[[Page 14370]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.009


[[Page 14371]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.010


[[Page 14372]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.011


[[Page 14373]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.012


[[Page 14374]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.013


[[Page 14375]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.014


[[Page 14376]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.015


[[Page 14377]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.016

[FR Doc. 00-6141 Filed 3-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C