[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 19, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7548-7574]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3995]



[[Page 7547]]

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

Part V





Department of Education





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



Special Education: State Program Improvement Grants Program Notice 
Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 33 / Tuesday, February 19, 2002 / 
Notices  

[[Page 7548]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA No.: 84.323A]


Special Education: State Program Improvement Grants Program 
Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001

    Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package. 
Together with the statute authorizing the program and the applicable 
regulations governing this program, including the Education Department 
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains all of 
the information, application forms, and instructions needed to apply 
for a grant under this program.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program, authorized under 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 
1997, is to assist State educational agencies and their partners 
referred to in section 652(b) of IDEA with reforming and improving 
their systems for providing educational, early intervention, and 
transitional services, including their systems for professional 
development, technical assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about 
best practices, to improve results for children with disabilities.
    Eligible Applicants: A State educational agency of one of the 50 
States, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or 
an outlying area (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, 
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 29, 2002.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 28, 2002.
    Available Funds: $13.5 million.
    Estimated Range of Awards: Awards will be not less than $530,000, 
nor more than $2,120,000 in the case of the 50 States, the District of 
Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and not less than 
$84,800, in the case of an outlying area. Pursuant to subsection 
655(a)(1) the Secretary has increased the minimum and maximum award 
amount above the minimum and maximum award amount for the FY 1999, 
2000, and 2001 competitions to account for inflation. The Secretary 
anticipates that there may be additional funds available subsequent to 
making awards under this year's competition. To utilize additional 
funds that might become available, the Secretary intends to run a 
separate competition under which only grantees from the FY 1999, 2000 
and 2001 competitions would be eligible. This competitive supplement 
could be used to enhance those State Improvement Grant activities that 
can be shown, based on the project's data-based evaluation, to have 
impacted positively on the goal(s) of the project.
    Consistent with EDGAR 34 CFR 75.104(b), we will reject any 
application that proposes a project funding level for any year that 
exceeds the stated maximum award amount for that year.
    We will set the amount of each grant after considering:
    (1) The amount of funds available for making the grants;
    (2) The relative population of the State or outlying area; and
    (3) The types of activities proposed by the State or outlying area.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1,000,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 13.


    Note: The Department of Education is not bound by the estimated 
size and number of awards in this notice.

    Project Period: Not less than one year and not more than five 
years.
    Page Limits: Part III of each application submitted under a 
priority in this notice, the application narrative, is where an 
applicant addresses the selection criteria that are used by reviewers 
in evaluating the application. You must limit Part III to the 
equivalent of no more than 100 pages, using the following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5" x 11" (on one side only) with one-inch 
margins (top, bottom, and sides).
     Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, 
tables, figures, and graphs.
     If using a proportional computer font, use no smaller than 
a 12-point font, and an average character density no greater than 18 
characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font or a typewriter, 
do not use more than 12 characters per inch.
    The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part 
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the 
resumes, the bibliography or references, or the letters of support. 
However, you must include all of the application narrative in Part III.
    We will reject without consideration or evaluation any application 
if--
     You apply these standards and exceed the page limit; or
     You apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the 
page limit.
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 
82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99; and (b) The selection criteria for this 
program are drawn from EDGAR in 34 CFR 75.210.

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

General Requirements

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

Description of Program

    The statutory authorization for this program and the application 
requirements that apply to this competition are set out in sections 
651-655 of the IDEA.

Findings and Purposes

    (a) States are responding with some success to multiple pressures 
to improve educational and transitional services and results for 
children with disabilities in response to growing demands imposed by 
ever-changing factors, such as demographics, social policies, and labor 
and economic markets.
    (b) In order for States to address those demands and to facilitate 
lasting systemic change that is of benefit to all students, including 
children with disabilities, States must involve local educational 
agencies, parents, individuals with disabilities and their families, 
teachers and other service providers, and other interested individuals 
and organizations in carrying out comprehensive strategies to improve 
educational results for children with disabilities.
    (c) Targeted Federal financial resources are needed to assist 
States, working in partnership with others, to identify and make needed 
changes to address the needs of children with disabilities into the 
next century.
    (d) State educational agencies, in partnership with local 
educational agencies and other individuals and organizations, are in 
the best position to identify and design ways to meet

[[Page 7549]]

emerging and expanding demands to improve education for children with 
disabilities and to address their special needs.
    (e) Research, demonstration, and practice over the past 20 years in 
special education and related disciplines have built a foundation of 
knowledge on which State and local systemic-change activities can now 
be based.
    (f) Research, demonstration, and practice in special education and 
related disciplines have demonstrated that an effective educational 
system now and in the future must--
    (1) Maintain high academic standards and clear performance goals 
for children with disabilities, consistent with the standards and 
expectations for all students in the educational system, and provide 
for appropriate and effective strategies and methods to ensure that 
students who are children with disabilities have maximum opportunities 
to achieve those standards and goals;
    (2) Create a system that fully addresses the needs of all students, 
including children with disabilities, by addressing the needs of 
children with disabilities in carrying out educational reform 
activities;
    (3) Clearly define, in measurable terms, the school and post-school 
results that children with disabilities are expected to achieve;
    (4) Promote service integration, and the coordination of State and 
local education, social, health, mental health, and other services, in 
addressing the full range of student needs, particularly the needs of 
children with disabilities who require significant levels of support to 
maximize their participation and learning in school and the community;
    (5) Ensure that children with disabilities are provided assistance 
and support in making transitions as described in section 674(b)(3)(C) 
of the Act;
    (6) Promote comprehensive programs of professional development to 
ensure that the persons responsible for the education or a transition 
of children with disabilities possess the skills and knowledge 
necessary to address the educational and related needs of those 
children;
    (7) Disseminate to teachers and other personnel serving children 
with disabilities research-based knowledge about successful teaching 
practices and models and provide technical assistance to local 
educational agencies and schools on how to improve results for children 
with disabilities;
    (8) Create school-based disciplinary strategies that will be used 
to reduce or eliminate the need to use suspension and expulsion as 
disciplinary options for children with disabilities;
    (9) Establish placement-neutral funding formulas and cost-effective 
strategies for meeting the needs of children with disabilities; and
    (10) Involve individuals with disabilities and parents of children 
with disabilities in planning, implementing, and evaluating systemic-
change activities and educational reforms.

Absolute Priority

    Under section 653 and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we will give an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priority. We will 
fund under this competition only those applications that meet this 
absolute priority.
    This priority supports projects that assist State educational 
agencies and their partners in reforming and improving their systems 
for providing educational, early intervention, and transitional 
services, including their systems for professional development, 
technical assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about best 
practices, to improve results for children with disabilities.

State Improvement Plan

    Applicants must submit a State improvement plan that--
    (a) Is integrated, to the maximum extent possible, with State plans 
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, if appropriate;
    (b) Identifies those critical aspects of early intervention, 
general education, and special education programs (including 
professional development, based on an assessment of State and local 
needs) that must be improved to enable children with disabilities to 
meet the goals established by the State under section 612(a)(16) of the 
Act. Specifically, applicants must include:
    (1) An analysis of all information, reasonably available to the 
State educational agency, on the performance of children with 
disabilities in the State, including--
    (i) Their performance on State assessments and other performance 
indicators established for all children, including drop-out rates and 
graduation rates;
    (ii) Their participation in postsecondary education and employment; 
and
    (iii) How their performance on the assessments and indicators 
compares to that of non-disabled children;
    (2) An analysis of State and local needs for professional 
development for personnel to serve children with disabilities that 
includes, at a minimum:
    (i) The number of personnel providing special education and related 
services; and
    (ii) Relevant information on current and anticipated personnel 
vacancies and shortages (including the number of individuals described 
in paragraph (b)(2)(i) with temporary certification), and on the extent 
of certification or retraining necessary to eliminate those shortages, 
that is based, to the maximum extent possible, on existing assessments 
of personnel needs;
    (3) An analysis of the major findings of the Secretary's most 
recent reviews of State compliance, as they relate to improving results 
for children with disabilities; and
    (4) An analysis of other information, reasonably available to the 
State, on the effectiveness of the State's systems of early 
intervention, special education, and general education in meeting the 
needs of children with disabilities;
    (c) Describes a partnership agreement that--
    (1) Specifies--
    (i) The nature and extent of the partnership among the State 
educational agency, local educational agencies, and other State 
agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with 
disabilities, and the respective roles of each member of the 
partnership; and
    (ii) How those agencies will work in partnership with other persons 
and organizations involved in, and concerned with, the education of 
children with disabilities, including the respective roles of each of 
these persons and organizations; and
    (2) Is in effect for the period of the grant;
    (d) Describes how grant funds will be used in undertaking the 
systemic-change activities, and the amount and nature of funds from any 
other sources, including funds under part B of the Act retained for use 
at the State level under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act, that 
will be committed to the systemic-change activities;
    (e) Describes the strategies the State will use to address the 
needs identified under paragraph (b), including how it will--
    (1) Change State policies and procedures to address systemic 
barriers to improving results for children with disabilities;
    (2) Hold local educational agencies and schools accountable for 
educational progress of children with disabilities;
    (3) Provide technical assistance to local educational agencies and 
schools

[[Page 7550]]

to improve results for children with disabilities;
    (4) Address the identified needs for in-service and pre-service 
preparation to ensure that all personnel who work with children with 
disabilities (including both professional and paraprofessional 
personnel who provide special education, general education, related 
services, or early intervention services) have the skills and knowledge 
necessary to meet the needs of children with disabilities, including a 
description of how it will--
    (i) Prepare general and special education personnel with the 
content knowledge and collaborative skills needed to meet the needs of 
children with disabilities, including how the State will work with 
other States on common certification criteria;
    (ii) Prepare professionals and paraprofessionals in the area of 
early intervention with the content knowledge and collaborative skills 
needed to meet the needs of infants and toddlers with disabilities;
    (iii) Work with institutions of higher education and other entities 
that (on both a pre-service and an in-service basis) prepare personnel 
who work with children with disabilities to ensure that those 
institutions and entities develop the capacity to support quality 
professional development programs that meet State and local needs;
    (iv) Work to develop collaborative agreements with other States for 
the joint support and development of programs to prepare personnel for 
which there is not sufficient demand within a single State to justify 
support or development of a program of preparation;
    (v) Work in collaboration with other States, particularly 
neighboring States, to address the lack of uniformity and reciprocity 
in the credentialing of teachers and other personnel;
    (vi) Enhance the ability of teachers and others to use strategies, 
like behavioral interventions, to address the conduct of children with 
disabilities that impedes the learning of children with disabilities 
and others;
    (vii) Acquire and disseminate, to teachers, administrators, school 
board members, and related services personnel, significant knowledge 
derived from educational research and other sources, and how the State, 
if appropriate, will adopt promising practices, materials, and 
technology;
    (viii) Recruit, prepare, and retain qualified personnel, including 
personnel with disabilities and personnel from groups that are 
underrepresented in the fields of regular education, special education, 
and related services;
    (ix) Integrate its plan, to the maximum extent possible, with other 
professional development plans and activities, including plans and 
activities developed and carried out under other Federal and State laws 
that address personnel recruitment and training; and
    (x) Provide for the joint training of parents and special 
education, related services, and general education personnel;
    (5) Address systemic problems identified in Federal compliance 
reviews, including shortages of qualified personnel;
    (6) Disseminate results of the local capacity-building and 
improvement projects funded under section 611(f)(4) of the Act;
    (7) Address improving results for children with disabilities in the 
geographic areas of greatest need;
    (8) Assess, on a regular basis, the extent to which the strategies 
implemented under this subpart have been effective; and
    (9) Coordinate its improvement strategies with public and private 
sector resources.

Required Partners

    Applicants must:
    (a) Establish a partnership with local educational agencies and 
other State agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of 
children with disabilities; and
    (b) Work in partnership with other persons and organizations 
involved in, and concerned with, the education of children with 
disabilities, including--
    (1) The Governor;
    (2) Parents of children with disabilities;
    (3) Parents of nondisabled children;
    (4) Individuals with disabilities;
    (5) Organizations representing individuals with disabilities and 
their parents, such as the parent training and information centers;
    (6) Community-based and other nonprofit organizations involved in 
the education and employment of individuals with disabilities;
    (7) The lead State agency for part C of the Act;
    (8) General and special education teachers, and early intervention 
personnel;
    (9) The State advisory panel established under part B of the Act;
    (10) The State interagency coordinating council established under 
part C of the Act; and
    (11) Institutions of higher education within the State.

Optional Partners

    A partnership established by applicants may also include--
    (a) Individuals knowledgeable about vocational education;
    (b) The State agency for higher education;
    (c) The State vocational rehabilitation agency;
    (d) Public agencies with jurisdiction in the areas of health, 
mental health, social services, and juvenile justice; and
    (e) Other individuals.

Reporting Procedures

    Each State educational agency that receives a grant must submit 
performance reports to the Secretary pursuant to a schedule to be 
determined by the Secretary, but not more frequently than annually. The 
reports must describe the progress of the State in meeting the 
performance goals established under section 612(a)(16) of the Act, 
analyze the effectiveness of the State's strategies in meeting those 
goals, and identify any changes in the strategies needed to improve its 
performance. Grantees must also provide information required under 
EDGAR at 34 CFR 80.40.

Use of Funds

    Each State educational agency that receives a State Improvement 
Grant under this program--
    (a) May use grant funds to carry out any activities that are 
described in the State's application and that are consistent with the 
purpose of this program;
    (b) Shall, consistent with its partnership agreement established 
under the grant, award contracts or subgrants to local educational 
agencies, institutions of higher education, and parent training and 
information centers, as appropriate, to carry out its State improvement 
plan; and
    (c) May award contracts and subgrants to other public and private 
entities, including the lead agency under part C of the Act, to carry 
out that plan;
    (d)(1) Shall use not less than 75 percent of the funds it receives 
under the grant for any fiscal year--
    (i) To ensure that there are sufficient regular education, special 
education, and related services personnel who have the skills and 
knowledge necessary to meet the needs of children with disabilities and 
developmental goals of young children; or
    (ii) To work with other States on common certification criteria; or
    (2) Shall use not less than 50 percent of those funds for these 
purposes, if the State demonstrates to the Secretary's

[[Page 7551]]

satisfaction that it has the personnel described in paragraph (d)(1).

Selection Criteria

    We will use the following selection criteria in 34 CFR 75.210 to 
evaluate applications for new grants under this competition. The 
maximum score for all of these criteria is 100 points. The maximum 
score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses.
    (a) Need for project. (19 points). (1) The Secretary considers the 
need for the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the need for the proposed project the Secretary 
considers 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.
    (b) Significance. (19 points). (1) The Secretary considers the 
significance of the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the 
Secretary considers the likelihood that the proposed project will 
result in system change or improvement.
    (c) Quality of the project design. (19 points). (1) The Secretary 
considers the quality of the design of the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
    (ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is 
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target 
population or other identified needs.
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained program of training in the field.
    (iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project 
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.
    (v) The extent to which the proposed project will establish 
linkages with other appropriate agencies and organizations providing 
services to the target population.
    (vi) 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.
    (d) Quality of project personnel. (8 points). (1) The Secretary 
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed 
project.
    (2) 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.
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of key project personnel.
    (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
    (e) Adequacy of resources. (8 points). (1) The Secretary considers 
the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.
    (2) 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 relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
    (iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project.
    (iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to 
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed 
project.
    (v) The potential for continued support of the project after 
Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated 
commitment of appropriate entities to this type of support.
    (f) Quality of the management plan. (8 points). (1) The Secretary 
considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
    (2) In determining 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) 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.
    (g) Quality of the project evaluation. (19 points). (1) The 
Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of 
the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the 
proposed project.
    (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for 
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
    (iii) 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.
    (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    Competitive Preference: Within this absolute priority, we will give 
the following competitive preference under section 606 of IDEA and 34 
CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) to applications that are otherwise eligible for 
funding under this priority:
    Up to ten (10) points based on the effectiveness of the applicant's 
strategies for employing and advancing in employment qualified 
individuals with disabilities as project employees in project 
activities as required under paragraph (a) of the ``General 
Requirements'' section of this notice. In determining the effectiveness 
of those strategies, we may consider the applicant's past success in 
pursuit of this goal.
    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.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the 
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
    One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an 
intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The 
Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local 
governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial 
assistance.

[[Page 7552]]

    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
actions for this program.
    Applicants must contact the appropriate State Single Point of 
Contact (SPOC) to find out about, and to comply with, the State's 
process under Executive Order 12372. Applicants proposing to perform 
activities in more than one State should immediately contact the SPOC 
for each of those States and follow the procedure established in each 
State under the Executive Order. See the latest official SPOC list on 
the Website of the Office of Management and Budget at the following 
address: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html In States that 
have not established a process or chosen a program for review, State, 
areawide, regional, and local entities may submit comments directly to 
the Department.
    Any State Process Recommendation and other comments submitted by a 
State SPOC and any comments from State, areawide, regional, and local 
entities must be mailed or hand-delivered by the date indicated in this 
notice to the following address: The Secretary, E.O. 12372--CFDA# 
84.323A, 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. (Washington, DC time) 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 six copies of the application on or 
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application 
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA#84.323A), 7th and D Streets, SW., Room 
3633, Regional Office Building #3, Washington, DC 20202-4725. or
    (2) Hand-deliver the original and six 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# 
84.323A), Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, 
SW., Washington, DC 20202-4725.
    The Application Control Center accepts application deliveries daily 
between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time), except Saturdays, 
Sundays, and Federal holidays. The Center accepts application 
deliveries through the D Street entrance only. A person delivering an 
application must show identification to enter the building.
    (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.
    (2) 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) 708-9493.
    (3) If your application is late, we will notify you that we will 
not consider the application.
    (4) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not 
provided by the Department--in Item 4 of the Application for Federal 
Assistance (ED 424 (exp.11/30/2004)) the CFDA number and suffix letter, 
if any, of the competition under which the application is being 
submitted.

Application Instructions and Forms

    The appendix to this notice is divided into three parts, plus a 
statement regarding estimated public reporting burden, additional non-
regulatory guidance, and various assurances, certifications, and 
required documentation. 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. 
11-2001)) and instructions.
    Part II: Budget Information--Non-Construction Programs (ED Form No. 
524) and instructions. The budget section of the application form 
requires all applicants for multi-year projects to provide detailed 
budget information for the total grant period requested. The Department 
will establish, at the time of initial award, the funding levels for 
each year of the grant award. By requesting detailed budget information 
in the initial application for the total grant period, the need for a 
formal noncompeting continuation application in the remaining years has 
been eliminated. A performance report will be required annually to 
determine substantial progress, rather than a non-competing 
continuation application.
    Part III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials

    The following forms and other items must be included in the 
application:
    a. Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
    b. Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B) and 
instructions.
    c. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and 
Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (ED 
80-0013).
    d. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and 
Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED 80-0014) and 
instructions. (Note: ED Form GCS-0014 is intended for the use of 
grantees and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
    e. Certification of Eligibility for Federal Assistance in Certain 
Programs (ED 80-0016).
    f. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL) (Rev. 7-
97) and instructions.
    g. Table of Contents.
    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. All applicants must submit ONE 
original signed application, including ink signatures on all forms and 
assurances, and THREE copies of the application. Please mark each 
application as ``original'' or ``copy''. No grant may be awarded unless 
a completed application has been received. FOR APPLICATIONS AND GENERAL 
INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for applications and general information 
should be addressed to the Grants and Contracts Services Team,

[[Page 7553]]

400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3317, Switzer Building, Washington, DC 
20202-2641. The preferred method for requesting information is to FAX 
your request to: (202) 205-8717. Telephone: (202) 260-9182. Individuals 
who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD 
number: (202) 205-8953.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of this notice or 
the application packages referred to in this notice in an alternative 
format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by 
contacting the Department as listed above. However, the Department is 
not able to reproduce in an alternative 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 the following site: 
www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister
    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at the previous site. If you have questions about using 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/nara/index.html


    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1405, 1461, 1472, 1474, and 1487.

    Dated: February 13 2002.
Robert H. Pasternack,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Instructions for Estimated Public Reporting Burden

    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 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. 1820-0620. The time required to 
complete this information collection is estimated to average between 
50-130 hours 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 or suggestions for 
improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, 
Washington, DC 20202-4651. If you have any comments or concerns 
regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write 
directly to: Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-2641.

Application Narrative

    The narrative should address fully all aspects of the selection 
criteria in the order listed and should give detailed information 
regarding each criterion. Do not simply paraphrase the criteria. 
Provide position descriptions, not resumes.

Budget

    Budget line items must support the goals and objectives of the 
proposed project and be directly applicable to the program design and 
all other project components.

Final Application Preparation

    Use the above checklist to verify that all items are addressed. 
Prepare one original with an original signature, and include six 
additional copies. Do not use elaborate bindings or covers. The 
application must be mailed to the Application Control Center (ACC) and 
postmarked by the deadline date of February 15, 2002.

Questions and Answers

    Following is a series of questions and answers that will serve as 
guidance for State educational agency (SEA) in completing the grant 
application for a State Improvement Grant (SIG) as authorized by the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The questions were 
chosen to provide additional insight into the statutory requirements 
contained in the grant application. The questions were generated from a 
number of sources including parents of students with disabilities, 
Regional Resource Centers, the Federal Resource Center, State Directors 
of Special Education, SEA staff and staff from the Office of Special 
Education Programs.

Eligible Applicants

1. Who May Apply for a State Improvement Grant?
    A State educational agency of one of the 50 States, the District of 
Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or an outlying area 
(United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) \1\ (sections 602(18), 
602(27), 652(a), and 655(a)(1)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Unless otherwise noted, the term ``State'' refers to the 50 
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico 
and the outlying areas (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Can Two or More SEAs Apply Jointly for a SIG?
    No. A State applying for a State Improvement Grant must submit an 
individual application. However, included in the application will be a 
description of how: (1) The State will work to develop collaborative 
agreements with other States for the joint support and development of 
programs to prepare personnel for which there is not sufficient demand 
within a single State to justify support or development of this type of 
program of preparation; and (2) the State will work in collaboration 
with other States, particularly neighboring States, to address the lack 
of uniformity and reciprocity in the credentialing of teachers and 
other personnel (section 653(c)(3)(D)(iv) and (v)).

Partners

3. With Whom Is the State Supposed To Form Partnerships and How Are the 
Partnerships Structured?
    Part D Subpart 1--State Program Improvement Grants for Children 
with Disabilities, section 652(b) describes three types of State 
partners. In order to be considered for a State Improvement Grant, a 
State educational agency must establish a partnership with individuals 
and organizations considered ``Required Partners.'' Required partners 
are made up of two subsets of partners--those called ``Contractual 
partners'' and those called ``Other partners.'' The SEA's contractual 
partners are local educational agencies and other State agencies 
involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with 
disabilities. These partners are called contractual because they must 
be parties to a formal ``partnership agreement'' that is explained 
further below in question four.
    Other partners include individuals and organizations involved in, 
and concerned with, the education of children with disabilities, with 
whom the SEA works in partnership to implement the State improvement 
grant. Other partners may be, but the SEA is not required to make them, 
parties to the formal partnership agreement. Those ``other partners'' 
may include the Governor; parents of children with disabilities; 
parents of nondisabled

[[Page 7554]]

children; individuals with disabilities; organizations representing 
individuals with disabilities and their parents, such as the parent 
training and information centers; \2\ community-based and other 
nonprofit organizations involved in the education and employment of 
individuals with disabilities; the lead State agency for Part C; 
general and special education teachers, and early intervention 
personnel; the State advisory panel established under Part B; the State 
interagency coordinating council established under Part C; and 
institutions of higher education (IHEs) within the State. The State is 
encouraged to only partner with those IHEs that are currently 
implementing or, based on the partnership Agreement, will develop and 
implement, training programs that are consistent with the principles of 
IDEA Amendments of 1997 (e.g., training that facilitates access to the 
general education curriculum; training that facilitates inclusionary 
practices; joint training of general educators, special educators and 
parents, where appropriate; training that targets pedagogical practices 
that focus on accommodating and modifying instruction to meet State 
standards). Based on the needs assessment, the State must focus at 
least 75% of the funds received under the State Improvement Grant on 
the professional development and training of regular education, special 
education, or related services personnel (only 50% of the funds must be 
used on professional development if the State can demonstrate to the 
Department that it has sufficient personnel; see question 13 for 
additional clarification). In order to ensure that the perspectives of 
school based staff are represented in the grant activities, the State 
is encouraged to incorporate into its partnership agreement and 
partnership activities, professional organizations that negotiate for 
and may represent school-based staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ States in which Community Parent Resource Centers are 
located are encouraged to include these organizations as ``other 
partners.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to required partners, the SEA, at its option, may 
include as partner's individuals and organizations called ``Optional 
Partners''. The SEA may include ``optional partners'' as parties to the 
formal partnership agreement or work in partnership with them, without 
them being parties to the partnership agreement. Those optional 
partners may include individuals knowledgeable about vocational 
education, the State agency for higher education, the State vocational 
rehabilitation agency, public agencies with jurisdiction in the areas 
of health, mental health, social services, and juvenile justice and 
other individuals.
4. What Is the Partnership Agreement and What Must It Include?
    Each State's application must include a description of the 
partnership agreement entered into by the SEA with its contractual 
partners and with any ``other'' and ``optional'' partners who will be 
parties to the partnership agreement. As specified in the grant 
application package, the partnership agreement must specify the nature 
and extent of the partnership among the SEA, the LEAs, and other State 
agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with 
disabilities. It must specify the respective roles of each member of 
the partnership in the implementation of the proposed State improvement 
grant. The partnership agreement must also specify how the SEA, LEAs, 
and other State agencies identified above, will work in partnership 
with other persons and organizations involved in, and concerned with, 
the education of children with disabilities (these would be the ``other 
partners'' and any ``optional partners''), and must specify the 
respective roles of each of these persons and organizations (section 
653(c)(1)(B)).
    The partnership agreement must indicate that it is in effect for 
the period of the grant. The terms of the partnership agreement will 
determine whether the SEA will award subgrants or contracts to any of 
the partners listed in section 654(a)(2)(A).
5. What Is the Connection Between the Partnership Agreement and the 
SEA's Use of Funds?
    The SEA must, as appropriate, award contracts or subgrants to LEAs, 
IHEs, and parent training and information centers identified in the 
partnership agreement to carry out the State improvement grant 
activities. To carry out the State improvement grant activities, the 
SEA may also award contracts and subgrants to other public and private 
entities, including the lead agency under Part C and other agencies 
that are partners, as well as public and private entities that are not 
partners. It is anticipated that a SEA will need and desire the 
resources of other individuals and organizations to develop and 
implement all of the systemic change, technical assistance, in-service 
and pre-service training, dissemination and assessment activities 
designated in the State improvement grant application. There is, 
however, no required amount of funds that must be used for contracts or 
subgrants (section 654(a)(2)).

Funding Availability and Levels

6. What are the grant amounts to States?
    We must make a grant to each State educational agency whose 
application we selected for funding under this subpart in an amount for 
each fiscal year that is: (1) Not less than $530,000, nor more than 
$2,120,000, in the case of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and 
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and (2) not less than $84,800, in the 
case of an outlying area (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American 
Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (Section 
655(a)). This means that the Department will reject and will not 
consider any application that proposes a budget that exceeds the 
maximum award amount or is less than the minimum award amount for any 
single budget period of 12 months.
7. How Will Decisions Be Made Regarding the Amount of Funds That States 
Will Receive If Approved for a State Improvement Grant?
    The Department will set the amount of each grant, within the limits 
outlined in the response to question 6, after considering: (1) The 
relative population of the State; (2) the types of activities proposed 
by the State; and (3) the amount of funds available for making the 
grants (section 655(c)). Using the same considerations, (but without 
the increase in the minimum and maximum awards to account for inflation 
that we have added for this competition) we funded successful 
applications for fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000 at the following 
levels:


North Dakota............................................        $500,000
Vermont.................................................         500,000
Wyoming.................................................         500,000
Alaska..................................................         550,000
Montana.................................................         550,000
Nebraska................................................         575,816
Utah....................................................         578,551
Maine...................................................         600,000
New Hampshire...........................................         600,000
Hawaii..................................................         600,000
Idaho...................................................         625,000
Oklahoma................................................         814,000
Oregon..................................................         850,000
Iowa....................................................         875,526
New Mexico..............................................         880,000
Kansas..................................................         900,000
Connecticut.............................................         920,000
Kentucky................................................       1,000,000
Washington..............................................       1,088,288
Massachusetts...........................................       1,009,000
Minnesota...............................................       1,015,000
Alabama.................................................       1,025,000
Georgia.................................................       1,060,000
Maryland................................................       1,095,000
Louisiana...............................................       1,100,000
Missouri................................................       1,145,000
New Jersey..............................................       1,200,000

[[Page 7555]]

 
North Carolina..........................................       1,210,000
Virginia................................................       1,240,000
Ohio....................................................       1,320,000
Pennsylvania............................................       1,320,000
Michigan................................................       1,320,000
Illinois................................................       1,400,000
Florida.................................................       1,550,000
New York................................................       1,650,000
California..............................................       1,840,000
 

8. How Will the Connection Between Grant Amounts and ``Need'' Be 
Determined?
    As previously stated in the response to question 7, we must set the 
amount of each grant after considering: (1) The relative population of 
the State; (2) the types of activities proposed by the State or 
outlying area; and (3) the amount of funds available for making the 
grants. ``Need'' will be determined through the quality of the needs 
assessment performed under section 653(b) including: (i) An analysis of 
all information, reasonably available to the State educational agency, 
on the performance of children with disabilities in the State; (ii) an 
analysis of State and local needs for professional development for 
personnel to serve children with disabilities; (iii) an analysis of the 
major findings of the Department's most recent reviews of State 
compliance, as they relate to improving results for children with 
disabilities; and (iv) an analysis of other information, for example, 
findings made by the Department's Office for Civil Rights, reasonably 
available to the State, on the effectiveness of the State's systems of 
early intervention, special education, and general education in meeting 
the needs of children with disabilities.
9. What We Will Consider In Making An Award On a Competitive Basis?
    Using the selection criteria identified elsewhere in this 
application package, we expect to select for funding applications from 
States that demonstrate a need for improvement and effective strategies 
to meet those State needs. The application should show how the State 
plans to fulfill the purpose of the State Improvement Grant, which is 
to assist State educational agencies and their partners in reforming 
and improving their systems for providing educational, early 
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for 
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of 
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with 
disabilities. We will give priority to applications on the basis of 
need, as indicated by information from the findings of Federal 
compliance reviews (section 653(d)).

Improvement Strategies and Use of Funds

10. Can Funds From the State Improvement Grants Be Distributed to LEAs 
on a Competitive Basis?
    Yes. The statute does not provide a particular method for States to 
use when distributing State Improvement Grant funds to LEAs or other 
entities. When awarding and administering subgrants, under 34 CFR 
80.37(a), the State must follow State law and procedures. As long as 
the SEA's proposal to contract or subgrant SIG funds is consistent with 
the partnership agreement and the funds are used to support the 
activities specified in the approved grant application, there is no 
statutory prohibition against the funds being distributed to LEAs on a 
competitive basis.
11. Can Charter Schools Be Involved as Partners in the State 
Improvement Grant?
    Yes. Charter schools are schools under contract--or charter--
between a public agency and groups of parents, teachers, community 
leaders or others who want to create alternatives and choice within the 
public school system. Charter schools can be involved as partners in 
the State Improvement Grant, either as an LEA or as part of an existing 
LEA, consistent with the State charter schools law.
12. Does the ``Service Obligation'' Apply to the Use of State 
Improvement Grant Funds If They Are Being Used for Scholarships?
    No. The ``service obligation'' contained under the personnel 
preparation discretionary grant program provides that a recipient of a 
scholarship funded by the personnel preparation program under section 
673(b), (c), (e), and to the extent appropriate (d), must subsequently 
perform work in the field in which they were trained or repay the cost 
of the financial assistance. The service obligation only applies to 
scholarships awarded under the personnel preparation program. However, 
consistent with State law, a SEA may impose its own service obligation.
13. Can Funds Be Used To Prepare Early Intervention Personnel?
    Yes, but only in limited circumstances. Under section 654(b)(1), a 
State educational agency that receives a grant must use not less than 
75 percent of the funds it receives under the grant for any fiscal year 
to work with other States on common certification criteria or to ensure 
that there are sufficient regular education, special education, and 
related services personnel who have the skills and knowledge necessary 
to meet the needs of children with disabilities and developmental goals 
of young children. This section ensures that based on the needs 
assessment, the State focuses at least 75% of the funds received under 
the State Improvement Grant on the professional development and 
training of regular education, special education, or related services 
personnel. Only 50% of the funds must be used on professional 
development if the State can demonstrate to the Department that it has 
sufficient personnel. Training that prepares personnel to deliver early 
intervention services that could not also be considered regular 
education, special education, or related services would not be a 
permissible use of the 75%, or 50% as the case may be, of the funds. 
However, it would be permissible for early intervention personnel to 
participate in training in those areas of special education and related 
services that would be useful to them, even if the training is funded 
using the 75% of the funds. There is no limitation on the use of the 
remaining 25% of the funds received under the SIG; it can be used to 
train personnel to provide early intervention services or for any other 
activity in an approved SIG.
14. How Does a State Demonstrate That It Meets the Requirement To Use 
at Least 75% (or 50% If Applicable) of the Grant Funds for Professional 
Development?
    States should structure the presentation of their budget so that 
the Department can easily determine that the State has met the 75% or 
50% requirement as the case may be.
15. What Is the Relationship of the SIG to the State Set Aside Under 
Part B?
    In order to carry out the activities proposed in the State's SIG 
application, a State may choose to supplement the State Improvement 
Grant award with funds from the IDEA Part B State set aside (i.e., the 
portion of the IDEA, Part B grant awards retained for use by the SEA 
under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act for discretionary 
purposes).
16. Can Funds From Sources Other Than the SIG Be Used To Support the 
Required Activities for Awards Under This Program?
    Yes. In addition to the SIG award, funds from other sources (e.g., 
other IDEA discretionary grants, Part B State set aside funds, 
preschool grants) may be used, so long as those activities are 
permissible under the funding statute

[[Page 7556]]

and regulations to carry out any activities described in the State's 
SIG application. States may also use funds from private sources (e.g. 
foundations) to carry out activities described in the State's 
application. In its State Improvement Plan, the State must describe the 
amount and nature of funds from any other sources, including the Part B 
funds retained for use under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act and 
Part D discretionary funds that will be committed to the SIG program.
17. Can SIG Funds Be Used for Direct Services to Children With 
Disabilities?
    Yes. The statute does not forbid the use of SIG funds for direct 
services to children with disabilities; however, funding for these 
services must come from the 25% or 50% of the grant award, as the case 
may be, not obligated by statute to fund professional development 
activities or to work with other States on common certification 
criteria. In addition, the need for direct services must be one of the 
critical aspects of early intervention, general education and special 
education identified in the State's need assessment. The direct 
services improvement strategy must be described in the States' 
application and be consistent with the purpose of the grant, which is 
to assist State educational agencies and their partners in reforming 
and improving their systems for providing educational, early 
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for 
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of 
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with 
disabilities.

Strategies Used To Address Identified Needs

18. Is Interstate Personnel Preparation Mandatory?
    No. The State is required to describe how it will work to develop 
collaborative agreements with other States for the joint support and 
development of programs to prepare personnel for which there is not 
sufficient demand within the State to justify support or development of 
this type of program of preparation (section 653(c)(3)(D)(iv)). If the 
State demonstrates, through its needs assessment, that there is 
sufficient demand within the State to support its own personnel 
preparation programs, then interstate collaborative agreements are not 
required.
19. Is Training of General Education Personnel Required?
    Yes. In its application, the State is required to include a 
description of how the State will prepare general as well as special 
education personnel with the content knowledge and collaborative skills 
needed to meet the needs of children with disabilities (section 
653(c)(3)(D)(i)).
20. Is Training of Parents Required?
    Yes. In its application, the State is required to include a 
description of how the State will provide for the joint training of 
parents and special education, related services, and general education 
personnel (section 653(c)(3)(D)(x)).

Role of Regional Resource Center/Technical Assistance and Dissemination 
Projects

21. What Role Can the Regional Resource Center (RRC) Play in the 
Development of the State Improvement Grant Application?
    The RRC is encouraged to provide general technical assistance to 
States in the development of their State improvement grant application. 
An RRC is funded to provide technical assistance and resources to all 
States within its region and must do so on an equitable basis across 
those States. Helping States improve their special education programs 
is the central mission of the RRCs and many State activities related to 
the State Improvement Grant program will be crucial in these 
improvement efforts. It would be inappropriate, however, for an RRC to 
help a State in drafting its grant application or even to provide 
technical assistance on strategies to improve the competitiveness of a 
State's application because it could be viewed as providing a 
competitive advantage to one potential applicant over another. On the 
other hand, helping States, for example, with data analyses, needs 
assessments, and facilitating meetings concerning planning the States' 
improvement activities could be, except as noted above, a part of the 
RRC's technical assistance activities to the States in their region. 
RRCs can also assist States in their implementation of a State 
Improvement Grant once those grants are awarded.
22. Can the State Use SIG Funds To Subcontract or Contract With the 
University or Entity in Which the RRC Is Located To Carry Out SIG 
Activities?
    Yes. The State can use SIG funds to subgrant or contract with the 
University or entity in which the RRC is located to carry out SIG 
activities. However, the University or other entity would need to 
ensure that personnel time and other resources covered by the RRC's 
cooperative agreement with the Department are not used to work on SIG 
activities performed under the subgrant or contract and that work done 
under the other subcontract or contract is not represented as being 
performed as part of the cooperative agreement with the Department of 
Education.
23. Can Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) Projects Funded 
by OSEP Play a Role in SIG Activities?
    Similarly to RRCs, TA&D projects funded by OSEP must ensure that 
the services they provide are fairly and evenhandedly available to 
their respective audience (under the terms of their OSEP funding 
agreement/grant/contract) in all States, that the proposed SIG activity 
is permissible under the terms of the particular Project's funding 
agreement/ grant/contract/ with OSEP and that projects do not accept 
SIG funds under contract or grant with an SEA for activities they are 
currently receiving Federal funds to provide. In addition, TA&D 
projects, like the RRCs, should not engage in activities that could be 
seen as providing a competitive advantage to any one State over others 
in the SIG competition.

Relationship Between State Improvement Grant and Other Federal Statutes 
and Requirements

24. What Is the Link Between the Comprehensive System of Personnel 
Development (CSPD) and the SIG? What Are the Similarities and 
Differences?
    The requirements for a CSPD as amended by IDEA Amendments of 1997 
must be implemented by July 1, 1998 regardless of whether or not a 
State receives a SIG. Under section 612(a)(14) of IDEA, in order to be 
eligible for funding under Part B, a State must have in effect a 
comprehensive system of personnel development that is designed to 
ensure an adequate supply of qualified special education, regular 
education, related services, and early intervention personnel and that 
meets the requirements contained in the personnel development sections 
of the State Improvement Plan addressing needs assessment and 
improvement strategies. It is intended that the CSPD meet the SIG 
personnel development requirements so that it may serve as the 
framework for the State's personnel development part of a SIG grant 
application.

[[Page 7557]]

25. To What Extent Does the State Improvement Grant Proposal Have To Be 
Linked to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and 
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973?
    To the ``maximum extent possible'' State improvement grant 
proposals must be linked to State plans under ESEA and the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The IDEA Amendments of 1997 emphasize that 
children with disabilities have access to the general curriculum and 
general educational reforms. Although the legislation does not mention 
integration with any other State plans under any other Federal statute, 
because the State improvement grant proposal is focused on systems 
change for students with disabilities, integration with relevant State 
plans or projects would be beneficial (section 653(a)(2)(A)).
26. What Is the Relationship Between the Performance Goals and 
Indicators a State Must Have To Be Eligible for Part B and the State 
Improvement Grant Proposal?
    Under Part B (section 612(a)(16)), in order to be eligible to 
receive financial assistance under Part B, the State must have in place 
by July 1, 1998 performance goals for children with disabilities that 
must promote the purposes of the IDEA and be consistent, to the maximum 
extent appropriate, with other goals and standards developed for 
children established by the State and performance indicators to assess 
progress toward achieving those goals. A State must have developed 
those performance goals and indicators in order to apply for a State 
Improvement Grant because in conducting the needs assessment required 
as part of its application, the State must identify those critical 
aspects of early intervention, general education, and special education 
programs that must be improved to enable children with disabilities to 
meet the performance goals and indicators established by the State for 
the performance of children with disabilities under section 612(a)(16). 
In submitting the required SIG performance reports to the Department 
under section 653(f), the State must describe the progress of the State 
in meeting the performance goals established under section 612(a)(16), 
analyze the effectiveness of the State's strategies in meeting those 
goals, and identify any changes in the strategies needed to improve its 
performance.

Monitoring and Corrective Action Plans

27. How Is the State Improvement Grant Aligned With Federal Compliance 
Reviews?
    There are three areas in which the State Improvement Grant aligns 
with Federal compliance reviews. First, the State improvement plan must 
include an analysis of the major findings of the Department's most 
recent reviews of State compliance, as they relate to improving results 
for children with disabilities (section 653(b)(2)(C)). The second is 
that the State improvement plan must include a description of 
strategies that will address systemic problems identified in Federal 
compliance reviews, including shortages of qualified personnel (section 
653(c)(3)(E)). The third area of alignment with monitoring is that in 
determining competitive awards we will give priority to applications on 
the basis of need, as indicated by information from the findings of 
Federal compliance reviews (section 653(d)(2)).
28. Can the State Improvement Grant Funds Be Used To Address 
Deficiencies Identified in Federal Compliance Reviews?
    Yes, if the activities to address the deficiencies are consistent 
with the purposes of the grant and described in the State's 
application. If, for example, a Federal compliance review identified 
that a personnel shortage impacted on the provision of a free 
appropriate public education to students with disabilities, then it 
would be consistent with the purposes of the grant to use grant funds 
to address the personnel shortage.

Applications, Length of Awards, and Reapplication

29. Can the First Grant Be Written as a Planning Grant?
    No. The purpose of the SIG program is to assist State educational 
agencies, and their partners referred to in section 652(b), in 
reforming and improving their systems for providing educational, early 
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for 
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of 
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with 
disabilities. In order to be funded a State must include in its 
application improvement strategies that were developed to address State 
and local needs identified in the State needs assessment. The purpose 
of the needs assessment is to provide the necessary information to 
facilitate the development of a State improvement plan that identifies 
those critical aspects of early intervention, general education, and 
special education programs that must be improved to enable children 
with disabilities to meet the goals established by the State under 
section 612(a)(16). In conjunction with the needs assessment, the 
improvement strategies (section 653(c)) subsumed in the State 
improvement grant proposal constitute the State's plan for the use of 
SIG funds.
30. What Grant Period Can a State Request in Its Initial Application?
    A State may request a grant of from one to five years. However, we 
may award a grant that is shorter than the State requests, but not less 
than one year, if the State's application does not sufficiently justify 
the full requested duration.
31. If a Project Is Funded for Less Than Five Years, Can It Be Extended 
Later?
    No, with the exception of relatively short ``no-cost'' extensions 
that are sometimes given to allow the completion of project activities. 
These extensions do not award new funds or approve new activities.
32. After a State Completes One State Improvement Grant, Can It Apply 
for Another? If So, Will It Compete Against All Applicants or only 
Against Other States That Have Received Previous Grants?
    Yes, a State can apply for another SIG after it completes one. It 
will be in competition with all applicants, not just those with 
previous grants. We will give priority to applications on the basis of 
need (section 653(d)(2)).
33. If a State Applies Unsuccessfully in One Year, Will It Be Able To 
Apply Again?
    Yes.
34. Will a Project Be Approved and Funded All at Once or a Year at a 
Time?
    At the time of the initial grant award, the project duration of one 
to five years will be determined and budgets for all years of the grant 
will be established. However, funds can only be awarded one-year at a 
time. States receiving multi-year grants will submit annual performance 
reports to demonstrate that their grants are making substantial 
progress. Funding for project years after the first will be based, in 
part, on these reports. This is not part of the competitive process of 
awarding funds, and it is expected that funding will be continued each 
year for the duration of the project, provided that substantial

[[Page 7558]]

progress is demonstrated and that Congress continues to fund the 
program.
35. Does Funding Have To Be the Same for All Years of the Project?
    No, but it cannot exceed $2,120,000 or be less than $530,000 or 
$84,800 in the case of an outlying territory.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U

[[Page 7559]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.005


[[Page 7560]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.006


[[Page 7561]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.007


[[Page 7562]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.008


[[Page 7563]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.009


[[Page 7564]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.010


[[Page 7565]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.011


[[Page 7566]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.012


[[Page 7567]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.013


[[Page 7568]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.014


[[Page 7569]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.015


[[Page 7570]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.016


[[Page 7571]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.017


[[Page 7572]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.018


[[Page 7573]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.019


[[Page 7574]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.020

[FR Doc. 02-3995 Filed 2-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C