[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 42 (Monday, March 4, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9745-9756]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-5088]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

[Program Announcement No. ACF/ACYF/HS-UP, EHS-UP&HSGS 2002-03]


Fiscal Year 2002 Discretionary Announcement for Head Start-
University Partnerships Research Projects, Early Head Start-University 
Partnerships Research Projects, and Head Start Graduate Student 
Research Grants; Availability of Funds and Request for Applications

AGENCY: Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), ACF, 
DHHS.

ACTION: Announcement of the availability of funds and request for 
applications for research by university faculty or other nonprofit 
institutions (Priority Areas 1.01 and 1.02) and doctoral level graduate 
students (Priority Area 1.03) in partnership with Head Start programs.

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

SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), 
Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF) and Office of 
Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE) announce the availability of 
funds for three initiatives: Priority Area 1.01: Head Start-University 
Partnerships for research activities to develop and test models that 
use child outcomes to support continuous program improvement in local 
Head Start programs; Priority Area 1.02: Early Head Start-University 
Partnerships for research activities to support the development of 
infant-toddler mental health; Priority Area 1.03: Graduate Student 
Research Grants to support field-initiated research activities.

DATES: The closing time and date for receipt of applications is 5 p.m. 
(Eastern Time Zone), May 3, 2002. Applications received after 5 p.m. on 
the deadline date will be classified as late.

ADDRESSES: Mail applications to: Head Start Research Support Team, 1749 
Old Meadow Road, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102.
    Hand delivered, courier or overnight delivery applications are 
accepted during the normal working hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, on or prior to the established closing date.
    All packages should be clearly labeled as follows:

Application for Head Start-University Partnerships, or
Application for Early Head Start-University Partnerships, or

[[Page 9746]]

Application for Head Start Graduate Student Grants, as appropriate.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Head Start Research Support 
Technical Assistance Team (1-877) 663-0250, is available to answer 
questions regarding application requirements and to refer you to the 
appropriate contact person in ACYF for programmatic questions. You may 
e-mail your questions to: [email protected].
    In order to determine the number of expert reviewers that will be 
necessary, if you are going to submit an application, you must send a 
post card, call or e-mail with the following information: the name, 
address, telephone and fax number, e-mail address of the principal 
investigator, and the name of the university or non-profit institution 
at least four weeks prior to the submission deadline date to:

Head Start Research Support Team, 1749 Old Meadow Road, Suite 600, 
McLean, VA 22102. (1-877) 663-0250.
E-mail [email protected].

Part I. Purpose and Background

A. Purpose

    The purpose of this announcement is to announce the availability of 
funds for three initiatives: Priority Area 1.01: Head Start-University 
Partnerships for research activities to develop and test models that 
use child outcomes to support continuous program improvement in local 
Head Start programs; Priority Area 1.02: Early Head Start-University 
Partnerships for research activities to support the development of 
infant-toddler mental health; Priority Area 1.03: Graduate Student 
Research Grants to support field-initiated research activities.

B. Background

Priority 1.01: Head Start-University Partnerships
    In 2001, Head Start marked the sixth year of implementing its 
system of Program Performance Measures. From initial planning in 1995 
to the ongoing data collection on a second national cohort of Head 
Start children that began in fall 2000, Head Start has made dramatic 
progress in developing an outcome-oriented accountability system. This 
approach combines nationally representative data on programs, families, 
and children with program-level reporting and monitoring and is based 
on a consensus-driven set of criteria for program accountability.
    Specifically, the Program Performance Measures were developed in 
accordance with the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Head 
Start Quality and Expansion, the mandate of section 641A(b) of the Head 
Start Act (42 USC 9831 et seq.) as reauthorized in 1994, and the 
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (Pub. L. 103-62). 
In fall 1997, Head Start launched the Family and Child Experiences 
Survey (FACES), a study with a nationally representative sample of 3200 
children and families in 40 Head Start programs. FACES describes the 
characteristics, experiences and outcomes for children and families 
served by Head Start, and also observes the relationships among family, 
staff, and program characteristics and child outcomes. Continuing with 
a second nationally representative sample in fall 2000, FACES now 
provides Head Start with the ability to examine all facets of key 
outcomes and children's school readiness on an ongoing basis. For 
further information see http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/core/ongoing_research/faces/faces_intro.html.
    The reauthorization of Head Start in 1998 further specified child 
outcomes that local programs should use in their self-assessments and 
that should be reviewed as part of the monitoring process. In two 
information memoranda (ACYF-IM-00-03, January 31, 2000 and ACYF-IM-00-
18, August 10, 2000) Head Start outlined the legislative changes and 
provided guidance on the use of child outcomes in program self-
assessments. As part of the second memorandum, the Head Start Bureau 
provided a Child Outcomes Framework of eight Domains based on the Head 
Start Program Performance Standards: Language Development, Literacy, 
Mathematics, Science, Creative Arts, Social and Emotional Development, 
Approaches Toward Learning, and Physical Health and Development. 
Programs are expected to ensure that their system for ongoing 
assessment of children includes collection of data in each of these 
Domains. In addition, because they are legislatively mandated, programs 
must gather and analyze data on certain specific Domain Elements or 
Indicators of progress in language, literacy, and numeracy skills. For 
further information see: http://www.hskids-tmsc.org/publications/im00/im00_18.htm.
    Under these new accountability requirements, local programs must 
develop a system to analyze data on child outcomes that centers on 
patterns of progress for groups of children over the course of the Head 
Start year. At a minimum, data analysis should compare progress when 
children enter the program, at a mid-point, and when they complete the 
program year. In most programs, analysis of child outcomes should be 
based on data from all children enrolled, but approaches that include 
representative sampling of children can also be considered. Child 
assessment should provide objective, accurate, consistent and credible 
information, including ensuring that tools are appropriate in terms of 
age, language, and cultural background. Grantees should fully include 
children with identified disabilities in the child assessment system, 
with appropriate accommodation of the assessment tool(s). Training and 
oversight for personnel who administer assessments, record progress, 
and analyze and report on data are key to ensure quality and 
usefulness. Strategies for incorporating data on patterns of child 
outcomes into overall program self-assessment and reporting are also 
addressed in the guidance.
    These requirements call for programs to develop, refine and 
maintain systems which meet requirements both for individualizing 
services to meet child and family needs, and for providing information 
for improving services. The overall goal of the child assessment 
initiative is to create improved learning environments for children 
served by Head Start. Through the National Leadership Conference held 
in December 2000, and a number of subsequent leadership and training 
and technical assistance conferences, the Head Start Bureau has further 
specified its expectations for grantees.
    This new initiative creates an opportunity for building model 
partnerships between program staff and researchers based in 
universities and other non-profit research institutions. Grantees are 
experts on the available strengths and needs of their families and 
communities, as well as the particular histories of their programs. 
Grantees can usually benefit from technical expertise in all aspects of 
the initiative, from selection of assessment tools appropriate for 
their curriculum, methods for administering assessments, methods for 
measuring classroom quality, approaches for data entry and management, 
techniques for data analysis, and of course, training of staff who will 
be responsible for each phase. Such partnerships necessitate that 
researchers become familiar with the goals, approaches, and existing 
systems of grantee self-assessment and child assessment, and build on 
these to develop logic models or theories of change. They also require 
that the technical experts encourage professional development of 
program personnel to become increasingly adept at managing

[[Page 9747]]

the system on their own. The successful partnership will be able to 
provide research-based evidence that the intervention is using 
information on child outcomes to improve the early learning 
environments for Head Start children.
    The lessons learned from model partnerships can then be 
disseminated through training and technical assistance, both through 
the Head Start network and by other means. Examples of products 
expected from these partnerships include, but are not limited to: 
Methodological approaches for sampling, assessment and analysis at the 
local program level; plans for reporting data to teachers, parents, and 
management staff; data management systems; integrated curricular and 
assessment approaches; professional development approaches including 
coursework and training materials; and plans for disseminating 
information to the broader Head Start and child development 
communities.
Cooperative Agreements
    For Priority Area 1.01 ACYF is utilizing a cooperative agreement 
mechanism, a funding mechanism that allows substantial Federal 
involvement in the activities undertaken with Federal financial 
support. Details of the responsibilities, relationships and governance 
of the cooperative agreement will be spelled out in the terms and 
conditions of the award. The specific responsibilities of the Federal 
staff and project staff will be identified and agreed upon prior to the 
award of each cooperative agreement. At a minimum, however, the 
following roles and responsibilities will characterize the Research 
Partnerships:
1. Responsibilities of the Grantee
The Grantee
    Conducts a local intervention and research project designed to 
develop, evaluate, refine and assist in dissemination of models to 
support continuous program improvement through use of child outcome 
measures.
    Cooperates with one or more local Head Start programs in the 
design, implementation, and evaluation of the intervention.
    Participates as a member of the Head Start-University Partnerships 
Research Consortium with other researchers, program partners, and 
Federal staff.
2. Responsibilities of the Federal Staff
Federal Staff
    Provide guidance in the development of the final study design, 
including suggestions for possible cross-site measures.
    Participate as members of the Research Consortium or any policy, 
steering, or other working groups established at the Research 
Consortium level to facilitate accomplishment of the project goals.
    Facilitate communication and cooperation among the Research 
Consortium members.
    Provide logistical support to facilitate meetings of the Research 
Consortium.
Priority Area 1.02: Early Head Start-University Partnerships
    In recognition of the importance of the first three years of life, 
the 1994 Head Start Reauthorization legislation expanded Head Start to 
serve pregnant women and families with infants and toddlers. From 
initial funding in 1995 to the 664 programs in operation today, Early 
Head Start continues the legacy of Head Start in providing 
comprehensive services to low-income children, families and 
communities. While programs are flexibly designed to provide services 
in response to the needs of families in the community, all programs are 
required to provide home visits, child development, health and 
nutrition services for young children and pregnant women and to develop 
family and community partnerships.
    Early Head Start also continues the long-standing commitment of 
Head Start programs to supporting the social and emotional well-being 
of children. However, programs serving infants and toddlers often 
struggle to understand the emotional and mental health needs of very 
young children and their families and how to address these needs. In 
fact, the relatively young (but growing) field of infant mental health 
has only recently begun to shed light on the importance of assessing 
and addressing these needs as well as providing guidance through 
empirically validated practice. In response to questions from program 
staff and members of the technical assistance network and at the urging 
of the Early Head Start Technical Work Group, in October 2000 the 
Administration on Children, Youth and Families held a national meeting, 
the Infant Mental Health Forum. For further information see http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/core/ongoing_research/imh/imh_intro.html. The 
primary goals of the Forum were to address the role of Early Head Start 
and the Migrant Head Start program along with their community child 
care partners in promoting infant mental health in all children, 
preventing problems in at-risk populations, and accessing treatment for 
those with identified needs. The Forum allowed for the sharing of 
information from leaders in the field of infant mental health and the 
sharing of promising practices from four Early Head Start programs.
    One of the challenges of the Infant Mental Health Forum was to come 
to a common definition of the term ``infant mental health.'' The term 
itself causes many to feel unease as it links the suffering, 
maladjustment and stigma associated with mental health to the innocence 
and newness of infancy. However, others advocate using the term because 
of the inclusion of the mental health professions as well as an 
acknowledgement of the suffering that infants can experience. Charles 
Zeanah, a keynote speaker at the Forum used the following definition: 
``Infant mental health may be defined as the state of emotional and 
social competence in young children who are developing appropriately 
within the interrelated contexts of biology, relationship, and 
culture.'' The definition stresses the developmental appropriateness of 
behaviors and the relationship context of understanding behaviors and 
intervention.
    The participants in the Forum identified a rationale for addressing 
the mental health of young children and their parents, principles to 
guide the work, and suggested action steps in order for programs to be 
able to more fully address the needs of young children and their 
families. The forum participants stressed the need to addresses issues 
of cultural competence, adequacy of available screening and assessment 
tools, as well as populations with special needs. Several areas of need 
were highlighted, including program guidance, public awareness, public 
policy, professional development, reflective supervision, cross-
disciplinary collaboration, financing, and research and evaluation. In 
response to those suggestions, the Head Start Bureau has commissioned 
the Early Head Start National Resource Center to engage in consensus 
building, training and dissemination. This announcement builds on the 
suggestion to conduct research at demonstration sites to identify 
interventions that are effective in promoting infant mental health and 
to better understand what works for whom, how and why.
    The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project has also 
provided information on the needs of the children and families served 
as well as areas in which the program is effective. For further 
information see http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/core/ongoing_research/
ehs/ehs--intro.html. When children were two years old,

[[Page 9748]]

Early Head Start children were functioning significantly better across 
a range of domains including cognitive, language and social-emotional 
than children in a randomly assigned control group. There were also 
significant impacts on parents. For instance, Early Head Start mothers 
report lower levels of parenting stress and family conflict, read to 
their children more, provide more enriched home environments, and seem 
to use less harsh discipline techniques. From observations of parent-
child interactions, there is some indication that Early Head Start 
mothers provide more optimal levels of support and sensitivity, 
although no differences were observed in child behaviors. However, 
there was no indication that Early Head Start made a difference in 
rates of maternal or paternal depression, the one mental illness 
assessed. Furthermore, although approximately half of the mothers 
entering Early Head Start scored above the ``at-risk for depression'' 
cutoff on a measure of depressive symptoms, Early Head Start families 
were not more likely to be accessing mental health services than the 
control group (both approximately 17%). So, while programs are not 
affecting depression or improving access to mental health services, 
they may bolster the parent-child relationship and help protect 
children from the problems associated with parental depression.
    Building on the needs identified both by practitioners in Early 
Head Start and the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project, 
and at the suggestion of the Infant Mental Health Forum participants, 
this announcement will support the identification of empirically-based 
interventions that are enhancements to Early Head Start programs, 
designed to promote the mental health of young children and their 
families. Each partnership team of one or more Early Head Start 
grantees and a research organization will identify or further develop a 
particular, self-selected approach toward enhancing program practices, 
based on the needs of the population served, which they will then 
implement along with an evaluation. However, the evaluation shall 
include aspects of the intervention delivery (services delivered) and 
program context (structures and supports necessary to implement the 
intervention) as well as outcomes for children and families and 
associations between services and outcomes. The evaluation design 
should be responsive to the nature of the intervention, the state of 
development of the intervention, the program context, and other 
factors. Possible designs include (but are not limited to) change over 
time (pre to post testing), quasi-experimental methods (e.g., non-
randomized comparison group), or random assignment. As part of the 
evaluation, assessment tools that are comfortable (with training) for 
staff to use and that provide information that is useful for planning 
and referral must be identified. Staff training may be needed on use of 
the assessment tools as well as a broader training in the understanding 
of mental health disorders to aid in recognition of possible problems. 
During the assessment and implementation process there will certainly 
be families who need additional and specialized treatments. Partners 
should also identify protocols for helping those families who need 
additional services access those services. The ultimate goal for this 
work is to disseminate identified interventions and measures through 
training and technical assistance.
Cooperative Agreements
    For Priority Area 1.02 ACYF is utilizing a cooperative agreement 
mechanism, a funding mechanism that allows substantial Federal 
involvement in the activities undertaken with Federal financial 
support. Details of the responsibilities, relationships and governance 
of the cooperative agreement will be spelled out in the terms and 
conditions of the award. The specific responsibilities of the Federal 
staff and project staff will be identified and agreed upon prior to the 
award of each cooperative agreement. At a minimum, however, the 
following roles and responsibilities will characterize the Research 
Partnerships:
1. Responsibilities of the Grantee
The Grantee
    Conducts a local intervention and research project designed to 
implement, evaluate, refine and assist in dissemination of 
interventions to support the mental health of infants/toddlers and 
their families.
    Uses common assessment battery to be determined by Early Head Start 
University Partnerships Research Consortium (consisting of Research 
Grantees, program partners, and Federal staff). Grantees are also 
encouraged to use site-specific measures as well.
    Cooperates with one or more local Early Head Start programs in the 
design, implementation, and evaluation of the intervention.
    Participates as a member of the Early Head Start University 
Partnerships Research Consortium with other researchers, program 
partners, and Federal staff.
2. Responsibilities of the Federal Staff
Federal Staff
    Provide guidance in the development of the final study design, 
including suggestions for possible cross-site measures.
    Participate as members of the Consortium or any policy, steering, 
or other working groups established by the consortium to facilitate 
accomplishment of the project goals.
    Facilitate communication and cooperation among the Consortium 
members.
    Provide logistical support to facilitate meetings of the 
Consortium.
Priority Area 1.03: Head Start Graduate Student Grants
    Since 1991, the Head Start Bureau has explicitly supported the 
relationship between established Head Start researchers and their 
graduate students by awarding research grants, on behalf of specific 
graduate students, to conduct research in Head Start communities. As 
many previously funded Head Start graduate students have continued to 
make significant contributions to the early childhood research field as 
they have pursued their careers, this funding mechanism is an important 
research capacity-building effort. Mentor-student relationships will 
help foster the intellectual and professional development of the next 
generation of researchers who will advance the scientific knowledge 
base needed to improve services for Head Start children and families.
    To ensure that future research is responsive to the changing needs 
of low-income families, graduate students need strong and positive role 
models. Therefore, Head Start's support of the partnership between 
students and their mentors is essential. The unique partnership that is 
forged between mentor and student, within the Head Start research 
context, serves as a model for the establishment of other partnerships 
within the community (e.g., researcher-Head Start staff, researcher-
family). This foundation helps foster the skills necessary to build a 
graduate student's trajectory of successful partnership-building and 
contributions to the scientific community. Within this nurturing and 
supportive relationship, young researchers are empowered to become 
autonomous researchers, learning both theory as well as the process of 
interacting with the various members and relevant organizations within 
their communities. In an ever-changing, dynamic society, graduate 
student researchers need to be flexible in

[[Page 9749]]

adapting to the changing needs of the diverse populations and 
communities. The mentoring relationship serves to support graduate 
students as they actively engage in this learning process, preparing 
them to be exemplary and responsible research scientists in the 
community.
    Thus, the goals of the Head Start Graduate Student Research Grant 
program can be summarized as follows:
    1. Provide direct support for graduate students as a way of 
encouraging the conduct of research with Head Start populations, thus 
contributing to the knowledge base about the best approaches for 
delivering services to diverse, low-income families and their children;
    2. Promote mentor-student relationships which support students' 
graduate training and professional development as young researchers 
engaged in policy-relevant, applied research;
    3. Emphasize the importance of developing true working partnerships 
with Head Start programs and other relevant entities within the 
community, thereby fostering skills necessary to build a student's 
trajectory of successful partnership-building and contributions to the 
scientific community; and
    4. Support the active communication, networking and collaboration 
among graduate students, their mentors and other prominent researchers 
in the field, both during their graduate training, as well as into the 
early stages of their research careers.
    While the specific topics addressed under these Graduate Student 
Research Grants are intended to be field-initiated, applicants who 
address issues of both local and national significance will be most 
likely to succeed. Some illustrative examples of such topics include, 
but are not limited to the areas of school readiness, children's mental 
health, and strengthening fatherhood and healthy marriages in Head 
Start.
    Unlike the first two priority areas of this announcement, awards 
for Priority Area 1.03 will be funded as research grants rather than as 
cooperative agreements.

Part II. Priority Areas

Statutory Authority

    The Head Start Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq.

CFDA: 93.600

Priority Area 1.01: Head Start-University Partnerships Research 
Projects

    Eligible Applicants: Universities, four-year colleges, and non-
profit institutions on behalf of researchers who hold a doctoral degree 
or equivalent in their respective fields. Faith-based organizations are 
also eligible to apply.

Additional Requirements

     The principal investigator must have a doctorate or 
equivalent degree in the respective field, conduct research as a 
primary professional responsibility, and have published or have been 
accepted for publication in the major peer-reviewed research journals 
in the field as a first author or second author.
     The proposed intervention plan must be responsive to the 
goal of supporting continuous program improvement through use of child 
outcome data.
     The proposed evaluation plan should specify which measures 
of implementation quality and standardized assessments of child 
development outcomes are to be used.
     The applicant must apply the University's or nonprofit 
institution's off-campus research rates for indirect costs.
     The applicant must enter into a partnership with a Head 
Start program for the purposes of conducting the research.
     The application must contain a letter from the Head Start 
program certifying that they have entered into a partnership with the 
applicant and the application has been reviewed and approved by the 
Policy Council.
     The principal investigator must agree to attend two 
meetings each year in Washington, DC, including Head Start's National 
Research Conference in the summer of 2004.
     The budget should reflect travel funds for such purposes.
     Contact information, including an e-mail address, for the 
principal investigator must be included in the application.
    Project Duration: The announcement is soliciting applications for 
project periods of up to four years. Awards, on a competitive basis, 
will be for the first one-year budget period. Applications for 
continuation of cooperative agreements funded under these awards beyond 
the one-year budget period, but within the established project period, 
will be entertained in subsequent years on a non-competitive basis, 
subject to availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the grantee 
and a determination that continued funding would be in the best 
interest of the Government.
    Federal Share of Project Costs: The Federal share of project costs 
shall not exceed $200,000 for the first 12-month budget period 
inclusive of indirect costs and shall not exceed $200,000 per year for 
the second through fourth 12-month budget periods.
    Matching Requirement: There is no matching requirement.
    Anticipated Number of Projects to be Funded: It is anticipated that 
4-6 projects will be funded.

Priority Area 1.02  Early Head Start-University Partnership Research 
Projects

    Eligible Applicants: Universities, four-year colleges, and non-
profit institutions on behalf of researchers who hold a doctoral degree 
or equivalent in their respective fields. Faith-based organizations are 
also eligible to apply.

Additional Requirements

    1. The principal investigator must have a doctorate or equivalent 
degree in the respective field, conduct research as a primary 
professional responsibility, and have published or have been accepted 
for publication in the major peer-reviewed research journals in the 
field as a first author or second author.
    2. The proposed intervention plan must be responsive to the goal of 
supporting the development of infant-toddler mental health in Early 
Head Start programs. The proposal should address the following 
intervention questions: What is the theoretical justification for the 
intervention? Is the intervention universal or selective? If selective, 
how will participants be identified? What is expected to be the 
preliminary evidence that the intervention is successful? What are the 
expected outcomes (benefits) for children and families? What are the 
mediating and moderating variables that are expected to influence these 
outcomes (logic model or theory of change)? How will the mediating and 
moderating variables and outcomes be measured? How will the age of 
child, gender, disability and other key child characteristics as well 
as family characteristics such as language and culture be addressed?
    3. The proposal should specify the plan to measure implementation 
quality. The proposal should address how the following questions 
regarding intervention delivery will be assessed: How does the 
intervention deviate from existing procedures in the site? What are the 
specific services received by the child/family? Who gets what, from 
whom, and how much? To what extent is the intervention individualized? 
Who is most and least likely to participate? How are specific services 
linked with child and family outcomes? What are the barriers to 
implementation and how are challenges resolved?

[[Page 9750]]

    4. The proposal should specify how the intervention will be 
documented. The proposal should address how the following will be 
assessed: To what extent can procedures be documented and manualized? 
What are the structures and supports necessary to implement the 
intervention? What is the level of education, training and supervision 
that is required of intervention staff? What are key activities that 
are conducted to include or gain support from community stakeholders, 
program administers, policy councils, program staff including teachers, 
home visitors and others, as well as parents and families? What are 
contextual variables that might influence how the intervention is 
implemented (e.g., community factors such as culture, levels of 
poverty, available resources, etc.).
    5. The proposal should specify what assessments of child outcomes 
are to be used and address how program staff will be trained to 
administer assessments.
    6 .The applicant must apply the University's or nonprofit 
institution's off-campus research rates for indirect costs.
    7. The applicant must enter into a partnership with an Early Head 
Start program for the purposes of conducting the research.
    8. The application must contain a letter from the Early Head Start 
program certifying that they have entered into a partnership with the 
applicant and the application has been reviewed and approved by the 
Policy Council.
    9. The principal investigator must agree to attend two meetings 
each year in Washington, DC, including Head Start's National Research 
Conference in the summer of 2004.
    10. The budget should reflect travel funds for such purposes.
    11. Contact information, including an e-mail address, for the 
principal investigator must be included in the application.
    Project Duration: The announcement is soliciting applications for 
project periods of up to four years. Awards, on a competitive basis, 
will be for the first one-year budget period. Applications for 
continuation of cooperative agreements funded under these awards beyond 
the one-year budget period, but within the established project period, 
will be entertained in subsequent years on a non-competitive basis, 
subject to availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the grantee 
and a determination that continued funding would be in the best 
interest of the Government.
    Federal Share of Project Costs: The Federal share of project costs 
shall not exceed $200,000 for the first 12-month budget period 
inclusive of indirect costs and shall not exceed $200,000 per year for 
the second through fourth 12-month budget periods.
    Matching Requirement: There is no matching requirement.
    Anticipated Number of Projects to be Funded: It is anticipated that 
4-6 projects will be funded.

Priority Area 1.03  Head Start Graduate Student Grants

    Eligible Applicants: Institutions of higher education on behalf of 
doctoral-level graduate students. Doctoral students must have completed 
their Master's Degree or equivalent in that field and submitted formal 
notification to ACYF by August 15, 2002. Faith-based organizations are 
also eligible to apply.
    To be eligible to administer the grant on behalf of the student, 
the institution must be fully accredited by one of the regional 
accrediting commissions recognized by the Department of Education and 
the Council on Post-Secondary Accreditation. Although the faculty 
mentor is listed as the Principal Investigator, this grant is intended 
for dissertation research for an individual student. Information about 
both the graduate student and the student's faculty mentor is required 
as part of this application. Any resultant grant award is not 
transferable to another student. The award may not be divided between 
two or more students.

Additional Requirements

     A university faculty member must serve as a mentor to the 
graduate student; this faculty member is listed as the ``Principal 
Investigator.'' The application must include a letter from this faculty 
member stating that s/he has reviewed and approved the application, the 
status of the project as dissertation research, the student's status in 
the doctoral program, and a description of how the faculty member will 
regularly monitor the student's work.
     The research project must be an independent study 
conducted by the individual graduate student or well-defined portions 
of a larger study currently being conducted by a faculty member. The 
graduate student must have primary responsibility for the study 
described in the application.
     The graduate student must enter into a partnership with a 
Head Start or Early Head Start program for the purposes of conducting 
the research.
     The application must contain (A) a letter from the Head 
Start or Early Head Start program certifying that they have entered 
into a partnership with the applicant and (B) a letter certifying that 
the application has been reviewed and approved by the Policy Council.
     The graduate student applicant must agree to attend two 
meetings each year of the grant. The first meeting consists of the 
annual meeting for all Head Start Graduate Students. This grantee 
meeting is typically scheduled during the Summer or Fall of each year 
and is held in Washington, DC. The second meeting each year consists of 
the Biennial Head Start National Research Conference in Washington, DC 
(in June or July 2004) or the biennial meeting of the Society for 
Research in Child Development-SRCD (in April, 2003). The budget should 
reflect travel funds for the graduate student for each of these 4 
meetings.
     Given the strong emphasis that is placed on supporting the 
mentor-student relationship, the faculty mentors are strongly 
encouraged to attend and participate in the activities of the annual 
grantee meeting for all Head Start Graduate Students. The budget should 
reflect travel funds for such purposes, as appropriate. However, if the 
faculty mentor does plan to attend the annual Graduate Student grantee 
meeting, but will utilize another source of travel funds, such 
arrangements should be noted in the application.
     Due to the small amount of the grant, the applicant is 
strongly encouraged to waive indirect costs.
     Contact information, including an e-mail address, for both 
the graduate student applicant and faculty mentor must be included in 
the application.
     The graduate student must write the application.
    Project Duration: The announcement for priority area 1.03 is 
soliciting applications for project periods up to two years. Awards, on 
a competitive basis, will be for a one-year budget period, although 
project periods may be for two years. It should be noted, that if the 
graduate student, on whose behalf the University is applying, expects 
to receive his/her degree by the end of the first one-year budget 
period, the applicant should request a one-year project period only. A 
second year budget-period will not be granted if the student has 
graduated by the end of the first year. Applications for continuation 
grants funded under these awards beyond the one-year budget period, but 
within the two-year project period, will be entertained in the 
subsequent year on a non-competitive basis, subject to availability of 
funds, satisfactory progress of the grantee and a determination that 
continued funding would be in the best interest of the Government.

[[Page 9751]]

    Federal Share of Project Costs: The maximum Federal share will 
range between $10,000-$20,000 for the first 12-month budget period or a 
maximum of $40,000 for a 2-year project period.
    Matching Requirement: There is no matching requirement.
    Anticipated Number of Projects to be Funded: It is anticipated that 
between 5 and 10 projects will be funded. It is unlikely that any 
individual university will be funded for more than one graduate student 
research grant if there are at least 10 applications from different 
institutions that qualify for support.

Part III. General Instructions for All Priority Areas

Project Description

Purpose
    The project description provides a major means by which an 
application is evaluated and ranked to compete with other applications 
for available assistance. The project description should be concise and 
complete and should address the activity for which Federal funds are 
being requested. Supporting documents should be included where they can 
present information clearly and succinctly. In preparing your project 
description, all information requested through each specific evaluation 
criteria should be provided. Awarding offices use this and other 
information in making their funding recommendations. It is important, 
therefore, that this information be included in the application.
General Instructions
    ACF is particularly interested in specific factual information and 
statements of measurable goals in quantitative terms. Project 
descriptions are evaluated on the basis of substance, not length. 
Extensive exhibits are not required. Cross referencing should be used 
rather than repetition. Supporting information concerning activities 
that will not be directly funded by the grant or information that does 
not directly pertain to an integral part of the grant funded activity 
should be placed in an appendix.
    Pages should be numbered and a table of contents should be included 
for easy reference.
Introduction
    Applicants required to submit a full project description shall 
prepare the project description statement in accordance with the 
following instructions and the specified evaluation criteria. The 
instructions give a broad overview of what your project description 
should include while the evaluation criteria expands and clarifies more 
program-specific information that is needed.
Project Summary/Abstract
    Provide a summary of the project description (a page or less) with 
reference to the funding request.
Results or Benefits Expected
    Identify the results and benefits to be derived. For example, using 
a comprehensive review of the current literature, justify how the 
research questions and the findings will add new knowledge to the field 
and specifically how the project will improve services for children and 
families.
Approach
    Outline a plan of action which describes the scope and detail of 
how the proposed work will be accomplished. Account for all functions 
or activities identified in the application. Cite factors which might 
accelerate or decelerate the work and state your reason for taking the 
proposed approach rather than others. Describe any unusual features of 
the project such as design or technological innovations, reductions in 
cost or time, or extraordinary social and community involvement.
    Provide quantitative quarterly projections of the accomplishments 
to be achieved for each function or activity in such terms as the 
proportion of data collection expected to be completed. When 
accomplishments cannot be quantified by activity or function, list them 
in chronological order to show the schedule of accomplishments and 
their target dates.
    If any data is to be collected, maintained, and/or disseminated, 
clearance may be required from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB). This clearance pertains to any ``collection of information that 
is conducted or sponsored by ACF.''
    List organizations, cooperating entities, consultants, or other key 
individuals who will work on the project along with a short description 
of the nature of their effort or contribution.
Additional Information
    Following are requests for additional information that need to be 
included in the application.
    Staff and Position Data. Provide a biographical sketch for each key 
person appointed and a job description for each vacant key position. A 
biographical sketch will also be required for new key staff as 
appointed.
    Organization Profiles.
    Provide information on the applicant organization(s) and 
cooperating partners such as organizational charts, financial 
statements, audit reports or statements from CPAs/Licensed Public 
Accountants, Employer Identification Numbers, names of bond carriers, 
contact persons and telephone numbers, child care licenses and other 
documentation of professional accreditation, information on compliance 
with Federal/State/local government standards, documentation of 
experience in the program area, and other pertinent information. Any 
non-profit organization submitting an application must submit proof of 
its non-profit status in its application at the time of submission. The 
non-profit agency can accomplish this by providing a copy of the 
applicant's listing in the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent 
list of tax-exempt organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the 
IRS code, or by providing a copy of the currently valid IRS tax 
exemption certificate, or by providing a copy of the articles of 
incorporation bearing the seal of the State in which the corporation or 
association is domiciled.
    Dissemination Plan. Provide a plan for distributing reports and 
other project outputs to colleagues and the public. Applicants must 
provide a description of the kind, volume and timing of distribution.
    Budget and Budget Justification. Provide line item detail and 
detailed calculations for each budget object class identified on the 
Budget Information form. Detailed calculations must include estimation 
methods, quantities, unit costs, and other similar quantitative detail 
sufficient for the calculation to be duplicated. The detailed budget 
must also include a breakout by the funding sources identified in Block 
15 of the SF-424.
    Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the 
categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, 
and allocability of the proposed costs.
General
    The following guidelines are for preparing the budget and budget 
justification. Both Federal and non-Federal resources shall be detailed 
and justified in the budget and narrative justification. For purposes 
of preparing the budget and budget justification, ``Federal resources'' 
refers only to the ACF cooperative agreement or grant for which you are 
applying. Non-Federal resources are all other Federal and non-Federal 
resources. It is suggested that

[[Page 9752]]

budget amounts and computations be presented in a columnar format: 
first column, object class categories; second column, Federal budget; 
next column(s), non-Federal budget(s), and last column, total budget. 
The budget justification should be a narrative.
Personnel
    Description: Costs of employee salaries and wages.
    Justification: Identify the project director or principal 
investigator, if known. For each staff person, provide the title, time 
commitment to the project (in months), time commitment to the project 
(as a percentage or full-time equivalent), annual salary, cooperative 
agreement or grant salary, wage rates, etc. Do not include the costs of 
consultants or personnel costs of delegate agencies or of specific 
project(s) or businesses to be financed by the applicant.
Fringe Benefits
    Description: Costs of employee fringe benefits unless treated as 
part of an approved indirect cost rate.
    Justification: Provide a breakdown of the amounts and percentages 
that comprise fringe benefit costs such as health insurance, FICA, 
retirement insurance, taxes, etc.
Travel
    Description: Costs of project-related travel by employees of the 
applicant organization (does not include costs of consultant travel).
    Justification: For each trip, show the total number of traveler(s), 
travel destination, duration of trip, per diem, mileage allowances, if 
privately owned vehicles will be used, and other transportation costs 
and subsistence allowances.
Equipment
    Description: ``Equipment'' means an article of nonexpendable, 
tangible personal property having a useful life of more than one year 
and an acquisition cost which equals or exceeds the lesser of (a) the 
capitalization level established by the organization for the financial 
statement purposes, or (b) $5,000. (Note: Acquisition cost means the 
net invoice unit price of an item of equipment, including the cost of 
any modifications, attachments, accessories, or auxiliary apparatus 
necessary to make it usable for the purpose for which it is acquired. 
Ancillary charges, such as taxes, duty, protective in-transit 
insurance, freight, and installation shall be included in or excluded 
from acquisition cost in accordance with the organization's regular 
written accounting practices.)
    Justification: For each type of equipment requested, provide a 
description of the equipment, the cost per unit, the number of units, 
the total cost, and a plan for use on the project, as well as use or 
disposal of the equipment after the project ends. An applicant 
organization that uses its own definition for equipment should provide 
a copy of its policy or section of its policy which includes the 
equipment definition.
Supplies
    Description: Costs of all tangible personal property other than 
that included under the Equipment category.
    Justification: Specify general categories of supplies and their 
costs. Show computations and provide other information that supports 
the amount requested.
Other
    Enter the total of all other costs. Such costs, where applicable 
and appropriate, may include but are not limited to insurance, food, 
medical and dental costs (non-contractual), professional services 
costs, space and equipment rentals, printing and publication, computer 
use, training costs, such as tuition and stipends, staff development 
costs, and administrative costs.
    Justification: Provide computations, a narrative description and a 
justification for each cost under this category.
Indirect Charges
    Description: Total amount of indirect costs. This category should 
be used only when the applicant currently has an indirect cost rate 
approved by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or 
another cognizant Federal agency.
    Justification: An applicant that will charge indirect costs to the 
cooperative agreement or grant must enclose a copy of the current rate 
agreement. If the applicant organization is in the process of initially 
developing or renegotiating a rate, it should immediately upon 
notification that an award will be made, develop a tentative indirect 
cost rate proposal based on its most recently completed fiscal year in 
accordance with the principles set forth in the cognizant agency's 
guidelines for establishing indirect cost rates, and submit it to the 
cognizant agency. Applicants awaiting approval of their indirect cost 
proposals may also request indirect costs. It should be noted that when 
an indirect cost rate is requested, those costs included in the 
indirect cost pool should not also be charged as direct costs to the 
cooperative agreement or grant. Also, if the applicant is requesting a 
rate which is less than what is allowed under the program, the 
authorized representative of the applicant organization must submit a 
signed acknowledgement that the applicant is accepting a lower rate 
than allowed.
Total Direct Charges, Total Indirect Charges, Total Project Costs
[Self explanatory]

Part IV. Competitive Criteria for Reviewers

A. Criteria for Priority Area 1.01: Head Start-University Partnerships

    Reviewers will consider the following factors when assigning 
points.
1. Results or Benefits Expected  20 Points
     The research questions are clearly stated.
     The extent to which the questions are of importance and 
relevance for low-income children's development and welfare.
     The extent to which the research study makes a significant 
contribution to the knowledge base.
     The extent to which the literature review is current and 
comprehensive and supports the need for the intervention and for its 
evaluation, the questions to be addressed or the hypotheses to be 
tested.
     The extent to which the questions that will be addressed 
or the hypotheses that will be tested are sufficient for meeting the 
stated objectives.
     The extent to which the proposal contains a dissemination 
plan that encompasses both professional and practitioner-oriented 
products.
2. Approach  45 Points
     The extent to which the intervention is adequately 
described, responsive to the key questions outlined in the background 
section above, and represents a research-based, cost effective model 
that meets the goal of using child outcomes data to support program 
improvement.
     The extent to which the research design is appropriate and 
sufficient for addressing the questions of the study.
     The extent to which child outcomes in the comprehensive 
domains of school readiness are the major focus of the study.
     The extent to which the planned research specifies the 
measures to be used, their psychometric properties, and the proposed 
analyses to be conducted.
     The extent to which the planned measures are appropriate 
and sufficient for the questions of the study and the population to be 
studied.

[[Page 9753]]

     The extent to which the planned measures and analyses both 
reflect knowledge and use of state-of-the-art measures and analytic 
techniques and advance the state-of-the art.
     The extent to which the analytic techniques are 
appropriate for the question under consideration.
     The extent to which the proposed sample size is sufficient 
for the study.
     The scope of the project is reasonable for the funds 
available for these cooperative agreements.
     The extent to which the planned approach reflects 
sufficient input from and partnership with the Head Start program.
     The extent to which the planned approach includes 
techniques for successful transfer of the intervention and research to 
an additional site or sites.
     The extent to which the budget and budget justification 
are appropriate for carrying out the proposed project.
3. Staff and Position Data  35 Points
     The extent to which the principal investigator and other 
key research staff possess the research expertise necessary to conduct 
the study as demonstrated in the application and information contained 
in their vitae.
     The principal investigator(s) has earned a doctorate or 
equivalent in the relevant field and has first or second author 
publications in major research journals.
     The extent to which the proposed staff reflect an 
understanding of and sensitivity to the issues of working in a 
community setting and in partnership with Head Start program staff and 
parents.
     The adequacy of the time devoted to this project by the 
principal investigator and other key staff in order to ensure a high 
level of professional input and attention.

B. Criteria for Priority Area 1.0-2: Early Head Start-University 
Partnerships

    Reviewers will consider the following factors when assigning 
points.
1. Results or Benefits Expected  20 Points
     The research questions are clearly stated.
     The extent to which the proposed intervention is justified 
as meeting the needs of low-income children and families.
     The extent to which the research study makes a significant 
contribution to the knowledge base about supporting the mental health 
of low-income infants and toddlers and their families.
     The extent to which the literature review is current and 
comprehensive and justifies the intervention and evaluation plan. The 
extent to which the questions that will be addressed or the hypotheses 
that will be tested are sufficient for meeting the stated objectives.
     The extent to which the proposal contains a dissemination 
plan that encompasses both professional and practitioner-oriented 
products.
2. Approach  45 Points
     The extent to which the intervention is adequately 
described and represents a research-based, cost effective quality 
program enhancement that meets the goal of supporting the mental health 
of children in Early Head Start.
     The extent to which the proposal is responsive to the 
questions outlined in the additional requirements section (especially 
items 2-5).
     The extent to which the research design is appropriate and 
sufficient for addressing the questions of the study (i.e., evaluation 
includes aspects of the intervention delivery (services delivered) and 
program context (structures and supports necessary to implement the 
intervention) as well as outcomes for children and families and 
associations between services and outcomes).
     The extent to which program-usable measures particularly 
of child functioning, are the major focus of the evaluation.
     The extent to which the planned research specifies the 
measures to be used, their psychometric properties, and the analyses to 
be conducted.
     The extent to which the planned measures are appropriate 
and sufficient for the questions of the study and the population to be 
studied.
     The extent to which the planned measures and analyses both 
reflect knowledge and use of state-of-the-art measures and analytic 
techniques and advance the state-of-the art.
     The extent to which the analytic techniques are 
appropriate for the question under consideration.
     The extent to which the proposed sample size is sufficient 
for the study.
     The scope of the project is reasonable for the funds 
available for these cooperative agreements.
     The extent to which the planned approach reflects 
sufficient input from and partnership with the Early Head Start 
program.
     The extent to which the planned approach includes 
techniques for successful documentation and dissemination.
     The extent to which the budget and budget justification 
are appropriate for carrying out the proposed project.
3. Staff and Position Data  35 Points
     The extent to which the principal investigator and other 
key research staff possess the research expertise necessary to 
implement the intervention and conduct the evaluation as demonstrated 
in the application and information contained in their vitae.
     The principal investigator(s) has earned a doctorate or 
equivalent in the relevant field and has first or second author 
publications in major research journals.
     The extent to which the proposed staff reflect an 
understanding of and sensitivity to the issues of working in a 
community setting and in partnership with Early Head Start program 
staff and parents.
     The adequacy of the time devoted to this project by the 
principal investigator and other key staff in order to ensure a high 
level of professional input and attention.

C. Criteria for Priority Area 1.03: Head Start Graduate Student Grants

    Reviewers will consider the following factors when assigning 
points.
1. Results or Benefits Expected  25 Points
     The research questions are clearly stated.
     The extent to which the questions are of importance and 
relevance for low-income children's development and welfare.
     The extent to which the research study makes a significant 
contribution to the knowledge base.
     The extent to which the literature review is current and 
comprehensive and supports the need for the study.
     The extent to which the questions that will be addressed 
or the hypotheses that will be tested are sufficient for meeting the 
stated objectives.
     The extent to which the proposed project is appropriate to 
the student's level of ability and the stated time frame for completing 
the project.
2. Approach  40 Points
     The extent to which there is a discrete project designed 
by the graduate student. If the proposed project is part of a larger 
study designed by others, the approach section should clearly delineate 
the research component to be carried out by the student.
     The extent to which the research design is appropriate and 
sufficient for addressing the questions of the study.

[[Page 9754]]

     The extent to which the planned research specifies the 
measures to be used, their psychometric properties, and the proposed 
analyses to be conducted.
     The extent to which the planned measures have been shown 
to be appropriate and sufficient for the questions of the study, and 
the population to be studied.
     The extent to which the planned measures and analyses both 
reflect knowledge and use of state-of-the-art measures and analytic 
techniques, and advance the state-of-the art, as appropriate.
     The extent to which the analytic techniques are 
appropriate for the question under consideration.
     The extent to which the proposed sample size is sufficient 
to answer the range of proposed research questions for the study.
     The scope of the project is reasonable for the funds 
available and feasible for the time frame specified.
     The extent to which the planned approach reflects 
sufficient written input from and partnership with the Head Start 
program.
     The extent to which the budget and budget justification 
are appropriate for carrying out the proposed project.
3. Staff and Position Data  35 Points
     The extent to which the faculty mentor and graduate 
student possess the research expertise necessary to conduct the study 
as demonstrated in the application and information contained in their 
vitae.
     The principal investigator/faculty mentor has earned a 
doctorate or equivalent in the relevant field and has first or second 
author publications in major research journals.
     The extent to which the faculty mentor and graduate 
student reflect an understanding of and sensitivity to the issues of 
working in a community setting and in partnership with Head Start 
program staff and parents.
     The adequacy of the time devoted to this project by the 
faculty mentor for mentoring the graduate student. The proposal should 
include evidence of the faculty mentor's commitment to mentoring the 
individual graduate student, and as appropriate, willingness to serve 
as a resource to the broader group of Head Start Graduate Students 
funded under this award.

D. The Review Process

    Applications received by the due date will be reviewed and scored 
competitively. Experts in the field, generally persons from outside the 
Federal government, will use the evaluation criteria listed in Part IV 
of this announcement to review and score the applications, also taking 
into account responsiveness to other aspects of the announcement. The 
results of this review are a primary factor in making funding 
decisions. ACF may also solicit comments from ACF Regional Office staff 
and other Federal agencies. These comments, along with those of the 
expert reviewers, will be considered in making funding decisions. In 
selecting successful applicants, consideration may be given to other 
factors including but not limited to geographical distribution.

Part V. Instructions for Submitting Applications

A. Availability of Forms

    Eligible applicants interested in applying for funds must submit a 
complete application including the required forms. In order to be 
considered for a cooperative agreement or grant under this 
announcement, an application must be submitted on the Standard Form 424 
(approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control Number 
0348-0043). Each application must be signed by an individual authorized 
to act for the applicant and to assume responsibility for the 
obligations imposed by the terms and conditions of the cooperative 
agreement or grant award. Applicants requesting financial assistance 
for non-construction projects must file the Standard Form 424B, 
Assurances: Non-Construction Programs (approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget under control number 0348-0040). Applicants must 
sign and return the Standard Form 424B with their application. 
Applicants must provide a certification concerning lobbying. Prior to 
receiving an award in excess of $100,000, applicants shall furnish an 
executed copy of the lobbying certification (approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget under control number 0348-0046). Applicants must 
sign and return the certification with their application.
    Applicants must make the appropriate certification of their 
compliance with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. By signing and 
submitting the application, applicants are providing the certification 
and need not mail back the certification with the application.
    Applicants must make the appropriate certification that they are 
not presently debarred, suspended or otherwise ineligible for award. By 
signing and submitting the application, applicants are providing the 
certification and need not mail back the certification with the 
application.
    Applicants must also understand that they will be held accountable 
for the smoking prohibition included within Pub. L. 103-227, Part C 
Environmental Tobacco Smoke (also known as The Pro-Children's Act of 
1994). A copy of the Federal Register notice which implements the 
smoking prohibition is included with the forms. By signing and 
submitting the application, applicants are providing the certification 
and need not mail back the certification with the application.
    Depending on the activities that are funded under this 
announcement, it is possible that the grantee institution may as a 
result of conducting the project have obligations or be impacted by the 
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 
104-191).
    Applicants will be covered by the terms of the Head Start Act (42 
U.S.C. 9801 et seq.) including section 649(f) that ensures that ``all 
studies, reports, proposals, and data produced or developed with 
Federal funds under this subchapter shall become the property of the 
United States.''
    All applicants for research projects must provide a Protection of 
Human Subjects Assurance as specified in the policy described on the 
HHS Form 596 (approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 
control number 0925-0418). If there is a question regarding the 
applicability of this assurance, contact the Office for Protection from 
Research Risks of the National Institutes of Health at (301)-496-7041. 
Those applying for or currently conducting research projects are 
further advised of the availability of a Certificate of Confidentiality 
through the National Institute of Mental Health of the Department of 
Health and Human Services. To obtain more information and to apply for 
a Certificate of Confidentiality, contact the Division of Extramural 
Activities of the National Institute of Mental Health at (301) 443-
4673. All necessary forms are available on the ACF Web site at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofs/grants/form.htm

B. Proposal Limits

    The proposal should be double-spaced and single-sided on 8 \1/2\" x 
11" plain white paper, with 1'' margins on all sides. Use only a 
standard size font no smaller than 12 pitch throughout the proposal. 
All pages of the proposal (including appendices, resumes, charts, 
references/footnotes, tables, maps and exhibits) must be sequentially 
numbered, beginning on the first page after the budget justification, 
the principal investigator contact

[[Page 9755]]

information and the Table of Contents. The length of the proposal 
starting with page 1 as described above and including appendices and 
resumes must not exceed 60 pages. Anything over 60 pages will be 
removed and not considered by the reviewers. The project abstract 
should not be counted in the 60 pages. Applicants should not submit 
reproductions of larger sized paper that is reduced to meet the size 
requirement. Applicants are requested not to send pamphlets, brochures, 
or other printed material along with their applications as these pose 
copying difficulties. These materials, if submitted, will not be 
included in the review process. In addition, applicants must not submit 
any additional letters of endorsement beyond any that may be required.
    Applicants are encouraged to submit curriculum vitae using 
``Biographical Sketch'' forms used by some government agencies.
    Please note that applicants that do not comply with the 
requirements in the section on ``Eligible Applicants'' will not be 
included in the review process.

C. Checklist for a Complete Application

    The checklist below is for your use to ensure that the application 
package has been properly prepared.

--One original, signed and dated application plus six copies.
--Attachments/Appendices, when included, should be used only to provide 
supporting documentation such as resumes, and letters of agreement/
support.

    A complete application consists of the following items in this 
order:

Front Matter:
     Cover Letter
     Table of Contents
     Principal Investigator including telephone number, fax 
number and e-mail address.
     Project Abstract

    (1) Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424, REV. 4-92);
    (2) Budget information-Non-Construction Programs (SF424A&B REV.4-
92);
    (3) Budget Justification, including subcontract agency budgets;
    (4) Letters (A) from the Head Start program certifying that the 
program is a research partner of the respective applicant and (B) that 
the Policy Council has reviewed and approved the application;
    (5) Application Narrative and Appendices (not to exceed 60 pages);
    (6) Proof of non-profit status. Any non-profit organization 
submitting an application must submit proof of its non-profit status in 
its application at the time of submission. The non-profit organization 
can accomplish this by providing a copy of the applicant's listing in 
the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent list of tax-exempt 
organizations described in section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code or by 
providing a copy of the currently valid IRS tax exemption certificate, 
or by providing a copy of the articles of incorporation bearing the 
seal of incorporation of the State in which the corporation or 
association is domiciled.
    (7) Assurances Non-Construction Programs;
    (8) Certification Regarding Lobbying;
    (9) Where appropriate, a completed SPOC certification with the date 
of SPOC contact entered in line 16, page 1 of the SF 424, REV.4-92;
    (10) Certification of Protection of Human Subjects.

D. Due Date for the Receipt of Applications

    1. Deadline: The closing time and date for receipt of applications 
is 5 p.m. (Eastern Time Zone) (May 3, 2002.). Mailed applications shall 
be considered as meeting an announced deadline if they are received on 
or before the deadline time and date at: Head Start Research Support 
Team, 1749 Old Meadow Road, Suite 600, McLean, VA 22102. (1-877) 663-
0250. E-mail [email protected].

Attention:
    Application for Head Start-University Partnerships, or Application 
for Early Head Start-University Partnerships, or Application for Head 
Start Graduate Student Grants, as appropriate
    Applicants are responsible for mailing applications well in 
advance, when using all mail services, to ensure that the applications 
are received on or before the deadline time and date.
    Applications hand carried by applicants, applicant couriers, or by 
overnight/express mail couriers shall be considered as meeting an 
announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline date, 
between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday-Friday (excluding 
holidays) at the address above. (Applicants are cautioned that express/
overnight mail services do not always deliver as agreed.)
    ACF cannot accommodate transmission of applications by fax or e-
mail. Therefore, applications faxed or e-mailed to ACF will not be 
accepted regardless of date or time of submission and time of receipt.
    2. Late applications: Applications which do not meet the criteria 
above are considered late applications. ACF shall notify each late 
applicant that its application will not be considered in the current 
competition.
    3. Extension of deadlines: ACF may extend an application deadline 
when justified by circumstances such as acts of God (e.g., floods or 
hurricanes), widespread disruptions of mail service, or other 
disruptions of services, such as a prolonged blackout, that affect the 
public at large. A determination to waive or extend deadline 
requirements rests with the Chief Grants Management Officer.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, the 
Department is required to submit to OMB for review and approval any 
reporting and record keeping requirements in regulations including 
program announcements. All information collections within this program 
announcement are approved under the following current valid OMB control 
numbers: 0348-0043, 0348-0044, 0348-0040, 0348-0046, 0925-0418 and 
0970-0139.
    Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated to average 
40 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 
gathering and maintaining the data needed and reviewing the collection 
of information.
    The project description is approved under OMB control number 0970-
0139 which expires 12/31/2003.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.

F. Required Notification of the State Single Point of Contact

    This program is covered under Executive Order 12372, 
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, and 45 CFR part 100, 
Intergovernmental Review of Department of Health and Human Services 
Program and Activities. Under the Order, States may design their own 
processes for reviewing and commenting on proposed Federal assistance 
under covered programs.
    * All States and Territories except Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, 
Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, 
Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, 
Oregon, Palau, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, 
Virginia, Washington, and American Samoa have elected to participate in 
the Executive Order process and have established Single Points of 
Contact (SPOCs). Applicants

[[Page 9756]]

from these twenty-three jurisdictions need take no action regarding 
E.O. 12372. Applicants for projects to be administered by Federally-
recognized Indian Tribes are also exempt from the requirements of E.O. 
12372. Otherwise, applicants should contact their SPOCs as soon as 
possible to alert them of the prospective applications and receive any 
necessary instructions. Applicants must submit any required material to 
the SPOCs as soon as possible so that the program office can obtain and 
review SPOC comments as part of the award process. It is imperative 
that the applicant submit all required materials, if any, to the SPOC 
and indicate the date of this submittal (or the date of contact if no 
submittal is required) on the Standard Form 424, item 16a.
    Under 45 CFR 100.8(a)(2), a SPOC has 60 days from the application 
deadline to comment on proposed new or competing continuation awards.
    SPOCs are encouraged to eliminate the submission of routine 
endorsements as official recommendations.
    Additionally, SPOCs are requested to clearly differentiate between 
mere advisory comments and those official State process recommendations 
which may trigger the accommodate or explain rule.
    When SPOC comments are submitted directly to ACF, they should be 
addressed to: William Wilson, ACYF's Office of Grants Management, Room 
2220 Switzer Building, 330 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: 
Head Start Discretionary Research Grants Announcement. A list of the 
Single Points of Contact for each State and Territory can be found on 
the Web site http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html

    Dated: February 26, 2002.
Joan E. Ohl,
Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
[FR Doc. 02-5088 Filed 3-1-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P