[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35967-35980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12865]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Consolidated State 
Applications Under Section 9302 of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of final requirements.

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

SUMMARY: We announce final requirements for optional State consolidated 
applications submitted under section 9302 of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as reauthorized by the No Child 
Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. 107-110 (NCLB). Submitting a 
consolidated application will allow a State to obtain funds under many 
Federal programs through a single application, rather than through 
separate applications for each program. To receive fiscal year (FY) 
2002 program funds on a timely basis, a State educational agency's 
(SEA's) application will need to be received no later than June 12, 
2002.

DATES: These requirements are effective June 21, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia Kingman, Office of Elementary 
and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland 
Avenue, SW., Room 3E213, Washington, DC 20202-6400. Telephone: (202) 
260-2199. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), 
you may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-
8339.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an 
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer 
diskette) on request to the contact person for information identified 
in the preceding paragraph.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: President Bush signed The No Child Left 
Behind Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 107-110) (NCLB) into law on January 8, 
2002. NCLB, which substantially revised the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), is intended to provide all of America's 
school children with the opportunity and means to achieve academic 
success. It embodies the four key principles of the President's 
education reform plan: (1) Accountability for results, (2) expanded

[[Page 35968]]

State and local flexibility and reduced ``red tape,'' (3) expanded 
choices for parents, and (4) focusing resources on proven educational 
methods, particularly in reading instruction.
    These principles aim to produce fundamental reforms in classrooms 
throughout America. NCLB provides officials and educators at the 
school, school district, and State levels substantial flexibility to 
plan and implement school programs that will help close the achievement 
gap between disadvantaged and minority students and their peers. At the 
same time, the reauthorized Act holds school officials accountable--to 
parents, students, and the public--for achieving results. These and 
other major changes to the ESEA redefine the Federal role in K-12 
education to focus on improving the academic performance of all 
students.
    The full text of this law may be found on the Internet at: http://www.ed.gov/legislation/ESEA02/.
    On March 6, 2002, the Department published in the Federal Register 
a notice of proposed requirements for optional consolidated State 
applications (67 FR 10166). That notice explains the general purpose of 
consolidated State applications that Congress has authorized in ESEA 
sections 9301 and 9302 as an alternative means for States to receive 
finding under most ESEA programs. These provisions authorize the State, 
in consultation with the Governor, to apply for ESEA program funds on 
the basis of a consolidated State application that conforms to the 
criteria and procedures the Department establishes, rather than by 
submitting the individual applications or plans that the ESEA otherwise 
requires.
    The March 6 notice also explained our proposal for using this 
application and the consolidated performance report that States 
thereafter annually would submit, as the basis for a core system of 
ESEA accountability for student achievement. Specifically, we proposed 
that each State adopt (1) six overall ``performance goals'' that cut 
across the ESEA programs, (2) a minimum core of common performance 
indicators for measuring progress toward these goals, and (3) State-
defined performance targets that define when satisfactory progress 
occurs. We also proposed that each State then would collect reliable 
data with which it would determine whether it is meeting its 
performance targets.
    As we explained in the March 6 notice, this proposal was guided by 
a set of basic principles in the ESEA emphasizing that successful 
academic performance depends upon schools that--
    z Provide instruction that, based on rigorous research, will 
improve student achievement;
    z Have highly qualified teachers and principals;
    z Provide a learning environment that is safe, drug-free, and 
conducive to learning; and
    z Are accountable to the public for results.
    The final requirements for consolidated State applications contain 
several significant changes from those we had proposed, which we 
explain in the Analysis of Public Comments that is available on the 
Department's web site at http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/esea/regsandguidance.html.

I. Principal Changes From Our March 6, 2002 Proposal

    In response to our request for public comment, we received 53 
letters of comments and recommendations. On March 28, 2002, the 
Department also conducted a listening session where State officials 
from nine States discussed our proposal. After reviewing all of these 
comments and recommendations, we have made several changes to our 
proposal. The principal changes are the following:

ESEA Accountability System: Appendix A

    We have reduced the number of Goals from six to five, and the 
number of indicators from 17 to ten. The ESEA Goals are now:
    1. By 2013-2014, all students will reach high standards, at a 
minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and 
mathematics.
    2. All limited English proficient students will become proficient 
in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining 
proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics.
    3. By 2005-2006, all students will be taught by highly qualified 
teachers.
    4. All students will be educated in learning environments that are 
safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.
    5. All students will graduate from high school.
    The changes in goals and indicators reflect the following:
Goal 1
    z Modification of Indicators 1.1 and 1.2 to focus on the percentage 
of students in all schools, rather than in Title I schools, in each 
subgroup and in the aggregate who gain proficiency in reading/language 
arts and mathematics.
    z Change of definition of subgroups from those identified in 
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) for adequate yearly progress, to those 
identified in section 1111(h)(1)(C)(i) for reporting State assessment 
results--thus bringing in reporting by migrant status and gender.
    z Withdrawal of proposed Indicators 1.4 and 1.5: ``The percentage 
of migrant students who are enrolled in schools in need of 
improvement,'' and ``The percentage of students that meet or exceed 
State standards for student literacy in technology.''
Proposed Goal 2
    z Withdrawal of proposed Goal 2: ``By 2013-2014, all students will 
be proficient in reading/language arts and mathematics by the end of 
the third grade,'' and Indicator 2.1: ``The percentage of students in 
third grade reading/language arts at grade level or above.''
Goal 2 (Proposed Goal 3)
    z Revision of statement of Goal 2 to include goal of reaching high 
academic standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency in reading/
language arts and mathematics.
    z Revision of Indicator 2.1 (proposed 3.1) to clarify that the 
percentage of limited English proficient students who have attained 
English language by the end of the year is to be determined on a cohort 
basis.
Goal 3 (Proposed Goal 4)
    z Inclusion of a new Indicator 3.3 that focuses on having all 
paraprofessionals become qualified consistent with the requirements of 
ESEA section 1119 (c)-(e).
    z Withdrawal of proposed Indicator 4.3: ``The percentage of 
teachers qualified to use technology for instruction.''
Goal 4 (Proposed Goal 5)
    z Withdrawal of all proposed indicators except Indicator 5.4 (now 
4.1): ``The number of persistently dangerous schools, as defined by the 
State.''
Goal 5 (Proposed Goal 6)
    z Clarification of the two performance indicators, 5.1 and 5.2.
    In addition, we have clarified for which indicator States must 
submit baseline data relative to their performance targets by May 2003, 
and for which indicators they may do so no later than early September 
2003.

State Activities to Implement ESEA Programs: Appendix B

    z For item 1 (state system of standards, assessments, and 
accountability), clarification of information the SEAs must submit

[[Page 35969]]

consistent with ESEA section 1111, and, for each item, whether the SEA 
must do so in June of 2002, no later than May 2003, or at some other 
time.
    z For item 2 (non-formula subgranting), inclusion of a description 
of definition of key ESEA terms that the SEA adopts for each program.
    z For item 5a (assistance for schoolwide programs), inclusion of a 
description of the SEA's actions to modify or eliminate State fiscal 
and accounting barriers so that schools can easily consolidate Federal, 
State, and local funds for schoolwide programs.
    z For item 5 (teacher quality), inclusion in a new item 5c of the 
State's need to describe how it will ensure that all paraprofessionals 
(excluding those working with parents or as translators) attain the 
qualifications in section 1119(c) and (d) by the 2005-2006 school year.
    z For item 6 (state coordination), inclusion of the State's need to 
describe briefly how SEA officials and staff consulted with the 
Governor's office in the development of the State application.

Key Programmatic and Fiscal Information: Appendix C

    z Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies, 
Title I, Part A: Clarification that, for purposes of funds that LEAs 
distribute to schools for supplemental services under ESEA section 
1167(e)(7), States will describe how they will inform LEAs of the 
procedures LEAs must use to distribute these funds, rather than 
describe how the State will distribute these funds.
    z Teacher and Principal Training and Recruitment Fund, Title II, 
Part A: Establishment of a rule that of the one percent available to 
the State for administration and planning, absent an agreement between 
the SEA and the State agency for higher education (SAHE) to the 
contrary, the Department will award the SAHE the greater of--
    1. The amount of FY 2001 funds it had received for administration 
under the predecessor Title II, ESEA Eisenhower Professional 
Development Program, or
    2. Five percent of the amount available each year for subgrants to 
partnerships under ESEA section 2113(a)(2).
    z Enhancing Education Through Technology, Title II, Part D: 
Addition of a new item 5a that SEAs describe program goals, performance 
indicators, performance objectives, and data sources for use in 
assessing program effectiveness in improving access to and use of 
educational technology by students and teachers in support of academic 
achievement.
    z English Language Acquisition and Language Enhancement, Title III, 
Part A: Addition of a new item 6c that SEAs describe the process for 
making subgrants under section 3114(d) to eligible entities that have 
experienced a significant increase in the percentage or number of 
immigrant children and youth.
    z Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities: Reservation of State 
Funds for the Governor, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1, section 4112(a): 
Addition of new items 8b and 8c that SEAs describe (1) performance 
measures, performance indicators, timelines, and baseline data for drug 
and violence prevention programs and activities to be funded under this 
program, and (2) steps the State will use to implement the Uniform 
Management Information and Reporting System (UMIRS) required by ESEA 
section 4112(c)(3).
    z Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities: Community Service 
Grants (Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, section 4126): Adoption of the 
proposed rule that the Department will award grants only to SEAs, after 
they have consulted with their Governors.
    z 21st Century Community Learning Centers (Title IV, Part B): 
Addition of new requirement that the SEA, no later than early September 
2003--
    1. Identify the percentage of students participating in the 21st 
Century Community Learning Centers program who meet or exceed the 
proficient level of performance on State assessments in reading/
language arts and mathematics;
    2. Collect baseline data for the 2002-2003 school year; and
    3. Submit all of these data to the Department.
    z Rural and Low-Income Schools, Title VI, Part B, Subpart 2: 
Inclusion of a description identifying specific measurable goals and 
objectives, and how program funds will help the SEA to meet them.
    All of the changes above are reflected in the specific requirements 
for consolidated State applications that are contained in appendices A-
D of this notice.
    We also have made the following change to the selection criteria 
for the Enhanced Assessment Instruments Competitive Grant Program 
(Title VI, section 6112) announced in appendix E:
    z Revision of the first proposed competitive preference for 
``alternative assessments'' so that it is available for applications 
that can be expected to advance practice significantly in the area of 
increasing the accessibility and validity of assessments for students 
with disabilities or limited English proficiency, or both.
    Finally, we have made the following change to the optional interim 
application for FY 2002 funds under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities State Grants Program, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1 (appendix 
F):
    z Revision of requirements to conform to the revised core set of 
ESEA performance indicators identified in appendix A.
    We have published on the Department's website at http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/esea/regsandguidance.html the substantive comments we 
received, our responses to them, and these changes, as well as more 
minor or technical changes to the requirements for consolidated State 
applications. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor 
changes, or suggested changes in proposed requirements that the law 
does not authorize the Secretary to make.

II. Requirements for Consolidated State Applications

    Each consolidated State application will have four principal 
components: (1) Elements constituting the foundation for a core system 
of ESEA accountability, State components and baseline data (see 
appendix A); (2) a description of key strategies States would use to 
implement the ESEA programs in order to accomplish program purposes; 
(see appendix B); (3) key programmatic and fiscal information that the 
Department needs to review before it awards FY 2002 funds (see appendix 
C); and (4) assurances of the State's adherence to all requirements of 
the programs included in the application (see appendix D).

Summary of the ESEA Accountability System

    A. ``ESEA Performance Goals'' The ESEA performance goals reflect 
the expectations of the ESEA programs. We have identified in appendix A 
five ESEA performance goals that each SEA submitting a consolidated 
application will adopt. These are:
    1. By 2013-2014, all students will reach high standards, at a 
minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and 
mathematics.
    2. All limited English proficient students will become proficient 
in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining 
proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics.
    3. By 2005-2006, all students will be taught by highly qualified 
teachers.

[[Page 35970]]

    4. All students will be educated in learning environments that are 
safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.
    5. All students will graduate from high school.
    These performance goals, like the basic purposes of the ESEA 
programs themselves, fall into three areas: (a) Those that address 
levels of proficiency that all students would meet; (b) those that 
address the special needs of certain populations of students, such as 
limited English proficient students, who are the focus of particular 
ESEA programs; and (c) those that address such factors as qualified 
teachers and safety that are critical to a school's success in 
improving student achievement.
    B. ``ESEA Performance Indicators'' States will use performance 
indicators to measure their progress in meeting the performance goals. 
Along with adopting the five key performance goals identified above, 
States that submit a consolidated application will submit a statement 
that they have adopted, at minimum, a core set of indicators for these 
five performance goals. For example, as explained in appendix A, 
relative to the third ESEA performance goal, ``By 2005-2006, all 
students will be taught by highly qualified teachers,'' all States will 
adopt and use the following indicator:
    EXAMPLE: 3.1. Performance Indicator: ``The percentage of classes 
being taught by ``highly qualified'' teachers (as the term is defined 
in ESEA section 9101(23)), in the aggregate and in `high-poverty' 
schools (as the term is defined in ESEA section 1111(h)(1)(C)(viii)).''
    State adoption of the common core indicators listed in appendix A 
is critical to ensuring that all States are accountable for 
implementing the ESEA programs in ways that contribute significantly to 
the achievement of all students. As with the ESEA performance goals, 
States are free to add their own performance indicators to the core set 
of indicators that the Department has established.
    C. ``Performance targets'' Performance targets define the progress 
a State expects to make at specified points in time with respect to 
each indicator. For example, for indicator 3.1, described in the 
preceding paragraph, a State might adopt as a target: the percentage of 
classes being taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate and 
in high-poverty schools, will increase from the baseline of ``x'' 
percent in school year 2002-2003 to ``y'' percent in school year 2003-
2004, ``z'' percent in school year 2004-2005, etc.
    While all States submitting a consolidated application must adopt 
the core set of ESEA performance goals and indicators in appendix A, 
each State defines and adopts its own performance targets. (See 
appendix A for some examples of performance targets that States might 
choose to use.)
    Finally, the accountability system relies upon collection of data 
that document how well States are succeeding in meeting their 
performance targets. States will describe in their consolidated 
applications their timelines and benchmarks for securing these data, as 
well as their data sources. States also will provide their ``baseline 
data.'' For example, if a State adopted the performance target 
described above, it would identify as its baseline ``the percentage of 
classes being taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate and 
in high-poverty schools, in school year 2002-2003.'' In its annual 
performance report, a State will provide updated data on its progress 
in meeting these performance targets.
    States may include web site references, electronic files, or other 
existing documentation to comply with the requirements listed in the 
application.

Other Requirements for the Consolidated Application

    In addition to the framework for ESEA accountability, a State's 
consolidated application also must include:
    A. A description of key strategies States will use to implement the 
ESEA programs in order to accomplish the purposes of those programs 
(see appendix B);
    B. Key programmatic and fiscal information the Department needs to 
award FY 2002 funds (see appendix C). The information to be included in 
the consolidated State application is a small part of what the ESEA 
program statutes would have a State otherwise provide in individual 
program plans or applications; and
    C. Assurances of the State's adherence to all requirements of the 
programs included in the application (see appendix D). The final 
application package for the consolidated application contains a partial 
list of individual program requirements that are while covered by these 
general assurances, and that we believe warrant special attention.

III. Documentation of Compliance With Program Requirements

    For programs a State chooses to include in a consolidated 
application, ESEA section 9302(a)(2) relieves the State of the need to 
either prepare or submit to the Department separate individual State 
plans or applications that the ESEA would otherwise require in order to 
receive funding on a program-by-program basis. However, section 9302 
contains no authority for the Department to eliminate or waive 
statutory or regulatory requirements that apply to the funds the 
Department awards on the basis of a consolidated application.
    Therefore, whether or not the ESEA specifies program requirements 
as elements of a program-specific plan (or application), a State (or 
LEA) that submits a consolidated application still must (1) comply with 
all requirements for designing and implementing programs, and (2) 
maintain documentation of this compliance. These requirements might 
govern, for example, public input, program implementation, or 
evaluation. Also, a State must comply with, and maintain records of its 
compliance with, requirements of the consolidated application announced 
in this notice.

    (Note: To the extent consistent with State ``open records'' 
statutes, documents demonstrating adherence to ESEA requirements 
will be available to parents, policymakers, and other members of the 
public.)

    In determining whether the statute, regulations, or requirements 
governing the consolidated application requires the State to document 
its plans or planning activities, we suggest that States consider the 
following:
    1. Does the ESEA require the State to develop a plan that is 
separate from the application for funding? For example, does the ESEA 
require that the State include a separate plan, or a description of a 
separate plan, with the application? Or does the ESEA require that a 
State that has received program funding develop or implement a plan of 
this kind?
    If the answer to any of these questions is yes, the State must 
develop that plan and maintain it in its written records, even if the 
State includes the program in its consolidated application.
    2. Does the statute require that a State conduct a specified 
activity? For example, does it require a description of the results of 
a needs assessment or procedures for consulting with others? If so, it 
requires that specific activities (expressed as application content 
requirements) be undertaken--e.g., a needs assessment or consultation, 
and the State would need to maintain documentation showing that it had 
conducted the activity.
    3. Does the law require that a State's individual program plan or 
application describe how activities ``will'' occur only after some 
precondition, such as a review of scientifically-based research?

[[Page 35971]]

    If the answer is yes, the State must conduct those program 
activities after meeting the precondition, and must maintain 
documentation that it has done so.

IV. Consolidation of Federal Funds

    Title VI of the ESEA contains a number of flexibility provisions 
that permit States and LEAs to treat funds received under some programs 
as if received under other programs. In addition, sections 9201-9203 
continue to permit SEAs and LEAs to consolidate administrative funds 
under specified programs. However, beyond the flexibility that these 
provisions offer, our approval of a consolidated State application 
neither authorizes a State or LEA to combine or commingle program funds 
nor eliminates State or LEA responsibilities to keep separate records 
on the use of each program's funds.

V. Data Management Reform

    Starting in 2002, we will work with LEAs and SEAs to establish data 
standards for performance indicators and other information collected 
from States and districts. Toward that end, we will confer with LEA and 
SEA officials, the research community, information technology vendors, 
and other interested parties on ways in which States, LEAs, and schools 
can collect and record useful baseline and follow-up data through an 
Internet-based format. The new format will accommodate the measurement 
of success relative to the various indicators that the Department and 
States have adopted. Future application and reporting guidelines will 
encourage electronic reporting and provide States with additional 
options in fulfilling Federal information requests.

VI. Other Considerations

    The requirements for the content of a State's consolidated 
application recognize that although the NCLB makes significant changes 
to the ESEA, it also builds upon efforts States had begun under both 
the ESEA as previously authorized and other Federal and State 
initiatives. In developing their consolidated applications, States may 
draw upon relevant information and data gathered through these efforts.
    To help States try to save money by working together to implement 
the core system of ESEA accountability, the Department intends to work 
with States to see whether development and use of common or consistent 
data collection systems can reduce costs for each State.

VII. Process for Submitting a Consolidated State Application

    As explained in the March 6 notice of proposed requirements (67 FR 
10168), we recognize the challenges posed by the January 2002 enactment 
of the NCLB. States have a limited time to prepare and submit their 
consolidated applications and to plan for their use of the FY 2002 ESEA 
program funds the Department will distribute this July. In addition, 
the ESEA includes a large number of new requirements that govern a 
State's use of these FY 2002, and the Department needs to ensure that 
States understand them before it awards these funds.
    In balancing thee factors, we have determined that, with the 
exceptions noted in appendix B, each SEA submitting a consolidated 
application must provide the Department certain information in the 
following three stages:
    June 2002 No later than June 12, 2002, the State must submit:
    A. A statement that it: (a) Has adopted the minimum core ESEA goals 
and performance indicators that the Department has established, (b) 
agrees to adopt and include in its May 2003 submission, its own 
performance targets for these indicators, and (c) agrees to include 
baseline data for these indicators in May 2003 or September 2003, 
respectively, as specified in the in the following discussion of the 
schedule for submissions (appendix A);
    B. A description of the key activities and initiatives the State 
will carry out with State funds or ESEA funds reserved for 
administration and State-level activities (appendix B) including--
    z Activities to help achieve its performance targets, i.e., 
information about the State's standards, assessments, and 
accountability system (of which for certain items States will submit 
only timelines in June 2002);
    z Subgranting procedures;
    z Technical assistance, monitoring, and professional development, 
and
    z Activities to promote highly-qualified Teachers in all schools, 
support for schoolwide programs, and effective coordination of Federal 
programs; and
    C. The individual ESEA program descriptions and fiscal information 
that the Department determines are needed in order to ensure program 
integrity (appendix C), and the required statutory assurances and 
certification (appendix D).
    May 2003 No later than early May 2003, the State must submit to the 
Department those performance targets and corresponding baseline data 
that the ESEA requires the State to establish based on the 2001-2002 
school year. The OMB-approved application package identifies those 
performance indicators for which the State must provide its targets and 
baseline data in early May 2003. We will announce a specific due date 
in May 2003 at a later time.
    September 2003 No later than early September 2003, the State must 
submit its performance targets and baseline data that relate to other 
ESEA requirements. These baseline data must reflect either the 2001-
2002 or 2002-2003 school year. The OMB-approved application package 
identifies those performance indicators for which the State must 
provide its targets and indicators no later than early September 2003. 
We will announce a specific due date in September 2003 at a later time.

Other Submission Dates

    Appendix B identifies a limited amount of other information that 
States must submit at a different due date, e.g., submission of the 
State's definition of adequate yearly progress (AYP), as well as how 
the State calculated its ``starting point'' as required for AYP by 
January 31, 2003.

VIII. Programs That May Be Included in a Consolidated Application

    A State may include the following programs in its consolidated 
application:
    Title I, Part A: Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local 
Educational Agencies.
    Title I, Part B, Subpart 3: Even Start Family Literacy.
    Title I, Part C: Education of Migrant Children.
    Title I, Part D: Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children 
and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk.
    Title I, Part F: Comprehensive School Reform.
    Title II, Part A: Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting 
Fund.
    Title II, Part D: Enhancing Education Through Technology.
    Title III, Part A: English Language Acquisition and Language 
Enhancement.
    Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities.
    Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2: Community Service Grants.
    Title IV, Part B: 21st Century Community Learning Centers.
    Title V, Part A: Innovative Programs.
    Title VI, Part B, Subpart 2: Rural and Low-Income Schools.
    In addition, for reasons states in the March 6 Federal Register 
notice, the Secretary has designated both the

[[Page 35972]]

formula and discretionary components of the program supporting 
development of State assessments, authorized in sections 6111 and 6112 
of Title VI, as programs that SEAs may include in their consolidated 
applications. Section 6111, the State Assessment formula grants program 
provides grants to States for development of State assessments and 
related activities. Section 6112, the Enhanced Assessment competitive 
grants program, provides competitive grants to States for development 
of ``enhanced assessment instruments.'' These two programs bear a close 
relationship to the development of a State system of accountability for 
student achievement that is at the heart of the Title I, Part A 
program. The Department's selection criteria and other requirements to 
govern the initial competition under the competitive grant portion of 
the section 61111 program are contained in appendix E. SEAs that choose 
to apply for the competitive grant program must submit their 
applications by September 15, 2002.

IX. Public Participation Requirements

    ESEA section 9304(a)(7) provides that a State must provide the 
public a reasonable opportunity to comment on a consolidated 
application before it is submitted to the Secretary. The procedures 
under which SEAs will secure adequate public participation are to be 
determined under State law. States that are unable to complete their 
public participation requirements, before the June 12, 2002 deadline 
for submitting their consolidated applications, must submit appropriate 
revisions to the applications at the end of the public participation 
process.
    Many of the ESEA program statutes contain provisions that require 
stakeholder or public input into the process of developing program-
specific funding plans or applications. Absent a State's decision to 
include those programs in its consolidated application, it would have 
to develop these individual program plans or applications in ways that 
complied with these public input requirements. The public participation 
requirement in section 9304(a)(7), rather than those program-specific 
public or stakeholder participation requirements, govern the 
development of a consolidated application for all included programs. 
However, as explained in Section IV, States will still need to comply 
with those public and stakeholder participation requirements that, 
under a given program statute, expressly apply to program planning and 
implementation.

X. Consolidated Local Plans or Applications

    ESEA section 9305(a) authorizes LEAs to receive funding from the 
SEA under more than one ``covered program'' through consolidated local 
plans or applications. Section 9305(c) and (d) requires the SEA, in 
consultation with the Governor, to collaborate with LEAs in 
establishing procedures for submission of these plans or applications, 
and to require ``only descriptions, information, assurances, and other 
material that are absolutely necessary for the consideration of the 
[LEA] plan or application.''
    These provisions mirror provisions in section 9302 that govern the 
content and procedures for consolidated State applications. Consistent 
with the statutory language, we believe that SEAs in consultation with 
the Governor and LEAs have wide discretion in fashioning procedures and 
content for these plans or applications that focus on increased student 
achievement and other ESEA goals. However, we stress that LEAs 
submitting consolidated local plans or applications must still 
implement all of the statutory requirements--including record-keeping 
requirements--of the programs included in those plans or applications 
include. See section IV of this notice, ``Documentation of Compliance 
With All Program Requirements.''

XI. Voluntary Submission of Consolidated State Applications

    Development of a consolidated State application is voluntary. It is 
the SEA's decision whether to submit a consolidated application, which 
of the eligible programs to include in it if one is submitted, and 
whether to add, in later submissions, programs that are not included in 
the consolidated application submitted this June for FY 2002 funds. 
(Should an SEA choose to submit an individual, program specific 
application under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities 
program, the program statute (Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1) permits SEAs 
to submit an ``interim'' application in FY 2002, and a comprehensive 
application by FY 2003. Final rules for this interim program 
application are included in appendix F.) Moreover, an SEA that submits 
a consolidated application for FY 2002 funds that does not contain all 
of the information requested can later decide not to submit that 
outstanding information and, instead, submit individual program plans 
or applications that the ESEA, as amended by NCLB, requires.

Executive Order 12866

    This notice has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 
12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed the potential 
costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
    The potential costs associated with the notice are those resulting 
from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary 
for administering this program effectively and efficiently.
    In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative 
and qualitative--of this notice, we have determined that the benefits 
justify the costs.
    We have also determined that this regulatory action does not unduly 
interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of 
their governmental functions.
    Summary of Potential Costs and Benefits: We do not anticipate that 
the application requirements proposed in this notice will impose any 
significant costs on applicants. These proposed requirements provide a 
basis for the Secretary to award funds from a number of different 
Federal programs under a single application. Therefore, the 
requirements would not impose any unfunded mandates on States. The 
benefits of the program are described in the SUMMARY section of this 
notice.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The Secretary certifies that the requirements in this notice would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act Considerations

    The procedures and requirements contained in this notice relate to 
the consolidated State application package that the Department has 
developed under ESEA section 9309. The public may obtain copies of this 
package by calling or writing the individuals identified at the 
beginning of this notice as the Department's contact, or through the 
Department's website: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/esea/regsandguidance.html.
    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB has approved the 
use of these application packages under the following OMB control 
number 1810-0576, expiration date November 30, 2002.

Intergovernmental Review

    These programs are 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

[[Page 35973]]

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.
    This document is intended to provide early notification of our 
specific plans and actions for this program.

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: 
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister.
    To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available 
free at this 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.gov/nara/index.html.


    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7842.

    Dated: May 16, 2002.
Susan B. Neuman,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
Maria H. Ferrier,
Director of English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and 
Academic Achievement for Limited English Proficient Students.

Appendix A: ESEA Performance Goals, Performance Indicators, and State 
Performance Targets

    State and local accountability for the academic achievement of 
all students is central to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The 
consolidated State application builds the framework for a system of 
overall ESEA accountability that is intended to help the public 
understand how well the State is meeting its student achievement 
goals for all students. This system is built around with several key 
elements:
    1. ESEA ``Performance goals'' that the Department has 
established. These goals reflect the basic purposes of the ESEA and 
the programs included in the consolidated application.
    2. ESEA ``Performance indicators'' that the Department has 
established for each ESEA performance goal. States submitting a 
consolidated State application will use these indicators to measure 
their progress in meeting the ESEA performance goals.
    3. ``Performance targets'' that each State will establish. The 
performance targets define the progress a State expects to make at 
specified points in time with respect to each indicator. For 
example, for indicator 3.1, described below, a State might adopt as 
a target: the percentage of classes being taught by highly qualified 
teachers, in the aggregate and in high-poverty schools, will 
increase from the baseline of ``x'' percent in school year 2002-2003 
to ``y'' percent in school year 2003-2004, ``z'' percent in school 
year 2004-2005, etc.
    We identify the following five ESEA performance goals that are 
central to the purposes of the ESEA programs, and performance 
indicators for each of these performance goals. Each State must 
adopt this set of five performance goals and corresponding 
performance indicators. However, a State may include additional 
performance goals and indicators in its application if it desires to 
do so.

Performance Goal 1: All Students Will Reach High Standards, at a 
Minimum Attaining Proficiency or Better in Reading/Language Arts and 
Mathematics by 2013-2014

    1.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of students, in the 
aggregate and for each subgroup, who are at or above the proficient 
level in reading/language arts on the State's assessment. (Note: 
These subgroups are those for which the ESEA requires State 
reporting, as identified in section 1111(h)(1)(C)(i).)
    1.1.1 Example of a State performance target: The percentage of 
students, in the aggregate and in each subgroup, who will be at or 
above the proficient level in reading/language arts consistent with 
the State's annual measurable objectives for ensuring that all 
students reach this level by the end of the 2013-2014 school year.

    Note: The State annual measurable objectives for all students in 
reading/language are the same as those the State includes in its 
definition of adequate yearly progress.


    1.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of students, in the 
aggregate and in each subgroup, who are at or above the proficient 
level in mathematics on the State's assessment. (Note: These 
subgroups are those for which the ESEA requires State reporting, as 
identified in section 1111(h)(1)(C)(i).)
    1.3 Performance indicator: The percentage of Title I schools 
that make adequate yearly progress.
    1.3.1 Example of a State performance target: The percentage of 
Title I schools that make adequate yearly progress will increase by 
``x'' percent each year from the percentage of schools that made 
adequate yearly progress in 2001-2002

Performance Goal 2: All Limited English Proficient Students Will Become 
Proficient in English and Reach High Academic Standards, at a Minimum 
Attaining Proficiency or Better in Reading/Language Arts and 
Mathematics

    2.1 Performance Indicator: The percentage of limited English 
proficient students, determined by cohort, who have attained English 
proficiency by the end of the school year.
    2.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of limited English 
proficient students who are at or above the proficient level in 
reading/language arts on the State's assessment, as reported for 
Performance Indicator 1.1.
    2.3 Performance indicator: The percentage of limited English 
proficient students who are at or above the proficient level in 
mathematics on the State's assessment, as reported for Performance 
Indicator 1.2.

Performance Goal 3: By 2005-2006, All Students Will Be Taught by Highly 
Qualified Teachers

    3.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of classes being 
taught by ``highly qualified'' teachers (as the term is defined in 
ESEA section 9101(23), in the aggregate and in ``high-poverty'' 
schools (as the term is defined in ESEA section 
1111(h)(1)(C)(viii)).
    3.1.1. Example of a State performance target: The percentage of 
classes being taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate 
and in high-poverty schools, will increase from the baseline of 
``x'' percent in 2001-2002 to ``y'' percent in 2002-2003, ``z'' 
percent in 2003-2004, etc.
    3.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of teachers receiving 
high-quality ``professional development'' as the term is defined in 
ESEA section 9101(34).
    3.3 Performance Indicator: The percentage of paraprofessionals 
(excluding those with sole duties as translators and parental 
involvement assistants) who are qualified. (See criteria in section 
1119(c) and (d).)

Performance Goal 4: All Students Will Be Educated in Learning 
Environments That Are Safe, Drug Free, and Conducive to Learning

    4.1 Performance indicator: The number of persistently dangerous 
schools, as defined by the State.

    Note: The lack of other performance indicators from this Goal 4 
demonstrates our difficulty in finding good measures that can 
reliably link indicators of schools that are safe, drug-free, and 
conducive to quality teaching and academic achievement. Students and 
teachers plainly need to work in learning environments that are safe 
and drug-free. Technology, which we had proposed as a subject of 
performance indicators for this goal, like other instructional tools 
can be a powerful means of helping teachers and other school staff 
make a school environment conducive to learning. In determining 
whether individual States and the Nation as a whole are meeting Goal 
4, the Department intends to seek other means of obtaining useful 
information.

Performance Goal 5: All Students Will Graduate From High School

    5.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of students who 
graduate from high school each year with a regular diploma--
disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, disability status, migrant 
status, English proficiency, and status as economically 
disadvantaged--calculated in the same manner as used in National 
Center

[[Page 35974]]

for Education Statistics reports on Common Core of Data.
    5.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of students who drop 
out of high school--disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, 
disability status, migrant status, English proficiency, and status 
as economically disadvantaged--calculated in the same manner as used 
in National Center for Education Statistics reports on Common Core 
of Data. (ESEA section 1907 requires States to report all LEA data 
regarding annual school dropout rates in the State disaggregated by 
race and ethnicity according to procedures that conform with the 
National Center for Education Statistics' (NCES') Common Core of 
Data. Consistent with this requirement, in developing their 
performance targets for Indicator 5.2 States must use NCES' 
definition of ``high school dropout,'' i.e., a student in grade 9-12 
who--
    (a) Was enrolled in the district at some time during the 
previous school year;
    (b) Was not enrolled at the beginning of the succeeding school 
year;
    (c) Has not graduated or completed a program of studies by the 
maximum age established by a State;
    (d) Has not transferred to another public school district or to 
a nonpublic school or to a State-approved educational program; and
    (e) Has not left school because of death, illness, or a school-
approved absence.)

    Note: As it develops regulations or guidance for the Title I, 
Part A program, the Department will determine what, if any, 
modifications to Indicators 5.1 and 5.2 are needed to ensure 
conformance with Title I requirements.


    During 2002, the Department will work with LEAs and SEAs to 
establish data standards for performance indicators and other 
information collected from States and districts. Toward that end, 
the Department will confer with LEA and SEA officials, the research 
community, information technology vendors, and other interested 
parties on ways in which States, LEAs, and schools can collect and 
electronically record useful baseline and follow-up data through an 
Internet-based format. The new format will accommodate indicators 
that the Department and States have adopted to measure success. 
Future application and reporting guidelines will encourage 
electronic reporting and provide States with additional options in 
fulfilling federal information requests.

Appendix B: State Activities To Implement ESEA Programs

    States will conduct a number of activities to ensure effective 
implementation of the ESEA programs included in their consolidated 
applications. Many of the activities may serve multiple programs. 
For example, a State may develop a comprehensive approach to 
monitoring and technical assistance that will be used for several 
(or all) programs. In responding to the items in this section, an 
SEA will indicate the ESEA programs that will benefit from the 
activities it describes. Where applicable, States may include web 
site references, electronic files, or other existing documentation 
to comply with the requirements listed in the application.
    1. Describe the State's system of standards, assessments, and 
accountability and provide evidence that it meets the requirements 
of the ESEA. In doing so--
    a. In the June 2002 submission, provide a timeline of major 
milestones for either--
    i. Adopting challenging content standards in reading/language 
arts and mathematics at each grade level for grades 3 through 8, 
consistent with ESEA section 1111(b)(1), or
    ii. Disseminating grade-level expectations for reading/language 
arts and mathematics for grades 3 through 8 to LEAs and schools if 
the State's academic content standards cover more than one grade 
level.

    (Note: This information must be consistent with the final 
regulations that the Department expects to issue in August 2002.)

    By May 1, 2003, provide evidence that the State has adopted 
standards or disseminated grade-level expectations.
    If the State already has content standards or has disseminated 
grade-level expectations that meet the requirements, provide--
    i. A statement to this effect in the June 2002 submission, and
    ii. Evidence when the Department requests it, which will likely 
be in fall 2002 after the Department issues final regulations and 
guidance.
    b. In the June 2002 submission, provide a timeline of major 
milestones for adopting challenging content standards in science 
that meet the requirements of section 1111(b)(1).
    By May 1, 2003, provide a detailed timeline for the above.
    By May 1, 2006, but as soon as available, provide evidence that 
the State has adopted challenging content standards in science that 
meet the requirements of section 1111(b)(1).
    If the State already has adopted science standards that meet the 
requirements of section 1111(b)(1), provide--
    i. A statement to this effect in the June 2002 submission, and
    ii. Evidence when the Department requests it, which will likely 
be in fall 2002, after the Department issues final regulations and 
guidance.
    c. In the June 2002 submission, provide a timeline of major 
milestones for the development and implementation, in consultation 
with LEAs, of assessments that meet the requirements of section 
1111(b)(3) in the required subjects and grade levels.
    By May 1, 2003, provide a detailed timeline for the above.
    No later than indicated in the following schedule, but as soon 
as available, provide evidence that the State has developed and 
implemented, in consultation with LEAs, assessments that meet the 
requirements of section 1111(b)(3) in the required subjects and 
grade levels.
    If the State already has implemented some of these assessments, 
provide--
    i. A statement to this effect in the June 2002 submission, and
    ii. Evidence when the Department requests it, which will likely 
be in the fall of 2002, after the Department issues final 
regulations and guidance.

Schedule for Assessments

Subject: Mathematics

    Grades: 3-8.
    Implement by: 2005-06.
    Submit evidence by: December 2006.

Subject: Reading/Language Arts

    Grades: 3-8.
    Implement by: 2005-06.
    Submit evidence by: December 2006.

Subject: Science

    Grades: Elementary (3-5); Middle (6-9); High School (10-12).
    Implement by: 2007-2008.
    Submit evidence by: December 2008.
    d. In the June 2002 submission, provide a timeline of major 
milestones for setting, in consultation with LEAs, academic 
achievement standards in mathematics, reading/language arts, and 
science that meet the requirements of section 1111(b)(1).
    By May 2003, provide a detailed timeline for the above.
    No later than indicated in the following schedule, but as soon 
as available, provide evidence that the State, in consultation with 
LEAs, has set academic achievement standards in mathematics, 
reading/language arts, and science that meet the requirements of 
section 1111(b)(1).
    If the State already has implemented some of these academic 
achievement standards, provide--
    i. A statement to this effect in the June 2002 submission, and
    ii. Evidence when the Department requests it, which will likely 
be in the fall of 2002 after the Department issues final regulations 
and guidance.

Schedule for Academic Achievement Standards

Subject: Mathematics

    Grades: 3-8.
    Implement by: 2005-06.
    Submit evidence by: December 2006.

Subject: Reading/Language Arts

    Grades: 3-8.
    Implement by: 2005-06.
    Submit evidence by: December 2006.

Subject: Science

    Grades: Elementary (3-5); Middle (6-9); High School (10-12).
    Implement by: 2007-2008.
    Submit evidence by: December 2008.
    e. By January 31, 2003, describe how the State calculated its 
``starting point'' as required for adequate yearly progress 
consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(E), including data elements and 
procedures for calculations.
    f. By January 31, 2003, provide the State's definition of 
adequate yearly progress. The definition must include:
    i. For the percentage of students meeting or exceeding the 
State's proficient level, provide for both reading/language arts and 
mathematics--
    z The starting point percentage;
    z The intermediate goals;
    z The timeline; and
    z Annual objectives.
    ii. The definition of graduation rate (consistent with section 
1111(b)(2)(c)(vi) and final regulations).
    iii. One academic indicator for elementary and for middle 
schools.

[[Page 35975]]

    iv. Any other (optional) academic indicators.
    g. By January 31, 2003, identify the minimum number of students 
that the State has determined, based on sound statistical 
methodology, to be sufficient to yield statistically reliable 
information for each purpose for which disaggregated data are used 
and justify the determination. (Note: This information must be 
consistent with final regulations, which the Department expects to 
issue in August 2002.)
    h. In the June 2002 submission, provide a plan for how the State 
will implement a single accountability system that uses the same 
criteria, based primarily on assessments consistent with section 
1111(b), for determining whether a school has made adequate yearly 
progress, regardless of whether the school receives Title I, Part A, 
or other Federal funds.
    By May 2003, provide evidence that the State has implemented a 
single accountability system consistent with sections 1111(b) and 
1116.
    i. In the June 2002 submission, identify the languages present 
in the student population to be assessed, the languages in which the 
State administers assessments, and the languages in which the State 
will need to administer assessments. Use the most recent data 
available and identify when these data were collected.
    j. In the June 2002 submission, provide evidence that, beginning 
not later than the school year 2002-2003, LEAs will provide for an 
annual assessment of English proficiency that meets the requirements 
of ESEA sections 1111(b)(7) and 3116(d)(4), including assessment of 
English proficiency in speaking, listening, reading, writing, and 
comprehension. Identify the assessment(s) the State will designate 
for this purpose.
    k. In the June 2002 submission, describe the status of the 
State's effort to establish standards and annual measurable 
achievement objectives under ESEA section 3122(a) that relate to the 
development and attainment of English proficiency by limited English 
proficient children. These standards and objectives must relate to 
the development and attainment of English proficiency in speaking, 
listening, reading, writing, and comprehension and be aligned with 
the State academic content and student academic achievement 
standards as required by ESEA section 1111(b)(1).
    If they are not yet established, describe the State's plan and 
timeline for completing the development of these standards and 
achievement objectives. Include in the May 2003 submission the 
State's annual measurable achievement objectives under ESEA section 
3122(a).
    (Note: Descriptions 2-6 must be included with the State's June 
2002 submission.)
    2. Describe key procedures, selection criteria, interpretations 
provided for any key ESEA terms, and priorities the State will use 
to award competitive subgrants or contracts to the entities and for 
the activities required by the program statutes of applicable 
programs included in the consolidated application. States should 
include a description of how, for each program, these selection 
criteria and priorities will promote improved academic achievement. 
Applicable included programs are:
    z Even Start Family Literacy (Title I, Part B).
    z Education of Migrant Children (Title I, Part C).
    z Prevention and Intervention for Children Who Are Neglected, 
Delinquent, or At-Risk--Local Agency Programs (Title I, Part D, 
Subpart 2).
    z Comprehensive School Reform (Title I, Part F).
    z Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund--subgrants 
to eligible partnerships (Title II, Part A, Subpart 3).
    z Enhanced Education Through Technology (Title II, Part D).
    z Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities--reservation for 
the Governor (Title IV, Part A, section 4112).
    z Community Service Grants (Title IV, Part A, Section 4126).
    z 21st Century Community Learning Centers (Title IV, Part B).
    3. Describe how the State will monitor and provide professional 
development and technical assistance to LEAs, schools, and other 
subgrantees to help these entities implement their programs and meet 
the State's (and those entities' own) performance goals and 
objectives. This description should include the assistance the SEA 
will provide to LEAs, schools, and other subgrantees in identifying 
and implementing effective instructional programs and practices 
based on scientific research.
    4. Describe the Statewide system of support under section 1117 
for ensuring that all schools meet the State's academic content and 
student achievement standards, including how the State will provide 
assistance to low-performing schools.
    5. Describe the activities the State will conduct to--
    a. Help Title I schools make effective use of schoolwide 
programs to improve the achievement of all students, including 
specific steps the SEA is taking and will take to modify or 
eliminate State fiscal and accounting barriers so that schools can 
easily consolidate Federal, State, and local funds for schoolwide 
programs;
    b. Ensure that all teachers, particularly those in high-poverty 
areas and those in schools in need of improvement, are highly 
qualified. This description should include the help the State will 
provide to LEAs and schools to--
    (i) Conduct effective professional development activities;
    (ii) Recruit and hire highly qualified teachers, including those 
licensed or certified through alternative routes; and
    (iii) Retain highly qualified teachers;
    c. Ensure that all paraprofessionals (excluding those working 
with parents or as translators) attain the qualifications in ESEA 
section 1119(c) and (d) by the 2005-2006 school year;
    d. Help LEAs with a high need for technology, high percentages 
or numbers of children in poverty, and low-performing schools to 
form partnerships with other LEAs, institutions of higher education 
(IHEs), libraries, and other private and public for-profit and non-
profit entities with technology expertise to improve the use of 
technology in instruction;
    e. Promote parental and community participation in schools; and
    f. Secure the baseline and follow-up data for the core ESEA 
accountability system discussed in appendix A.
    6. Describe how--
    a. SEA officials and staff consulted with the Governor's office 
in the development of the State application;
    b. State officials will coordinate the various ESEA-funded 
programs with State-level activities the State administers; and
    c. State officials and staff will coordinate with other 
organizations, such as businesses, IHEs, nonprofit organizations, 
and other State agencies, and with other State agencies, including 
the Governor's office, and with other Federal programs (including 
those authorized by Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the 
Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act, the Head Start Act, 
the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, and the McKinney-Vento 
Homeless Assistance Act).
    7. Describe the strategies the State will use to determine, on a 
regular basis, whether LEAs, schools, and other subgrantees are 
making satisfactory progress in meeting State and local goals and 
desired ESEA program outcomes. In doing so, the SEA should also 
describe how it will use data it gathers from subgrantees on how 
well they are meeting State performance targets, and the actions the 
State will take to determine or revise interventions for any LEAs, 
schools, and other subgrantees that are not making substantial 
progress.

Appendix C: Key Programmatic and Fiscal Information

    The Department has an overall responsibility for ensuring the 
programmatic and fiscal integrity of the ESEA programs. Therefore, 
before we can award FY 2002 program funds the Department needs to 
review and approve information on how the State will comply with a 
few key requirements of the various ESEA programs that the State 
includes in the application. In particular, the Department will 
review the SEA responses to the following:

I. Key Program Requirements

1. Title I, Part B, Subpart 3--Even Start Family Literacy

    a. Describe how the SEA will use its indicators of program 
quality to monitor, evaluate, and improve its Even Start projects, 
and to decide whether to continue operating them.
    b. Describe what constitutes sufficient program progress when 
the SEA makes continuation awards.
    c. Explain how the State's Even Start projects will provide 
assistance to low-income families participating in the program to 
help children in those families to achieve to the applicable State 
content and student achievement standards.

2. Title I, Part C--Education of Migrant Children

    a. Describe the process the State will use to develop, 
implement, and document a

[[Page 35976]]

comprehensive needs assessment that identifies the special 
educational and related needs of migratory children.
    b. Describe the State's priorities for the use of migrant 
education program funds in order to have migratory students meet the 
State's performance targets for indicators 1.1, and 1.2 in appendix 
A (as well as 5.1 and 5.2 that expressly include migratory 
students), and how they relate to the State's assessment of needs 
for services.
    c. Describe how the State will determine the amount of any 
subgrants the State will award to local operating agencies, taking 
into account the numbers and needs of migratory children, the 
statutory priority for service in section 1304(d), and the 
availability of funds from other Federal, State, and local programs.
    d. Describe how the State will promote continuity of education 
and the interstate and intrastate coordination of services for 
migratory children.
    e. Describe the State's plan to evaluate the effectiveness of 
its migrant education program and projects.

3. Title I, Part D--Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, 
Delinquent, or At-Risk

    a. Describe the program goals, performance indicators, 
performance objectives, and data sources that the State has 
established for its use in assessing the effectiveness of the 
program in improving the academic and vocational and technical 
skills of students participating in the program.
    b. Describe how the SEA is assisting projects funded under the 
program in facilitating the transition of children and youth from 
correctional facilities to locally operated programs.

4. Title I, Part F--Comprehensive School Reform

    a. Describe the process the SEA will use to ensure that programs 
funded include and integrate all eleven required components of a 
comprehensive school reform program.
    b. Describe the process the State will use to determine the 
percentage of Comprehensive School Reform schools with increasing 
number of students meeting or exceeding the proficient level of 
performance on State assessments in reading/language arts and 
mathematics.

5. Title II, Part A--Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting 
Fund

    a. If not fully addressed in the State's response to the 
information on performance goals, indicators, and targets in 
Appendix A, describe the remainder of the State's annual measurable 
objectives under ESEA section 1119(a)(2).
    b. Describe how the SEA will hold LEAs accountable both for (1) 
meeting the annual measurable objectives described in ESEA section 
1119(a)(2), and (2) ensuring that the professional development the 
LEAs offer their teachers and other instructional staff is 
consistent with the definition of ``professional development'' in 
ESEA section 9101(34).

    Note: This program, and the financial support it provides to 
States, LEAs, and schools is vitally important to ensure that all 
students have teachers who are highly qualified, and who can help 
them to achieve to their maximum capabilities. The two items 
identified above supplement other information States need to provide 
in response to items in Appendix A, Goal 3; Appendix B, item 5b and 
c; and Appendix C, information on Title II, Part D (Enhancing 
Education Through Technology program) on how they plan to implement 
key teacher quality activities.

6. Title II, Part D--Enhanced Education Through Technology

    a. Describe the program goals, performance indicators, 
performance objectives, and data sources that the State has 
established for its use in assessing the effectiveness of the 
program in improving access to and use of educational technology by 
students and teachers in support of academic achievement.
    b. Provide a brief summary of the SEA's long-term strategies for 
improving student academic achievement, including technology 
literacy, through the effective use of technology in the classroom, 
and the capacity of teachers to integrate technology effectively 
into curricula and instruction.
    c. Describe key activities that the SEA will conduct or sponsor 
with the funds it retains at the State level. These may include such 
activities as provision of distance learning in rigorous academic 
courses or curricula; the establishment or support of public-private 
initiatives for the acquisition of technology by high-need LEAs; and 
the development of performance measurement systems to determine the 
effectiveness of educational technology programs.
    d. Provide a brief description of how--
    i. The SEA will ensure that students and teachers, particularly 
those in the schools of high-need LEAs, have increased access to 
technology, and
    ii. The SEA will coordinate the application and award process 
for State discretionary grant and formula grant funds under this 
program.

7. Title III, Part A--English Language Acquisition and Language 
Enhancement

    a. Describe how the SEA will ensure that LEAs use program funds 
only to carry out activities that reflect scientifically based 
research on the education of limited English proficient children 
while allowing those grantees flexibility (to the extent permitted 
under State law) to select and implement such activities in a manner 
that they determine best reflects local needs and circumstances.
    b. Describe how the SEA will hold LEAs accountable for meeting 
all annual measurable achievement objectives for limited English 
proficient children, and for making adequate yearly progress that 
raises the achievement of limited English proficient children.
    c. Describe the process that the State will use in making 
subgrants under section 3114(d) to LEAs that have experienced a 
significant increase in the percentage or number of immigrant 
children and youth.

8. Title IV, Part A--Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities

    a. Describe the key strategies in the State's comprehensive plan 
for the use of funds by the SEA and the Governor to provide safe, 
orderly, and drug-free schools and communities through programs and 
activities that--
    i. Complement and support activities of LEAs under ESEA section 
4115(b);
    ii. Comply with the principles of effectiveness under section 
4115(a); and
    iii. Otherwise are in accordance with the purpose of Title IV, 
Part A.


    Note: The reauthorized provisions of the Safe and Drug-Free 
Schools and Communities (SDFSC) Program clearly emphasize well-
coordinated SEA and Governor's Program activities. The statute 
requires that significant parts of the program application be 
developed for each State's program, not for the SEA and Governors 
Programs individually. For this reason, each State must submit a 
single application for SDFSC SEA and Governors Program funds. States 
may choose to apply for SDFSC funding through this consolidated 
application or through a program-specific application.)


    B. Describe the State's performance measures for drug and 
violence prevention programs and activities to be funded under Title 
IV, Part A, Subpart 1.
    These performance measures must focus on student behaviors and 
attitudes. They must consist of (1) performance indicators for drug 
and violence prevention programs and activities, and (2) levels of 
performance for each performance indicator. The description must 
also include timelines for achieving the levels of performance 
stated, details about what mechanism the State will use to collect 
data concerning the indicators, and provide baseline data for 
indicators (if available).
    c. Describe the steps the State will use to implement the 
Uniform Management Information and Reporting System (UMIRS) required 
by ESEA section 4112(c)(3). The description should include 
information about which agency(ies) will be responsible for 
implementing UMIRS, a tentative schedule for implementing UMIRS 
requirements, as well as preliminary plans for collecting required 
information.

9. Title IV, Part B, 21st Century Community Learning Centers

    Identify the percentage of students participating in 21st 
Century Community Learning Centers who meet or exceed the proficient 
level of performance on State assessments in reading/language arts 
and mathematics. Baseline data is to be collected for the 2002-2003 
school year, and submitted to the Department no later than September 
2003 by a specific due date the Department will announce.

10. Title IV, Part B--21st Century Community Leaning Centers

    Identify the percentage of students who participate in 21st 
Century Community Learning Centers who meet or exceed the proficient 
level of performance on State assessments in reading/language arts 
and mathematics. The State must collect baseline data for the 2002-
2003 school year, and submit these data to the Department no later 
than early September of 2003 by a date the Department will announce.

[[Page 35977]]

11. Title VI, Part A, Subpart 1--grants for State Assessment and 
Related Activities

    Describe how the State plans to use formula funds awarded under 
section 6113(b)(1) for the development and implementation of State 
assessments in accordance with section 6111 (1) and (2).

12. Title VI, Part B, Subpart 2--Rural and Low-Income School 
Program

    a. Identify the SEA's specific measurable goals and objectives 
related to increasing student academic achievement; decreasing 
student dropout rates; or improvement in other educational factors 
the SEA may elect to measure, and describe how Rural and Low-Income 
School program funds will help the SEA meet the goals and objectives 
identified.
    b. Describe how the State elects to make awards under the Rural 
and Low-Income School Program:
    i. By formulas proportionate to the numbers of students in 
eligible districts;
    ii. Competitively (please explain any priorities for the 
competition); or
    iii. By a State-designed formula that results in equal or 
greater assistance being awarded to school districts that serve 
higher concentrations of poor students.

    (Note: If a State elects the third option, the formula must be 
submitted for Department approval. States that elect this option may 
submit their State-designed formulas for approval as part of this 
submission.)

I. Key Fiscal Information

Consolidated Administrated Funds

1. Does the SEA Plan To Consolidate State-Level Administrative Funds?

    If yes, please provide information and analysis concerning 
Federal and other funding that demonstrates that Federal funds 
constitute less than half of the funds used to support the SEA.
    If yes, are there any programs whose funds are available for 
administration that the SEA will not consolidate?

2. Please Describe Your Plans for Any Additional Uses of Funds

Transferability

    Does the State plan to transfer non-administrative State-level 
ESEA funds under the provisions of the State and Local 
Transferability Act (sections 6121 to 6123 of the ESEA)? If so, 
please list the funds and the amounts and percentages to be 
transferred, the program from which funds are to be transferred, and 
the program into which funds are to be transferred.

    (Note: If the State elects to notify ED of the transfer in this 
document, the State's responses to the application's requests for 
information should reflect the State's comprehensive plan after the 
transfer. If the State has not elected to transfer funds at this 
time, it may do so at a later date. To do so, the State must (1) 
establish an effective date for the transfer, (2) notify the 
Department (at least 30 days before the effective date of the 
transfer) of its intention to transfer funds, and (3) submit the 
resulting changes to the information previously submitted in the 
State's consolidated application by 30 days after the effective date 
of the transfer.)

Program Specific Fiscal Information

1. Title I, Part A--Improving Basic Programs Operated by LEAs

    a. Identify the amount of the reservation in section 1003(a) for 
school improvement that the State will use for State-level 
activities and describe those activities.
    b. For the 95 percent of the reservation in section 1003(a) that 
must be made available to LEAs, describe how the SEA will allocate 
funds to assist LEAs in complying with the school improvement, 
corrective action, and restructuring requirements of section 1116 
and identify any SEA requirements for use of those funds.
    c. Identify what part, if any, of State administrative funds the 
SEA will use for assessment development under ESEA section 1004, and 
describe how those funds will be used.
    d. Describe how the State will inform LEAs of the procedures 
LEAs must use to distribute funds for schools to use for 
supplemental services under section 1167(e)(7) and the procedures 
for determining the amount to be used for this purpose.
    e. Describe how the State will use formula funds awarded under 
section 6113(b)(1) for the development and implementation of State 
assessments in accordance with section 6111.

2. Title I, Part B--Even Start Family Literacy

    Identify the amount of the reservation under subsection 1233(a) 
that the State will use for each category of State-level activities 
listed in that section, and describe how the SEA will carry out 
those activities.

3. Title I, Part C--Education of Migratory Children

    Identify the amount of funds that the SEA will retain from its 
Migrant Education Program (MEP) allocation, under section 200.41 of 
the Title I regulations (34 CFR 200.41), to carry out administrative 
and program functions that are unique to the MEP, and describe how 
the SEA will use those funds.

4. Title I, Part D--Children and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, 
or At-Risk

    Describe how the funds reserved under section 1418 will be used 
for transition services for students leaving institutions for 
schools served by LEAs, or postsecondary institutions or vocational 
and technical training programs.

5. Title II, Part A--Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund

    a. If applicable, of the one percent of the State's program 
allocation that ESEA section 2113(d) makes available to both the SEA 
and State agency for higher education (SAHE) for the costs of 
administration and planning, identify the amount the two agencies 
have agreed each agency will retain.

    Note: In the absence of an agreement between the two agencies to 
apportion the one-percent in another way, of this amount the 
Department annually will award to the SAHE for administration and 
planning the greater of--

    1. The amount of FY 2001 funds it had received for 
administration under the predecessor Title II, ESEA Eisenhower 
Professional Development Program, or
    2. Five percent of the amount available each year for subgrants 
to partnerships under ESEA section 2113(a)(2).
    The Department annually will award the remainder of the one-
percent of the State allocation to the SEA for its costs of 
administration and planning. We will provide further guidance on 
within-State allocations of Title II, Part A funds reserved for 
administration in the guidance it is developing for the program.
    b. Describe how the SEA will use funds reserved for State 
activities described in ESEA section 2113(c) to meet the teacher 
professional development and paraprofessional requirements in 
section 1119.

6. Title III, Part A--English Language Acquisition and Language 
Enhancement

    a. Specify the percentage of the State's allotment that the 
State will reserve and the percentage of the reserved funds that the 
State will use for each of the following categories of State-level 
activities: professional development; planning, evaluation, 
administration, and interagency coordination; technical assistance; 
and providing recognition to subgrantees that have exceeded their 
annual measurable achievement objectives. A total amount not to 
exceed 5 percent of the State's allotment may be reserved by the 
State under ESEA section 3111(b)(2) to carry out one or more of 
these categories of State-level activities.
    b. Specify the percentage of the State's allotment that the 
State will reserve for subgrants to eligible entities that have 
experienced a significant increase in the percentage or number of 
immigrant children and youth. A total amount not to exceed 15 
percent of the State's allotment must be reserved by the State under 
section 3114(d)(1) to award this type of subgrant.
    c. Specify the number of limited English proficient children in 
the State. (See definitions of ``child'' in ESEA section 3301(1), 
and ``limited English proficient'' in section 9101(25).)
    d. Specify the number of immigrant children and youth in the 
State. (See definition of ``immigrant children and youth'' in ESEA 
section 3301(6).)

    Note: ESEA section 3111 requires that State allocations for the 
Language Acquisition State grants be calculated on the basis of the 
number of limited English proficient children in the State compared 
to the number of such children in all States (80 percent) and the 
number of immigrant children and youth in the State compared to the 
number of such children and youth in all States (20 percent). The 
Department plans to use data from the 2000 Census to calculate State 
shares of limited English proficient students. However, these data 
on limited English proficient students will not be available for all 
States until September 2002. To ensure that States have access to 
funds as soon as they are available, the Department will provide, 
for FY 2002 only, an initial distribution of 50 percent of the funds 
under the limited

[[Page 35978]]

English proficient portion of the formula based on State-reported 
data. As soon as Census data become available, the Department will 
recalculate and make final State allocations using 2000 Census data.
    For the 20 percent of formula funds distributed to States based 
on State shares of immigrant children and youth, the Department will 
use the most recent State-reported data in allocating these funds. 
Census does not collect data that can be used to calculate State 
allocations for this part of the formula.

7. Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 4112(a)--Safe and Drug-Free 
Schools and Communities: Reservation of State Funds for the Governor

    a. The Governor may reserve up to 20 percent of the State's 
allocation under this program to award competitive grants or 
contracts. Identify the percentage of the State's allocation that is 
to be reserved for the Governor's program.
    b. The Governor may administer these funds directly or designate 
an appropriate State agency to receive the funds and administer this 
allocation. Provide the name of the entity designated to receive 
these funds, contact information for that entity (the name of the 
head of the designated agency, address, telephone number) and the 
``DUNS'' number that should be used to award these funds.

8. Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, Section 4126--Safe and Drug-Free 
Schools and Communities: Community Service Grants

    Describe how the SEA, after it has consulted with the Governor, 
will use program funds to develop and implement a community service 
program for suspended and expelled students.

9. Title V, Part A--Innovative Programs

    a. In accordance with ESEA section 5112(a)(1), describe the 
SEA's formula for distributing program funds to LEAs. Include 
information on how the SEA will adjust its formula to provide higher 
per-pupil allocations to LEAs that have the greatest numbers or 
percentages of children whose education imposes a higher-than-
average cost per child, such as --
    z Children living in areas with concentrations of economically 
disadvantaged families;
    z Children from economically disadvantaged families; and
    z Children living in sparsely populated areas.
    b. Identify the amount or percentage the State will reserve for 
each State-level activity under section 5121, and describe the 
activity.

Appendix D: Assurances

    With its June 2002 submission, an SEA will need to include a 
signed statement of its agreement to the following sets of 
assurances and cross cutting declaration:
    1. General and Cross-Cutting Assurances. Section 9304(a) 
requires States to have on file with the Secretary, as part of their 
consolidated application, a single set of assurances, applicable to 
each program included in the consolidated application, that provide 
that--
    a. Each such program will be administered in accordance with all 
applicable statutes, regulations, program plans, and applications;
    b.i. The control of funds provided under each such program and 
title to property acquired with program funds will be in a public 
agency, a nonprofit private agency, institution, or organization, or 
an Indian tribe, if the law authorizing the program provides for 
assistance to those entities; and
    b.ii. The public agency, nonprofit private agency, institution, 
or organization, or Indian tribe will administer those funds and 
property to the extent required by the authorizing law;
    c. The State will adopt and use proper methods of administering 
each such program, including--
    i. The enforcement of any obligations imposed by law on 
agencies, institutions, organizations, and other recipients 
responsible for carrying out each program;
    ii. The correction of deficiencies in program operations that 
are identified through audits, monitoring, or evaluation; and
    iii. The adoption of written procedures for the receipt and 
resolution of complaints alleging violations of law in the 
administration of the programs;
    d. The State will cooperate in carrying out any evaluation of 
each such program conducted by or for the Secretary or other Federal 
officials;
    e. The State will use such fiscal control and fund accounting 
procedures as will ensure proper disbursement of, and accounting 
for, Federal funds paid to the State under each such program;
    f. The State will--
    i. Make reports to the Secretary as may be necessary to enable 
the Secretary to perform the Secretary's duties under each such 
program; and
    ii. Maintain such records, provide such information to the 
Secretary, and afford such access to the records as the Secretary 
may find necessary to carry out the Secretary's duties; and
    g. Before the plan or application was submitted to the 
Secretary, the State afforded a reasonable opportunity for public 
comment on the plan or application and considered such comment.
    2. ESEA Specific Assurances and Crosscutting Declaration. Each 
SEA also must provide an assurance that it will--
    a. Comply with all operational requirements of the ESEA programs 
included in the consolidated application, whether the program 
statute identifies these requirements as a description or assurance 
that States would have addressed, absent this consolidated 
application, in a program-specific plan or application, and
    b. Maintain records of the State's compliance with each of those 
requirements.

    (Note: For the Safe and Drug-Free Schools programs, the SEA must 
have all appropriate assurances from the Governor on record.)

    Through the general assurance and assurance (1) in section 
9304(a), the SEA agrees to comply with all requirements of the ESEA 
and other applicable program statutes. While all requirements are 
important, we have identified in the application package a number of 
those to which we believe SEAs should pay particular attention in 
order to ensure the effective use of ESEA program funds in promoting 
increased student achievement. At the same time we stress that this 
list of program-specific requirements that the SEA is assuring it 
will meet is not exhaustive and that States are accountable for all 
program requirements.
    3. Cross-Cutting Declaration: Certification of Compliance with 
Unsafe School Choice Option Requirements.
    The State certifies that it has established and implemented a 
Statewide policy requiring that students attending persistently 
dangerous public elementary or secondary schools, as determined by 
the State (in consultation with a representative sample of local 
educational agencies), or who become victims of violent criminal 
offenses, as determined by State law, while in or on the grounds of 
public elementary and secondary schools that the students attend, be 
allowed to choose to attend a different, safe public elementary or 
secondary school (which may include a public charter school) within 
the local educational agency.

Appendix E: Enhanced Assessment Instruments Competitive Grant Program 
(Title VI, section 6112)--Program Information and Proposed Selection 
Criteria

    Overview. Proficiency on State assessments required under Title 
I, Part A of the ESEA is the primary indicator in the ESEA of 
student academic achievement and, hence, the primary measure of 
State success in meeting the goals of No Child Left Behind. In view 
of the critical importance of these State assessments, ESEA section 
6111 provides formula grants to all SEAs, and section 6112 
authorizes the Secretary to make competitive grant awards to State 
educational agencies (SEAs) to help them enhance the quality of 
assessment and accountability systems.
    Because of the close relationship between this program and Title 
I, Part A, section 6112 requires States wishing to apply for the 
competitive portion of the State assessment grants to include their 
applications for this program in the State plans they prepare under 
Title I, Part A. For this reason, the Secretary has designated this 
program for voluntary inclusion in a State's ESEA consolidated 
application even though it is not a formula grant program. In doing 
so, the Secretary establishes the following procedures and 
requirements to govern this competition.
    Eligible applicants. By law, all eligible applicants must be 
SEAs or consortia of SEAs. An application from a consortium of SEAs 
must designate one SEA as the fiscal agent.
    Proposed Award Amounts and Timelines. The statute requires that 
any funds appropriated in excess of the required amount for State 
assessment formula allocations (section 6111) be allocated as 
competitive grants. From the amount appropriated, approximately $17 
million is available for the upcoming fiscal year 2002 competition. 
Subject to the minimum size of award provided in section 
6113(b)(2)(A)(ii) (which is based on a State's enrollment of

[[Page 35979]]

students ages 5-17), the Department estimates that it will make 20 
awards ranging from $300,000 to $2,000,000, with an average size of 
$850,000.
    All applications must be submitted on or before September 15, 
2002. We expect to issue grant awards by December 1, 2002. Project 
periods will run until September 30, 2004.
    Application requirements. Section 6112(a) requires that all 
funded applications demonstrate that States (or consortia of States) 
will--
    1. Collaborate with institutions of higher education, other 
research institutions, or other organizations to improve the 
quality, validity, and reliability of State academic assessments 
beyond the requirements for the assessments described in section 
1111(b)(3) of Title I, Part A;
    2. Measure student academic achievement using multiple measures 
of student academic achievement from multiple sources;
    3. Chart student progress over time; or
    4. Evaluate student academic achievement through the development 
of comprehensive academic assessment instruments, such as 
performance and technology-based academic assessments.
    Competitive preferences. Enhancing assessment instruments so 
that they take into consideration alternatives for assessing 
students with disabilities and limited English proficient students 
is one of the pressing needs in the area of assessments. In 
addition, the complexity of improving assessments calls for 
collaborative efforts between and among states to yield approaches 
that can be adapted in varied contexts and for effective 
dissemination of results to increase the likelihood that the 
projects funded will contribute to ongoing State efforts to improve 
their assessment systems.
    Toward those ends, the Secretary establishes the following 
competitive preferences, and will award up to 35 points to an 
applicant based on how well its application meets these preferences. 
These preference points are in addition to points an applicant earns 
under the selection criteria.
    1. Accommodations and alternate assessments (20 points) 
Applications that can be expected to advance practice significantly 
in the area of increasing accessibility and validity of assessments 
for students with disabilities or limited English proficiency, or 
both, including strategies for test design, administration with 
accommodations, scoring, and reporting.
    2. Collaborative efforts (10 points) Applications that are 
sponsored by a consortium of States.
    3. Dissemination (5 points) Applications that include an 
effective plan for dissemination of results.
    Selection criteria. The Secretary establishes the following 
criteria and weights authorized by sections 75.209-210 of the 
Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR):

1. Need for the Project (10 points)

    z The magnitude and severity of the problem to be addressed by 
the proposed project;
    z The extent to which the proposed project will provide services 
or otherwise address the needs of students at risk of educational 
failure; and
    z The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving 
or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals.

2. Scope (10 points)

    z The extent to which the goals and objectives to be achieved by 
the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable, and
    z The extent to which the goals and objectives are sufficiently 
broad to be likely to result in significant change or improvement of 
one or more State assessment systems.

3. Significance (15 points)

    z The potential contribution of the proposed project to 
increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, 
issues, or effective strategies;
    z The potential contribution of the proposed project to the 
development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in 
the field of study;
    z The extent to which the proposed project is likely to yield 
findings that may be used by other appropriate agencies and 
organizations; and
    z The extent to which the proposed project involves the 
development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build 
on, or are alternatives to, existing strategies.

4. Quality of Project Design (30 points)

    z The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying 
the proposed research or demonstration activities, and the quality 
of that framework;
    z The quality of the proposed design and procedures for 
documenting project activities and results;
    z The extent to which the design for implementing and evaluating 
the proposed project will result in information to guide possible 
replication of project activities or strategies, including 
information about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies 
employed by the project;
    z The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the period of 
Federal financial assistance;
    z The extent to which the design of the proposed project 
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice;
    z The extent to which the proposed project represents an 
exceptional approach for meeting statutory purposes and 
requirements; and
    z The quality of the methodology to be employed by the proposed 
project.

5. Quality of the Management Plan (5 points)

    z 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; and
    z The extent to which the time commitments of the project 
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel 
are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed 
project.

6. Quality of Project Personnel (10 points)

    z 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;
    z The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of the project director or principal investigator;
    z The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of key project personnel; and
    z The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

7. Adequacy of Resources (10 points)

    z The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources from the SEA or the lead applicant 
SEA;
    z The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the 
project; and
    z The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project.

8. Quality of the Evaluation Plan (10 points)

    z The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of 
the proposed project;
    z The extent to which the methods of evaluation are appropriate 
to the context within which the project operates;
    z 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; and
    z The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about 
effective strategies suitable for replication or testing in other 
situations.

Appendix F--Optional Interim Application for FY 2002 Funds Under the 
Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grants Program (Title 
IV, Part A, Subpart 1)

    The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grants 
program authorizes States that desire to submit a program-specific 
application for FY 2002 funds to do so in either of two ways. A 
State may either submit (1) the comprehensive State application 
described in ESEA section 4113(a) or (2) an interim application 
that, under section 4113(b), offers the State an opportunity to 
develop and submit the comprehensive application prior to its 
receipt of fiscal year 2003 funds under the program.
    Section 4113(b)(1) provides that the content of the interim 
application must be consistent with the requirements of that section 
of the law and contain the information that ``the Secretary may 
specify in regulations.'' So that States may understand their 
various options for applying for Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
Communities State Grants program, the

[[Page 35980]]

Department is using the vehicle of this notice to announce rules for 
this interim program application for FY 2002 funds.
    States that desire to use this interim application to apply for 
FY 2002 Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grants 
program funds must submit the following:
    z A description of how the SEA will coordinate the agency's 
activities under this subpart with the chief executive office's drug 
and violence prevention programs and with the prevention efforts of 
other State agencies and other programs, as appropriate.
    z A statement of the State's performance measures for drug and 
violence prevention programs and activities to be funded under this 
grant, which will be focused on student behavior and attitudes, 
derived from the State's needs assessment in section 4113(a)(9). 
These indicators must be developed through consultation between the 
State and local officials, and that consists of performance 
indicators for drug and violence prevention programs and activities, 
and levels of performance for each indicator. The description must 
also include timelines for achieving the levels of performance 
stated, details about what mechanisms the State will use to collect 
data concerning the stated indicators, and baseline data for 
indicators if they are available.
    In its statement, the State must submit performance measures for 
(1) the following indicator: the number of persistently dangerous 
schools, as defined by the State, and for (2) other indicators that 
it identifies as appropriate based on its analysis of need and its 
comprehensive plan for use of funds:
    z A description of how the State educational agency will review 
applications from local educational agencies, including how the 
agency will receive input from parents in such review.
    z A description of how the State educational agency will monitor 
the implementation of activities and provide technical assistance 
for local educational agencies, community-based organizations, other 
public entities, and private organizations.
    z A description of how the chief executive officer of the State 
will award funds under section 4112(a) and implement a plan for 
monitoring the performance of, and providing technical assistance 
to, grant recipients.

[FR Doc. 02-12865 Filed 5-21-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U