[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5000-5003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2126]



[[Page 4999]]

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

Part III





Department of Education





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



Community Technology Centers Program; Proposed Requirements, 
Priorities, and Selection Criteria; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 21 / Monday, February 2, 2004 / 
Notices  

[[Page 5000]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1830-ZA05


Community Technology Centers Program; Proposed Requirements, 
Priorities, and Selection Criteria

AGENCY: Office of Vocational and Adult Education, Department of 
Education.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Acting Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult 
Education proposes requirements, priorities, and selection criteria 
under the Community Technology Centers (CTC) Program. These proposed 
requirements, priorities, and selection criteria clarify the funding 
ranges and matching requirements for this program. The proposed 
priorities and selection criteria are intended to strengthen the 
quality of applications and provide greater understanding of the 
Department's intent regarding the direction of this program. The 
Assistant Secretary may use these requirements, priorities, and 
selection criteria for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2004 and later 
years.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 3, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about these proposed requirements, 
priorities, and selection criteria to Karen Holliday, U.S. Department 
of Education, OVAE, MES room 5520, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20202-7100. If you prefer to send your comments through 
the Internet, use the following address: [email protected]. You 
must include the phrase ``CTC Comments'' in the subject line of your 
electronic message.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Holliday, Telephone (202) 358-
3339.
    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 listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Invitation To Comment

    We invite you to submit comments regarding these proposed 
requirements, priorities, and selection criteria. To ensure that your 
comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final 
requirements, priorities and selection criteria, we urge you to 
identify clearly the specific requirement, priority, or selection 
criterion that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of 
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed 
requirements, priorities, and selection criteria. Please let us know of 
any further opportunities we should take to reduce potential costs or 
increase potential benefits while preserving the effective and 
efficient administration of the program.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public 
comments about these proposed requirements, priorities, and selection 
criteria at 330 C Street, SW., room 5520, Washington, DC, between the 
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., eastern time, Monday through Friday of 
each week except Federal holidays.

Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking 
Record

    On request, we will supply an appropriate aid, such as a reader or 
print magnifier, to an individual with a disability who needs 
assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public 
rulemaking record for these proposed requirements, priorities, and 
selection criteria. If you want to schedule an appointment for this 
type of aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

Background

    The purpose of the CTC Program is to assist eligible applicants to 
create or expand community technology centers that provide 
disadvantaged residents of economically distressed urban and rural 
communities with access to information technology and related training. 
Eligible applicants are community-based organizations (including faith-
based organizations), State and local educational agencies (LEAs) 
(including charter schools that are LEAs), institutions of higher 
education, and other entities, such as foundations, libraries, museums, 
public and private nonprofit organizations, and for-profit businesses, 
or consortia thereof. To be eligible, an applicant must also have the 
capacity to significantly expand access to computers and related 
services for disadvantaged residents of economically distressed urban 
and rural communities who would otherwise be denied such access.
    The CTC program competitions the Department conducted in FY 2003 
gave absolute priority to applicants seeking to improve the academic 
achievement of low-achieving high school students while continuing to 
provide a community technology center for all members of their 
community. Grant recipients were required to meet this priority as they 
developed and implemented their plans to create or expand community 
technology centers for increasing access to information technology and 
related training for disadvantaged residents of distressed urban or 
rural communities, and to evaluate the effectiveness of their projects. 
Specifically, we permitted grantees to use funds to provide services 
and activities that use technology to improve academic achievement, 
such as academic enrichment activities for children and youth, career 
development, adult education, and English language instruction for 
individuals with limited English proficiency. Other authorized 
activities included, among other things, support for personnel, 
equipment, networking capabilities, and other infrastructure costs. We 
did not permit grantees to use funds for construction, food, stipends, 
childcare, or security personnel.
    The Department held two competitions with FY 2003 funds. The first 
competition used 75 percent of available funds and made grants to the 
highest-ranking applicants that met the absolute priorities specified 
for the competition. The second competition used 25 percent of 
available funds for the highest-ranking novice applicants that met 
similar absolute priorities.
    For FY 2004, the Department proposes requirements, priorities, and 
selection criteria similar to those established in FY 2003. Yet we are 
clarifying some of the requirements, priorities, and selection criteria 
to refine the application process under the CTC program, while 
continuing to support and create local technology programs that are 
among the strongest in the nation.

Discussion of Proposed Requirements, Priorities, and Selection Criteria

    We will announce the final requirements, priorities, and selection 
criteria in a notice in the Federal Register. We will determine the 
final requirements, priorities, and selection criteria after 
considering responses to this notice and other information available to 
the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing or 
funding additional requirements, priorities, or selection criteria, 
subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

[[Page 5001]]

Targeted Applicants

    We held two competitions with FY 2003 funds for the CTC program. 
The first competition used 75 percent of available funds and made 
grants to the highest-ranking applicants that met the absolute 
priorities, and the second competition used 25 percent of available 
funds for the highest-ranking novice applicants that met similar 
absolute priorities.
    For FY 2004, we are proposing that one combined competition be 
conducted for both general and novice applicants, using the same 
priorities and selection criteria. The Department will rank and fund 
the two groups separately. At least seventy-five percent of the funds 
will be set aside for general applicants and up to twenty-five percent 
will be set aside for novice applicants.

Rationale

    The Department supports the idea that novice applicants be given 
special consideration when applying for discretionary grant funds. Last 
year, we pursued that strategy by setting aside 25 percent of program 
funds for novice applications. We hope that continuing this practice 
will yield a similar result this year.

Range of Awards

    The Department proposes to establish $250,000 as the minimum award 
and $500,000 as the maximum award for FY 2004, and proposes that no 
grant application will be considered for funding if it requests an 
award amount outside the funding range of $250,000 to $500,000.

Rationale

    In our work with CTC program grantees since 1999, we have acquired 
information to support the idea that programs must be of at least a 
moderate funding amount in order to significantly impact increased 
access to technology at the local level. The Department believes that 
the minimum award threshold, coupled with the applicant's mandatory 
match, ensures the applicant's ability to be effective. The maximum 
threshold is necessary to ensure that the Department is able to fund a 
significant number of grantees, and to promote access to technology in 
a number of geographic areas.

Matching Funds Requirement

    Pursuant to Section 5512(c) of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind 
Act of 2001 (NCLB), Federal funds may not be used to pay for more than 
50 percent of total CTC project costs.
    The statute requires that to receive a grant award under the CTC 
competition, each applicant must furnish from non-Federal sources at 
least 50 percent of its total project costs. Applicants may satisfy 
this requirement in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including 
services. Accordingly, we are proposing to clarify this requirement as 
follows: each applicant must provide a dollar-for-dollar match of the 
amount requested from the Federal Government. An example of an 
allowable match would be a situation in which an applicant requested 
$250,000 in Federal funds (the mandatory minimum request). In that 
situation, the applicant would be requested to furnish at least 
$250,000 from non-Federal funds in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, 
resulting in a total project cost of $500,000.

Rationale

    Clarification of the matching requirement is necessary to eliminate 
the possibility of any confusion among applicants.

Discussion of Proposed Priorities

    Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these proposed priorities, we 
invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register.

Priorities

    When inviting applications we designate each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational. The effect of each type of 
priority follows:

Absolute Priority

    Under an absolute priority, we consider only applications that meet 
the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).

Competitive Preference Priority

    Under a competitive preference priority, we give competitive 
preference to an application by either (1) awarding additional points, 
depending on how well or the extent to which the application meets the 
competitive priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an 
application that meets the competitive priority over an application of 
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).

Invitational Priority

    Under an invitational priority, we are particularly interested in 
applications that meet the invitational priority. However, we do not 
give an application that meets the priority a competitive or absolute 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
    We propose to establish the following priorities for the CTC 
general competition:

Proposed Priority 1

    We propose a priority for projects that include a partnership with 
a community-based organization and a local educational agency (or 
school, which may be a charter school). To meet the priority, an 
applicant must clearly identify the partnering agencies and include a 
detailed plan of their working relationship, including a project budget 
that reflects fund disbursements to the various partnering agencies. 
Thus, the Secretary would give priority to projects in which the 
delivery of instructional services includes:
    1. A community-based organization (CBO), which may include a faith-
based organization, and
    2. A local educational agency (LEA) (or school, including private, 
non-profit schools).
    A CBO is not required to submit a joint application with an LEA or 
school when applying for funds; however, the proposed project must 
deliver the educational services in partnership with an LEA (or 
school).
    Likewise, an LEA (or school) is not required to submit a joint 
application with a CBO when applying for funds; however, the proposed 
project must deliver the educational services in partnership with a 
CBO.
    Applicants that are neither CBOs nor LEAs must enter into a 
partnership that includes a CBO and an LEA (or school) in the delivery 
of educational services.

Rationale

    The Secretary has determined that the participation of both CBOs 
and LEAs (or schools) is critical to the success of CTC projects. Many 
academic support programs for adolescents report that securing and 
maintaining a high level of student participation can be challenging. 
Involving CBOs in service delivery will help projects better master 
this challenge, such as by providing expanded outreach and support to 
students, joint programming, or alternative service sites that are in 
or near the neighborhoods where students live. Community-based and 
faith-based partners bring other important resources to the table as 
well, such as assistance in recruiting staff and volunteers. LEAs (or 
schools) also are essential partners. Their involvement is needed to 
identify the students who are most in need of academic support and to 
ensure that the project's curriculum, assessment, and instructional 
practices are consistent with those of the schools the students attend.


[[Page 5002]]


    Note: Applicants should bear in mind that although LEAs are 
eligible under this program, individual public schools are not 
eligible applicants.

Proposed Priority 2

    We propose a priority pursuant to which applicants would meet the 
following criteria:
    Applicants must state whether they are proposing a local or State 
project. A local project must include one or more CTCs; a State project 
must include two or more CTCs. In addition, the project must be carried 
out by or in partnership with one or more LEAs or secondary schools 
that provide supplementary instruction in the core academic subjects of 
reading or language arts, or mathematics, to low-achieving secondary 
school students. Projects must serve students who are entering or 
enrolled in grades 9 through 12 and who: (1) Have academic skills 
significantly below grade level, or (2) who have not attained 
proficiency on State academic assessments as established by NCLB. 
Supplementary instruction may be delivered before or after school or at 
other times when school is not in session. Instruction may also be 
provided while school is in session, provided that it increases the 
amount of time students receive instruction in core academic subjects 
and does not require their removal from class. The instructional 
strategies used must be based on practices that have proven effective 
for improving the academic performance of low-achieving students. If 
these services are not provided directly by an LEA or secondary school, 
they must be provided in partnership with an LEA or secondary school.

Rationale

    We believe that such supplemental instruction is important for the 
students residing in the geographic areas the CTC program intends to 
serve. Further, the Department encourages local CBOs and other entities 
to expand their capacity for becoming supplemental service providers 
through the effective use of the local CTC.

Proposed Priority 3

    We propose a priority to focus CTC activities on adult education 
and family literacy services.
    Under this proposed priority, we would give priority to projects 
that provide adult education and family literacy activities through 
technology and the Internet, including adult basic education, adult 
secondary education, and English literacy instruction.

Rationale

    Section 5513(b)(3)(B) of the ESEA provides that funds under this 
program may be used for CTC activities focusing on adult education and 
family literacy services. We believe that projects using technology and 
the Internet to provide adult education are critical to improving adult 
academic achievement.

Proposed Priority 4

    We propose a priority to focus CTC activities on career development 
and job preparation activities.
    Under this proposed priority we would give priority to projects 
that provide career development and job preparation activities in high-
demand occupational areas.

Rationale

    Section 5513(b)(3)(C) of the ESEA provides that program funds may 
be used to provide services relating to career development and job 
preparation. We believe that career development and job preparation 
activities in high-demand occupational areas will benefit greatly the 
students residing in areas that CTC projects serve.

Proposed Selection Criteria

    We propose that the following selection criteria be used for this 
competition:

Need for the Project

    In evaluating the need for the proposed project, we consider the 
extent to which the proposed project will--
    (1) Serve students from low-income families;
    (2) Serve students entering or enrolled in secondary schools that 
are among the secondary schools in the State that have the highest 
numbers or percentages of students who have not achieved proficiency on 
the State academic assessments required by Title I of ESEA, or who have 
academic skills in reading or language arts, or mathematics, that are 
significantly below grade level;
    (3) Serve students who have the greatest need for supplementary 
instruction, as indicated by their scores on State or local 
standardized assessments in reading or language arts, or mathematics, 
or some other local measure of performance in reading or language arts, 
or mathematics; and
    (4) Create or expand access to information technology and related 
training for disadvantaged residents of distressed urban or rural 
communities.

Quality of the Project Design

    In evaluating the quality of the design of the proposed project, we 
consider the extent to which the proposed project will--
    (1) Provide instructional services that will be of sufficient size, 
scope, and intensity to improve the academic performance of 
participating students;
    (2) Incorporate strategies that have proven effective for improving 
the academic performance of low-achieving students;
    (3) Implement strategies in recruiting and retaining students that 
have proven effective;
    (4) Provide instruction that is aligned with the secondary school 
curricula of the schools in which the students to be served by the 
grant are entering or enrolled; and
    (5) Provide high-quality, sustained, and intensive professional 
development for personnel who provide instruction to students.

Quality of the Management Plan

    In evaluating the quality of the management plan, we consider the 
extent to which the proposed project--
    (1) Outlines specific, measurable goals, objectives, and outcomes 
to be achieved by the proposed project;
    (2) Assigns responsibility for the accomplishment of project tasks 
to specific project personnel, and provides timelines for the 
accomplishment of project tasks;
    (3) Requires appropriate and adequate time commitments of the 
project director and other key personnel to achieve the objectives of 
the proposed project; and
    (4) Includes key project personnel, including the project director 
and other staff, with appropriate qualifications and relevant training 
and experience.

Adequacy of Resources

    In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, 
we consider the following factors:
    (1) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant;
    (2) The extent to which a preponderance of project resources will 
be used for activities designed to improve the academic performance of 
low-achieving students in reading and/or mathematics;
    (3) The extent to which the budget is adequate and costs are 
reasonable in relation to the objectives and design of the proposed 
project; and
    (4) The potential for continued support of the project after 
Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated 
commitment of appropriate entities to such support.

[[Page 5003]]

Quality of the Evaluation

    In determining the quality of the evaluation, we consider the 
extent to which the proposed project--
    (1) Includes a plan that utilizes evaluation methods that are 
feasible and appropriate to the goals and outcomes of the project;
    (2) Will regularly examine the progress and outcomes of 
participating students on a range of appropriate performance measures 
and has a plan for utilizing such information to improve project 
activities and instruction;
    (3) Will use an independent, external evaluator with the necessary 
background and technical expertise to assess the performance of the 
project; and
    (4) Effectively demonstrates that the applicant has adopted a 
rigorous evaluation design.

Executive Order 12866

    This notice of proposed requirements, priorities, and selection 
criteria 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 of proposed 
requirements, priorities, and selection criteria 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 of proposed requirements, priorities, 
and selection criteria, we have determined that the benefits of the 
proposed requirements, priorities, and selection criteria 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 Benefits

    Elsewhere in this notice we discuss the potential benefits of these 
proposed requirements, priorities, and selection criteria.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the 
regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive 
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened 
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State 
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
financial assistance.
    This document provides 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/news/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.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.


(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.341--Community 
Technology Centers Program)

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7263.

    Dated: January 29, 2004.
Susan Sclafani,
Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education.
[FR Doc. 04-2126 Filed 1-29-04; 1:41 pm]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P