[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 53 (Thursday, March 18, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12841-12845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-6195]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1865-ZA02


Safe Schools/Healthy Students

AGENCY: Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority, selection criteria, requirements, 
and definitions.

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

SUMMARY: The Departments of Education (ED), Health and Human Services 
(HHS), and Justice (DOJ) issue this notice to propose a priority, 
selection criteria, requirements, and definitions for the Safe Schools/
Healthy Students Initiative (SS/HS). We propose this action to focus 
Federal financial assistance on safe, disciplined and drug-free 
learning environments and healthy childhood development. We intend the 
priority to support the implementation and enhancement of integrated, 
comprehensive community-wide plans that create safe and drug-free 
schools and promote healthy childhood development. The Associate Deputy 
Under Secretary may use this priority, selection criteria, requirements 
and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2004 and later 
years.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before April 19, 2004.

[[Page 12842]]


ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this proposed priority, selection 
criteria, requirements, and definitions to Karen Dorsey, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E347, 
Washington, DC 20202-6450. If you prefer to send your comments through 
the Internet, use the following address: [email protected]. Please 
include the following in the subject line of all e-mails, ``Comments on 
SS/HS NPP.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Dorsey. Telephone (202) 708-4674 
or via Internet: [email protected].
    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 the proposed priority, 
selection criteria, requirements and definitions. To ensure that your 
comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final 
priority, selection criteria, requirements, and definitions, we urge 
you to identify clearly the specific proposed priority, selection 
criterion, requirement or definition your comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirements of 
reducing regulatory burden that might result from the proposed 
priority, selection criteria, requirements and definitions. 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 this proposed priority in room 3E316 at 400 Maryland 
Avenue, SW., 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 
printer magnifier, to an individual with a disability who needs 
assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public 
rulemaking record for this proposed priority, selection criteria, 
requirements and definitions. If you want to schedule an appointment 
for this type of aid, please contact the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    We will announce the final priority, selection criteria, 
requirements, and definitions in a notice in the Federal Register. We 
will determine the final priority, selection criteria, requirements, 
and definitions after considering responses to this notice and other 
information available to the Department. This notice does not preclude 
us from proposing or funding additional priorities, other selection 
criteria, or other requirements, or changing definitions, subject to 
meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

    Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use this priority, we will invite applications 
through a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting applications 
we designate the 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 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 
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other 
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Discussion of Proposed Priority

Background

    The SS/HS grant program draws on the best practices of the 
education, justice, social service, and mental health systems to 
promote enhanced resources for prevention programs and prosocial 
services for youth. The SS/HS grant program is based on evidence that a 
comprehensive, integrated community-wide approach is an effective way 
to promote healthy child development and address the problems of school 
violence and alcohol and other drug abuse. Key to the grant program is 
the creation and implementation of a comprehensive plan that addresses 
violence and alcohol and other drug abuse and promotes prosocial skills 
and healthy child development for youth.
    A critical feature of SS/HS is the linking and integration of 
existing and new services and activities into a comprehensive approach 
to violence prevention and healthy child development that reflects an 
overall vision for the community, not the isolated objectives of a 
single activity, particularly the reliance on security devices alone. 
The primary objectives of a community's SS/HS plan should be to present 
a thoughtful, well-coordinated strategy that will unify and enhance 
existing programs and services and to develop a systematic approach for 
sustaining those activities, curricula, programs, and services that 
prove to be effective.

Proposed Priority

    This proposed priority would support the projects of local 
educational agencies proposing to implement an integrated, 
comprehensive community-wide plan designed to create safe and drug-free 
schools and promote prosocial skills and healthy childhood development 
in youth. Plans must focus activities, curricula, programs, and 
services in a manner that responds to all of the following six 
elements:
     Element One--Safe school environment--Note: We 
propose that no more than 10 percent of the total budget for each year 
may be used to support costs associated with (1) security equipment and 
personnel, and (2) minor remodeling of school facilities to improve 
school safety;
     Element Two--Alcohol and other drugs and 
violence prevention and early intervention programs;
     Element Three--School and community mental 
health preventive and treatment intervention services;
     Element Four--Early childhood psychosocial and 
emotional development programs;
     Element Five--Supporting and connecting schools 
and communities; and
     Element Six--Safe school policies.

Discussion of Proposed Selection Criteria

Background

    The SS/HS grant program was established in 1999 with the award of 
54 grants. The SS/HS grant program was created to provide Federal 
financial

[[Page 12843]]

assistance to school districts and communities to promote ongoing 
partnerships as a way of enhancing and expanding their existing 
activities relating to youth violence prevention and healthy child 
development. Since the original competition in 1999 two additional 
competitions have been held (FY 2001 and FY 2002). Our experience with 
competitions, peer reviewers, applicants, and funded grantees 
demonstrates the need to develop selection criteria that more 
adequately represent the qualities of successful SS/HS grantees. For 
example, selection criteria used in previous competitions may have 
unintentionally limited the opportunity for reviewers to evaluate the 
existence of an applicant's partnership and its capacity to use Federal 
financial assistance efficiently and effectively to enhance and expand 
current activities.
    To improve the program we held focus groups with current grantees 
and other professionals with a working knowledge of the SS/HS program 
to identify key qualities of successful SS/HS grantees and gathered 
related input from the Federal program staff who monitor SS/HS grants. 
All of these factors were used to develop the following proposed 
selection criteria.

Proposed Selection Criteria

    We propose the following selection criteria for this program:
1. Community Assessment
    (a) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, 
infrastructure, opportunities, and/or resources have been identified 
and will be addressed by the proposed project and the nature and 
magnitude of those gaps and weaknesses are based on quantitative and 
qualitative data for the district, students, families and the 
community. An example of the kinds of problems that might be identified 
and addressed would be a high number of truant students, in relation to 
comparable jurisdictions, and a lack of truancy officers and programs.
    (b) The extent to which existing services, infrastructure, 
opportunities and resources are described and integrated with the 
proposed project. An example citing existing services would be the 
number of after school programs available to students that would be 
improved by adding supplemental services and staff through the proposed 
project.
    (c) The extent to which the applicant will serve the entire school 
district or the extent to which sufficient rationale is provided for 
selecting particular schools and/or areas and why a district-wide 
approach is not feasible or appropriate.
    (d) The extent to which the target population is clearly identified 
and defined in terms of the number of students/families/staff to be 
served.
2. Goals, Objectives and Performance Indicators
    (a) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and performance 
indicators for the project are related to data provided in the 
``Community Assessment'' section.
    (b) The extent to which the applicant includes at least one 
measurable and attainable performance indicator for each of the six 
elements in the priority and at least one performance indicator for the 
SS/HS partnership, for a total of at least seven performance 
indicators.
    (c) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and performance 
indicators are reflected in proposed programs, curricula, and other 
activities.
    (d) The extent to which the applicant includes baseline data and a 
source of data for the periodic measuring of progress of project-
specific performance indicators and for required Government Performance 
and Results Act (GPRA) performance indicators.
3. Project Design
    (a) The extent to which the project design builds upon community 
assessment data, and/or identified gaps or weaknesses in existing 
services, infrastructure, opportunities, and resources.
    (b) The extent to which the applicant can demonstrate that 
programs, training, curriculum, and other activities selected for the 
project reflect current research and use evidence-based and effective 
practices and that they are responsive to the targeted population to be 
served, including meeting cultural and linguistic needs.
    (c) The extent to which the proposed short- and long-term 
strategies will promote healthy child development and school 
environments that are safe, disciplined, and drug-free.
    (d) The extent to which the proposed short- and long-term 
strategies allow for systematic development of infrastructure that 
builds organizational, community, and individual capacity to sustain 
outcomes beyond the life of the grant.
    (e) The extent to which the project design addresses the six 
elements of the priority, integrating existing and new services into a 
comprehensive approach to violence prevention and healthy childhood 
development.
4. Partnership and Community Readiness
    (a) The extent to which the applicant has demonstrated the 
existence of an active school-community partnership prior to planning 
and submitting its SS/HS application. Examples of how to demonstrate 
the existing partnership can include a description of the history of 
the partnership, including the circumstances around its creation and 
accomplishments to date.
    (b) The extent to which the applicant will engage multiple and 
diverse sectors of the community in its strategic planning process. 
Examples of possible community participants include but are not limited 
to nonprofit community groups, faith-based organizations, private 
schools, teachers, youth, parents, and supervisory and line staff of 
social service agencies.
    (c) The extent to which the applicant's memorandum of agreement for 
SS/HS Partners includes: A mission statement for the SS/HS partnership; 
a delineation of the roles and responsibilities of each partner; a 
process for communicating and sharing resources; and other pertinent 
information to evaluate the partnership's likelihood of successfully 
implementing the project.
    (d) The extent to which the applicant's memorandum of agreement for 
mental health services demonstrates the willingness of the mental 
health authority to provide administrative oversight of mental health 
services. This agreement describes a process for securing mental health 
providers and procedures to be used for referral, treatment, and 
follow-up for children and adolescents with serious mental health 
problems. This agreement provides evidence that there will be 
integration, coordination, and resource sharing with mental health and 
social service providers by schools and other community-based programs.
5. Evaluation
    (a) The extent to which the applicant describes an appropriate 
evaluation design--using both quantitative and qualitative methods, 
including: (1) What types of data will be collected; (2) when various 
types of data will be collected; (3) what evaluation methods will be 
used and why; (4) what instruments will be developed and when; (5) how 
the data will be analyzed; (6) when reports of results and outcomes 
will be available; (7) how data and other information will be used for 
strategic planning, measuring progress, making programmatic 
adjustments, and keeping the proposed strategy focused on its

[[Page 12844]]

overall objective of promoting healthy childhood development and 
preventing violence and alcohol and other drug abuse; and (8) how the 
applicant will use the information collected through the evaluation to 
support SS/HS GPRA indicators.
    (b) The extent to which the individual or organization that has 
been selected or will be sought to serve as the local evaluator has 
adequate qualifications and experience to conduct the local evaluation.
    (c) The extent to which the applicant allocates an appropriate and 
reasonable level of resources to local project evaluation. Please note: 
Consistent with funding restrictions established for the program, a 
minimum of 7 percent of the total budget must be designated for local 
evaluation activities.
6. Program Management
    (a) The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of key 
staff, including the full-time project director, and partners are 
defined.
    (b) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time, including clearly defined timelines 
with reasonable dates for implementing and accomplishing project tasks.
    (c) The adequacy of procedures for communicating and sharing 
information among all partners, to ensure feedback and continuous 
improvement in the operation of the project.
7. Budget
    (a) The extent to which the proposed budget and narrative 
correspond to the project design and provide adequate documentation and 
justification for how funds will be used and how costs were calculated.
    (b) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates current fiscal 
control and accounting procedures to ensure prudent use, proper and 
timely disbursement, and accurate accounting of funds received under 
the grant.

Additional Selection Factors

    We propose to consider the following two factors in selecting an 
application for an award: (1) Geographic distribution and diversity of 
activities addressed by the projects; and (2) equitable distribution of 
funds among urban, suburban and rural local educational agencies.

Discussion of Proposed Requirements

Background

    SS/HS applicants from prior competitions have suggested that we 
clarify certain of the SS/HS application and other requirements. These 
include: Eligibility requirements; requirements that must be met for an 
application to be forwarded to peer review; the maximum funding that 
may be requested; and the limits on the amount of funds that may be 
used for certain grant activities. Accordingly we propose the following 
requirements:

Proposed Requirements

    Application and Eligibility. We propose that, before we will submit 
an SS/HS application for peer review, the applicant must meet the 
following requirements:
    (1) The local educational agency/applicant must not have received 
funds or services under the SS/HS initiative under any previous fiscal 
years.
    (2) The applicant's request for funding must not exceed the maximum 
amount established for its defined urbancity. The maximum request for 
SS/HS funds is $3 million for urban schools for a 12-month period; $2 
million for suburban schools for a 12-month period; and $1 million for 
rural and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools for a 12-month period. 
To determine urbancity and the maximum amount they are eligible to 
apply for, all applicants except BIA schools must use the district 
locale code on the National Public School and School District Locator 
website and the definitions established for rural, suburban and urban 
to determine urbanicity. A BIA school's request must not exceed $1 
million.
    (3) The applicant must include in its application two memoranda of 
agreement demonstrating the commitment of the required SS/HS partners. 
Two agreements must be signed by the required partners (as described 
below) and dated no earlier than six months prior to the SS/HS 
application deadline. Applicants must also include information in the 
application that supports the selection of the identified local law 
enforcement and juvenile justice partner and describe how those 
partners' activities will support and be integrated in the SS/HS 
strategy. Applicants must contact their State Department of Mental 
Health to identify the relevant local public mental health authority. 
Mental health entities that have no legal authority in the 
administrative oversight of the delivery of mental health services are 
not acceptable as the sole mental health partner. Each SS/HS 
application must include the local public mental health authority (as 
defined elsewhere in this notice) as a partner. (The local public 
mental health authority is not required to provide mental health 
services to the target population but must provide administrative 
control or oversight of the delivery of mental health services.)
    (a) The first of these two agreements is the Memorandum of 
Agreement for the SS/HS Partners. This agreement must contain the 
signatures of the school superintendent and authorized representatives 
for the local public mental health authority and local law enforcement 
and juvenile justice agencies. This agreement must include the 
following information: A mission statement for the SS/HS partnership; 
the goals and objectives of the partnership; desired outcomes for the 
partnership; a description of how information will be shared among 
partners; and a description of the roles and responsibilities of each 
partner. Applicants submitting as a consortium of LEAs must demonstrate 
partnership with the relevant local law enforcement agency (or 
agencies), public mental heath authority (or authorities) and juvenile 
justice agency (or agencies) for each of the participating LEAs in the 
consortium. Applicants must indicate those instances where a local law 
enforcement agency, public mental health authority, or juvenile justice 
agency has authority or jurisdiction for one or more of the 
participating LEAs in the consortium.
    (b) The second of these two agreements is the Memorandum of 
Agreement for Mental Health Services. This agreement must contain the 
signatures of the school superintendent and the authorized 
representative of the local public mental health authority. The local 
public mental health authority must agree to provide administrative 
control and/or oversight of the delivery of mental health services. 
This agreement also must state procedures to be used for referral, 
treatment, and follow-up for children and adolescents with serious 
mental health problems. Applicants submitting as a consortium of LEAs 
must demonstrate partnership with the relevant public mental health 
authority (or authorities) for each of the participating LEAs in the 
consortium. Applicants must indicate those instances where a local 
public mental health authority has authority/jurisdiction for one or 
more of the participating LEAs in the consortium.

Proposed Funding Restrictions

    We propose that no less than 7 percent of a grantee's budget for 
each year may be used to support costs associated with local evaluation 
activities.

Proposed Definitions

    Several important terms associated with this competition are not 
defined in

[[Page 12845]]

the statute. We propose the following definitions:
    1. Authorized representative--We propose defining the term 
authorized representative as the official within an organization with 
the legal authority to give assurances, make commitments, enter into 
contracts, and execute such documents on behalf of the organization as 
may be required by the Department of Education (the Department), 
including certification that commitments made on grant proposals will 
be honored and that the applicant agrees to comply with the 
Department's regulations, guidelines, and policies.
    2. Local law enforcement agency--We propose defining the term local 
law enforcement agency as the agency (or agencies) that has law 
enforcement authority for the LEA. Examples of local law enforcement 
agencies include: municipal, county, and state police; tribal police 
and councils; and sheriffs' departments.
    3. Local public mental health authority--We propose defining the 
term local public mental health authority as the entity legally 
constituted (directly or through contract with the State mental health 
authority) to provide administrative control or oversight of mental 
health services delivery within the community.
    4. Local juvenile justice agency--We propose defining the term 
local juvenile justice agency as an agency or entity at the local level 
that is officially recognized by state or local government to address 
juvenile justice system issues in the communities to be served by the 
grant. Examples of juvenile justice agencies include: Juvenile justice 
task forces; juvenile justice centers; juvenile or family courts; 
juvenile probation agencies; and juvenile corrections agencies.
    5. Urban districts--We propose defining the term urban districts as 
those with a designated locale code of Large Central City (1) or Mid-
Size Central City (2) using the National Center for Education 
Statistics' National Public School and School District Locator 
(available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).
    6. Suburban districts--We propose defining the term suburban 
districts as those with a designated local code of Urban Fringe of 
Large City (3) or Urban Fringe of Mid-Size City (4) using the National 
Center for Education Statistics' National Public School and School 
District Locator (available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).
    7. Rural districts--We propose defining the term rural districts as 
those with a designated local code of Large Town (5), Small Town (6) or 
Rural, outside MSA (7), or Rural, inside MSA (8) using the National 
Center for Education Statistics' National Public School and School 
District Locator (available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).

Executive Order 12866

    This notice of proposed priority, selection criteria, requirements 
and definitions 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 
priority, selection criteria, requirements and definitions 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 priority, selection 
criteria, requirements and definitions we have determined that the 
benefits of the proposed priority 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: The potential costs 
associated with this proposed priority, selection criteria, 
requirements, and definitions are minimal while the benefits are 
significant. Grantees may anticipate costs with completing the 
application process in terms of staff and partner time, copying, and 
mailing or delivery.
    The benefit of this proposed priority, selection criteria, 
requirements, and definitions is that grantees that develop a 
comprehensive, community-wide SS/HS plan may receive significant 
Federal assistance to support the implementation and enhancement of 
prevention and intervention activities, programs and services that 
create safe and drug-free schools and promote healthy childhood 
development.

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 strengthened 
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State 
and local governments for coordination and review of the proposed 
Federal financial assistance.
    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
action for this program.

Applicable Program Regulations

    The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) 
in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 98, 99, and 299.

Electronic Access to This Document

    You may view this document, as well as 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: 84.184L Safe 
Schools/Healthy Students.)

    Program Authority: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities 
Act (20 U.S.C. 7131); Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa); 
and Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 
5614(b)(4)(e) and 5781 et seq.).

    Dated: March 16, 2004.
Deborah Price,
Deputy Under Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools.
[FR Doc. 04-6195 Filed 3-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P