[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5572-5578]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-937]



[[Page 5571]]

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

Part VII





Department of Education





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



Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Overview Information, 
Early Childhood Educator Professional Development (ECEPD) Program; 
Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2006; 
Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / 
Notices  

[[Page 5572]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Overview 
Information, Early Childhood Educator Professional Development (ECEPD) 
Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year 
(FY) 2006

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.349A

    Dates:
    Applications Available: February 6, 2006.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 7, 2006.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 6, 2006.
    Eligible Applicants: A partnership that has not previously received 
an ECEPD grant and that consists of at least one entity from each of 
the following categories:
    (i) One or more institutions of higher education, or other public 
or private entities (including faith-based organizations), that provide 
professional development for early childhood educators who work with 
children from low-income families in high-need communities.
    (ii) One or more public agencies (including local educational 
agencies, State educational agencies, State human services agencies, 
and State and local agencies administering programs under the Child 
Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990), Head Start agencies, or 
private organizations (including faith-based organizations).
    (iii) If feasible, an entity with demonstrated experience in 
providing training to educators in early childhood education programs 
concerning identifying and preventing behavior problems or working with 
children identified as or suspected to be victims of abuse. This entity 
may be one of the partners described in paragraphs (i) and (ii) under 
Eligible Applicants.
    A partnership may apply for these funds only if one of the partners 
currently provides professional development for early childhood 
educators working in programs located in high-need communities with 
children from low-income families.
    Estimated Available Funds: $14,330,800.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $2,400,000-$4,800,000.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,600,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6 awards.


    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this 
notice.


    Project Period: Up to 36 months.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the ECEPD program is to enhance 
the school readiness of young children, particularly disadvantaged 
young children, and to prevent them from encountering difficulties once 
they enter school, by improving the knowledge and skills of early 
childhood educators who work in communities that have high 
concentrations of children living in poverty.
    Projects funded under the ECEPD program provide high-quality, 
sustained, and intensive professional development for these early 
childhood educators in how to provide developmentally appropriate 
school-readiness services for preschool-age children that are based on 
the best available research on early childhood pedagogy and on child 
development and learning. For these grants, increased emphasis is being 
placed on the quality of program evaluations for the proposed projects.
    The specific activities for which recipients may use grant funds 
are identified in the application package.

Priorities

    This competition includes one absolute priority, a competitive 
preference priority and two invitational priorities that are as 
follows.
    Absolute Priority: For FY 2006 this priority is an absolute 
priority. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is 
from section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 6651(e)(5)(A). Under 34 CFR 
75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet this priority. 
This priority is:

High-Need Communities

    The applicant partnership, if awarded a grant, shall use the grant 
funds to carry out activities that will improve the knowledge and 
skills of early childhood educators who are working in early childhood 
programs that are located in ``high-need communities.''
    An eligible applicant must demonstrate in its application how it 
meets the statutory requirement in section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the ESEA by 
including relevant demographic and socioeconomic data about the ``high-
need community'' in which each program is located, as indicated in the 
application package. (See section 2151(e)(3)(B)(i) of the ESEA.)
    ``High-need community,'' as defined in section 2151(e)(9)(B) of the 
ESEA, means--
    (a) A political subdivision of a State, or a portion of a political 
subdivision of a State, in which at least 50 percent of the children 
are from low-income families; or
    (b) A political subdivision of a State that is among the 10 percent 
of political subdivisions of the State having the greatest numbers of 
such children.


    Note: The following additional terms used in or related to this 
absolute priority have statutory definitions that are included in 
the application package: ``early childhood educator,'' ``low-income 
family,'' and ``professional development.''


    Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2006, this priority is a 
competitive preference priority. This priority is from the notice of 
final priority for Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods, published 
in the Federal Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 3586), available at 
http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2005-1/012505a.html. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an 
additional 20 points to an application, depending on how well the 
application meets this priority. These points are in addition to any 
points the application earns under the selection criteria.
    When using the priority to give competitive preference to an 
application, the Secretary will review applications using a two-stage 
process. In the first stage, the application will be reviewed without 
taking the priority into account. In the second stage of review, the 
applications rated highest in stage one will be reviewed for 
competitive preference. We consider awarding additional (competitive 
preference) points only to those applicants with top-ranked scores on 
their selection criteria.
    This priority is:

Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods

    The Secretary establishes a priority for projects proposing an 
evaluation plan that is based on rigorous scientifically based research 
methods to assess the effectiveness of a particular intervention, as 
described in the following paragraphs. The Secretary intends that this 
priority will allow program participants and the Department to 
determine whether the project produces meaningful effects on student 
achievement or teacher performance.
    Evaluation methods using an experimental design are best for 
determining project effectiveness. Thus,

[[Page 5573]]

when feasible, the project must use an experimental design under which 
participants--e.g., students, teachers, classrooms, or schools--are 
randomly assigned to participate in the project activities being 
evaluated or to a control group that does not participate in the 
project activities being evaluated.
    If random assignment is not feasible, the project may use a quasi-
experimental design with carefully matched comparison conditions. This 
alternative design attempts to approximate a randomly assigned control 
group by matching participants--e.g., students, teachers, classrooms, 
or schools--with non-participants having similar pre-program 
characteristics.
    In cases where random assignment is not possible and participation 
in the intervention is determined by a specified cutting point on a 
quantified continuum of scores, regression discontinuity designs may be 
employed.
    For projects that are focused on special populations in which 
sufficient numbers of participants are not available to support random 
assignment or matched comparison group designs, single-subject designs 
such as multiple baseline or treatment-reversal or interrupted time 
series that are capable of demonstrating causal relationships can be 
employed.
    Proposed evaluation strategies that use neither experimental 
designs with random assignment nor quasi-experimental designs using a 
matched comparison group nor regression discontinuity designs will not 
be considered responsive to the priority when sufficient numbers of 
participants are available to support these designs. Evaluation 
strategies that involve too small a number of participants to support 
group designs must be capable of demonstrating the causal effects of an 
intervention or program on those participants.
    The proposed evaluation plan must describe how the project 
evaluator will collect--before the project intervention commences and 
after it ends--valid and reliable data that measure the impact of 
participation in the program or in the comparison group.
    If the priority is used as a competitive preference priority, 
points awarded under this priority will be determined by the quality of 
the proposed evaluation method. In determining the quality of the 
evaluation method, we will consider the extent to which the applicant 
presents a feasible, credible plan that includes the following:
    (1) The type of design to be used (that is, random assignment or 
matched comparison). If matched comparison, include in the plan a 
discussion of why random assignment is not feasible.
    (2) Outcomes to be measured.
    (3) A discussion of how the applicant plans to assign students, 
teachers, classrooms, or schools to the project and control group or 
match them for comparison with other students, teachers, classrooms, or 
schools.
    (4) A proposed evaluator, preferably independent, with the 
necessary background and technical expertise to carry out the proposed 
evaluation. An independent evaluator does not have any authority over 
the project and is not involved in its implementation.
    In general, depending on the implemented program or project, under 
a competitive preference priority, random assignment evaluation methods 
will receive more points than matched comparison evaluation methods.
Definitions
    As used in this notice--
    Scientifically based research (section 9101(37) of the ESEA as 
amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7801(37)):
    (A) Means research that involves the application of rigorous, 
systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid 
knowledge relevant to education activities and programs; and
    (B) Includes research that--
    (i) Employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation 
or experiment;
    (ii) Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the 
stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn;
    (iii) Relies on measurements or observational methods that provide 
reliable and valid data across evaluators and observers, across 
multiple measurements and observations, and across studies by the same 
or different investigators;
    (iv) Is evaluated using experimental or quasi-experimental designs 
in which individuals entities, programs, or activities are assigned to 
different conditions and with appropriate controls to evaluate the 
effects of the condition of interest, with a preference for random-
assignment experiments, or other designs to the extent that those 
designs contain within-condition or across-condition controls;
    (v) Ensures that experimental studies are presented in sufficient 
detail and clarity to allow for replication or, at a minimum, offer the 
opportunity to build systematically on their findings; and
    (vi) Has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a 
panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective, 
and scientific review.
    Random assignment or experimental design means random assignment of 
students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to participate in a project 
being evaluated (treatment group) or not participate in the project 
(control group). The effect of the project is the difference in 
outcomes between the treatment and control groups.
    Quasi-experimental designs include several designs that attempt to 
approximate a random assignment design.
    Carefully matched comparison groups design means a quasi-
experimental design in which project participants are matched with non-
participants based on key characteristics that are thought to be 
related to the outcome.
    Regression discontinuity design means a quasi-experimental design 
that closely approximates an experimental design. In a regression 
discontinuity design, participants are assigned to a treatment or 
control group based on a numerical rating or score of a variable 
unrelated to the treatment such as the rating of an application for 
funding. Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, or schools above a 
certain score (``cut score'') are assigned to the treatment group and 
those below the score are assigned to the control group. In the case of 
the scores of applicants' proposals for funding, the ``cut score'' is 
established at the point where the program funds available are 
exhausted.
    Single subject design means a design that relies on the comparison 
of treatment effects on a single subject or group of single subjects. 
There is little confidence that findings based on this design would be 
the same for other members of the population.
    Treatment reversal design means a single subject design in which a 
pre-treatment or baseline outcome measurement is compared with a post-
treatment measure. Treatment would then be stopped for a period of 
time, a second baseline measure of the outcome would be taken, followed 
by a second application of the treatment or a different treatment. For 
example, this design might be used to evaluate a behavior modification 
program for disabled students with behavior disorders.
    Multiple baseline design means a single subject design to address 
concerns about the effects of normal development, timing of the 
treatment, and amount of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs 
by using a varying time schedule for introduction of the treatment and/
or treatments of different lengths or intensity.
    Interrupted time series design means a quasi-experimental design in 
which

[[Page 5574]]

the outcome of interest is measured multiple times before and after the 
treatment for program participants only.
    Invitational Priorities: For FY 2006 these priorities are 
invitational priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an 
application that meets these invitational priorities a competitive or 
absolute preference over other applications.
    These priorities are:

Invitational Priority 1--English Language Acquisition Plan

    For applicants serving children with limited English proficiency, 
the Secretary is especially interested in applications that include a 
specific plan for the development of English language acquisition for 
these children from the start of their preschool experience. The ECEPD 
program is designed to prepare children to enter kindergarten with the 
necessary cognitive, early language, and literacy skills for success in 
school. School success often is dependent on each child entering 
kindergarten being as proficient as possible in English so that the 
child is ready to benefit from formal reading instruction in English 
when the child starts school.
    The English language acquisition plan should, at a minimum: (1) 
Include a description of the approach for the development of language, 
based on the linguistic factors or skills that serve as the foundation 
for a strong language base, which is a necessary precursor for success 
in the development of pre-literacy and literacy skills for children 
with limited English proficiency; (2) explain the acquisition 
strategies, based on best available valid and reliable research, that 
the applicant will use to address English language acquisition in a 
multi-lingual classroom; (3) describe how the project will facilitate 
the children's transition to English proficiency by means such as the 
use of environmental print in appropriate multiple languages, and 
hiring bilingual teachers, paraprofessionals, or translators to work in 
the preschool classroom; (4) include intensive professional development 
for instructors and paraprofessionals on the development of English 
language proficiency; and (5) include a timeline that describes 
benchmarks for the introduction of the development of English language 
proficiency and the use of measurement tools.
    Ideally, at least one instructional staff member in each ECEPD 
classroom should be dual-language proficient both in a child's first 
language and in English to facilitate the child's understanding of 
instruction and transition to English proficiency. At a minimum, each 
classroom should include a teacher who is proficient in English.

Invitational Priority 2--Classroom Curricula and Teacher Professional 
Development

    The Secretary is especially interested in applications that focus 
the professional development that will be provided for early childhood 
educators on the specific curricula promoting young children's school 
readiness in the areas of language and cognitive development and early 
reading and numeracy skills that are being used in those educators' 
early childhood programs, and on the research base supporting that 
curricula. In addition to being based on scientifically based research, 
the curricula should have standardized training procedures and 
published curriculum materials to support implementation by the early 
childhood educators. The chosen curricula should include a scope and 
sequence of skills and content with concrete instructional goals that 
are designed to promote early language, reading, and numeracy skills.
    The need for rigorous preschool curricula is driven by the national 
focus on high-quality preschool experiences that prepare children for 
formal reading instruction in the elementary grades. The professional 
development in the ECEPD program provides opportunities for the program 
participants to achieve greater understanding of the implementation of 
scientifically based curricula that focus on early language, reading, 
and numeracy skills of young children. Grantees should focus on 
assisting the early childhood educators to implement fully the selected 
curricula and measuring learning outcomes for the children taught by 
those educators.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6651(e).
    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99, as applicable. (b) The notice of 
final priority for Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods, published 
in the Federal Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 3586).


    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants 
except federally recognized Indian tribes. Note: The regulations in 
34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Discretionary grant.
    Estimated Available Funds: $14,330,800.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $2,400,000-$4,800,000.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,600,000.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6 awards.

    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this 
notice.


    Project Period: Up to 36 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: A partnership that has not previously 
received an ECEPD grant and that consists of at least one entity from 
each of the following categories:
    (i) One or more institutions of higher education, or other public 
or private entities (including faith-based organizations), that provide 
professional development for early childhood educators who work with 
children from low-income families in high-need communities.
    (ii) One or more public agencies (including local educational 
agencies, State educational agencies, State human services agencies, 
and State and local agencies administering programs under the Child 
Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990), Head Start agencies, or 
private organizations (including faith-based organizations).
    (iii) If feasible, an entity with demonstrated experience in 
providing training to educators in early childhood education programs 
concerning identifying and preventing behavior problems or working with 
children identified as or suspected to be victims of abuse. This entity 
may be one of the partners described in paragraphs (i) and (ii) under 
Eligible Applicants.
    A partnership may apply for these funds only if one of the partners 
currently provides professional development for early childhood 
educators working in programs located in high-need communities with 
children from low-income families.
    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Each partnership that receives a grant 
under this program must provide (1) at least 50 percent of the total 
cost of the project for the entire grant period; and (2) at least 20 
percent of the project cost for each year. The project may provide 
these funds from any source, other than this program, including other 
Federal sources. The partnership may satisfy these cost-sharing 
requirements by providing contributions in cash or in-kind, fairly 
evaluated, including plant, equipment, and services. Only allowable 
costs may be counted as part of the grantee's share. For example, any 
indirect costs over and above the allowable amount may not be counted

[[Page 5575]]

toward a grantee's share. For additional information about indirect 
costs, see section IV.5. Funding Restrictions of this notice.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Address to Request Application Package: You may obtain an 
application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications 
Center (ED Pubs). To obtain an application via the Internet, use the 
following Web address: http://www.ed.gov/programs/eceducator/index.html.
    To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write or call the following: 
Education Publications Center, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. 
Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244. If you use 
a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll 
free): 1-877-576-7734.
    You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: 
[email protected].
    If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify 
this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.349A.
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application 
package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, 
audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the program contact 
person listed in section VII of this notice.
    2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements 
concerning the content of the application, together with the forms you 
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
    Page Limits: The application narrative for this program (Part III 
of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection 
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must 
limit Part III of the application to the equivalent of no more than 30 
typed pages. Part IV of the application is where you, the applicant, 
provide a budget narrative that reviewers use to evaluate your 
application. You must limit the budget narrative in Part IV of the 
application to the equivalent of no more than 5 typed pages. Part V of 
the application is where you, the applicant, include the Appendices 
described later in this section, including any response to the 
Competitive Preference Priority--Scientifically Based Evaluation 
Methods. You must limit any response to the Competitive Preference 
Priority to no more than 3 typed pages.
    For all page limits, use the following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application and budget narratives, including titles, 
headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions. Text in 
tables, charts, or graphs, and the limited Appendices, may be single 
spaced.
     Use a font that is either 12-point or larger or no smaller 
than 10 pitch (characters per inch). You may use other point fonts for 
any tables, charts, graphs, and the limited Appendices, but those 
tables, charts, graphs and limited Appendices should be in a font size 
that is easily readable by the reviewers of your application.
     Any tables, charts, or graphs are included in the overall 
narrative page limit. The limited Appendices, including the partnership 
agreement required as a group agreement under 34 CFR 75.128, and any 
Competitive Preference Priority response, are not part of the overall 
narrative page limits.
     Appendices are limited to the following: Absolute Priority 
Form (required); partnership agreement (required); any response to the 
Competitive Preference Priority; and any position descriptions (and 
resumes or curriculum vitae if available) of key personnel (including 
key contract personnel and consultants).
    Other application materials are limited to the specific materials 
indicated in the application package, and may not include any video or 
other non-print materials.
    Our reviewers will not read any pages of your application that--
     Exceed the page limits if you apply these standards; or
     Exceed the equivalent of the page limits if you apply 
other standards.
    3. Submission Dates and Times.
    Applications Available: February 6, 2006.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 7, 2006. 
Applications for grants under this program must be submitted 
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For 
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your 
application electronically or by mail or hand delivery if you qualify 
for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer 
to section IV.6. Other Submission Requirements in this notice.
    We do not consider an application that does not comply with the 
deadline requirements.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 6, 2006.
    4. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive 
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about 
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 
12372 is in the application package for this competition.
    5. Funding Restrictions:
    (a) Indirect Costs. For purposes of indirect cost charges, the 
Secretary considers all ECEPD program grants to be ``educational 
training grants'' within the meaning of section 75.562(a) of EDGAR. 
Consistent with 34 CFR 75.562, the indirect cost rate for any fiscal 
agent other than a State agency or agency of local government (such as 
a local educational agency or a federally recognized Indian tribal 
government) is limited to a maximum of eight percent or the amount 
permitted by the fiscal agent's negotiated indirect cost rate 
agreement, whichever is less. This indirect cost limit applies to cost-
type contracts only if those contracts are for educational training as 
defined in 34 CFR 75.562. Further information about indirect cost rates 
is in the application package for this competition.
    (b) Pre-award Costs. For FY 2006 the Secretary approves, under 
sections 75.263 and 74.25(e)(1) of EDGAR, pre-award costs incurred by 
recipients of ECEPD grants more than 90 calendar days before the grant 
award. Specifically, the Secretary approves necessary and reasonable 
pre-award costs incurred by grant recipients for up to 90 days before 
the application deadline date. These pre-award costs must be related to 
the needs assessment that applicants conduct under section 
2151(e)(3)(B)(iii) of the ESEA before submitting their applications to 
determine the most critical professional development needs of the early 
childhood educators to be served by the project and in the broader 
community.
    Applicants incur any pre-award costs at their own risk. The 
Secretary is under no obligation to reimburse these costs if for any 
reason the applicant does not receive an award or if the award is less 
than anticipated and inadequate to cover these costs.
    We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions 
in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
    6. Other Submission Requirements. Applications for grants under 
this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify 
for an

[[Page 5576]]

exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in 
this section.
    a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
    Applications for grants under the ECEPD program-CFDA 84.349A must 
be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site at: http://www.grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to download a copy 
of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and 
submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a 
grant application to us.
    We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format 
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of 
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no 
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written 
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these 
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that 
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in 
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
    You may access the electronic grant application for the ECEPD 
program at: http://www.grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable 
application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include 
the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search.
    Please note the following:
     When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find 
information about submitting an application electronically through the 
site, as well as the hours of operation.
     Applications received by Grants.gov are time and date 
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted, and 
must be date/time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as 
otherwise noted in this section, we will not consider your application 
if it is date/time stamped by the Grants.gov system later than 4:30 
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. When we 
retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are 
rejecting your application because it was date/time stamped by the 
Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the 
application deadline date.
     The amount of time it can take to upload an application 
will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the 
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we 
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline 
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
     You should review and follow the Education Submission 
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are 
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that 
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov 
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures 
pertaining to Grants.gov at http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf.
     To submit your application via Grants.gov, you must 
complete all of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process (see 
http://www.Grants.gov/GetStarted). These steps include (1) registering 
your organization, (2) registering yourself as an Authorized 
Organization Representative (AOR), and (3) getting authorized as an AOR 
by your organization. Details on these steps are outlined in the 
Grants.gov 3-Step Registration Guide (see http://www.grants.gov/assets/GrantsgovCoBrandBrochure8X11.pdf. You also must provide on your 
application the same D-U-N-S Number used with this registration. Please 
note that the registration process may take five or more business days 
to complete, and you must have completed all registration steps to 
allow you to successfully submit an application via Grants.gov.
     You will not receive additional point value because you 
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you 
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your 
application in paper format.
     You must submit all documents electronically, including 
all information typically included on the Application for Federal 
Education Assistance (ED 424), Budget Information--Non-Construction 
Programs (ED 524), the Absolute Priority Form and all necessary 
assurances and certifications and required and optional Appendices. You 
must attach any narrative sections of your application as files in a 
.DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable Document) format. 
If you upload a file type other than the three file types specified 
above or submit a password protected file, we will not review that 
material.
     Your electronic application must comply with any page 
limit requirements described in this notice.
     After you electronically submit your application, you will 
receive an automatic acknowledgment from Grants.gov that contains a 
Grants.gov tracking number. The Department will retrieve your 
application from Grants.gov and send you a second confirmation by e-
mail that will include a PR/Award number (an ED-specified identifying 
number unique to your application).
     We may request that you provide us original signatures on 
forms at a later date.

Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues With 
the Grants.gov System

    If you are prevented from electronically submitting your 
application on the application deadline date because of technical 
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension 
until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to 
enable you to transmit your application electronically, or by hand 
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing 
instructions as described elsewhere in this notice. If you submit an 
application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the deadline date, 
please contact the person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, and provide an explanation of the 
technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the 
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number (if available). We will accept your 
application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with 
the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your ability to 
submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the 
application deadline date. The Department will contact you after a 
determination is made on whether your application will be accepted.


    Note: Extensions referred to in this section apply only to the 
unavailability of or technical problems with the Grants.gov system. 
We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register 
to submit your application to Grants.gov before the deadline date 
and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to 
the Grants.gov system.

Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement

    You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you 
are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system 
because--
     You do not have access to the Internet; or

[[Page 5577]]

     You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to 
the Grants.gov system; and
     No later than two weeks before the application deadline 
date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the 
application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business 
day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement 
to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception 
prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application. If you 
mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no 
later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax 
your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed 
statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. 
Address and mail or fax your statement to: Rosemary V. Fennell, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 3C122, FB-6, 
Washington, DC 20202-6132. Fax: (202) 260-7764.
    Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the 
mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.
    b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a 
commercial carrier), your application to the Department. You must mail 
the original and two copies of your application, on or before the 
application deadline date, to the Department at the applicable 
following address:
    By mail through the U.S. Postal Service: U.S. Department of 
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A, 
400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260. or
    By mail through a commercial carrier: U.S. Department of Education, 
Application Control Center--Stop 4260, Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A, 
7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506.
    Regardless of which address you use, you must show proof of mailing 
consisting of one of the following:
    (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark,
    (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the 
U.S. Postal Service,
    (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial 
carrier, or
    (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the 
U.S. Department of Education.
    If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do 
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
    (1) A private metered postmark, or
    (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
    If your application is postmarked after the application deadline 
date, we will not consider your application.


    Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated 
postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your 
local post office.


    c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
    If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission 
requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper 
application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original 
and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the 
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: 
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: 
CFDA Number 84.349A, 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center 
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
    The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily 
between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, 
Sundays and Federal holidays.


    Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you 
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department:

    (1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by 
the Department--in Item 4 of the Application for Federal Education 
Assistance (ED 424) the CFDA number--and suffix letter, if any--of 
the competition under which you are submitting your application.
    (2) The Application Control Center will mail a grant application 
receipt acknowledgment to you. If you do not receive the grant 
application receipt acknowledgment within 15 business days from the 
application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of 
Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.


V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition 
are from section 75.210 of EDGAR. The maximum score for all the 
selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion 
is indicated in parentheses. Each criterion also includes the factors 
that the reviewers will consider in determining how well an application 
meets the criterion. The selection criteria are as follows:
    (a) Need for project (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary 
considers the following factor:
    (i) The extent to which the proposed project will focus on serving 
or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals.
    (b) Significance (10 points). The Secretary considers the 
significance of the proposed project. In determining the significance 
of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely 
to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in 
teaching and student achievement.
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build 
local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the 
needs of the target population.
    (c) Quality of the project design (20 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In 
determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained program of training in the field.
    (ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project 
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.
    (d) Quality of project services (10 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of the services to be provided by 
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and 
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for 
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed 
project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or 
beneficiaries of those services.
    (ii) The extent to which the training or professional development 
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient 
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice 
among the recipients of those services.
    (e) Quality of project personnel (10 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed 
project. In determining

[[Page 5578]]

the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to 
which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons 
who are members of groups that have been traditionally underrepresented 
based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. In 
addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of key project personnel.
    (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
    (f) Quality of the management plan (10 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. 
In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
project tasks.
    (ii) 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.
    (g) Quality of the project evaluation (25 points). The Secretary 
considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed 
project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the 
proposed project.
    (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment or progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (h) Adequacy of Resources (5 points). The Secretary considers the 
adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the 
adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers 
the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
    (ii) The potential for continued support of the project after 
Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated 
commitment of appropriate entities to such support.
    2. Review and Selection Process: An additional factor we consider 
in selecting an application for an award is geographical distribution 
(section 2151(e)(4)(B) of the ESEA).

VI. Award Administration Information

    1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your 
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notice 
(GAN). We may also notify you informally.
    If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, 
we notify you.
    2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify 
administrative and national policy requirements in the application 
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable 
Regulations section of this notice.
    We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of 
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and 
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also 
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding 
commitments under the grant.
    3. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a 
final performance report, including financial information, as directed 
by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an 
annual performance report that provides the most current performance 
and financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in 
34 CFR 75.118. For specific requirements on grantee reporting, please 
go to: http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
    4. Performance Measures: For FY 2006, grants under the ECEPD 
program will be governed by the achievement indicators that the 
Secretary published in the Federal Register on March 31, 2003 (68 FR 
15646-15648). These achievement indicators are included in the 
application package.
    In addition, in response to the Government Performance and Results 
Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established performance measures 
for assessing the effectiveness of the ECEPD program, which are 
coordinated with the achievement indicators and are included in the 
application package. The coordination of these achievement indicators 
and performance measures is designed to improve program management, and 
to help Congress, the Department, the Office of Management and Budget, 
and others review a program's progress toward its goals. For FY 2006 
ECEPD grants, the Secretary expects all grantees to document, in the 
required annual performance report their success in addressing the GPRA 
performance measures through the following assessment tools: The Early 
Language and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO); the Peabody 
Picture Vocabulary Test-III (Receptive); and the PALS Pre-K Alphabet 
Knowledge-Upper Case subtask. The applicant's evaluation design 
provided in response to the selection criterion for Quality of project 
evaluation in section V.1. of this notice should include the use of 
these assessment tools, at a minimum.

VII. Agency Contact

    For Further Information Contact: Rosemary Fennell, U.S. Department 
of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3C-122, Washington, DC 
20202-6132. Telephone: (202) 260-0792, or by e-mail: [email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may 
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) 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 program contact person listed in this 
section.

VIII. Other Information

    Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as 
well as all other documents of this Department 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.


    Dated: January 27, 2006.
Henry L. Johnson,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 06-937 Filed 1-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P