Federal Register, Volume 78 Issue 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29733-29748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12083]

[[Page 29733]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards; Promoting the Readiness of Minors in
Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE)

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

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

Overview Information

Promoting the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income
(PROMISE)
Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY)
2013.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.418P.

DATES:
Applications Available: May 21, 2013.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 20, 2013.
Dates of Pre-Application Webinars: May 30, 2013 and June 4, 2013.
Date of Pre-Application Teleconference: June 27, 2013. For further
information about the pre-application webinars and teleconference, see
the PROMISE Web site at www.ed.gov/promise.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 19, 2013.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: Promoting the Readiness of Minors in
Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE) is a joint initiative of the
U.S. Department of Education (ED), the U.S. Social Security
Administration (SSA), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). Under PROMISE, ED will
fund States to develop and implement model demonstration projects
(MDPs) that promote positive outcomes for children who receive
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and their families. Specifically,
PROMISE is intended to improve the provision and coordination of
services and supports for child SSI recipients and their families to
enable them to achieve improved outcomes. These outcomes include
graduating from high school ready for college and a career, completing
postsecondary education and job training, and obtaining competitive
employment in an integrated setting and, as a result, achieving long-
term reductions in the child recipients' reliance on SSI.
Priority: We are establishing this priority for the FY 2013 grant
competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the
list of unfunded applicants from this competition, in accordance with
section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20
U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).
Absolute Priority: This priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet this priority.
Applications submitted under this absolute priority may be from a
single State or a multi-State consortium.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Applicants are invited to form consortia consistent with the
Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR
75.127 through 75.129. A consortium is any combination of eligible
entities. See the Eligibility Information section of this notice for
further requirements for consortia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This priority is:

Promoting the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income
(PROMISE)

Background
The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program for children
provides cash payments to low-income families that have a child with a
severe disability under SSA disability eligibility criteria. This
means-tested cash payment is a vital source of income for families of
children under the age of 18. To qualify for SSI, children and their
families must meet income, asset, and disability eligibility criteria.
To meet the SSI disability eligibility criteria, a child must have a
medically determinable physical or mental impairment that results in
marked and severe functional limitations, and that can be expected to
result in death or that has lasted, or can be expected to last, for a
continuous period of not less than 12 months (42 U.S.C. 1382(c)). In
2011, SSA paid roughly $9.4 billion to 1.3 million children, an average
monthly payment of $592 per child. In 2013, the maximum monthly SSI
payment is $710 per child (www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/SSI.html ).
Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996, when they reach the age of 18, child SSI
recipients must have their eligibility for SSI redetermined using more
stringent adult eligibility criteria. Using the adult program rules,
eligibility is based on the inability to perform substantial gainful
activity (Hemmeter & Gilby, 2009).
Approximately 60 percent of child SSI recipients receive SSI as
adults (Hemmeter, Kauff, & Wittenburg, 2009). Of those who leave the
program at age 18, either because they did not meet the adult SSI
disability criteria or for other reasons, about one-fourth of the SSI
recipients return to the program within four years (Hemmeter & Gilby,
2009). The probability of remaining on SSI varies substantially among
individuals and especially by the type and significance of impairment
(Hemmeter, Kauff, & Wittenburg, 2009).
Child SSI recipients who become adult SSI recipients continue to
face many challenges. Rangarajan et al. (2009) report the following
data (from 2000) for young adults, ages 19 to 23, receiving SSI
payments:
Low educational attainment rates: 39 percent did not have
a high school diploma and were not currently attending school.
Low employment rates: 22 percent were employed compared
with 69 percent for all adults ages 20 to 24.
Low postsecondary enrollment rates: 6 percent were
enrolled in some form of postsecondary education after graduating from
high school, compared with 41 percent of all youth ages 18 to 23.
Low enrollment rates in vocational rehabilitation (VR):
Only 13 percent had ever received services from a State VR agency.
High arrest rates: Approximately one-fifth had been
arrested, which is fairly consistent with other reports (e.g., Quinn,
Rutherford, Leone, Osher, & Poirier, 2005) indicating that 30 to 50
percent of all incarcerated youth have disabilities that could qualify
them for support services, such as special education.
High rates of disconnection overall: 57 percent were not
enrolled in education programs, not receiving VR services, and not
employed.
Parents and other family members of child SSI recipients also face
many challenges and are in need of support services. According to
Davies, Rupp, and Wittenburg (2009), about one-third of the parents of
child SSI recipients have less than a high school education, and almost
half of child SSI recipients live in a household with at least one
other person with a disability. There also is evidence that child SSI
recipients and their families lack information about various work
incentives available to them to help them pursue activities that would
increase self-sufficiency (Fraker & Rangarajan, 2009; Loprest &
Wittenburg, 2005).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ SSI programs include a number of employment support
provisions commonly referred to as ``work incentives.'' Additional
information about SSI work incentives is available at
www.socialsecurity.gov/redbook/eng/ssi-only-employment-supports.htm#2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The structure of services to help children with disabilities who
are SSI recipients transition from school to

[[Page 29734]]

postsecondary education and competitive employment may also be a
barrier to achieving self-sufficiency and independence. Not all child
SSI recipients receive transition support services as adults because
many services, including VR and mental health services, are not
entitlements (Hemmeter, Kauff, & Wittenburg, 2009). In addition, there
are concerns about gaps (e.g., differing eligibility requirements and
goals) in the coordination of transition support services provided by
Federal, State, and local governments, as noted in a series of U.S.
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports over the past decade
(GAO, 2003, 2008, 2012).
To address these gaps and improve postsecondary education and
employment outcomes for children with disabilities, there is a need to
strengthen coordination among agencies through the development of
interagency partnerships that integrate educational and employment
services, supports, and resources. It is also essential to provide
coordinated individual and family-centered interventions that use
evidence-based transition support services (SSA, 2003). The Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that, beginning at age
16, or younger if determined appropriate by the individualized
education program (IEP) Team, a child with a disability, including
child SSI recipients served under the IDEA, receive transition
services, which are a coordinated set of activities to facilitate the
child's movement from school to post-school activities.\3\ Transition
services could include services available through the VR State Grants
program, SSA's Ticket to Work Program and Work Incentives Program,
Medicaid's care coordination services, Job Corps, and other Workforce
Investment Act programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ See 20 U.S.C. 1401(34) and 34 CFR 300.43; see also 20 U.S.C.
1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) and 34 CFR 300.320(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfortunately, there is no strong evidence of the effectiveness of
specific services for youth with disabilities who are transitioning
from school to post-school activities. More research is needed to
identify effective interventions, although there are some suggestive
findings (Cobb et al., in review). For example, the National Survey of
SSI Children and Families found that the probability of remaining on
SSI was substantially lower for those who were employed prior to age 18
(Hemmeter, Kauff, & Wittenburg, 2009). Other correlational studies
suggest that better post-school outcomes for children with disabilities
may be linked to the following: (1) Primary and secondary school
activities such as inclusion in general education, exposure to career
awareness and community activities, and education in skills such as
self-awareness, self-advocacy, and independent living; (2) interagency
collaboration; and (3) education and supports for the families,
including ways to encourage parental participation in IEP Team
meetings, financial and career planning courses, and transition plans
for moving off of SSI (Test et al., 2009).
To address these concerns about barriers, to encourage new ways of
providing supports, and to build an evidence base on the effectiveness
of promising interventions, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012
(P.L. 112-74) provided funds for activities aimed at improving the
outcomes for child SSI recipients and their families. Specifically, the
FY 2012 appropriation for Special Education included $2 million to
support activities needed to plan and begin implementing PROMISE. In
addition, the FY 2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act allows the
Secretary to use amounts that remain available subsequent to the
reallotment of funds to States under the VR State Grants program
pursuant to section 110(b) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (Rehabilitation Act), for improving the outcomes of child SSI
recipients and their families under PROMISE. These funds, which remain
available for Federal obligation until September 30, 2013, will be used
to support PROMISE grant awards and related activities.
Children receiving payments under the SSI program need a continuum
of coordinated services and supports to prepare for the transition to
postsecondary education and competitive employment and to continue on a
path to economic self-sufficiency. Through the PROMISE program, States
will develop and implement MDPs that are designed to improve the
educational and employment outcomes of child SSI recipients and their
families, and SSA will evaluate these MDPs in order to help build an
evidence base of practices that improve these outcomes.
Based on our review of the available research, extensive public
input, and consultation with experts, ED believes that effective
partnerships among agencies responsible for programs that provide key
services to child SSI recipients and their families will increase the
likelihood of success of the PROMISE MDPs. Effective partnerships can
improve the coordination of services, integrate multiple funding
sources and other resources at the State and local levels, and enhance
the ability of the State to effectively serve child SSI recipients and
their families. We also believe that focusing on the needs of both
children and their families will help further the long-term goal of
independence and self-sufficiency for child SSI recipients. In
particular, we are interested in testing whether initiating
interventions with the child and family when the child is 14 to 16
years of age will lead to better outcomes.
For this reason, each PROMISE project must have several core
features: (1) Strong and effective partnerships with agencies
responsible for programs that play a key role in providing services to
child SSI recipients and their families; (2) a plan to provide a set of
coordinated services and supports, and implement effective practices,
targeted to the needs of child SSI recipients and their families; and
(3) the capacity to achieve results, including the capacity to
implement the required project design and adhere to data collection
protocols that allow for the testing and rigorous evaluation of the
project.
The first four months of the project period will be used for
planning and finalizing all aspects of the MDP, such as establishing
formal partnerships, securing memoranda of understanding (MOUs) with
the lead coordinating entity as described in the Eligibility
Information section of this notice, and collaborating with the national
evaluator\4\ to plan for and initiate participant outreach and
recruitment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ A national evaluator, funded under a contract with SSA, will
conduct a rigorous evaluation using randomized controlled trials to
determine the effectiveness of the projects at improving the
outcomes of participating youth and reducing their dependence on
SSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ED expects States, in developing their MDPs, to draw on their
knowledge and experience in working with children and families with
similar characteristics (i.e., those living in poverty and those with
family members with disabilities), as well as on the relevant
literature, to identify innovative methods of providing services and
supports that show potential to improve the economic self-sufficiency
of child SSI recipients and their families. In addition, based on the
review of literature, input from non-Federal experts, and expertise of
the Federal PROMISE partners, we have identified a small subset of
services that each project will be required to provide. Furthermore, we
have identified examples of other services and supports that we ask
States to consider as they develop their MDPs (see Services and
Supports under paragraph (b) of the Project Activities section of this
notice).

[[Page 29735]]

ED and its Federal PROMISE partners intend to use the findings and
results of these projects to inform public policy and to build an
evidence base for improving postsecondary education and employment
outcomes for child SSI recipients and their families.

References

Cobb, R.B., Lipscomb, S., Wolgemuth, J., Schulte, T., Veliquette,
A., Alwell, M., Batchelder, K., Bernard, R., Hernandez, P.,
Holmquist-Johnson, H., Orsi, R., Sample McMeeking, L., Wang, J., and
Weinberg, A. (in review). Improving Postsecondary Outcomes for
Transition-Age Students with Disabilities: An Evidence Review.
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S.
Department of Education.
Davies, P.S., Rupp, K., & Wittenburg, D. (2009). A life-cycle
perspective on the transition to adulthood among children receiving
Supplemental Security Income payments. Journal of Vocational
Rehabilitation, 30, 133-151.
Fraker, T., & Rangarajan, A. (2009). The Social Security
Administration's youth transition demonstration projects. Journal of
Vocational Rehabilitation, 30, 223-240.
Hemmeter, J., & Gilby, E. (2009). The age-18 redetermination and
postredetermination participation in SSI. Social Security Bulletin,
69(4).
Hemmeter, J., Kauff, J., & Wittenburg, D. (2009). Changing
circumstances: Experiences of child SSI recipients before and after
their age-18 redetermination for adult benefits. Journal of
Vocational Rehabilitation, 30, 201-221.
Loprest, P., & Wittenburg, D. (2005). Choices, Challenges, and
Options: Child SSI Recipients Preparing for the Transition to Adult
Life. Retrieved from The Urban Institute Web site: www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=411168.
Quinn, M.M., Rutherford, R.B., Leone, P.E., Osher, D.M., & Poirier,
J.M. (2005). Youth with disabilities in juvenile corrections: A
national survey. Exceptional Children, 71, 339-345.
Rangarajan, A., Fraker, T., Honeycutt, T., Mamun, A., Martinez, J.,
O'Day, B., & Wittenburg, D. (2009). The Social Security
Administration's Youth Transition Demonstration Projects: Evaluation
Design Report. Available from www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_576.pdf.
Social Security Administration (SSA). (2003). Youth Demonstration
Request for Applications. Program: Cooperative Agreements for Youth
Transition Process Demonstrations (Program Announcement No. SSA-
OPDR-03-01). Washington, DC.
Test, D.W., Mazzotti, V.L., Mustian, A.L., Fowler, C.H., Kortering,
L.J., & Kohler, P.H. (2009). Evidence-based secondary transition
predictors for improving post-school outcomes for students with
disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32,
160-181.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2003, July). Special
education: Federal actions can assist States in improving
postsecondary outcomes for youth (GAO-03-773). Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2008, May). Federal
disability programs: More strategic coordination could help overcome
challenges to needed transformation (GAO-08-635). Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2012, June). Supplemental
Security Income: Better management oversight needed for children's
benefits (GAO-12-497). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

Priority

The purpose of this priority is to fund three to six cooperative
agreements for five years, to establish and operate State MDPs designed
to improve the education and employment outcomes of child SSI
recipients and their families, and eventually lead to increased
economic self-sufficiency and a reduction in their dependence on SSI
payments. At a minimum, the MDPs must--
(a) Develop and implement interventions for child SSI recipients
between the ages of 14 and 16 at the time the project services are
initiated for them and their families. The MDP interventions should be
based on the best available research evidence or data from State
experience relating to coordinating, arranging, and providing services
and supports for child SSI recipients and their families.
The MDP interventions must be designed to meet PROMISE's goals (for
both the children and their families), which include:
Increased educational attainment for the child SSI
recipients and their parents;
Improved rates of employment, wages/earnings, and job
retention for the child SSI recipients and their parents;
Increased total household income; and
Long-term reduction in SSI payments.
(b) Establish partnerships (through subgrants subcontracts,
memoranda of understanding, or other formal agreements) with State and
local agencies and other entities to improve interagency collaboration
in carrying out the MDP interventions and in developing innovative
methods of providing services and supports that will lead to better
outcomes for child SSI recipients and their families. For example,
these methods could include better use of existing services,
identification of gaps in services, and sharing resources, data, or
other information so long as such sharing of data or information is
permitted under any applicable Federal or State laws or regulations
that protect the confidentiality or privacy of personally identifiable
information or records;
(c) Participate, and require any subgrantees or partners to
participate, in collaboration with the national evaluator, in ongoing
data collection and analysis, in a manner consistent with any
applicable Federal or State laws or regulations that protect the
confidentiality or privacy of personally identifiable information or
records, both to determine the effectiveness of the MDP, including
specific interventions, and to allow for mid-course corrections in the
project as needed during the demonstration period, including by--
(1) Cooperating with the national evaluator in the random
assignment of eligible child participants and their families either to
the group that receives the MDP interventions (treatment group) or to
the group that does not receive the MDP interventions, but receives
services they would ordinarily receive (control group), and in the
collection of data for the evaluation as permitted under applicable
Federal or State laws or regulations; and
(2) Designing and implementing a plan for continually assessing the
progress of the MDP interventions, for the purpose of ongoing program
evaluation.
Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this priority, the
MDP, at a minimum, must conduct the following activities:
(a) Partnerships
(1) Establish a formal partnership with agencies and organizations
in the State that play, or have the potential to play, a substantial
role in the development and implementation of policies and practices
affecting child SSI recipients and their families and in the provision
of services and supports to those children and their families.
(i) At a minimum, partners must include the State agencies or
equivalents responsible for administering programs that provide the
following services:
State VR services under Title I of the Rehabilitation Act;
Special education and related services under Part B of the
IDEA;
Workforce Development services under Title I of the
Workforce Investment Act (WIA), including Youth

[[Page 29736]]

Services described in the WIA (Section 129(c)(2));
Medicaid services under Title XIX of the Social Security
Act;
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families under the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act;
Developmental/intellectual disabilities services; and
Mental health services.
(ii) An applicant may propose a partnership that excludes a
required State partner described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section
if the applicant provides a strong justification for doing so. A strong
justification for excluding a required State partner would be if the
applicant can provide the required services and supports and other
proposed services and supports (described in Services and Supports
under paragraph (b) of the Project Activities section of this notice)
to the child participants and their families without the participation
of the required partner. However, at least three of the required
partners, including the lead coordinating entity, must participate in
the partnership.
(iii) In order to meet the requirements described in paragraph
(a)(1)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this section, applicants may propose to
include an established State-level interagency entity such as a State
Transition Coordinating Council.
(iv) Applicants may propose other partners that they believe would
facilitate the success of the project, such as Employment Networks
under the Ticket to Work Program, employers or employer organizations,
community colleges, institutions of higher education, independent
living centers, and agencies that administer or carry out adult
education programs, career and technical education programs, and
maternal and child welfare programs.
(v) Applicants must establish procedures governing the exchange of
information by the partners in accordance with any applicable Federal
or State laws or regulations that protect the confidentiality or
privacy of personally identifiable information or records. This
includes establishing procedures to ensure that personally identifiable
information from education records is exchanged among the partners in
compliance with the requirements of the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act (FERPA),\5\ 20 U.S.C. 1232g, and its implementing
regulations in 34 CFR part 99, and the IDEA confidentiality of
information provisions in 20 U.S.C. 1417(c) and 34 CFR 300.622, which
protect the privacy of personally identifiable information in education
records and generally require the prior consent of the parent or
eligible student for the disclosure of such information to third
parties, unless there is an exception that would permit the disclosure
without consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ Applicants must ensure the confidentiality of individual
data, consistent with the requirements of FERPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232g,
the confidentiality of information provisions in section 617(c) of
the IDEA, and any other applicable Federal or State laws or
regulations that protect the privacy or confidentiality of
personally identifiable information or records. FERPA generally
prohibits school districts and schools that receive Federal funds
from the U.S. Department of Education from disclosing, without the
prior written consent of a parent or an eligible student, personally
identifiable information from education records. See 20 U.S.C. 1232g
and 34 CFR 99.30. (An eligible student is a student who is 18 years
of age or older or attends a postsecondary institution at any age).
However, certain disclosures may occur, without the prior written
consent of a parent or an eligible student, under one of FERPA's
specific exceptions to the prior consent requirement. See 34 CFR
99.31. In general and consistent with FERPA, IDEA's confidentiality
of information provisions require prior written consent for
disclosures of personally identifiable information contained in
education records, unless a specific exception applies (20 U.S.C.
1417(c) and 34 CFR 300.622). Questions about FERPA can be forwarded
to the Family Policy Compliance Office (www.ed.gov/fpco) at (202)
260-3887 or [email protected].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Services and Supports for Participants in the Treatment Group
(1) Develop and implement interventions for child SSI recipients
and their families that include a coordinated set of services and
supports designed to improve the education and employment outcomes
(described under Performance Measures in paragraph (c) of the
Evaluation and Project Assessment Activities section of this notice) of
child SSI recipients and their families. The MDP must also develop
innovative methods of providing these services and supports, including
coordinating and using resources available through existing programs or
funding streams.
In selecting the services and supports to be provided, the
applicant must consider the best available information on promising
strategies and practices, including, where available, evidence of the
effectiveness of the proposed strategies and practices.
(i) As a subset of the proposed services and supports, each MDP
must provide or arrange for the following--
(A) Case management: Each MDP must provide case management services
for the duration of the project to ensure that services for the
participating children and their families are appropriately planned and
coordinated and to assist project participants in navigating through
the services, supports, and benefits available from the larger service
delivery system. Case management services must include, at a minimum:
(1) Identifying, locating, and arranging for needed services and
supports for the children and their families;
(2) Coordinating services provided directly by the MDP with other
services that are available in the larger service delivery system; and
(3) Transition planning to assist the participating children in
setting post-school goals and to facilitate their transition to an
appropriate post-school setting, including postsecondary education,
training, or competitive employment in an integrated setting.
Transition planning must be conducted in coordination with the local
educational agency \6\ and, as appropriate, with the consent of the
parents or a child who has reached the age of majority under State law,
with other agency partners, such as the VR agency, the State Medicaid
Agency or other public insurance program, and workforce investment
agencies;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ Under the IDEA, beginning not later than the first IEP to be
in effect when the child turns 16, or younger if determined
appropriate by the IEP Team and updated annually thereafter, the IEP
must include (1) appropriate measurable postsecondary goals based
upon age appropriate transition assessments related to training,
education, employment, and where appropriate, independent living
skills; and (2) the transition services (including courses of study)
needed to assist the child in reaching those goals. 34 CFR
300.320(b). These determinations are made through the IEP process in
a meeting of the IEP Team. If a purpose of an IEP Team meeting is
the consideration of the child's postsecondary goals and the
transition services needed to assist the child in reaching those
goals, the requirements in 34 CFR 300.321(b) apply to the
participants at that meeting. Section 300.321(b)(3) provides that:
To the extent appropriate, with the consent of the parents or a
child who has reached the age of majority under State law, the
public agency, a term that includes the local educational agency,
must invite a representative of any participating agency that is
likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition
services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Benefits counseling and financial capability services: Each MDP
must include ongoing training for the child participants and their
families on SSA work incentives, eligibility requirements of various
programs, earnings rules, asset accumulation, and financial literacy
and planning;
(C) Career and work-based learning experiences: At least one paid
work experience in an integrated setting must be provided for children
participating in the project before leaving high school. In addition,
other skill development opportunities must be provided in an integrated
setting, such as volunteering or participating in internships,
community services, and on-the-job training experiences, including
experiences designed to improve

[[Page 29737]]

workplace basic skills (sometimes called ``soft skills''); and
(D) Parent training and information: At a minimum, the project must
provide information and training to the family of participating
children with respect to:
(1) The parents' role in supporting and advocating for their
children's education and employment goals, including the importance of
high expectations for their children's participation in education and
competitive employment;
(2) Resources for improving the education and employment outcomes
of the parents and the economic self-sufficiency of the family,
including through--
(i) The acquisition of basic education, literacy, and job-readiness
skills, and
(ii) Job training and employment services.
(ii) The MDPs also must provide, or arrange for the provision of,
other services and supports designed, in combination with the required
services, to improve education and employment outcomes for
participating children and their parents. Examples of other services
include:
(A) Youth development activities: Examples include training in job-
seeking skills, life skills, independent living skills, self-advocacy,
self-determination, and conflict resolution; exposure to personal
leadership development and mentoring opportunities; and exposure to
post-school supports through structured arrangements with postsecondary
education programs and adult service agencies;
(B) Career development/preparatory activities: Examples include
career assessments to help identify career preferences, interests, and
skills; career counseling and exploration, including structured
exposure to postsecondary education and other life-long learning
opportunities; exposure to career opportunities that ultimately lead to
a living wage; and information about educational requirements, entry
requirements, and income and benefits potential;
(iii) Extended and experiential learning opportunities in
integrated settings;
(iv) Job search and job placement assistance, job development, and
post-placement employment supports;
(v) Activities designed to engage employers in providing work
experiences and in employing participants of the project;
(vi) Health and behavioral management and wellness services,
including transition to adult services;
(vii) Literacy training;
(viii) Training in the use of technology and assistive technology
services and devices, including the use of assistive technology for
education, training, and employment purposes; and
(ix) Independent living activities such as assistance in locating
and obtaining housing, health care, and personal attendant services;
transportation training and subsidies; child care services; and other
community supports.
(c) Participant Outreach and Recruitment
Within two years of the initiation of the project:
(1) Plan for and conduct outreach and recruitment activities (such
activities may include mailings, phone calls, informational meetings at
State or local agencies or schools, home visits, and other efforts
targeted to this population); \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ To assist in these efforts, SSA will, upon completion of an
MOU between SSA and the State, provide a list of child SSI
recipients and the available contact information in order to assist
each funded project in identifying potential participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) Obtain consent for the participation of a minimum of 2,000
child SSI recipients;
(3) Initiate services to participants in the treatment group who
must be between the ages of 14 and 16 at the time that project services
are initiated; and
(4) As part of the plan for outreach and recruitment, prepare and
provide potential participants with a recruitment packet that
includes--
(i) A description of the full scope of the project and the goals
and objectives of the project with respect to participant outcomes and
evaluation activities, including the use of random assignment to
determine who will receive MDP interventions, and an explanation of
what will be expected of the control group members (e.g., participation
in surveys at 18 months, and potentially 60 months after random
assignment);
(ii) An MDP enrollment form developed by the national evaluator
that includes sufficient demographic and other information to classify
the participants into subgroups for further analysis; and
(iii) A written consent form to participate in the project for the
parent and, if applicable, the child, that will be developed jointly by
the MDP and the national evaluator. As part of the consent, the project
requirements must be fully explained to the parent and, if appropriate,
to the child. If appropriate, a child who has reached the age of
majority under State law must sign the consent form. The consent form
must obtain from the parent or child, if appropriate, written consent
to participate in the program and to permit the disclosure of
personally identifiable information from relevant, privacy-protected
records either to the national evaluator or to the project partners in
order for them to share data needed to carry out project activities.
All outreach and recruitment materials and forms must be developed
and provided in accessible formats for individuals with disabilities,
using jargon-free, easily comprehended language, and provided in the
family's native language or through another mode of communication,
unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.
(d) Technical Assistance and Training
(1) Provide or arrange for the provision of technical assistance,
professional development, and training for State and local staff who
will carry out project and evaluation activities to ensure that the
interventions are implemented in accordance with the MDP design and the
needs of the national evaluation. At a minimum, the MDP must provide
for the following:
(i) Development of all necessary information and materials about
the MDP interventions and project assessments, including the roles and
responsibilities of all partners and staff at the State and local
levels;
(ii) Twice-a-year meetings in which local site staff are required
to participate and for which their participation is supported with
project funds. For single State applicants, conduct these meetings
either at the location of the lead coordinating entity or at a central
location in the State. For consortia, conduct these meetings at a
mutually agreeable location. The types of professional development and
training to carry out the MDP interventions will be determined by the
lead coordinating entity, its partners, and ED. The professional
development will be provided by personnel from those entities or other
experts. One or more sessions at the semi-annual meetings will be led
by the national evaluator in order to train appropriate State and local
staff on the evaluation requirements, including the random assignment
and data collection processes consistent with any applicable Federal or
State laws or regulations that protect the privacy or confidentiality
of any relevant data. The first semi-annual meeting must occur early in
the first year of the project before random assignment begins; and
(iii) Other ongoing technical assistance that the lead coordinating
entity and its partners, including the

[[Page 29738]]

national evaluator, determine is necessary for fidelity of
implementation of the MDP interventions and the evaluation and project
assessment activities.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ ED and SSA plan to fund technical assistance to PROMISE
projects on program implementation, data collection, and evaluation
fidelity. Projects should provide or arrange for technical
assistance beyond what will be funded by ED and SSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Evaluation and Project Assessment Activities. Each MDP must be
designed to show progress in the key outcome measures to be evaluated
under the PROMISE initiative (described in the Performance Measures
under paragraph (c) of the Evaluation and Project Assessment Activities
section of this notice), as well as the other outcomes that a project
proposes to measure. To meet the requirements of this priority, each
MDP, at a minimum, must participate in the following activities.
(a) Rigorous Program Evaluation
(1) SSA, in collaboration with ED, will conduct a rigorous
evaluation of the PROMISE program using a randomized controlled trial
design for each project to obtain evidence of the effectiveness of the
MDP interventions carried out under the PROMISE program. MDPs and their
designated partners at the State and local levels must:
(i) Agree to allow random assignment to determine which half of the
at least 2,000 children and their families recruited for the project
will receive the MDP interventions (treatment group) and which half of
the children and families will receive the services they ordinarily
would receive and will not receive the MDP interventions (control
group);
(ii) Ensure that State or local site staff, wherever MDP enrollment
forms are being collected, assist in the random assignment process.
Staff will be required to provide information from each child's
enrollment form (e.g., name, Social Security number, gender,
disability, age) to the national evaluator through a secure Web-based
random assignment system or a secure phone system. The Web or phone
systems will be developed by the national evaluator. After staff
provide the data items that are necessary to conduct the random
assignment, the results of the random assignment will be made available
to the project staff;
(iii) Ensure that State or local staff communicate the results of
the random assignment (i.e., whether the participants have been
assigned to the treatment group or the control group) to the child SSI
recipients and their families;
(iv) Provide the MDP interventions only to the children and their
families assigned to the treatment group; and
(v) Require State and local staff involved in the random assignment
process to receive training from the national evaluator at the
technical assistance and training meetings (described in paragraph
(d)(1) of the Technical Assistance and Training section of this notice)
arranged by the State.
(b) Formative Evaluation
(1) Each MDP must develop and implement a plan for conducting a
formative evaluation of the project's activities and model, consistent
with the proposed logic model and data collection plan, to assess the
project's performance and progress in achieving its goals and inform
decision making (as outlined in paragraph (j) in the Application
Requirements section of this notice).
(c) Performance Measures
(1) Each project must be designed to track its progress on the key
outcomes to be evaluated under the PROMISE program as well as the other
outcomes that a project proposes to measure.
(2) In collaboration with the national evaluator, the performance
of the PROMISE program will be assessed on the basis of established key
outcome measures for participating child SSI recipients and their
families, as reflected in the goals of the program provided in the
priority:
(i) Increased educational attainment (high school completion,
diploma or equivalent) and enrollment and persistence in postsecondary
education or training by child SSI recipients and their parents;
(ii) Increased number of individuals, including both child SSI
recipients and their parents, earning credentials after high school
(e.g., postsecondary degree, technical certification, occupational
licensure, or other industry-recognized credential);
(iii) Improved employment outcomes (e.g., competitive employment
and increased earnings, number of hours worked per week, job retention)
for child SSI recipients and their parents;
(iv) Reduced use of public benefits provided to the individual or
family (e.g., cash benefits and other benefits with directly measurable
economic value);
(v) Increased total gross income of all the members of a household
who are 15 years old and older (included in the total are amounts
reported separately for wage or salary income; net self-employment
income; interest, dividends, or net rental or royalty income or income
from estates and trusts; Social Security or Railroad Retirement income;
Supplemental Security Income; public assistance or welfare payments;
retirement, survivor, or disability pensions; and all other income);
and
(vi) Post-program reduction in SSI payments as a result of
participation in the MDP (i.e., amounts paid to children and their
families who participate in the MDP interventions are expected to be
less than amounts paid to participants randomly assigned to receive
services they typically receive).
(3) In addition to the key program outcome measures, each MDP must
develop project measures that assess the project's performance in
achieving its goals consistent with the purpose of the priority and the
project's logic model.
(i) The set of project measures must include interim measures that
assess the progress toward achieving the project's outcomes, including
the attainment of milestones and benchmarks consistent with the logic
model. For example, the applicant may consider measures related to
school attendance, project attrition, work experiences, enrollment in
education or workforce development programs, or the use of partner-
provided services for which the child participants and their families
are eligible.
(ii) The MDP must report progress and performance on its measures
at least quarterly to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
and the national evaluator and use this information to inform decision
making consistent with any applicable Federal or State laws or
regulations that protect the privacy or confidentiality of any
personally identifiable information or records.
(d) Data Collection
(1) Each MDP must develop and implement a plan for collecting data
and for cooperating with the national evaluator in its efforts to
obtain data and other information on the MDP. The plan must be designed
to ensure that the MDP will:
(i) Assist in collecting baseline (pre-program) data using the MDP
enrollment form provided by the national evaluator;
(ii) Require project partners and staff at the State and local
levels to cooperate with the national evaluator's efforts to obtain
descriptive information on project implementation such as through
surveys, focus groups, or other methods.
(iii) Have the capacity to track and manage project information,
such as referrals and service participation, and document the services
and supports

[[Page 29739]]

received by the child participants and their families.
(iv) Ensure the State administrative data collected by various
State agency PROMISE partners are shared with the national evaluator,
subject to obtaining required consent under FERPA and the IDEA
confidentiality of information provisions and any other applicable
Federal or State laws or regulations that protect the privacy or
confidentiality of personally identifiable information or records.
These State data may include information related to services provided,
interim and long-term outcomes, and project progress and performance.
Examples of State administrative data include education records
maintained by a State educational agency through its statewide
longitudinal data system (e.g., transcripts, State assessment data,
attendance records, high school completion data, postsecondary
enrollment information), employment and earnings information obtained
through the State Unemployment Insurance system, service data collected
by the State VR system, and health records maintained by the State
Medicaid office;
(v) Collect data to evaluate the performance of the MDP on the key
outcome measures (described in the Performance Measures under paragraph
(c)(1) of the Evaluation and Project Assessment Activities section of
this notice), and develop and implement a process to identify and
collect the data needed to support project measures that assess the
MDP's progress and performance, including by making data available from
its statewide longitudinal data system(s); and
(vi) Use unique program identifiers that can be matched to various
data systems.
Other Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this
priority, each MDP, at a minimum, must conduct the following
activities:
(a) Maintain ongoing telephone and email communication with the
OSEP project officer;
(b) Maintain detailed documentation sufficient for model
replication purposes, should the model be successful, including the
sources of support for services to participants (other than direct
project funds) such as services provided through existing State and
local programs;
(c) Communicate and collaborate on an ongoing basis with other
federally funded projects, including other MDPs funded under this
priority, to share information on successful strategies and
implementation challenges regarding the coordination of services and
supports for child SSI recipients and their families. ED will encourage
ED-funded projects to cooperate with, and provide technical assistance
to, PROMISE MDPs when appropriate. The following are examples of
federally funded technical assistance centers and projects the MDPs are
encouraged to contact: The National Dropout Prevention Center for
Students with Disabilities (www.ndpc-sd.org), National Secondary
Transition Technical Assistance Center (www.nsttac.org), State
Implementation and Scaling-up of Evidence-based Practices Center
(http://sisep.fpg.unc.edu), Postsecondary Education Programs Network
(www.pepnet.org), IDEA Partnership (www.ideapartnership.org), National
and Regional Parent TA Centers (www.parentcenternetwork.org), Parent
Training and Information Centers and Community Parent Resource Centers
(www.parentcenternetwork.org), Independent Living Research and
Utilization Project (www.ilru.org), National Collaborative on Workforce
and Disability for Youth (www.ncwd-youth.info), Rehabilitation Research
and Training Centers (http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/index.html), The
National Technical Assistance Center for Children's Mental Health
(http://gucchdtacenter.georgetown.edu), The Solutions Desk on Helping
Youth Transition (www.syvsd.ou.edu), Healthy & Ready to Work National
Resource Center (www.syntiro.org/hrtw), TA Partnership for Child and
Family Mental Health (www.tapartnership.org), and the National Center
for Mental Health Promotion and Youth Violence Prevention
(www.promoteprevent.org);
(d) Maintain contact and cooperate with the national evaluator
throughout the project period and for one year after the close of the
project for follow-up data collection and other needs; and
(e) Contribute relevant MDP information to a central PROMISE Web
site that OSEP will make available.
Application Requirements. To be considered for funding under this
absolute priority, an applicant must include in its application--
(a) A description of the proposed project, including the
applicant's plan for implementing the project. The description must
include--
(1) A cohesive, articulated model of partnership and coordination
among the participating agencies and organizations;
(2) A logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project. The logic
model must specify the contributions of each partner to the activities,
outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project. A logic model
communicates how a project will achieve its outcomes and provides a
framework for the formative evaluation of the project;

Note: The following Web sites provide more information on logic
models: www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html and http://archive.tadnet.org/model_and_performance?format=html; and

(3) A timeline for implementing the model and achieving project
milestones and outcomes consistent with the logic model and the
requirements of this priority.
(b) A description of the coordinated set of required and other
services and supports that the project proposes to provide to the
participating children and their families in order to meet the
project's objectives. The description must describe how the services
and supports, including the four required services and other services
chosen by the project, will be provided, including whether the project
will provide the services directly or will arrange for the services to
be provided through its partners or other entities (described in
Services and Supports under paragraph (b) of the Project Activities
section of this notice).
(c) A detailed description of any evidence that the services and
supports proposed by the applicant have been implemented previously
with the targeted populations of child SSI recipients and their
families, or similar populations, albeit on a limited scale or in a
limited setting, and have yielded promising results that suggest that
more formal and systematic study is warranted. An applicant must
provide a rationale for the coordinated set of services or supports
that is based on research findings or reasonable hypotheses, including
related research or theories in education and other disciplines.
(d) A detailed description of the project's proposed partners
(including required partners described in paragraph (a)(1) of the
Project Activities section of this notice) that will play a key role in
coordinating services and implementing the interventions in the
proposed model, including a description of--
(1) The proposed partners' roles and responsibilities under the
project;
(2) The proposed partners' commitment to the project, including
letters of intent from all proposed partners to enter into an MOU with
the lead coordinating entity as described in the Eligibility
Information section of this notice;

[[Page 29740]]

(3) The plan to coordinate services among partner agencies and
other entities to ensure that project resources are used efficiently
and effectively; and
(4) The justification to exclude a required State partner, if
applicable.
(e) A description of the proposed outreach and recruitment plan,
including--
(1) The methods for ensuring that, within two years of the start of
the MDP, the project will obtain consent from at least 2,000 child SSI
recipients who will be between the ages of 14 and 16 at the time that
project services are initiated, and their families.
(2) An assurance that the applicant will secure a signed written
consent to participate in the project from the parent or, if
applicable, the child; that the consent form will be provided to the
parent and the child in an accessible format; and that, as part of the
consent, project requirements will be fully explained to the parent and
child, including that participation in the program is voluntary on the
part of the child and family (described in Participant Outreach and
Recruitment under paragraph (c) of the Project Activities section of
this notice). The MDP must also obtain any necessary written consent
from the parent or, if applicable, the child for the disclosure of
personally identifiable information from relevant records, consistent
with FERPA, the IDEA confidentiality of information provisions, and any
other applicable Federal or State laws or regulations that protect the
privacy or confidentiality of personally identifiable information or
records, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act, which contains specific privacy and security rules protecting
health information. In addition, under the State VR Services Program,
the requirements in 34 CFR 361.38 (protection, use, and release of
personal information) would apply to any records of participants in
that VR Services program.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ 34 CFR 361.38(e)(1) provides: Upon receiving the informed
written consent of the individual or, if appropriate, the
individual's representative, the State unit may release personal
information to another agency or organization for its program
purposes only to the extent that the information may be released to
the involved individual or the individual's representative and only
to the extent that the other agency or organization demonstrates
that the information requested is necessary for its program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(f) A description of the applicant's commitment to work with ED,
SSA, and the national evaluator for PROMISE to ensure that random
assignment and data collection are completed in a manner that supports
ED's and SSA's efforts to conduct a rigorous national evaluation of the
PROMISE program and the specific interventions and strategies
implemented by individual grantees. The application must include an
assurance that--
(1) Project staff will assist with the random assignment of
recruited children and their families; and
(2) Through MOUs with partners and other participating entities,
the national evaluator, ED, and SSA will be provided access to relevant
program and project data (e.g., administrative data and program and
project performance data) and that, if requested, ED and SSA will be
provided data quarterly.
(g) An assurance that the applicant will provide or arrange for the
provision of technical assistance and training to ensure consistency in
the implementation and evaluation of the MDP, including the fidelity of
implementation of the MDP interventions (described in Technical
Assistance and Training under paragraph (d) of the Project Activities
section of this notice).
(h) A description of the performance measures (and performance
targets), including interim measures, the MDP will use to assess its
performance and progress toward achieving its goals, consistent with
the logic model and the formative evaluation plan.
(i) A description of the data collection plan that--
(1) Outlines the process for assessing, collecting, and sharing
project data and other information among the collaborating partners and
the national evaluator (described in Data Collection in paragraph (d)
of the Evaluation and Project Assessment Activities section of this
notice), in a manner consistent with any Federal or State laws or
regulations that protect the confidentiality or privacy of personally
identifiable information or records; and
(2) Identifies the systems or tools that will be used for storing,
managing, analyzing, and reporting data, including a description of the
applicant's capacity to track and manage project information (e.g.,
referrals and service participation) and document the services and
supports received by the children and their families, and for the
partners or other participating entities to communicate about, and
collaborate on, the MDP's services, processes, and data collection
plan.
(j) A description of the applicant's plan, consistent with the
proposed logic model and data collection plan, for conducting a
formative evaluation of the proposed project's activities and model,
including--
(1) The data to be periodically collected for the formative
evaluation, including data related to the fidelity of implementation,
stakeholder acceptability, and descriptions of the site context;
(2) The methods the applicant will use to collect these data;
(3) How these data will be reviewed by the project, when they will
be reviewed (consistent with the timeline required in paragraph (a)(3)
of the Application Requirements section of this notice), and how they
will be used during the course of the project to adjust the model or
its implementation to increase the model's usefulness,
generalizability, and potential for sustainability; and
(4) How the formative evaluation will use clear performance
objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the
proposed project, including objective measures of progress in
implementing the project and ensuring the quality of products and
services.
(k) A plan for attendance at the following:
(1) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting to be held in
Washington, DC, after receipt of the award and an annual planning
meeting to be held in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer
during each subsequent year of the project period.

Note: Within 30 days of the receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative.

(2) A three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period;
(3) Three, two-day trips annually to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP; and
(4) A one-day intensive review meeting in Washington, DC, that will
be held during the last half of the third year of the project period.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project

In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a), and in addition--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting in Washington, DC, that will be held during the
second half of the third year of the project period;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have

[[Page 29741]]

been or are being met by the project including successfully obtaining
consent from at least 2,000 child SSI recipients and their families;
(c) The number of child SSI recipients and their families still
being served and the duration of their participation in project
services; and
(d) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's
activities and products; the degree to which the project's activities
and products are aligned with the project's objectives; and the
likelihood that current performance and progress will result in the
project achieving its proposed outcomes.

Waivers

Applicants may apply for waivers that are currently authorized
under existing Federal programs if the applicant believes having one or
more waivers would enable the applicant to achieve better outcomes for
the project participants. Applicants may request waivers under
authorities administered by any of the Federal agencies participating
in this interagency initiative--ED, DOL, DHHS, and SSA. Applicants
seeking waivers must apply directly to the agency that administers the
relevant waiver authority. However, to assist us in ensuring that the
effect on PROMISE projects is carefully considered in processing any
waiver request, we are asking applicants to submit to the Department of
Education an explanation of the waivers the applicant is requesting,
why the applicant believes the waivers are needed for the PROMISE
project, and how project outcomes might be enhanced with the approval
of such waivers. The applicant should not refer to the requested
waivers in its application narrative for PROMISE. The waiver content
will not be considered as part of the application scoring process. The
approval of any requested waivers will be at the sole discretion of the
relevant Federal agency. For example, waivers of SSA program rules will
be approved or denied by SSA. For further information about waivers see
www.ed.gov/promise. Information on waivers requested by the applicant
should be sent by August 19, 2013 as an email attachment to Corinne
Weidenthal at [email protected].
Within this absolute priority, we are particularly interested in
applications that address the following invitational priority.

Invitational Priority

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets
this invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over
other applications.
This priority is:
Outcome-Based Payments. The Secretary is especially interested in
applicants that propose to incorporate into their PROMISE MDPs an
Outcome-based Payment (OBP) model that ties payments to service
providers to the achievement of outcomes or established milestones.
Although the OBP model is distinct from the fee-for-service payment
model, the OBP model has been used in the health-care arena to offer
financial rewards to providers that achieve, improve, or exceed their
performance on specified quality, cost, and other benchmarks. Under an
OBP arrangement, providers are rewarded for meeting pre-established
targets for delivery of services, thus creating an incentive to meet
performance objectives. However, for OBP arrangements to be effective,
all the factors that affect performance must be considered including:
Motivation, skills, an understanding of the goals, and the ability to
measure progress. For example, one type of OBP model is performance-
based contracting. Performance-based contracts typically:
Emphasize results related to output, quality, and outcomes
rather than how the work is performed;
Specify deliverables, measurable performance standards,
and clearly defined objectives and timeframes;
Use quality assurance plans;
Provide performance incentives and consequences for
nonperformance; and
Tie payment to deliverables, performance measures, and
outcomes.
In inviting OBP models, ED is interested in demonstrating how
payment models can help achieve positive outcomes for child SSI
recipients and their families, consistent with those identified in the
absolute priority. ED's objectives in establishing this OBP
invitational priority are to:
Test a model that limits at least part of the risk of
government funding for unachieved outcomes by clearly defining
performance-based consequences (rewards or sanctions) for service
providers.
Learn whether the OBP concept is feasible in this arena
given the complexity of needs and number of agencies involved in
serving child SSI recipients and their families.
Determine whether paying only for specific outcomes
achieved at predetermined milestones within the project period creates
an incentive structure that promotes the achievement of PROMISE's
goals.
Applicants that address this invitational priority must include a
plan for implementing the OBP model during the project. The plan must
describe a validation methodology and a payment plan that (a) is
derived from quantifiable data and (b) measures performance against
outcome targets for the target population relative to a well-defined
comparison population. The applicant must describe the terms of the
payment arrangement between the applicant and the provider, including
the agreed performance milestones and targeted outcomes and the
payments due upon their achievement.
For more information, see the following Web site: http://www.mass.gov/chia/docs/pc/2009-02-13-pay-for-performance-c3.pdf.

Definitions

Background
The following definitions are provided to ensure that applicants
have a clear understanding of how we are using these terms in the
priority. These definitions apply in any year in which this program is
in effect. These definitions are based on definitions that ED uses or
relies on in other contexts.
Competitive employment means work:
(a) In the competitive labor market that is performed on a full-
time or part-time basis in an integrated setting; and
(b) For which an individual is compensated at or above the minimum
wage, but not less than the customary wage and level of benefits paid
by the employer for the same or similar work performed by individuals
who are not disabled.
Source: State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, 34 CFR
361.5(b)(11).
Education records means those records that are directly related to
a student and maintained by an educational agency or institution or by
a party acting for the agency or institution. Source: FERPA (20 U.S.C.
1232g(a)(4)(A)) and the FERPA regulations at 34 CFR 99.3 (definition of
``Education records.'')
Experiential learning means learning through experience. The
individual is encouraged to be directly involved in the experience and
then reflect on the experience using analytic skills, in order to gain
a better understanding of the new knowledge and retain the information.
For further information: www.infed.org/biblio/b-explrn.htm.
Extended learning opportunities (ELOs) means safe, structured
learning environments for students outside the traditional school day.
ELOs include after-school, before-school, evening,

[[Page 29742]]

weekend, and summer learning programs. ELOs come in many forms and can
include tutoring, volunteering, academic support, community service,
organized sports, homework help, and art and music programs. Source:
www.ccsso.org/Documents/2009/The_Quality_Imperative_a_2009.pdf.
Families includes a wide range of relationships, including spouse,
parents, parents-in-law, children, brothers, sisters, grandparents,
grandchildren, stepparents, stepchildren, foster parents, foster
children, guardianship relationships, same-sex and opposite-sex
domestic partners, and spouses or domestic partners of the
aforementioned, as applicable. Source: www.opm.gov/oca/leave/html/FamilyDefs.asp.
Fidelity of implementation means the accurate and consistent
delivery of the intervention in the way in which it was designed to be
delivered. Source: www.nrcld.org/rti_manual/pages/RTIManualSection4.
Integrated setting, as used in the context of education or
employment, means a setting typically found in the community in which
individuals with disabilities interact with non-disabled individuals,
other than non-disabled individuals who are providing services to such
individuals, to the same extent that non-disabled individuals in
comparable positions interact with other persons. Source: State
Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program, 34 CFR 361.5(b)(33)(ii).
Logic model means a well-specified conceptual framework that
identifies key components of the proposed project, practice, strategy,
or intervention (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized
to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
relationships among the key components and outcomes, theoretically and
operationally. For further information: www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html; and www.tadnet.org/pages/589.
Parent means (from 34 CFR 300.30):
(a) Parent means--
(1) A biological or adoptive parent of a child;
(2) A foster parent, unless State law, regulations, or contractual
obligations with a State or local entity prohibit a foster parent from
acting as a parent;
(3) A guardian generally authorized to act as the child's parent,
or authorized to make educational decisions for the child (but not the
State if the child is a ward of the State);
(4) An individual acting in the place of a biological or adoptive
parent (including a grandparent, stepparent, or other relative) with
whom the child lives, or an individual who is legally responsible for
the child's welfare; or
(5) A surrogate parent who has been appointed in accordance with
section 300.519 or section 639(a)(5) of the Act.
(b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the
biological or adoptive parent, when attempting to act as the parent
under this part and when more than one party is qualified under
paragraph (a) of this section to act as a parent, must be presumed to
be the parent for purposes of this section unless the biological or
adoptive parent does not have legal authority to make educational
decisions for the child.
(2) If a judicial decree or order identifies a specific person or
persons under paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section to act as
the ``parent'' of a child or to make educational decisions on behalf of
a child, then such person or persons shall be determined to be the
``parent'' for purposes of this section.
Source: 34 CFR 300.30 of the IDEA regulations.
Personally identifiable information includes, but is not limited
to, the following--
(a) The student's name;
(b) The name of the student's parent or other family members;
(c) The address of the student or student's family;
(d) A personal identifier, such as the student's Social Security
number, student number, or biometric record;
(e) Other indirect identifiers, such as the student's date of
birth, place of birth, and mother's maiden name;
(f) Other information that, alone or in combination, is linked or
linkable to a specific student that would allow a reasonable person in
the school community, who does not have personal knowledge of the
relevant circumstances, to identify the student with reasonable
certainty; or
(g) Information requested by a person who the educational agency or
institution reasonably believes knows the identity of the student to
whom the education record relates.
Source: 34 CFR 99.3 of the FERPA regulations; see also 34 CFR
300.32 of the IDEA regulations.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. 553), ED generally offers interested parties the
opportunity to comment on proposed priorities, definitions,
requirements, and selection criteria. Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA,
however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking requirements
regulations governing the first grant competition under a new or
substantially revised program authority. This is the first grant
competition for this initiative, as authorized under the Fiscal Year
2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act, and therefore qualifies for this
exemption. Due to the extensive public input received in the
development of this priority, and in order to ensure timely grant
awards, the Secretary has decided to forego formal public comment on
the priority, definitions, requirements, and selection criteria under
section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. The Secretary has gathered input on the
priority, definitions, requirements, and selection criteria through a
public input notice, which is posted on the following Web site:
www.ed.gov/promise. The priority, definitions, requirements, and
selection criteria will apply to the FY 2013 grant competition and any
subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded
applicants from this competition.

Program Authority: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Pub.
L. 112-74).

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Education Department debarment
and suspension regulations in 2 CFR part 3485.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: $100,000,000. Dependent upon the number
of awards that are made, these funds would largely be used to support
years one and two, and possibly year three, of PROMISE project
activities.
Estimated Range of Awards: $22,500,000-$50,000,000 for 5 years.
Estimated Average Award Size: $37,500,000 for 5 years.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3 to 6. Contingent upon the quality of
applications, the Secretary will make an award to at least one
consortium applicant in this competition.
Maximum Award: $50,000,000 for 5 years. We will not consider any
application that proposes an award size for a project period of up to
60 months exceeding an annual average of $6,500 per child SSI recipient
and his or her family served. Therefore, an applicant proposing to
serve the minimum treatment group size of 1,000 child SSI recipients
and their families for five years may request an annual average funding
level of up to $6,500 per child and his or her family, which
corresponds to a five-year award of up to $32,500,000.

[[Page 29743]]

An applicant requesting the maximum award of $50,000,000 must
propose to serve at least 1,539 child SSI recipients and their families
in the treatment group for a five year project period. Projects may
spend more than $6,500 per year to serve a particular child and his or
her family during the operation of the project. Projects may also
propose a funding level for a single 12-month budget period that
exceeds $6,500 per child and his or her family served. However, the
average annual funding level for all of the project's budget periods
may not exceed $6,500 per child SSI recipient and his or her family
served. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice
published in the Federal Register.

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months. Grants awarded under this
competition may be for a project period of up to five years. Depending
on the availability of funds, the Department will make continuation
awards for years two and three of the project period in accordance with
section 75.253 of EDGAR (34 CFR 75.253). However, to ensure that
continuation funds will be used only for high-quality and effective
projects, in determining whether to award continuation grants for years
four and five the Department will consider whether: (1) Funds are
available; (2) the grantee meets the requirements in section 75.253 of
EDGAR; and (3) the grantee is achieving the intended outcomes of the
grant (see specific factors to be considered in the Fourth and Fifth
Years section of this notice).

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants: Eligible applicants are the 50 States and
the District of Columbia. A consortium of States may also apply. A
grantee, subgrantee, or partner under this program is not eligible to
receive funding for the SSA national evaluation contract. An applicant
must meet the following requirements to be eligible to compete for
funding under this program:
(a) Single State applicant. A single State with adequate child SSI
recipients, as described in paragraph (d) of this section, may apply.
The State applicant must:
(1) Designate a lead coordinating entity, which must be a State
agency; and
(2) Submit an application that has been signed by the State's
Governor and the administrative head of the State's lead coordinating
entity.
(b) Consortium of States applicant. A consortium of States may
apply in order to meet the minimum sample size eligibility requirement,
as described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(1) One of the States participating in the consortium must submit
an application on behalf of the consortium;
(2) Each of the consortium States must designate a lead
coordinating entity, which must be a State agency;
(3) The application must be signed by the Governor of each State
and the administrative head of each State's lead coordinating entity;
(4) The applicant on behalf of the consortium is the grantee and is
legally responsible for the use of all grant funds and ensuring that
the project is carried out by the consortium in accordance with Federal
requirements;
(5) Each member of the consortium is legally responsible to carry
out the activities it agrees to perform (EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.129); and
(6) Each State participating in the consortium must have
partnerships with at least three common agencies (or equivalent for
administering common programs). (Described in Partnerships under
paragraph (a) of the Project Activities section of this notice.)
(7) Each State participating in the consortium must provide the
coordinated set of required and other services and supports as proposed
in the application (described in paragraph (b) of the Application
Requirements section of this notice.) This set of coordinated services
and supports must be the same across all States in the consortium.
(c) Lead coordinating entity. The lead coordinating entity must
partner with other State agencies and is encouraged to partner with
local agencies and organizations that play or have the potential to
play a substantial role in the development and implementation of
policies and practices affecting child SSI recipients and their
families (see Partnerships under the Project Activities section of this
notice and the related application requirements).
(d) Minimum sample size. The State or consortium of States must
have a sufficient number of children between the ages of 14 and 16 who
receive SSI to, within two years of the start of the project, recruit
the minimum sample size of 2,000 child SSI recipients into the MDP and
begin providing MDP interventions to half of those recruited. This
sample size is necessary to assess the effectiveness of each MDP. If
the MDP chooses to exceed the minimum sample size, half of the child
SSI recipients must still be assigned to the treatment group and half
to the control group. Each MDP will be evaluated separately because ED
and its Federal PROMISE partners expect grantees to vary in their
approaches to implementing PROMISE (see the Evaluation and Project
Assessment Activities section of this notice).
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Other General Requirements:
(a) The projects funded under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) Applicants and the grant recipients funded under this
competition must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26 in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an
application package via the Internet, from the Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs), or from the program office.
To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address:
www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. To obtain a copy from
ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S. Department of
Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. Telephone, toll free:
1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY),
call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at
its email address: [email protected].
If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to
identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.418P.
To obtain a copy from the program office, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
2. Notice of Intent To Apply: ED will be able to develop a more
efficient process for reviewing grant applications if it has a better
understanding of the number of entities that intend to apply

[[Page 29744]]

for funding under this competition. Therefore, we strongly encourage
each potential applicant to notify ED by sending a short email message
indicating the applicant's intent to submit an application for funding.
If the applicant is submitting an application on behalf of a consortium
also indicate the States that will be involved. The email need not
include information regarding the content of the proposed application.
This email notification should be sent to Corinne Weidenthal at
[email protected].
Applicants that fail to provide this email notification may still
apply for funding.
3. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition. Page
Limit: The application narrative (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 to the equivalent
of no more than 100 pages, using 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 narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support. However, the page
limit does apply to all of the application narrative section (Part
III).
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit; or if
you apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the page limit.
4. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: May 21, 2013.
Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 20, 2013.
Dates of Pre-Application Webinars: Interested parties are invited
to participate in pre-application webinars. The pre-application
webinars with staff from ED and its Federal PROMISE partners will be
held on May 30, 2013 and June 4, 2013; and a teleconference will be
held on June 27, 2013, between 2:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington, DC
time.
For further information about the pre-application webinars and
teleconference, see the PROMISE Web site at www.ed.gov/promise.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 19, 2013.
Applications for grants under this competition 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 in paper format by mail or hand delivery
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, please refer to section IV. 8. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
5. 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. Please note
that, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we have waived the standard 60-day
intergovernmental review period in order to make awards by the end of
FY 2013.
6. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
7. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, Central Contractor Registry, and System for Award Management:
To do business with the Department of Education, you must--
a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the Central
Contractor Registry (CCR)--and, after July 24, 2012, with the System
for Award Management (SAM), the Government's primary registrant
database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active CCR or SAM registration with current
information while your application is under review by the Department
and, if you are awarded a grant, during the project period.
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number
can be created within one business day.
If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or
organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service.
If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal
Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a
new TIN, please allow 2-5 weeks for your TIN to become active.
The CCR or SAM registration process may take five or more business
days to complete. If you are currently registered with the CCR, you may
not need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN
associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will
need to update your registration annually. This may take three or more
business days to complete. Information about SAM is available at
SAM.gov.
In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov,
you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized
Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with
Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the
following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp.
8. Other Submission Requirements:
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement
in accordance with the instructions in this section.

a. Electronic Submission of Applications

Applications for grants under the PROMISE competition, CFDA number
84.418P, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide
Grants.gov Apply site at 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 email
an electronic copy of a grant application to us.
We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format
unless, as

[[Page 29745]]

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 PROMISE
competition at www.Grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable
application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not
include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for
84.418, not 84.418P).
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 date and time
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must
be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as
otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if
it is received--that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov
system--after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply
with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from
Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application
because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after
4:30:00 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 under News and Events on the Department's G5
system home page at www.G5.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 you typically provide on the following forms: The
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications.
You must upload any narrative sections and all other
attachments to your application as files in a PDF (Portable Document)
read-only, non-modifiable format. Do not upload an interactive or
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only,
non-modifiable PDF or submit a password-protected file, we will not
review that material. Additional, detailed information on how to attach
files is in the application instructions.
Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send
a second notification to you by email. This second notification
indicates that the Department has received your application and has
assigned your application 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 experiencing problems submitting
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
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 4:30:00 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 described elsewhere in this notice.
If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC
time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this
notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you
experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk
Case Number. 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 4:30:00
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: The extensions to which we refer 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 application 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
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
prevents 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: Corinne Weidenthal, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland

[[Page 29746]]

Avenue SW., Room 4115, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC
20202-2600. FAX: (202) 245-7617.
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 following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.418P), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
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.
(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.
(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 84.418P), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 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 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including
suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are
submitting your application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a
notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not
receive this notification 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 Process and Evaluation Criteria

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are based on 34 CFR 75.210 and include selection criteria established
for PROMISE. They are:
(a) Quality of the project design (35 points).
(1) The extent to which the MDP identifies and plans to address
gaps and weaknesses in current State service systems for child SSI
recipients and their families.
(2) The extent to which the MDP's interventions are likely to meet
the needs of child SSI recipients and their families and achieve the
desired outcomes.
(3) The extent to which the applicant documents that proposed
services and supports are based on the best available evidence
including, where available, research that has demonstrated
statistically significant positive effects using the strongest possible
study designs such as those that meet the standards of the What Works
Clearinghouse.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ The What Works Clearinghouse uses objective and transparent
standards and procedures to make its assessment of the scientific
merit of studies of the effectiveness of education interventions,
and then summarizes the results of its systematic reviews in a set
of products. For further information: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed MDP, including whether costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(5) The extent to which the MDP has clearly articulated a model of
partnership, coordination, and service delivery that includes:
(i) An explicit and comprehensive strategy, with actions that are
expected to result in achieving the goals, objectives, and desired
outcomes of the proposed project; and
(ii) Measurable goals and benchmarks that are supported by
quantitative projections of the accomplishments for each activity and
that are attainable given the number of activities to be accomplished
and the project period, as well as a timetable with target dates for
achievement of the benchmarks and goals.
(6) Quality of the logic model, project implementation plan, and
timeline, including the extent to which there is a conceptual framework
underlying the demonstration activities and the quality of that
framework.
(b) Quality of participant recruitment plan (25 points).
(1) The extent to which the MDP has clearly articulated a realistic
outreach and recruitment plan that is likely to lead to at least 2000
child SSI recipients and their families giving consent to participate
in the MDP.
(c) Quality of management plan and personnel (35 points).
(1) The adequacy of the management plan that is designed to achieve
the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget.
(2) The adequacy of partnerships within the State or consortium
that are designed to achieve project objectives, including:
(i) An overall management plan for the partnerships, including
mechanisms for coordinating across agencies and organizations. The plan
should also describe how the partnership will be organized to carry out
the project, including clearly defined roles and responsibilities for
each partner;
(ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners,
including at least three of the required partners, to maximize the
impact of the MDP;
(iii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
Partner commitment should be demonstrated in the form of MOUs,
substantive non-form letters of intent, or other documents that show
strategic relationships are preferably already in place, that the
partners have prior experience collaborating to serve low-income
children with disabilities, that each partner understands its roles and
responsibilities, and that the leadership of each partner supports the
proposed activities; and
(iv) A system for holding partners accountable for performance in
accordance with the MOU, letters of

[[Page 29747]]

intent, or other commitments among the partners.
(3) The capacity of the project to execute necessary data
collection protocols and requirements in a high-quality manner,
including:
(i) Implementing a process to collect the data needed to track the
required outcome measures, project-specific measures, and other
necessary information over time and across partner agencies and
organizations;
(ii) Adequately documenting project activities, referrals,
services, and supports received by each child SSI recipient and his or
her family, and any resulting State systems change; and
(iii) Cooperating with the national evaluator on all matters
necessary to undertake rigorous evaluation and measurement of the
project.
(4) The quality of key personnel, including:
(i) A qualified and sufficient staff to accomplish the goals of the
project, including the techniques proposed to ensure that an adequate
supply of qualified staff are enlisted in a timely manner;
(ii) The extent to which there is evidence that key project staff,
by virtue of their training or professional experience, have the
requisite knowledge to design, implement, and manage projects of the
size and scope of the proposed project; and
(iii) The extent to which the identified key personnel have the
requisite authority to commit their agency and its resources to the
implementation of the project.
(d) Significance (20 points).
(1) The extent to which the proposed project will result in systems
change and improvement.
(2) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the
development and advancement of knowledge and practices in the field.
(3) The extent to which the project is designed to raise the
expectations held by, and about, participating child SSI recipients
regarding their education and employment outcomes.
(4) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project.
(e) Capacity for continuous feedback and improvement (10 points).
(1) The adequacy of plans and procedures for ensuring continuous
feedback and improvement in the implementation of the proposed project.
(2) The capacity for incorporating participating child SSI
recipient and family feedback, including:
(i) The extent to which the proposed project seeks, encourages, and
includes parental involvement and feedback; and
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project seeks, encourages,
and includes feedback from participating child SSI recipients and
encourages their self-determination.
2. Review and Selection Process: The Department will screen
applications submitted in accordance with the requirements in this
notice, and will determine which applications have met eligibility
requirements and other requirements in this notice. Additional
information about the review process will be published on the program's
Web site.
We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in
any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under
34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying
out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement
of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The
Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a
timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable
quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that, for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications. However, if the Department decides to
select an equal number of applications in each group for funding, this
may result in different cut-off points for fundable applications in
each group.
4. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary
may impose special conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is
not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance;
has a financial or other management system that does not meet the
standards in 34 CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has not fulfilled
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

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
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
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: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) 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 directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
4. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.253, the

[[Page 29748]]

extent to which a grantee has made ``substantial progress toward
meeting the objectives in its approved application.'' This
consideration includes the review of a grantee's progress in meeting
the targets and projected outcomes in its approved application, and
whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent
with its approved application and budget. In making a continuation
grant, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in
compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including
those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial
assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and
110.23).

VII. Agency Contact

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Corinne Weidenthal, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 4115, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2600. Telephone: (202) 245-6529 or by email:
[email protected].
If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS),
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

VIII. Other Information

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting
the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 20202-2550.
Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS,
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: 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 via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can 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). To use PDF
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.

Dated: May 16, 2013.
Michael K. Yudin,
Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-12083 Filed 5-20-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P