[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10099-10102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03877]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Community Living

[CFDA Number: 84.133B-1]


Proposed Priority--National Institute on Disability, Independent 
Living, and Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Research and 
Training Centers

AGENCY: Administration for Community Living, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority.

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

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the Administration for Community Living 
proposes a priority for the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center 
(RRTC) Program administered by the National Institute on Disability, 
Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR). 
Specifically, this notice proposes a priority for an RRTC on Employer 
Practices Leading to Successful Employment Outcomes for Individuals 
with Disabilities. We take this action to focus research attention on 
an area of national need. We intend this priority to contribute to 
improved employment practices and successful employment outcomes for 
individuals with disabilities.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 27, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
or via postal mail or commercial delivery. We will not accept comments 
submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after the comment 
period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, please 
submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the Docket 
ID at the top of your comments.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to 
submit your comments electronically. Information on using 
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents, 
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site 
under ``Are you new to the site?''
     Postal Mail or Commercial Delivery: If you mail or deliver 
your comments about these proposed regulations, address them to 
Patricia Barrett, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 400 
Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, 
DC 20202-2700.
    Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments 
received from members of the public available for public viewing in 
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include 
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly 
available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Barrett. Telephone: (202) 
245-6211 or by email: [email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice of proposed priority is in 
concert with NIDILRR's currently approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The 
Plan, which was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2013 (78 
FR 20299), can be accessed on the Internet at the following site: 
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
    The Plan identifies a need for research and training regarding 
employment of individuals with disabilities. To address this need, 
NIDILRR seeks to: (1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and 
rehabilitation research; (2) foster an exchange of research findings, 
expertise, and other information to advance knowledge and understanding 
of the needs of individuals with disabilities and their family members, 
including those from among traditionally underserved populations; (3) 
determine effective practices, programs, and policies to improve 
community living and participation, employment, and health and function 
outcomes for individuals with disabilities of all ages; (4) identify 
research gaps and areas for promising research investments; (5) 
identify and promote effective mechanisms for integrating research and 
practice; and (6) disseminate research findings to all major 
stakeholder groups, including individuals with disabilities and their 
family members in formats that are appropriate and meaningful to them.
    This notice proposes one priority that NIDILRR intends to use for 
one or more competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2015 and possibly later 
years. NIDILRR is under no obligation to make an award under this 
priority. The decision to make an award will be based on the quality of 
applications received and available funding. NIDILRR may publish 
additional priorities, as needed.
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
this proposed priority. To ensure that your comments have maximum 
effect in developing the final priority, we urge you to identify 
clearly the specific topic within the priority that each comment 
addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall 
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from this 
proposed priority. Please let us know of any further ways we could 
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving 
the effective and efficient administration of the program.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public 
comments by following the instructions found under the ``Are you new to 
the site?'' portion of the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
wwww.regulations.gov. Any comments sent to NIDILRR via postal mail or 
commercial delivery can be viewed in Room 5142, 550 12th Street SW., 
PCP, Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., 
Washington, DC

[[Page 10100]]

time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the 
Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate 
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who 
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the 
public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an 
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Disability and 
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is to plan and 
conduct research, demonstration projects, training, and related 
activities, including international activities, to develop methods, 
procedures, and rehabilitation technology that maximize the full 
inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent living, 
family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals 
with disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe 
disabilities, and to improve the effectiveness of services authorized 
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).

Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers

    The purpose of the RRTCs, which are funded through the Disability 
and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is to achieve 
the goals of, and improve the effectiveness of, services authorized 
under the Rehabilitation Act through well-designed research, training, 
technical assistance, and dissemination activities in important topical 
areas as specified by NIDILRR. These activities are designed to benefit 
rehabilitation service providers, individuals with disabilities, family 
members, policymakers and other research stakeholders. Additional 
information on the RRTC program can be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/index.html#types.
    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(2).
    Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
    Proposed Priority: This notice contains one proposed priority.

RRTC on Employer Practices Leading to Successful Employment Outcomes 
for Individuals With Disabilities

    Background: Individuals with disabilities experience lower rates 
and quality of employment than those without disabilities. The 
percentage of the population that is employed is lower for individuals 
with disabilities (17.6%) than for individuals without disabilities 
(64.0%), and this difference has been relatively stable since 2012 
(U.S. Department of Labor, 2014a, 2014b). Of those individuals who are 
employed, individuals with disabilities are more likely to work part 
time (34%) than are individuals without disabilities (19%) (U.S. 
Department of Labor, 2014a), and individuals with disabilities earn 
less than do individuals without disabilities (Brault, 2012; Schur et 
al., 2009; U.S. Department of Commerce, 2013). In addition, employees 
with disabilities have more limited opportunities for experiences 
related to retention and advancement, such as training and 
participation in decision-making, and less job security (Schur et al., 
2009).
    Although the employment of individuals with disabilities is the 
result of a complex interaction among many variables, employer 
practices comprise an important factor in the employment of individuals 
with disabilities. In recent years, researchers (Bruy[egrave]re & 
Barrington, 2012; Chan et al., 2010a) have recognized the importance of 
considering demand-side, i.e., employer, variables to understand and 
decrease the difference in employment outcomes between individuals with 
and without disabilities. In addition, a number of Federal initiatives 
have highlighted the need for employers to change their practices to 
improve employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities (e.g., 
new regulations for Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, establishing 
nationwide 7% employment goals for qualified individuals with 
disabilities for companies doing business with the Federal government; 
Executive Order 13548 (2010), ``Increasing Federal Employment of 
Individuals with Disabilities'').
    A number of employer practices are associated with better 
employment outcomes (i.e., hiring, retention, or advancement) for 
individuals with disabilities. These include, but are not limited to: 
Employer knowledge of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the 
inclusion of disability in employer diversity plans, diversity training 
for management, targeted recruitment, and employer-provided 
accommodations (Bruy[egrave]re & Barrington, 2012; Chan et al., 2010b; 
Hirsh & Kmec, 2009; Schur et al., 2009). Factors associated with 
employment of individuals with disabilities vary by employer size, 
industry type, and sector of the economy (U.S. Department of Labor, 
2008; Bruy[egrave]re & Barrington, 2012; Fraser et al., 2010).
    However, knowledge of employer practices that are associated with 
better employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities does not 
tell us whether those practices actually caused those outcomes 
(Bruy[egrave]re & Barrington, 2012; Fraser et al., 2011). In addition 
to the need for a stronger evidence base for the effectiveness of 
promising employer practices, there is a need for the development of 
measures that employers can use to track employment outcomes for 
individuals with disabilities (Erickson et al., 2013; Von Schrader et 
al., 2013). Both of these types of knowledge are critical to the 
development of effective workplace programs and practices to improve 
employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

References

Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010. U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US 
Census Bureau.
Bruy[egrave]re, S. M., & Barrington, L. (2012). Current issues, 
controversies, and solutions. In S.M. Bruy[egrave]re and L. 
Barrington, (Eds.), Employment and work. Sage Publications.
Chan, F., Strauser, D., Gervey, R., & Lee, E-J. (2010a). 
Introduction to demand-side factors related to employment of people 
with disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 20, 407-
411.
Chan, F., Straser, D., Maher, P., Lee, E-J., Jones, R., & Johnson, 
E. T. (2010b). Demand-side factors related to employment of people 
with disabilities: A survey of employers in the Midwest region of 
the United Sates. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 20, 412-
419.
Erickson, W. A., von Schrader, S., Bruy[egrave]re, S. M., & VanLooy, 
S. A. (2013). The employment environment: Employer perspectives, 
policies, and practices regarding the employment of persons with 
disabilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 0034355213509841.
Exec. Order No. 13548, 3 C. F. R. 168 (2010).
Fraser, R. T., Johnson, K., Hebert, J., Ajzen, I., Copeland, J., 
Brown, P., & Chan, F. (2010). Understanding employers' hiring 
intentions in relation to qualified workers with disabilities: 
Preliminary findings. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 20(4), 
420-426.
Fraser, R., Ajzen, I., Johnson, K., Hebert, J., & Chan, F. (2011). 
Understanding employers' hiring intention in relation to qualified 
workers with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 
35(1), 1-11.
Hirsh, E., & Kmec, J. A. (2009). Human resource structures: Reducing 
discrimination or raising rights awareness?. Industrial Relations: A 
Journal of Economy and Society, 48(3), 512-532.

[[Page 10101]]

Schur, L., Kruse, D., Blasi, J., & Blanck, P. (2009). Is disability 
disabling in all workplaces? Workplace disparities and corporate 
culture. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 
48(3), 381-410.
Von Schrader, S., Malzer, V., & Bruy[egrave]re, S. (2013). 
Perspectives on disability disclosure: The importance of employer 
practices and workplace climate. Employee Responsibilities and 
Rights Journal, 26(4), 237-255.
U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. (2013). Selected 
economic characteristics for the civilian noninstitutionalized 
population by disability status. 2013 American Community Survey 1-
year estimates. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_13_1YR_S1811&prodType=table 
Retrieved November 19, 2014.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014a). 
Persons with A Disability: Labor Force Characteristics--2013. 
Available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/disabl.pdf 
Retrieved November 14, 2014.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (2014b). Table 
A6. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, and 
disability status, not seasonally adjusted. Available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm Retrieved November 19, 2014.
U.S. Department of Labor, Office on Disability Employment Policy 
(2008). Survey of Employer Perspectives on the Employment of People 
with Disabilities. Technical report. Available at http://www.dol.gov/odep/documents/survey_report_jan_09.doc. Retrieved 
February 2, 2015.
    Definitions: The research that is proposed under this priority must 
be focused on one or more stages of research. If the RRTC is to conduct 
research that can be categorized under more than one research stage, or 
research that progresses from one stage to another, those research 
stages must be clearly specified. For purposes of this priority, the 
stages of research are from the notice of final priorities and 
definitions published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2013 (78 FR 
34261).
    (a) Exploration and Discovery means the stage of research that 
generates hypotheses or theories by conducting new and refined analyses 
of data, producing observational findings, and creating other sources 
of research-based information. This research stage may include 
identifying or describing the barriers to and facilitators of improved 
outcomes of individuals with disabilities, as well as identifying or 
describing existing practices, programs, or policies that are 
associated with important aspects of the lives of individuals with 
disabilities. Results achieved under this stage of research may inform 
the development of interventions or lead to evaluations of 
interventions or policies. The results of the exploration and discovery 
stage of research may also be used to inform decisions or priorities.
    (b) Intervention Development means the stage of research that 
focuses on generating and testing interventions that have the potential 
to improve outcomes for individuals with disabilities. Intervention 
development involves determining the active components of possible 
interventions, developing measures that would be required to illustrate 
outcomes, specifying target populations, conducting field tests, and 
assessing the feasibility of conducting a well-designed interventions 
study. Results from this stage of research may be used to inform the 
design of a study to test the efficacy of an intervention.
    (c) Intervention Efficacy means the stage of research during which 
a project evaluates and tests whether an intervention is feasible, 
practical, and has the potential to yield positive outcomes for 
individuals with disabilities. Efficacy research may assess the 
strength of the relationships between an intervention and outcomes, and 
may identify factors or individual characteristics that affect the 
relationship between the intervention and outcomes. Efficacy research 
can inform decisions about whether there is sufficient evidence to 
support ``scaling-up'' an intervention to other sites and contexts. 
This stage of research can include assessing the training needed for 
wide-scale implementation of the intervention, and approaches to 
evaluation of the intervention in real world applications.
    (d) Scale-Up Evaluation means the stage of research during which a 
project analyzes whether an intervention is effective in producing 
improved outcomes for individuals with disabilities when implemented in 
a real-world setting. During this stage of research, a project tests 
the outcomes of an evidence-based intervention in different settings. 
It examines the challenges to successful replication of the 
intervention, and the circumstances and activities that contribute to 
successful adoption of the intervention in real-world settings. This 
stage of research may also include well-designed studies of an 
intervention that has been widely adopted in practice, but that lacks a 
sufficient evidence-base to demonstrate its effectiveness.
    Proposed Priority: The Administrator for Community Living proposes 
a priority for an RRTC on Employer Practices Leading to Successful 
Employment Outcomes for Individuals with Disabilities. The purpose of 
the RRTC is to generate new knowledge about effective employer 
practices that support successful employment outcomes for individuals 
with disabilities. The RRTC must contribute to improving the employment 
outcomes of individuals with disabilities by:
    (a) Identifying promising employer practices most strongly 
associated with desired employment outcomes for individuals with 
disabilities as well as the prevalence of these practices. Practices 
should include those related to the hiring, retention, and advancement 
of individuals with disabilities.
    (b) Developing measures of employment outcomes that include hiring, 
retention, and advancement of individuals with disabilities. These 
measures must be developed for use by employers and other stakeholders. 
These measures may also include employment quality, such as, but not 
limited to, earnings, full- or part-time employment, or opportunities 
for on-the-job training. In developing these measures, the RRTC must 
collaborate with the NIDILRR-funded RRTC on Employment Policy and 
Measurement.
    (c) Generating new knowledge of the effectiveness of promising 
employer practices by identifying or developing, and then implementing 
and evaluating pilot workplace program(s) based on practices identified 
in (a). This work should be conducted in employment settings in 
collaboration with employers, and should include:
    (1) Implementation of practices that are particularly likely to be 
effective in improving employment outcomes for individuals with 
disabilities;
    (2) Implementation of practices among different types of employers 
(e.g., small v. large employers, private v. public sector employers);
    (3) Collection of data using, but not limited to, outcome measures 
from (b) above.
    (d) Focusing its research on one or more specific stages of 
research. If the RRTC is to conduct research that can be categorized 
under more than one of the research stages, or research that progresses 
from one stage to another, those stages should be clearly justified.
    (e) Serving as a national resource center related to employment for 
individuals with disabilities, their families, and other stakeholders 
by conducting knowledge translation activities that include, but are 
not limited to:
    (1) Providing information and technical assistance to employers, 
employment service providers, employer groups, individuals with

[[Page 10102]]

disabilities and their representatives, and other key stakeholders;
    (2) Providing training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to employers and employer groups, to facilitate more 
effective employer practices for individuals with disabilities. This 
training may be provided through conferences, workshops, public 
education programs, in-service training programs, and similar 
activities;
    (3) Disseminating research-based information and materials related 
to increasing employment levels for individuals with disabilities; and
    (4) Involving key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted 
under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this priority to promote the new 
knowledge generated by the RRTC.
    Final Priority: We will announce the final priority in a notice in 
the Federal Register. We will determine the final priority after 
considering responses to this notice and other information available to 
the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing 
additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection 
criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

    Note:  This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through 
a notice in the Federal Register or in a Funding Opportunity 
Announcement posted at www.grants.gov.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether 
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to 
the requirements of the Executive Order and subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely 
to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive Order.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866.
    We have also reviewed this regulatory action under Executive Order 
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in 
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 
13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing this proposed priority only upon a reasoned 
determination that its benefits would justify its costs. In choosing 
among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches 
that would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, 
the Department believes that this proposed priority is consistent with 
the principles in Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with both Executive Orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those 
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
    The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects 
and Centers Program have been well established over the years. Projects 
similar to one envisioned by the proposed priority have been completed 
successfully, and the proposed priority would generate new knowledge 
through research. The new RRTC would generate, disseminate, and promote 
the use of new information that would improve outcomes for individuals 
with disabilities in the area of employment.
    Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive 
Order 12372.
    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: February 19, 2015.
Kathy Greenlee,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-03877 Filed 2-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4154-01-P