[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11770-11778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05026]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities--Model Demonstration Projects To Improve Literacy Outcomes
for English Learners With Disabilities in Grades Three Through Five or
Three Through Six
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY:
Overview Information: Technical Assistance and Dissemination to
Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Model
Demonstration Projects to Improve Literacy Outcomes for English
Learners with Disabilities in Grades Three through Five or Three
through Six.
Notice inviting applications for a new award for fiscal year (FY)
2016.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326M.
DATES:
Applications Available: March 7, 2016.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 21, 2016.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 20, 2016.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve
results for children with disabilities by providing technical
assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating
useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by
scientifically based research.
Priorities: This competition has one absolute priority. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority is from
allowable activities specified in the statute or otherwise authorized
in the statute (see sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1463, 1481(d).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2016 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition,
this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we
consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Model Demonstration Projects to Improve Literacy Outcomes for
English Learners with Disabilities in Grades Three through Five or
Three through Six.
Background: IDEA has authorized model demonstrations to improve
early intervention, educational, or transitional results for children
\1\ with disabilities since the mid-1970s. For the purposes of this
priority, a model is a set of existing evidence-based interventions and
implementation strategies (i.e., core components) that research
suggests will improve child, teacher, or system outcomes when
implemented with fidelity. Model demonstrations involve investigating
the degree to which a given model can be implemented and sustained in
typical settings, by staff employed in those settings, while achieving
outcomes similar to those attained under research conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purpose of this priority, the term ``children''
includes infants, toddlers, children, and youth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this priority is to fund three cooperative
agreements to establish and operate model demonstration projects that
will assess how models can: (a) Improve literacy outcomes for English
Learners \2\ with disabilities (ELSWDs) in grades three through five or
three through six, within a multi-tier system of supports (MTSS)
framework; \3\ (b) use culturally responsive principles; \4\ and (c) be
implemented by educators and sustained in general and special education
settings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For purposes of this priority, the term English Learners
refers to those students considered to be Limited English Proficient
(LEP) students or English Learners, as those terms are defined under
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA), and
in the State in which the grantee implements its model demonstration
projects under this priority.
\3\ Multi-tier System of Supports means a comprehensive
continuum of evidence-based, systemic practices to support a rapid
response to students' needs, with regular observation to facilitate
data-based instructional decisionmaking.
\4\ Culturally responsive principles promote redesigning the
learning environments to support the development and success of all
students. Some examples of incorporating culturally responsive
principles into learning environments include communicating high
expectations to all students, incorporating students' cultural and
home experiences into lessons by reshaping the curriculum to reflect
students' experiences, and engaging students in activities where
they can converse with one another on topics that tap into their
background knowledge and experiences (Aceves & Orosco, 2014; Gay,
2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most recent average scale scores \5\ in reading for fourth
graders on the
[[Page 11771]]
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, 2014) by subgroup
were: English Learners (ELs), 192; students with disabilities (SWDs),
188; ELSWDs, 151; and students who were not ELs or SWDs, 230. Seven
percent of ELs, 10 percent of SWDs, and 2 percent of ELSWDs scored at
the proficient level compared to 31 percent of students who were not
ELs or SWDs (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). These figures are
especially troubling because, according to assessments using criteria
that correspond to the NAEP skill levels, children who are not
proficient readers by the end of third grade are four times more likely
to drop out of school than their peers who are proficient readers
(Hernandez, 2012). The disparities in achievement as illustrated by
these data underscore the challenges that schools encounter in
educating ELSWDs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The NAEP Reading scale ranges from 0 to 500. Source: U.S.
Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National
Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational
Progress, 2013 Reading Assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children must possess the ability to read for understanding in
order to meet college- and career-ready standards (Foorman & Wanzek,
2015). However, children must first develop basic literacy skills,
including phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and
comprehension, to become proficient readers (National Reading Panel,
2000) and to read for understanding.
Therefore, models should be designed to build literacy skills for
ELSWDs as a stepping stone to reading for understanding. Approaches to
improve literacy must include a combination of effective instruction,
modeling, professional development, and evidence-based teaching
practices that are appropriate for ELSWDs in both classrooms and small
group settings (Giroir, Grimaldo, Vaughn, & Roberts, 2015; Klingner &
Soltero-Gonzalez, 2009). In addition, research suggests that proposed
models should be replicable across multiple contexts (e.g., content
area instruction, small group settings, multiple school sites) with a
goal of scaling-up for wider use (Domitrovich et al., 2008).
Priority: The purpose of this priority is to fund three cooperative
agreements to establish and operate model demonstration projects that
will assess how models can: (a) Improve literacy outcomes for ELSWDs in
grades three through five or three through six, within an MTSS
framework; (b) use culturally responsive principles; and (c) be
implemented by educators and sustained in general and special education
settings. Applicants must propose models that meet the following
requirements:
(a) The model's core intervention components (e.g., services,
assessments, processes, data collection instruments) must include:
(1) A framework that includes, at a minimum, universal screening,
progress monitoring, and effective core instruction; \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ School sites that are selected must have an existing MTSS
framework that demonstrates strong core instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Culturally responsive principles within each component of the
framework;
(3) Interventions that meet the needs of the specific population
and are supported by scientifically based research;
(4) Practices that are valid and reliable and ensure appropriate
identification of ELs as having disabilities;
(5) Measures of literacy outcomes,\7\ using standardized measures
when applicable, and teacher and systems outcomes, when appropriate;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Applicants must ensure the confidentiality of individual
data, consistent with the requirements of section 444 of the General
Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g), commonly known as the
``Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act'' (FERPA), and State
laws or regulations concerning the confidentiality of individual
records. Final FERPA regulatory changes became effective January 3,
2012, and include requirements for data sharing. Applicants are
encouraged to review the final FERPA regulations published on
December 2, 2011 (76 FR 75604). Questions can be sent to the Family
Policy Compliance Office (www.ed.gov/fpco) at (202) 260-3887 or
[email protected].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Measures of language proficiency in the child's first language
and English; and
(7) Measures of the model's social validity, i.e., measures of
educators', parents', and students' satisfaction with the model
components, processes, and outcomes.
(b) The model's core implementation components must include:
(1) Strategies for selecting \8\ and recruiting sites, including
approaches to introducing the model to and promoting the model among
site participants,\9\ with consideration given to the following
criteria:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For factors to consider when selecting model demonstration
sites, the applicant should refer to Assessing Sites for Model
Demonstration: Lessons Learned for OSEP Grantees at http://mdcc.sri.com/documents/reports/MDCC_Site_Assessment_Brief_09-30-11.pdf. The document also contains a site assessment tool.
\9\ For factors to consider while preparing for model
demonstration implementation, the applicant should refer to
Preparing for Model Demonstration Implementation at http://mdcc.sri.com/documents/MDCC_PreparationStage_Brief_Apr2013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Each project must include at least three elementary schools
with students in grades three through five or three through six. Each
school must have at least 40 percent and no fewer than 100 students who
have been identified as ELs in these grades; and
(ii) In each of the schools, at least 10 percent of the identified
ELs in grades three through five or three through six must be ELSWDs
with literacy goals on their Individualized Education Programs (IEPs);
(2) A lag site implementation, which involves selecting one of the
three sites in year one of the project period to begin implementation
of the project's model for at least three years, with the other two
schools beginning implementation in year two;
(3) A professional development component that includes an evidence-
based coaching strategy to enable staff to implement the interventions
with fidelity; and
(4) Measures of the performance of the professional development
(e.g., improvements in teacher instructional delivery and knowledge)
required by paragraph (b)(3) of this section, including measures of the
fidelity of implementation.
(c) The core strategies for sustaining the model must include:
(1) Documentation that permits current and future practitioners to
replicate and tailor the model at any site; \10\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For a guide on documenting model demonstration sustainment
and replication, the applicant should refer to Planning for
Replication and Dissemination From the Start: Guidelines for Model
Demonstration Projects at http://mdcc.sri.com/documents/MDCC_ReplicationBrief_SEP2013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Strategies for the grantee to sustain the model, such as
developing easily accessible training materials or coordinating with TA
providers who might serve as future trainers.
To be considered for funding under this absolute priority,
applicants must meet the application requirements contained in this
priority. Each project funded under this absolute priority also must
meet the programmatic and administrative requirements specified in the
priority.
Application Requirements. An applicant must include in its
application--
(a) A project design that is at least supported by strong theory
(as defined in this notice) that supports the promise (e.g., evidence
base) of the proposed model, its components, and processes to improve
literacy outcomes for ELSWDs;
(b) A logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed model demonstration
project. A logic model used in connection with this priority
[[Page 11772]]
communicates how a project will achieve its outcomes and provides a
framework for both the formative and summative evaluations of the
project;
Note: The following Web sites provide examples for constructing
logic models: www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html and www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel/index.asp.
(c) A description of the activities and measures to be incorporated
into the proposed model demonstration project to improve literacy
outcomes for ELSWDs, including a timeline of how and when the
components are introduced within the model. A detailed and complete
description must include the following:
(1) All the intervention components, including culturally
responsive principles and, at a minimum, those components listed under
paragraph (a) under the heading Priority, and the supporting
literature.
(2) The existing and proposed child, teacher, and system outcome
measures and social validity measures. The measures should be described
as completely as possible, referenced as appropriate, and included,
when available, in an appendix.
(3) All the implementation components, including, at a minimum,
those listed under paragraph (b) under the heading Priority, and the
supporting literature. The existing or proposed implementation fidelity
measures, including those measuring the fidelity of the professional
development strategy, should be described as completely as possible,
referenced as appropriate, and included, when available, in an
appendix. In addition, this description should include:
(i) Demographics, including, at a minimum, ethnicity, gender, grade
level, and age for all ELSWDs at all implementation sites that have
been identified and successfully recruited for the purposes of this
application using the selection and recruitment strategies described in
paragraph (b)(1) under the heading Priority;
(ii) Whether the implementation sites are high-poverty, high-need,
rural, urban, or suburban LEAs or schools; and
Note: Applicants are encouraged to identify, to the extent
possible, the sites willing to participate in the applicant's model
demonstration. Final site selection will be determined in
consultation with the OSEP project officer following the kick-off
meeting described in paragraph (f)(1) of these application
requirements.
(iii) The lag design for implementation consistent with the
requirements in paragraph (b)(2) under the heading Priority.
(4) All the strategies to promote sustaining and replicating the
model, including, at a minimum, those listed in paragraph (c) under the
heading Priority.
(d) A description of the evaluation activities and measures to be
incorporated into the proposed model demonstration project. A detailed
and complete description must include:
(1) A formative evaluation plan, consistent with the project's
logic model, that includes evaluation questions, source(s) for data, a
timeline for data collection, and analysis plans. The plan must show
how the outcome (e.g., child measures, social validity) and
implementation data (e.g., fidelity) will be used separately or in
combination to improve the project during the performance period. The
plan also must outline how these data will be reviewed by project
staff, when they will be reviewed, 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
(2) A summative evaluation plan, including a timeline, to collect
and analyze data on positive changes to child, teacher, and systems
outcome measures over time or relative to comparison groups that can be
reasonably attributable to project activities. The plan must show how
the child or system outcome and implementation data collected by the
project will be used separately or in combination to demonstrate the
promise of the model.
(e) A budget 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;
(2) A three-day Project Directors' Conference in Washington, DC,
occurring twice during the project performance period; and
(3) Four travel days spread across years two through four of the
project period to attend planning meetings, Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP, to be held in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer.
Other Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this
priority, each project, at a minimum, must:
(a) Communicate and collaborate on an ongoing basis with other
relevant Department-funded projects, including, at minimum, OSEP-funded
TA centers that might disseminate information on the model or support
the scale-up efforts of an effective model;
(b) Maintain ongoing (i.e., at least monthly) telephone and email
communication with the OSEP project officer and the other model
demonstration projects funded under this priority; and
(c) If the project maintains a Web site, include relevant
information about the model, the intervention, and the demonstration
activities that meets government- or industry-recognized standards for
accessibility.
Competitive Preference Priority: Within this absolute priority, we
give competitive preference to applications that address the following
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional two
points to an application that meets this priority.
The priority is:
Evidence of Promise Supporting the Proposed Model (2 Points).
Projects that are supported by evidence that meets the conditions
set out in the definition of ``evidence of promise'' (as defined in
this notice). The proposed project must include:
(a) A detailed review of the research that meets at least the
evidence of promise standard and that supports the promise (e.g.,
evidence base) of the proposed model, its components, and processes to
improve literacy outcomes for ELSWDs;
(b) A logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed model demonstration
project. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its
outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative and summative
evaluations of the project; and
(c) A description of the activities and measures to be incorporated
into the proposed model demonstration project to improve literacy
outcomes for ELSWDs, including how and when the components are
introduced within the model. A detailed and complete description must
contain all of the implementation components, including, at a minimum,
those listed under paragraph (a) and linked to supporting literature.
The existing or proposed implementation fidelity measures, including
those measuring the fidelity of the professional development strategy,
should be described as completely as possible, referenced as
appropriate, and included, when available, in an appendix.
Note: An applicant addressing this competitive preference
priority must identify up to two study citations that meet this
standard.
[[Page 11773]]
References
Aceves, T.C., & Orosco, M.J. (2014). Culturally responsive teaching
(Document No. IC-2). Retrieved from University of Florida,
Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability,
and Reform Center Web site: http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/innovation-configurations/.
Domitrovich, C., Bradshaw, C., Poduska, J., Hoagwood, K., Buckley,
J., Olin, S., . . . Ialongo, N. (2008). Maximizing the
implementation quality of evidence-based preventive interventions in
schools: A conceptual framework. Advances in School Mental Health
Promotion, 1(3), 6-28. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1754730X.2008.9715730.
Foorman, B.R., & Wanzek, J. (2015). Classroom Reading Instruction
for all Students. In S.R. Jimerson, K. Burns, & A.M. VanDerHeyden
(EDs.), Handbook of Response to Intervention (pp. 235-252). New
York, NY: Springer.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research,
and practice. New York, NY: Teacher's College Press.
Giroir, S., Grimaldo, L.R., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G. (2015).
Interactive read-alouds for English learners in the elementary
grades. Reading Teacher, 68(8), 639-648.
Hernandez, D. (2012). Double Jeopardy. How Third Grade Reading
Skills and Poverty Influence High School Graduation. Retrieved from
Annie E. Casey Foundation Web site: http://gradelevelreading.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Double-Jeopardy-Report-030812-for-web1.pdf.
Klingner, J., & Soltero-Gonzalez, L. (2009). Culturally and
linguistically responsive literacy instruction for English Language
Learners with learning disabilities. Multiple Voices for Ethnically
Diverse Exceptional Learners, 12(1), 4-20.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000).
Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An
evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on
reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH
Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
(2014). National Center for Education Statistics, National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), The Nation's Report Card.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://nationsreportcard.gov.
Definitions: The following definitions apply to the priority:
Evidence of promise means there is empirical evidence to support
the theoretical linkage(s) between at least one critical component and
at least one relevant outcome presented in the logic model for the
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice. Specifically,
evidence of promise means the conditions in both paragraphs (i) and
(ii) of this definition are met:
(i) There is at least one study that is a--
(A) Correlational study with statistical controls for selection
bias;
(B) Quasi-experimental design study that meets the What Works
Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations; or
(C) Randomized controlled trial that meets the What Works
Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with or without reservations.
(ii) The study referenced in paragraph (i) of this definition found
a statistically significant or substantively important (defined as a
difference of 0.25 standard deviations or larger) favorable association
between at least one critical component and one relevant outcome
presented in the logic model for the proposed process, product,
strategy, or practice.
English Learner, when used with respect to an individual, means an
individual--
(A) Who is aged 3 through 21;
(B) Who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school
or secondary school;
(C)(i) Who was not born in the United States or whose native
language is a language other than English;
(ii)(I) Who is a Native American or Alaska Native, or a native
resident of the outlying areas; and
(II) Who comes from an environment where a language other than
English has had a significant impact on the individual's level of
English language proficiency; or
(iii) Who is migratory, whose native language is a language other
than English, and who comes from an environment where a language other
than English is dominant; and
(D) Whose difficulties in speaking, reading, writing, or
understanding the English language may be sufficient to deny the
individual--
(i) The ability to meet the State's proficient level of achievement
on State assessments described in section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA;
(ii) The ability to successfully achieve in classrooms where the
language of instruction is English; or
(iii) The opportunity to participate fully in society.
Logic model (also referred to as theory of action) means a well-
specified conceptual framework that identifies key components of the
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice (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.
Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an experimental design by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. These studies, depending on design and implementation, can
meet What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations (but
not What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations).
Randomized controlled trial means a study that employs random
assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, schools, or
districts to receive the intervention being evaluated (the treatment
group) or not to receive the intervention (the control group). The
estimated effectiveness of the intervention is the difference between
the average outcomes for the treatment group and for the control group.
These studies, depending on design and implementation, can meet What
Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations.
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) (or the ultimate
outcome if not related to students) the proposed process, product,
strategy, or practice is designed to improve; consistent with the
specific goals of a program.
Strong theory means a rationale for the proposed process, product,
strategy, or practice that includes a logic model.
What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards means the standards set
forth in the What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook
(Version 3.0, March 2014), which can be found at the following link:
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and other
requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to the absolute priority and
related definitions in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82,
84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget
Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as
regulations of
[[Page 11774]]
the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal
Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the
Department in 2 CFR part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $1,200,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2017 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $375,000 to $400,000.
Estimated Average Size of Award: $400,000.
Maximum Award: We will reject and not review any application that
proposes a budget exceeding $400,000 for a single budget period of 12
months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 48 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies (SEAs); LEAs,
including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State
law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations;
outlying areas; freely associated States; Indian tribes or tribal
organizations; and for-profit organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Eligible Subgrantees: (a) Under 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee may
award subgrants--to directly carry out project activities described in
its application--to the following types of entities: SEAs; LEAs,
including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State
law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations;
outlying areas; freely associated States; Indian tribes or tribal
organizations; and for-profit organizations.
(b) The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified
in an approved application.
4. Other General Requirements:
(a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding under this
program must involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (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 or from the Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs). 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: 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 84.326M.
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. 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
no more than 50 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, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
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 and double-spacing requirements do 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 abstract (follow the guidance provided in the
application package for completing the abstract), the table of
contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference
list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the page
limit and double-spacing requirements do apply to all of Part III, the
application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures,
graphs, and screen shots.
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit in the
application narrative section or if you apply standards other than
those specified in this notice and the application package.
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: March 7, 2016.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 21, 2016.
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 Other Submission Requirements in section
IV 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.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 20, 2016.
4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition 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
[[Page 11775]]
is in the application package for this program.
5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, 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 System for Award
Management (SAM) (formerly the Central Contractor Registry), the
Government's primary registrant database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active 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 at the
following Web site: http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. A DUNS number can be
created within one to two business days.
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 two to five weeks for your TIN to become active.
The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business
days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the
completeness and accuracy of the data you enter into the SAM database.
Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal financial
assistance under a program administered by the Department, please allow
sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS number and TIN. We
strongly recommend that you register early.
Note: Once your SAM registration is active, it may be 24 to 48
hours before you can access the information in, and submit an
application through, Grants.gov.
If you are currently registered with SAM, 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.
Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further
assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in
SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov
Tip Sheet, which you can find at: www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.
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/web/grants/register.html.
7. 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 Model Demonstration Projects to
Improve Literacy Outcomes for English Learners with Disabilities in
Grades Three through Five or Three through Six competition, CFDA number
84.326M, 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 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 Model
Demonstration Projects to Improve Literacy Outcomes for English
Learners with Disabilities in Grades Three through Five or Three
through Six 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 84.326, not 84.326M).
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
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 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 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. In addition, for specific guidance and
procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov, please
refer to the Grants.gov Web site at: www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/apply-for-grants.html.
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-
[[Page 11776]]
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 read-only, non-modifiable
Portable Document Format (PDF). Do not upload an interactive or
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only,
non-modifiable PDF (e.g., Word, Excel, WordPerfect, etc.) or submit a
password-protected file, we will not review that material. Please note
that this could result in your application not being considered for
funding because the material in question--for example, the project
narrative--is critical to a meaningful review of your proposal. For
that reason it is important to allow yourself adequate time to upload
all material as PDF files. The Department will not convert material
from other formats to PDF. 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. Grants.gov
will also notify you automatically by email if your application met all
the Grants.gov validation requirements or if there were any errors
(such as submission of your application by someone other than a
registered Authorized Organization Representative, or inclusion of an
attachment with a file name that contains special characters). You will
be given an opportunity to correct any errors and resubmit, but you
must still meet the deadline for submission of applications.
Once your application is successfully validated by Grants.gov, the
Department will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send you
an email with a unique PR/Award number for your application.
These emails do not mean that your application is without any
disqualifying errors. While your application may have been successfully
validated by Grants.gov, it must also meet the Department's application
requirements as specified in this notice and in the application
instructions. Disqualifying errors could include, for instance, failure
to upload attachments in a read-only, non-modifiable PDF; failure to
submit a required part of the application; or failure to meet applicant
eligibility requirements. It is your responsibility to ensure that your
submitted application has met all of the Department's requirements.
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 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 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 the problem affected your
ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date. We will contact you after we
determine 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: Tara Courchaine, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5143, Potomac
Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-5108. FAX: (202) 245-7590.
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 84.326M) 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.
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.
[[Page 11777]]
We will not consider applications postmarked after the application
deadline date.
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 84.326M) 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, 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 Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: 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
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. Risk Assessment and Special Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
3474.10, the Secretary may impose special conditions and, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk 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 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; 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 multiyear 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.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve
Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. We will
use these measures to evaluate the extent to which projects provide
high-quality products and services, the relevance of project products
and services to educational and early intervention policy and practice,
and the use of products and services to improve educational and early
intervention policy and practice.
Projects funded under this competition are required to submit data
on these measures as directed by OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department
(34 CFR 75.590).
[[Page 11778]]
5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the
performance targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, 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: Tara Courchaine, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5143, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5108. Telephone: (202) 245-6462.
If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service, 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 5037, Potomac Center Plaza, 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 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: March 1, 2016.
Michael K. Yudin,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2016-05026 Filed 3-4-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P