[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