[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35256-35265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15928]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and 
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With 
Disabilities, School Safety National Activities, and Student Support 
and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) Grants Programs--National Technical 
Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

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

[[Page 35257]]


ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice 
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2018 for 
Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results 
for Children With Disabilities, School Safety National Activities, and 
Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) Grants Programs--
National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral 
Interventions and Supports, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 
(CFDA) number 84.326S.

DATES: 
    Applications Available: July 25, 2018.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an 
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to 
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the 
Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at 
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renee Bradley, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5161, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7277. Email: 
[email protected].
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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.
    The School Safety National Activities Program provides support to 
State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) 
for activities to improve student safety and well-being.
    The Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) Grants Program 
is intended to improve student academic achievement by increasing the 
capacity of States, LEAs, schools, and communities to (1) provide all 
students with access to a well-rounded education, (2) improve school 
conditions for student learning, and (3) improve the use of technology 
in order to improve academic achievement and digital literacy.
    Priorities: This notice includes three absolute priorities. 
Applicants must address all three absolute priorities, and we will make 
one award as a comprehensive investment designed to enhance local and 
State efforts to improve school climate, conditions for learning, and 
access to and engagement in the instructional environment, with a focus 
on students with behavioral challenges, by implementing comprehensive 
positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) frameworks.
    In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), Absolute Priority 1 is 
from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 663 
and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 
20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d)). We are establishing Absolute Priority 2 
under title IV, part F, subpart 3, section 4631 of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 7281), 
and, for the FY 2018 grant competition and any subsequent year in which 
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications for this 
competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General 
Education Provisions Act (GEPA) (20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1)). We are 
establishing Absolute Priority 3 under title IV, part A, subpart 1 of 
the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.) and, for the FY 2018 grant 
competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the 
list of unfunded applications for this competition, in accordance with 
section 437(d)(1) of GEPA (20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1)).
    Absolute Priorities: These priorities are absolute priorities. 
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet all 
three of these priorities.
    These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1--Technical Assistance and Dissemination To Improve 
Services and Results for Children With Disabilities--National Technical 
Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

Background
    The mission of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services (OSERS) is to improve early childhood, educational, and 
employment outcomes and raise expectations for all people with 
disabilities, their families, their communities, and the Nation.
    PBIS is a framework or approach for assisting school personnel in 
adopting and organizing evidence-based behavioral interventions and 
supports into an integrated continuum that enhances academic and social 
behavior outcomes for all students. The Department provided additional 
background about the term PBIS in a notice inviting applications 
published in the Federal Register on July 5, 2013 (78 FR 40459).\1\ The 
term ``positive behavioral interventions and supports'' was first used 
in the 1997 reauthorization of IDEA. PBIS was also included in the 2004 
reauthorization of IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F), 
611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and 665), as well 
as the ESEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Available at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-07-05/pdf/2013-16191.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Evidence supports the positive outcomes associated with the 
effective implementation of PBIS frameworks (Bradshaw, Waasdorp, & 
Leaf, 2015). When there is fidelity in implementing PBIS frameworks, 
studies have found the following statistically significant results in 
schools as compared to schools without PBIS implementation: Improved 
student perception of school safety and reductions in overall problem 
behaviors, bullying behaviors, office discipline referrals, chronic 
absenteeism, and suspensions (Waasdorp, Bradshaw, & Leaf, 2012). 
Studies have also found a correlation between the use of PBIS 
procedures and improved social skills and academic achievement 
(McIntosh, Filter, Bennett, Ryan, & Sugai, 2010; Bradshaw et al., 
2009).
    Projects funded by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) 
to date have succeeded in developing and refining the multi-tiered 
behavioral framework, developing resources for educators, policy 
makers, students, and families, and building SEA, LEA, and school 
capacity for implementation of PBIS with fidelity at the universal or 
primary tier of support and, to some extent, at the more intensive 
tiers for students with disabilities. Although these projects have 
documented successful implementation of PBIS and positive outcome data 
in over 25,000 schools, additional TA is needed to focus on students 
with more intensive needs and those most likely to be excluded from the 
learning environment due to behavior that interferes with instruction. 
In addition, SEAs and LEAs

[[Page 35258]]

need further assistance to develop and sustain school-wide behavior 
frameworks and build the capacity and expertise of SEAs and LEAs to 
address the technical and training needs of their personnel.
    Accordingly, the National Technical Assistance Center on PBIS (TA 
Center) will enable SEAs and LEAs to continue to further develop, 
expand, and sustain comprehensive, systemic PBIS frameworks that (1) 
improve students' school behavior; (2) prevent bullying, violence, or 
disruptive actions that detract from a high-quality education; (3) 
address exclusionary practices and other disciplinary issues that 
detract from a high-quality learning environment; and (4) improve 
overall school climate by facilitating national, regional, State, and 
district implementation networks.
    This priority is consistent with four priorities from the 
Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for 
Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on 
March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Supplemental Priorities): Priority 1--
Empowering Families and Individuals To Choose a High-Quality Education 
That Meets Their Unique Needs; Priority 5--Meeting the Unique Needs of 
Students and Children With Disabilities and/or Those With Unique Gifts 
and Talents; Priority 8--Promoting Effective Instruction in Classrooms 
and Schools; and Priority 10--Protecting Freedom of Speech and 
Encouraging Respectful Interactions in a Safe Educational Environment.
Priority
    The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to 
establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center for 
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) (TA Center) to 
assist SEAs and LEAs and national and regional networks, including 
professional networks and private school associations, to successfully 
implement and sustain evidence-based (as defined in this notice) PBIS 
practices and policies, especially for, but not limited to, students 
with the most significant behavioral challenges that interfere with 
their ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality 
learning environment in public, private, parochial, alternative, 
charter, and other educational settings. This investment is needed to 
continue to assist SEAs and LEAs to enhance their capacity to develop, 
implement, scale-up, and sustain school-wide frameworks for PBIS to 
improve behavior and climate and to enable all students to fully 
participate in, and benefit from, instruction. The applicant must 
propose to achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:
    (a) Improved infrastructure at the national, regional, State, and 
district levels to support, develop, and sustain local PBIS 
implementation efforts;
    (b) Improved capacity at the SEA and LEA levels to implement the 
components of a PBIS framework (i.e., policies, funding, professional 
development, coaching, data collection, analysis, and use) and develop 
more tools for selecting and aligning multiple initiatives within the 
State or district with a special focus on tiers beyond universal (i.e., 
beyond strategies and supports provided to all students to include 
strategies that are provided to selected groups of students or 
individual students) in order to increase the number of schools 
effectively implementing a PBIS framework;
    (c) Improved capacity of SEA and LEA personnel to enhance the 
knowledge and skills of members of school leadership teams and 
Individualized Education Program (IEP) Teams to implement PBIS 
practices and policies to support positive school behavior and respond 
to behaviors that interfere with a student's ability to fully 
participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment 
(e.g., insubordination, leaving class without permission, chronic 
absenteeism, and aggression);
    (d) Increased use and promulgation by SEAs and LEAs, as well as 
charter management organizations and private school organizations, of 
interventions, accommodations, and reliable and valid tools and 
processes for implementing a behavioral framework, developing local 
capacity, and measuring fidelity of implementation and outcomes (e.g., 
reductions in the use of discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, 
restrictive placements, chronic absenteeism, and restraints and 
seclusion; and improvements in school climate, time engaged in 
instruction, and overall academic achievement); and
    (e) Increased body of knowledge to enhance implementation of PBIS 
in schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement under 
section 1111(d)(1) of the ESEA, schools identified for targeted support 
and improvement under section 1111(d)(2) of the ESEA, rural schools, 
high schools, alternative public schools, charter schools, mental 
health settings, private schools, parochial schools, and juvenile 
correction settings; and develop and improve the quality of 
information, tools, and resources to address these environments.

Absolute Priority 2--Technical Assistance for Grantees Under the School 
Safety National Activities Program--National Technical Assistance 
Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

Background
    In FY 2014, under Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities 
National Programs (the predecessor ESEA authority to School Safety 
National Activities) the Department awarded five-year grants to a 
cohort of SEAs and to a cohort of LEAs under a competition for School 
Climate Transformation Grants (SCTGs). The grants enabled these SEAs 
and LEAs to develop, adapt, or expand a multi-tiered decision-making 
framework that guides the selection, integration, and implementation of 
the best evidence-based behavioral practices aimed at improving school 
climate and behavioral outcomes for all students.
    The current National Technical Assistance Center on Positive 
Behavioral Interventions and Supports continues to provide TA to the 
recipients of SCTGs but began its five-year project period one year 
earlier than the FY 2014 cohort of SCTGs. As a result, there is a need 
for the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral 
Interventions and Supports to provide TA to recipients of SCTGs during 
their fifth and final year, as well as to one or more new cohorts of 
SCTGs, if additional funds for SCTGs become available.
Priority
    The purpose of this priority is to assist SEAs and LEAs that 
received or will receive SCTGs with developing and implementing PBIS 
frameworks that are designed to keep students engaged in instruction 
and improve academic outcomes. To meet this priority, the applicant 
must at a minimum propose to achieve for School Climate Transformation 
Grantees the following intended outcomes that support implementing a 
PBIS framework:
    (a) Improved skills of SEA personnel to organize the components of 
a PBIS framework, such as policies, funding, professional development, 
coaching, data collection and analysis, and interagency coordination 
for service provision with State justice, mental health, and other 
youth services agencies.
    (b) Improved skills of LEA personnel to (1) implement the evidence-
based practices and skills that comprise the PBIS behavioral framework; 
(2) collect and use data to inform behavioral decision-making; and (3) 
develop,

[[Page 35259]]

including through collaboration with mental health and juvenile justice 
agencies, the local capacity and expertise needed to implement, scale 
up, and sustain a PBIS framework and demonstrate the effects of the 
implementation within the school and the larger school community.
    (c) Increased body of knowledge of researchers and practitioners on 
implementing, scaling up, and sustaining a PBIS framework to provide 
the behavioral supports to prevent violence and the illegal use of 
drugs among, and promote safety and discipline for, students.
    (d) Increased use by SEAs and LEAs of reliable and valid tools and 
processes for evaluating the fidelity of the implementation of a PBIS 
framework and for measuring its outcomes, including reductions in 
violence and the illegal use of drugs, discipline referrals, 
suspensions, expulsions, and the use of restraints and seclusion, and 
improvements in school climate, time spent in instruction, and overall 
academic achievement.
    (e) Increased body of knowledge on the processes to effectively 
implement PBIS in high-need LEAs \2\--including those with schools 
identified for comprehensive support and improvement under section 
1111(d)(1) of the ESEA and schools identified for targeted support and 
improvement under section 1111(d)(2) of the ESEA--to develop and 
improve the quality of information, tools, and products to assist 
initial and sustained implementation of a PBIS framework in these LEAs;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ High-need LEA means an LEA (a) that serves not fewer than 
10,000 children from families with incomes below the poverty line; 
or (b) for which not less than 20 percent of the children served by 
the LEA are from families with incomes below the poverty line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (f) Expanded use of the lessons learned from implementing a PBIS 
framework to: (1) Inform other Federal, State, and district efforts to 
reduce incidents of violence and illegal drug use by students 
(including bullying), the use of restraint and seclusion, and the 
disproportionate application of disciplinary procedures such as 
suspension and expulsion to minority students and students with 
disabilities; (2) reduce inappropriate referrals of students to law 
enforcement; and (3) inform school climate and school mental health 
initiatives that are supported or will be supported by the Department 
and other Federal agencies.
    Funds under this priority must be used to meet the absolute 
priority with regard to serving recipients of SCTGs that do not receive 
assistance under Absolute Priority 3.

Absolute Priority 3--Technical Assistance for Grantees Under the 
Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE) Grants Program--National 
Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and 
Supports

Background
    Authorized under title IV, part A, subpart 1 of the ESEA, the SSAE 
Grants Program is intended to improve student academic achievement by 
increasing the capacity of States, LEAs, schools, and communities to 
(1) provide all students with access to a well-rounded education, (2) 
improve school conditions for student learning, and (3) improve the use 
of technology in order to improve academic achievement and digital 
literacy. State capacity-building under this priority could include, 
for example, assisting States in developing or refining PBIS frameworks 
for implementation by their LEAs.
Priority
    The purpose of this priority is to build the capacity of States to 
assist LEAs that seek to use SSAE funds to improve school conditions 
for student learning by implementing PBIS frameworks. To meet this 
priority the applicant must propose to build the capacity of States to 
assist such LEAs in a manner that achieves, at a minimum, the following 
intended outcomes that support implementing a PBIS framework:
    (a) Improved skills of SEA personnel to organize the components of 
a PBIS framework, such as policies, funding, professional development, 
coaching, data collection and analysis, and interagency coordination 
for service provision with State justice, mental health, and other 
youth services agencies.
    (b) Increased body of knowledge on implementing, scaling up, and 
sustaining a PBIS framework to provide the behavioral supports to 
prevent violence and illegal use of drugs among, and promote safety and 
discipline for, students.
    (c) Increased use of reliable and valid tools and processes for 
evaluating the fidelity of the implementation of a PBIS framework and 
for measuring its outcomes, including reductions in violence and the 
illegal use of drugs, discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, 
and the use of restraints and seclusion, and improvements in school 
climate, time spent on instruction, and overall academic achievement.
    (d) Increased body of knowledge on the processes to effectively 
implement PBIS in high-need schools, high-poverty schools, schools 
identified for comprehensive support and improvement under section 
1111(d)(1) of the ESEA, schools identified for targeted support and 
improvement under section 1111(d)(2) of the ESEA, or schools identified 
as persistently dangerous public elementary or secondary schools under 
section 8532 of the ESEA, to develop and improve the quality of 
information, tools, and products to assist initial and sustained 
implementation of a PBIS framework.
    (e) Expanded use of the lessons learned from implementing a PBIS 
framework to (1) inform other Federal, State, and district efforts to 
reduce incidents of illegal drug use and violence by students 
(including bullying), the use of restraint and seclusion, and the 
disproportionate application of disciplinary procedures such as 
suspension and expulsion to minority students and students with 
disabilities; and (2) reduce inappropriate referrals of students to law 
enforcement.
    Funds received under this priority must be used to build the 
capacity of States to assist only LEAs that: (1) Seek to use SSAE funds 
to improve school conditions for student learning by implementing PBIS 
frameworks; and (2) are not receiving assistance under Absolute 
Priority 2.
    Requirements: We are establishing the following application and 
administrative requirements for FY 2018 and any subsequent year in 
which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA:
    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Improve SEAs' and LEAs' implementation, scaling, and 
sustainability of evidence-based PBIS practices and policies that are 
designed to improve school climate and, as needed, to provide 
additional behavioral supports for students whose behavior interferes 
with their ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-
quality learning environment, including students with disabilities. To 
meet this requirement, the applicant must--
    (i) Present applicable State, regional, or local data demonstrating 
SEAs' and LEAs' needs related to (A) high-quality implementation of 
evidence-based PBIS practices and policies and (B) increasing students' 
ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality 
learning environment, particularly for students

[[Page 35260]]

with the most significant behavioral challenges;
    (ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy 
initiatives relating to PBIS and school climate practices and policies 
for students whose behavioral challenges interfere with their ability 
to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning 
environment, including students with disabilities; and
    (iii) Present information about the current level of implementation 
of PBIS practices and policies, as well as students' access to more 
positive school climates that supports their ability to fully 
participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment;
    (2) Improve outcomes for students with behavioral challenges that 
interfere with their ability or the ability of their peers to fully 
participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment 
through the implementation of PBIS frameworks, and indicate the likely 
magnitude or importance of the improvements.
    (b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Quality of Project Services,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that 
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the 
applicant must describe how it will--
    (i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and 
information; and
    (ii) Ensure that services and products meet the needs of the 
intended recipients of the grant;
    (2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet 
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
    (i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
    (ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in this notice) by 
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that 
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended 
outcomes of the proposed project;
    (3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) 
to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying 
concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as 
the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any 
empirical support for this framework;

    Note: The following websites provide more information on logic 
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

    (4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based 
practices (EBPs). To meet this requirement, the applicant must 
describe--
    (i) The current research on the assessment of the implementation of 
PBIS frameworks and related EBPs;
    (ii) The current research about adult learning principles and 
implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research 
and EBPs in the development and delivery of its products and services;
    (5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality 
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes 
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant 
must describe--
    (i) How it proposes to further develop the knowledge base of PBIS;
    (ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\3\ which must 
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided 
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in 
minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time, 
invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This 
category of TA also includes information or products, such as 
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the 
TA center's website by independent users. Brief communications by TA 
center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also 
considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\4\ which 
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA services based on 
needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively 
individualized. A relationship is established between the TA 
recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA 
includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating 
strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It 
can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend 
over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference 
calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the 
needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can 
also be considered targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach; and
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA 
recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their 
current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build 
capacity at the local level; and
    (iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\5\ which 
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided 
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA 
center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as 
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. 
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, 
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or 
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach;
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of State- and 
local-level personnel to work with the project, including their 
commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their 
needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to 
build capacity at the local level;
    (C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs, LEAs, charter management 
organizations, and private school organizations to build or enhance 
training systems that include professional development based on adult 
learning principles and coaching; and
    (D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the 
education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, districts, 
schools, families) to ensure that there is communication between each 
level and that there are systems in place to support the use of PBIS;
    (6) Develop products and implement services that maximize 
efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
    (i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the 
intended project outcomes;
    (ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the 
intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to 
achieve the intended project outcomes.
    (c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of 
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project 
developed in consultation with and implemented by a third-party 
evaluator.\6\ The evaluation plan must--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A ``third-party'' evaluator is an independent and impartial 
program evaluator who is contracted by the grantee to conduct an 
objective evaluation of the project. This evaluator must not have 
participated in the development or implementation of any project 
activities, except for the evaluation activities, nor have any 
financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Articulate formative and summative evaluation questions,

[[Page 35261]]

including important process and outcome evaluation questions. These 
questions should be related to the project's proposed logic model 
required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of these requirements;
    (2) Describe how progress in and fidelity of implementation, as 
well as project outcomes, will be measured to answer the evaluation 
questions by, at a minimum:
    (i) Specifying the measures and associated instruments or sources 
for data appropriate to the evaluation questions; and
    (ii) Including information regarding reliability and validity of 
measures where appropriate;
    (3) Describe strategies for analyzing data and how data collected 
as part of this plan will be used to inform and improve service 
delivery over the course of the project and to refine the proposed 
logic model and evaluation plan, including subsequent data collection;
    (4) Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and include 
staff assignments for completing the plan. The timeline must indicate 
that the data will be available annually for the Annual Performance 
Report (APR) and at the end of Year 2 for the review process described 
under the heading, Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and
    (5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the 
costs of developing or refining the evaluation plan in consultation 
with a ``third-party'' evaluator, as well as the costs associated with 
the implementation of the evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.
    (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Adequacy of resources,'' how--
    (1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment 
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been 
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or 
disability, as appropriate;
    (2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and 
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the 
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
    (3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to 
carry out the proposed activities; and
    (4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the 
anticipated results and benefits.
    (e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
    (1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's 
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To 
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
    (i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, 
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
    (ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
    (2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors 
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and 
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
    (3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and 
services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to 
recipients; and
    (4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of 
perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, 
researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and 
operation.
    (f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant 
must--
    (1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, 
as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the 
narrative;
    (2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:
    (i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, 
after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in 
Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff 
during each subsequent year of the project period.

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

    (ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in 
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;
    (iii) Three annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, 
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by 
OSEP; and
    (iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, 
during the last half of the second year of the project period;
    (3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of 
five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are 
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those 
needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP 
project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the 
project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside 
no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;
    (4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate 
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for 
accessibility; and
    (5) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the 
transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the 
continuity of services to States during the transition to this new 
award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project

    In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth 
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), as well as--
    (a) The recommendation of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts 
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the 
second year of the project period;
    (b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's 
products and services and the extent to which the project's products 
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to 
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

References

Bradshaw, C.P., Waasdorp, T.E., & Leaf, P.J. (2015). Examining 
variation in the impact of school-wide positive behavioral 
interventions and supports: Findings from a randomized controlled 
effectiveness trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 546-
557.
Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J. (2009). 
Altering school climate through school-wide positive behavioral 
interventions and supports: Findings from a group-randomized 
effectiveness trial. Prevention Science. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-008-0114-9.
McIntosh, K., Filter, K.J., Bennett, J., Ryan, C., & Sugai, G. 
(2010). Principles of sustainable prevention: Designing scale-up of 
school-wide positive behavior support to promote durable systems. 
Psychology in the Schools, 47, 5-21.
Waasdorp, T.E., Bradshaw, C.P., & Leaf, P.J. (2012). The impact of 
schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on 
bullying and peer rejection: A randomized controlled effectiveness

[[Page 35262]]

trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 166(2), 149-
56. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.755.

Definitions

    The following definition of ``evidence-based'' is from section 
8101(21) of the ESEA, as amended, 20 U.S.C. 7801(21). The remaining 
definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1:
    Evidence-based, when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school 
activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that--
    (i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving 
student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on--
    (I) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented experimental study;
    (II) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented quasi-experimental study; or
    (III) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-
implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection 
bias; or
    (ii)(I) Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research 
findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or 
intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant 
outcomes; and
    (II) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such 
activity, strategy, or intervention.
    Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a 
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed 
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to be 
critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the 
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project 
components and relevant outcomes.
    Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, 
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence 
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of 
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices 
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).
    Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) 
the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the 
specific goals of the program.
    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 
requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment 
requirements of the APA inapplicable to Absolute Priority 1 in this 
notice. In addition, section 437(d)(1) of GEPA allows the Secretary to 
exempt from rulemaking requirements regulations governing the first 
grant competition under a new or substantially revised program 
authority. This is the first grant competition for both the School 
Safety National Activities Program under section 4631(a)(1)(B) of the 
ESEA and the National Activities for the SSAE Grants Program under 
section 4103(a)(3), and therefore qualifies for this exemption. In 
order to ensure timely grant awards, the Secretary has decided to forgo 
public comment on Absolute Priorities 2 and 3 and the requirements 
under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. Absolute Priorities 2 and 3 and the 
requirements will apply to the FY 2018 grant competition and any 
subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded 
applications from this competition.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463, 1481, 7113(a)(3), 7101, and 
7281(a)(1)(B).

    Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General 
Administrative Regulations 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 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. (d) The regulations in 34 CFR part 299.

    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: For Absolute Priority 1: $1,850,000.
    For Absolute Priority 2: $3,750,000 from the School Safety National 
Activities Program.
    For Absolute Priority 3: $750,000 from the SSAE Grants Program.

    Note: We will make one award comprised of separate funding under 
each of the three absolute priorities. Therefore, applicants must 
submit a separate Form 524b budget and budget narrative for each 
absolute priority. The Secretary may reject any application that 
does not separately address the requirements specified in Absolute 
Priority 1, Absolute Priority 2, and Absolute Priority 3 and include 
separate budgets and budget narratives for each of those priorities.

    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of 
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2019 from the list of 
unfunded applications from this competition.
    Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,850,000 for 
Absolute Priority 1 for a single budget period of 12 months. We will 
not make an award exceeding $3,750,000 for Absolute Priority 2 for a 
single budget period of 12 months. We will not make an award exceeding 
$750,000 for Absolute Priority 3 for a single budget period of 12 
months.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

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

    Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including charter schools that 
operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private 
nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; 
Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost 
sharing or matching.
    3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee under this 
competition may award subgrants--to directly carry out project 
activities described in its application--to the following types of 
entities: IHEs and private nonprofit organizations suitable to carry 
out the activities proposed in the application. 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) Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect 
to the aspects of their proposed project relating to Absolute Priority 
1, 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. Application Submission Instructions: For information on how to

[[Page 35263]]

submit an application please refer to our Common Instructions for 
Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, 
published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and 
available at www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.
    2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to 
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However, 
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to 
make an award by the end of FY 2018.
    3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding 
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
    4. Recommended 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. We recommend 
that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 100 pages, 
and (2) use the following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application 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.
    The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover 
sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget 
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the 
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 recommended page limit does apply to 
all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, 
figures, graphs, and screen shots.

V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition 
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
    (a) Significance (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed 
project.
    (2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the 
Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, 
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be 
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude 
of those gaps or weaknesses.
    (ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely 
to be attained by the proposed project.
    (b) Quality of project services (35 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be 
provided by the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by 
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and 
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for 
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
    (ii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying 
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of 
that framework.
    (iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and 
effective practice.
    (iv) The extent to which the training or professional development 
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient 
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice 
among the recipients of those services.
    (v) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the 
proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the 
use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project 
resources.
    (c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be 
conducted of the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the 
proposed project.
    (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for 
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
    (iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the 
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and 
qualitative data to the extent possible.
    (d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15 
points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out 
the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of the project director or principal investigator.
    (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of key project personnel.
    (iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
    (iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator.
    (v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization.
    (vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
    (vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project.
    (viii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to 
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed 
project.
    (e) Quality of the management plan (20 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for 
the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the 
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
of the

[[Page 35264]]

proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined 
responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project 
tasks.
    (ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project 
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are 
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed 
project.
    (iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
and services from the proposed project.
    (iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives 
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including 
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of 
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of 
services, or others, as appropriate.
    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 
(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.
    4. Risk Assessment and Specific 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 specific 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.
    5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this 
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project 
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently 
$150,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your 
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal 
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make 
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that 
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as 
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System 
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may 
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal 
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
    Please note that, if the total value of your currently active 
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the 
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity 
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal 
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

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. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you 
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to 
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in 
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of 
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those 
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent 
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or 
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. 
Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant 
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. 
This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your 
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional 
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 
3474.20.
    4. 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.
    5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and 
Results

[[Page 35265]]

Act of 1993, 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. These measures are:
     Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of 
Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed to 
be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified 
to review the substantive content of the products and services.
     Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of Special 
Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services 
deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of 
high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or 
practice.
     Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of all 
Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and 
services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to 
be useful to improve educational or early intervention policy or 
practice.
     Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the 
Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program includes the percentage 
of milestones achieved in the current annual performance report period 
and the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal year.
     Long-term Program Performance Measure: The percentage of 
States receiving Special Education Technical Assistance and 
Dissemination services regarding scientifically or evidence-based 
practices for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities 
that successfully promote the implementation of those practices in 
school districts and service agencies.
    The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and 
grantees 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).
    6. 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. 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 Management Support Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5113, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 
20202-2500. 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. You may 
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of 
Federal Regulations 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 Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe 
Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

    Dated: July 20, 2018.
Johnny W. Collett,
Assistant Secretary, Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary, Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2018-15928 Filed 7-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4000-01-P