[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26088-26095]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11641]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and 
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities--Stepping-up Technology 
Implementation

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: 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. As such, the Department of Education (Department) is issuing a 
notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2019 
for Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with 
Disabilities--Stepping-up Technology Implementation, Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.327S. This notice relates to the 
approved information collection under OMB control number 1820-0028.

DATES: Applications Available: June 5, 2019.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 22, 2019.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than June 10, 2019, 
OSERS will post pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide 
technical assistance to interested applicants. The webinars may be 
found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
    Pre-Application Q & A Blog: No later than June 10, 2019, OSERS will 
open a blog where interested applicants may post questions about the 
application requirements for this competition and where OSERS will post 
answers to the questions received. OSERS will not respond to questions 
unrelated to the application requirements for this competition. The 
blog may be found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html and will remain open until June 24, 2019. After the blog 
closes, applicants should direct questions to the person listed under 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 18, 2019.

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 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at 
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5162, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6039. 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 purposes of the Educational Technology, 
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to 
(1) improve results for children with disabilities by promoting the 
development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) support 
educational activities designed to be of educational value in the 
classroom for children with disabilities; (3) provide support for 
captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the 
classroom; and (4) provide accessible educational materials to children 
with disabilities in a timely manner.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants should note that other laws, including the 
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 
CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 
U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State educational 
agencies and local educational agencies provide captioning, video 
description, and other accessible educational materials to students 
with disabilities when such materials are necessary to provide 
students with disabilities with equally integrated and equally 
effective access to the benefits of the educational program or 
activity, or as part of a ``free appropriate public education'' as 
defined in the Department's Section 504 regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Priorities: This competition includes one absolute priority. In 
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority, and the 
competitive preference priority within that priority, are from 
allowable activities specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 
1474(c)(1)(D) and 1481(d).
    Absolute Priority: For FY 2019 and any subsequent year in which we 
make awards from the list of unfunded applications 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:
    Stepping-up Technology Implementation.

[[Page 26089]]

Background:

    The purpose of this priority is to fund three cooperative 
agreements to identify strategies needed to effectively implement 
technology tools \2\ based on promising evidence \3\ that benefit 
children with disabilities \4\ and their families, children with high 
needs \5\ and their families, and educators; develop and disseminate 
products \6\ that will help a broad range of sites to understand, use, 
and implement these technology tools; provide ongoing coaching and 
professional development supports to educators that will allow them to 
integrate the technology into curricula and programs to support high 
expectations for children with disabilities, service providers, and 
families; and scale-up and disseminate to additional sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For the purposes of this priority, ``technology tools'' may 
include, but are not limited to, digital math text readers for 
students with visual impairments, reading software to improve 
literacy and communication development, and text-to-speech software 
to improve reading performance. These tools must assist or otherwise 
benefit students with disabilities.
    \3\ For the purposes of this priority, ``promising evidence'' 
has the meaning set forth in 34 CFR 77.1.
    \4\ In accordance with 34 CFR 300.8, ``Child with a disability'' 
means a child evaluated in accordance with the IDEA evaluation and 
eligibility procedures who is found to have a specific disability 
and, as a result of that disability, needs special education and 
related services. See also 20 U.S.C. 1401(3).
    \5\ For the purposes of this priority, ``children or students 
with high needs'' means children or students at risk of educational 
failure or otherwise in need of special assistance or support, such 
as children and students who are living in poverty, who are English 
Learners, who are academically far below grade level, who have left 
school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at 
risk of not graduating with a regular high school diploma on time, 
who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been 
incarcerated, or are children or students with disabilities.
    \6\ For the purposes of this priority, ``products'' may include, 
but are not limited to, apps, instruction manuals, lesson plans, 
demonstration videos, ancillary instructional materials, and 
professional development modules such as collaborative groups, 
coaching, mentoring, or online supports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress recognized in the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA that 
``almost 30 years of research and experience has demonstrated that the 
education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by . 
. . supporting the development and use of technology, including 
assistive technology devices and assistive technology services, to 
maximize accessibility for children with disabilities'' (section 
601(c)(5) of IDEA).
    Innovative technology tools and programs, including assistive 
technology devices and services, are especially helpful as educators 
work to engage students who struggle with the general education 
curriculum. However, having access to tools alone does not ensure 
improved outcomes.
    When educators receive the necessary supports to use technology 
effectively, technology integration in early childhood settings may 
increase social awareness and collaborative behaviors, improve abstract 
reasoning and problem-solving abilities, and enhance visual-motor 
coordination.
    Technologies (e.g., online career-readiness tools, computer-based 
writing tools to support literacy, web-based curriculum to support 
21st-century learning) can support State educational agencies (SEAs) 
and local educational agencies (LEAs) to (a) improve student learning 
and engagement; (b) accommodate the special needs of students; (c) 
facilitate student, family, and teacher access to digital content and 
resources; and (d) improve the quality of instruction through 
personalized learning and data. Furthermore, while the implementation 
of technology for K-12 students typically occurs in public school 
settings, including public charter and magnet schools, there are over 
two million students attending parochial schools, another segment of 
the student population that could benefit from building 21st-century 
skills through innovative technology.
    As stated in section 4109 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESEA), 
technologies can be used to support LEAs and SEAs to increase student 
access to personalized, rigorous learning experiences. The Education 
Freedom Scholarships policy proposal would also allow States to design 
student scholarship programs that could be tailored to expand access to 
innovative technology tools and programs for students with 
disabilities.
    Notwithstanding the potential benefits of using technology to 
improve learning outcomes, implementation can be a significant 
challenge. Even as access to coursework online expands, and the number 
of students involved in online learning has grown, many of these online 
learning technologies are not readily accessible to students with 
disabilities. Educators and families need products and resources that 
can assist them to readily implement technology tools for children with 
disabilities.
    In response to this need and to address this issue for children 
with disabilities, Stepping-up Technology Implementation projects build 
on technology development efforts by identifying, developing, and 
disseminating products and resources that promote the effective 
implementation \7\ of instructional and assistive technology tools in 
early childhood programs or K-12 settings.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In this context, ``effective implementation'' means ``making 
better use of research findings in typical service settings through 
the use of processes and activities (such as accountable 
implementation teams) that are purposeful and described in 
sufficient detail such that independent observers can detect the 
presence and strength of these processes and activities.'' (Fixen, 
D.L., Naoom, S. F., Blas[eacute], K.A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, 
F. (2005). Implementation Research: A synthesis of the literature. 
Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida 
Mental Health Institute. The National Implementation Research 
Network (FMHI Publication #231)).
    \8\ For the purposes of this priority, ``settings'' include 
general education classrooms; special education classrooms; high-
quality early childhood programs; private schools, including 
parochial schools; home education; after school programs; juvenile 
justice facilities; and settings other than those listed above in 
which students may receive services under IDEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Projects must be operated in a manner consistent with 
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and 
Federal civil rights laws.
    Priority:
    The Department intends to fund three cooperative agreements to (a) 
identify strategies needed to readily implement existing technology 
tools based on promising evidence that benefit children with 
disabilities and children with high needs; and (b) develop and 
disseminate products (see footnote 5; e.g., instruction manuals, lesson 
plans, demonstration videos, ancillary instructional materials) that 
will assist educators and families in early childhood programs or K-12 
settings to readily use, understand, and implement these technology 
tools.
    To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must 
meet the application requirements. Any project funded under this 
absolute priority must also 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 based on promising evidence;
    (b) A logic model \9\ or conceptual framework that depicts, at a 
minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods, 
performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``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. See 34 CFR 77.1.

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

[[Page 26090]]

    Note: The following websites provide more information on logic 
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel; 
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework; www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/guidanceuseseinvestment.pdf; and http://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015057.
    (c) A plan to implement the activities described in the Project 
Activities section of this priority;
    (d) A plan, linked to the proposed project's logic model or 
conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed 
project's activities. The plan must describe how the formative 
evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous 
improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including 
objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring 
the quality of products and services;
    (e) Documentation assuring that the final products disseminated to 
help sites effectively implement technology tools will be both open 
educational resources (OER) \10\ and licensed through an open access 
licensing authority;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ OERs are teaching and learning materials that the public 
may freely use and reuse at no cost. Unlike fixed, copyrighted 
resources, OER have been authored or created by an individual or 
organization that chooses to retain few, if any, ownership rights. 
Retrieved from www.oercommons.org/about.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (f) Documentation that the technology tool used by the project is 
fully developed,\11\ based on promising evidence, and addresses, at a 
minimum, the following principles of universal design for learning 
(UDL):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A technology that is ``fully developed'' is a completed, 
existing technology that is ready to be implemented. Any 
enhancements or additions to the existing technology should be minor 
and time-limited and must be completed before the end of year one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Multiple means of presentation so that students can approach 
information in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and 
websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech, 
changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of 
different reading levels);
    (2) Multiple means of expression so that all students can 
demonstrate knowledge through options such as writing, online concept 
mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate; and
    (3) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and 
motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning 
activities or content for a particular competency or skill and 
providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL 
principles); \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ For more information on UDL principles, see 
www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl/3principles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (g) A plan for how the project will sustain project activities 
after funding ends;
    (h) A plan, for recruiting and selecting sites,\13\ which includes 
appropriate consideration of a wide range of settings where children 
with disabilities are served, including the following sites:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For more information on recruiting and selecting sites, 
refer to Assessing Sites for Model Demonstration: Lessons Learned 
from OSEP Grantees at http://mdcc.sri.com/documents/MDCC_Site_Assessment_Brief_09-30-11.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Three development sites. Development sites are the sites in 
which iterative development \14\ of the products and resources intended 
to support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The 
project must start implementing the technology tool with one 
development site in year one of the project period and two additional 
development sites in year two;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For the purposes of this priority, ``iterative 
development'' refers to a process of testing, systematically 
securing feedback, and then revising the educational intervention to 
increase the likelihood that it will be implemented with fidelity. 
(Diamond, K.E., & Powell, D.R. (2011). An iterative approach to the 
development of a professional development intervention for Head 
Start teachers. Journal of Early Intervention, 33(1), 75-93).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out, 
formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will 
occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years 
three and four of the project period; and
    (3) Ten dissemination sites. Dissemination sites will be selected 
if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination sites will 
be used to (a) refine the products for use by educators, and (b) 
evaluate the performance of the tool. Dissemination sites will receive 
less TA from the project than development or pilot sites. Also, at this 
stage (i.e., the fifth year), dissemination sites will extend the 
benefits of the technology tool to additional students. To be selected 
as a dissemination site, eligible sites must commit to working with the 
project to implement the technology tool.
    Note: A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e., 
development, pilot, dissemination).
    Note: A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites 
must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and 
secondary schools. A minimum of four of the 10 dissemination sites must 
be in settings other than traditional public elementary and secondary 
schools. These non-traditional sites must otherwise meet the 
requirements of each category listed above.
    (i) Information on the development and pilot settings, including 
student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether the 
settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted support 
and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii), 
(c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)-(D) of the ESEA); and
    (j) 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, and an annual planning 
meeting held 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.
    (2) A three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC, 
during each year of the project period.
    (3) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, 
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by 
OSEP.

Project Activities

    To meet the requirements of this priority, the project, at a 
minimum, must conduct the following activities:
    (a) Recruit a minimum of three development sites and four pilot 
sites in accordance with the plan proposed under paragraphs (h) and (i) 
of the Application Requirements section of this notice.
    Note: Final dissemination site selection will be determined in 
consultation with the OSEP project officer following the kick-off 
meeting.
    (b) Identify and develop resources and products that, when used to 
support the implementation of the technology tool, create accessible 
learning opportunities for all children, including children with 
disabilities and children with high needs, and support the sustained 
implementation of the selected technology tool. Development of the 
products must be an iterative process beginning in a single development 
school and continuing through repeated cycles of development and 
refinement in the other development sites, followed by a formative 
evaluation and refinement in the pilot sites. To support implementation 
of the technology tool the products and resources must, at a minimum, 
include--
    (1) An instrument or method for assessing--

[[Page 26091]]

    (i) The site staff's current technology uses and needs, current 
technology investments, firewall issues, and the knowledge and 
availability of dedicated on-site technology personnel;
    (ii) The readiness of development and pilot sites to implement the 
technology tool. Any instruments and methods for assessing readiness 
may include resource inventory checklists, school self-study guides, 
and surveys of educators' and families' interests; and
    (iii) Whether the technology tool has achieved its intended 
outcomes.
    (c) Provide ongoing training to educators and families so that they 
might implement the technology tool with fidelity and to integrate it 
into the curriculum.
    (d) Collect and analyze data on whether the technology tool has 
achieved its intended outcomes for early childhood development, K-12, 
or college- and career-readiness.
    (e) Collect formative and summative data from the development and 
pilot sites to refine and evaluate the products.
    (f) If the project is extended to a fifth year--
    (1) Provide the products and the technology tool to no fewer than 
10 dissemination sites; and
    (2) Collect summative data about the success of the project's 
products and services in supporting implementation of the technology 
tool in the dissemination sites.
    (g) By the end of the project period, provide--
    (1) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the 
project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will 
enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the 
technology tool;
    (2) Information on the technology implementation report, including 
data on how educators and families used the technology, data on how 
technology impacted child outcomes, how technology was implemented with 
fidelity, and features of universal design for learning;
    (3) Information on how the technology tool contributed to changed 
practices and improved early childhood outcomes, academic achievement, 
or college- and career-readiness for children with disabilities, as 
well as children with high needs (i.e., data to assess how well the 
project addressed the goals of the project as described in the logic 
model); and
    (4) A plan for disseminating the technology tool and accompanying 
products beyond the sites directly involved in the project and how 
dissemination will be sustained after the project ends.

Cohort Collaboration and Support

    OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the 
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
    (a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and 
collaborate on implementation and specific project issues; and
    (b) Provide information annually using a template that captures 
descriptive data on project site selection, processes for installation 
of technology, and the use of technology and sustainability (i.e., the 
process of technology implementation).
    Note: The following website provides more information about 
implementation research: http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/learn-implementation.

Fifth Year of Project

    The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48 
months to work with dissemination sites if the grantee is achieving the 
intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data gathered as 
part of the project evaluation) and making a positive contribution to 
the implementation of a technology tool based on promising evidence 
with fidelity in the development and pilot sites. Each applicant must 
include in its application a plan for the full 60-month period. In 
deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fifth year, 
the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and 
will consider--
    (a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP 
project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This 
review will be held during the last half of the third year of the 
project period;
    (b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the 
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (c) The degree to which the project's activities have contributed 
to changed practices and improved early childhood outcomes, academic 
achievement, or college- and career-readiness for students with 
disabilities.
    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 five 
points to an application that meets this priority.
    This priority is:
    Improving Academic Outcomes for Children with Disabilities (0 or 5 
points).
    Projects that are designed to improve outcomes for children with 
disabilities in one of the following areas:
    (a) Literacy for children with disabilities in grades 3 through 5; 
or
    (b) Science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) for 
children with disabilities enrolled in middle school (grades 6 through 
8).
    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. Section 
681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the 
APA inapplicable to the priorities in this notice.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
    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.
    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 agreements.
    Estimated Available Funds: $1,500,000.
    Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of 
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2020 from the list of 
unfunded applications from this competition.
    Estimated Range of Awards: $450,000 to $500,000 per year.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $475,000 per year.
    Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $500,000 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: SEAs; LEAs, including public 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

[[Page 26092]]

Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost 
sharing or matching.
    3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award 
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities 
described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may 
contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with 
2 CFR part 200.
    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 must, with 
respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the 
absolute priority, 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: Applicants are required to 
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of 
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal 
Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at 
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf which 
contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.
    2. 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 is in the application package for this 
competition.
    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 50 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 significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the 
proposed project;
    (ii) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by 
the proposed project;
    (iii) 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;
    (iv) The potential contribution of the proposed project to 
increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, 
or effective strategies; and
    (v) The potential replicability of the proposed project or 
strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation 
in a variety of settings.
    (b) Quality of project services (25 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 services to be provided by the proposed 
project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective 
practice;
    (ii) 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;
    (iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for 
maximizing the effectiveness of project services;
    (iv) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project are appropriate to the needs of the intended 
recipients or beneficiaries of those services; and
    (v) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the 
proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.
    (c) Quality of the project design (20 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the 
proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
project, 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 the design of the proposed project 
includes a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a 
high-quality plan for project implementation, and the use of 
appropriate methodological tools to ensure successful achievement of 
project objectives;
    (iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is 
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target 
population or other identified needs;
    (iv) The extent to which the design for implementing and evaluating 
the proposed project will result in information to guide possible 
replication of project activities or strategies, including information 
about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the 
project; and

[[Page 26093]]

    (v) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying 
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of 
that framework.
    (d) 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 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; and
    (v) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous 
improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
    (e) Adequacy of resources (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
proposed project.
    (2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization;
    (ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project;
    (iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project;
    (iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to 
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed 
project; and
    (v) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
number of persons to be served and to the anticipated results and 
benefits.
    (f) Quality of the project evaluation (15 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 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;
    (iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for 
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies;
    (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes; and
    (v) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the 
key project components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a 
measurable threshold for acceptable implementation.
    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 
$250,000), 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

[[Page 26094]]

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 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.
    (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.
    5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and 
Results 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 Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for 
Individuals with Disabilities Program. These measures are:
     Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged to be of high quality by an independent review panel of 
experts qualified to review the substantial content of the products and 
services.
     Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged to be of high relevance to improving outcomes for 
infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
     Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged to be useful in improving results for infants, 
toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
     Program Performance Measure #4.1: The Federal cost per 
unit of accessible educational materials funded by the Educational 
Technology, Media, and Materials Program.
     Program Performance Measure #4.2: The Federal cost per 
unit of accessible educational materials from the National 
Instructional Materials Accessibility Center funded by the Educational 
Technology, Media, and Materials Program.
     Program Performance Measure #4.3: The Federal cost per 
unit of video description funded by the Educational Technology, Media, 
and Materials Program.
    These 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 performance reports and additional performance 
data to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 75.591).
    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 5074A, 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 at www.govinfo.gov. 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

[[Page 26095]]

your search to documents published by the Department.

Johnny W. Collett,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2019-11641 Filed 6-4-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4000-01-P