[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27314-27322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12317]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Personnel Development To Improve 
Services and Results for Children With Disabilities--Doctoral Training 
Consortia Associated With High-Intensity Needs

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 Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children 
with Disabilities--Doctoral Training Consortia Associated with High-
Intensity Needs, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 
84.325H. This notice relates to the approved information collection 
under OMB control number 1820-0028.

DATES: 
    Applications Available: June 12, 2019.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 29, 2019.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than June 17, 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 17, 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 July 1, 2019. After the blog 
closes, applicants should direct questions to the person listed under 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: September 25, 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: Celia Rosenquist, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5158, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7373. 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 this program are to (1) help 
address State-identified needs for personnel preparation in special 
education, early intervention, related services, and regular education 
to work with children, including infants and toddlers, with 
disabilities; and (2) ensure that those personnel have the necessary 
skills and knowledge, derived from practices that have been determined 
through scientifically based research and experience, to be successful 
in serving those children.
    Priorities: This competition includes one absolute priority and 
three competitive preference priorities. In accordance with 34 CFR 
75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority and competitive preference 
priorities are from allowable activities specified in sections 662 and 
681 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 
U.S.C. 1462 and 1481).
    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:
    Doctoral Training Consortia Associated with High-Intensity Needs.
    Background: The purpose of this competition is to support three 
doctoral training consortia that will prepare leaders with highly 
specialized skills, knowledge, and expertise to address the needs of 
children, including infants, toddlers, and youth (referred to as 
``children'' hereafter), with disabilities with high-intensity needs. 
Each training consortium will prepare special education, early 
intervention, or related services personnel who are well-qualified for, 
and can act effectively in, leadership positions as researchers and 
preparers of special education, early intervention, or related services 
personnel in institutions of higher education (IHEs), or as leaders in 
traditional and non-traditional public school systems such as State 
educational agencies (SEAs), charter management organizations (CMOs), 
charter school authorizers, lead agencies (LAs), local educational 
agencies (LEAs), private school networks, parochial schools, early 
intervention services (EIS) programs, or schools. This priority is 
consistent with three

[[Page 27315]]

priorities included in the Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities 
and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs (Supplemental 
Priorities) (83 FR 9096). Specifically, the priority is consistent with 
Supplemental Priority 2--Promoting Innovation and Efficiency, 
Streamlining Education with an Increased Focus on Improving Student 
Outcomes, and Providing Increased Value to Students and Taxpayers; 
Supplemental Priority 5--Meeting the Unique Needs of Students and 
Children With Disabilities and/or Those with Unique Gifts and Talents; 
and Supplemental Priority 8--Promoting Effective Instruction in 
Classrooms and Schools.
    Leadership personnel play an essential role in promoting high 
expectations for each child with a disability and provide, or prepare 
others to provide, effective interventions and services that improve 
outcomes for children, including infants, toddlers, and youth with 
disabilities. Children with disabilities with high-intensity needs 
refers to children with a complex array of disabilities (e.g., multiple 
disabilities, significant cognitive disabilities, significant physical 
disabilities, significant sensory disabilities, significant autism, 
significant emotional disabilities, or significant learning 
disabilities, including dyslexia) or the needs of children with these 
disabilities requiring intensive, individualized interventions (i.e., 
interventions that are specifically designed to address persistent 
learning or behavior difficulties, implemented with greater frequency 
and for a duration that is more extended than is commonly available in 
a typical classroom or early intervention setting, or which require 
personnel to have knowledge and skills in identifying and implementing 
multiple evidence-based \1\ interventions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For the purposes of this priority, ``evidence-based'' means, 
at a minimum, evidence that demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 
34 CFR 77.1), where a key project component included in the 
project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings 
that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant 
outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Gaps in the knowledge base of effective interventions and a 
shortage of educators with specialized preparation can negatively 
affect the quality of services provided to children with high-intensity 
needs (e.g., Bruce & Borders, 2015; Farmer et al., 2016; Guralnick, 
2017; Lemons, Vaughn, Wexler, Kearns, & Sinclair, 2018; Roberts & 
Kaiser, 2015; Browder, Wood, Thompson, & Ribuffo, 2014; Zwaigenbaum et 
al., 2015). Leadership personnel who have the knowledge, skills, and 
expertise are needed to effectively address the complexity of issues 
that children with disabilities with high-intensity needs may have; 
prepare educators with the specialized knowledge and skills to deliver 
effective intensive individualized intervention; and inform how 
intervention and services can best be coordinated to address these 
needs in different educational settings.
    There is a well-documented need for leadership personnel to fill 
faculty and leadership positions in special education, early 
intervention, and related services (Castillo, Curtis, & Tan, 2014; 
Montrosse & Young, 2012; Robb, Smith, & Montrosse, 2012; Smith, 
Montrosse, Robb, Tyler, & Young, 2011; Smith, Robb, West, & Tyler, 
2010; Woods & Snyder, 2009). However, few university programs include 
specialized training to address the needs of children with disabilities 
with high-intensity needs, and those programs usually have a small 
number of faculty members, and sometimes just one.
    The lack of faculty in high-need areas limits the number of future 
leaders and other educators (e.g., teachers) that can be prepared, 
restricts the curriculum and diversity of opportunities in preparation 
programs, and impacts the capacity of the field to advance the 
knowledge base of effective intervention and services needed to serve 
children with disabilities with high-intensity needs.
    A doctoral training consortium approach can address the need for 
preparing future leadership personnel in high-need areas. OSEP has 
funded doctoral training consortia in sensory disabilities (blind and 
visually impaired, deaf-blind, and deaf and hard of hearing) since 2004 
and a consortium that focuses on disabilities associated with academic 
and behavior-intensive service needs since 2014.
    An initial evaluation of the 2004, 2009, and 2014 sensory consortia 
indicates the success of the approach in preparing future leaders. For 
example, a majority of the scholars completed their programs in a 
timely manner, are working in the field as faculty or in other 
leadership positions, and made contributions to the field through 
presentations and publications on improving outcomes and services for 
children with sensory disabilities. Scholars, after completing their 
doctoral degrees, have also received research and personnel preparation 
grants to improve interventions and services as well as grants to 
prepare personnel to address the needs of children with sensory 
disabilities (Kruemmeling, Hayes, & Smith, 2017). Although the 
consortium that focuses on disabilities associated with intensive 
service needs has not yet ended, preliminary data suggest scholars are 
making timely progress; contributing to the field through 
presentations, publications, course materials, and other scholarly 
activities on improving outcomes for children with disabilities who 
have intensive service needs; and engaging in collaborative projects 
across institutions. Additional information about the consortia and the 
scholars is located at the following websites: www.nlcsdproject.org/ 
and http://nclii.org/.
    Each training consortium will prepare doctoral-level leaders with 
the knowledge, skills, and expertise needed to deliver effective 
intensive individualized intervention for children with disabilities 
with high-intensity needs; prepare educators with the specialized 
knowledge and skills to deliver effective, intensive individualized 
intervention; and inform how intervention and services can best be 
coordinated to address these needs in different educational settings. 
The consortia will prepare leaders who can act effectively in 
leadership positions in universities, traditional and non-traditional 
public school systems such as SEAs, CMOs, charter school authorizers, 
LAs, LEAs, private school networks, parochial schools, EIS programs, or 
schools.

Priority

    The purpose of the Doctoral Training Consortia Associated with 
High-Intensity Needs priority is to increase the number of highly 
skilled doctoral leaders by funding three cooperative agreements to 
support three doctoral training consortia to prepare leaders in special 
education, early intervention, and related services to address the 
needs of children with disabilities with high-intensity needs.
    This priority will provide support to help address identified needs 
for leadership personnel with the knowledge and skills to establish and 
meet high expectations for each child with a disability. To be 
considered for funding under this absolute priority, program applicants 
must meet the application requirements contained in this priority. All 
projects funded under this absolute priority also must meet the 
programmatic and administrative requirements specified in the priority.
    Note: Doctoral training consortia that lead to clinical doctoral 
degrees in related services (e.g., a Doctor of Audiology degree or 
Doctor of Physical Therapy degree) are not included in this priority. 
These types of training

[[Page 27316]]

programs are eligible to apply for funding under the Personnel 
Preparation in Special Education, Early Intervention, and Related 
Services priority (CFDA 84.325K) that OSEP intends to fund in FY 2019.
    Note: Applicants must demonstrate matching support for the proposed 
project at 10 percent of the total amount of the grant as specified in 
paragraph (d)(15) of the requirements of this priority for an 
application to be reviewed and be considered eligible to receive an 
award.
    To meet the requirements of this priority, an applicant must--
    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Significance,'' how--
    (1) The project addresses the need for leadership personnel to 
promote high expectations and provide, or prepare others to provide, or 
supervise the provision of, effective interventions and services that 
improve outcomes for children with disabilities with high-intensity 
needs. To address this requirement, the applicant must present--
    (i) Appropriate and applicable national data demonstrating the need 
for the leadership personnel the applicant proposes to prepare or, in 
cases where national data are not available, State, regional, district, 
or local data demonstrating the need; and
    (ii) Data demonstrating the potential success of the project in 
producing leaders in special education, early intervention, or related 
services, such as the professional accomplishments of each individual 
consortium university's program graduates (e.g., public service, 
awards, or publications) who demonstrate their leadership in special 
education, early intervention, or related services; the success of 
program graduates as preparers of teachers, service providers, or 
administrators, including any results from evaluating the impact of 
those teachers, service providers, or administrators on the outcomes of 
children with disabilities; the average amount of time it takes for 
program graduates to complete the program; the number of program 
graduates; and the percentage of program graduates finding employment 
directly related to their preparation; and
    Note: Data on each individual consortium university's program 
should be no older than five years prior to the start date of the 
project proposed in the application. When reporting percentages, the 
denominator (i.e., the total number of scholars or program graduates) 
must be provided.
    (2) The competencies each scholar acquires by participating in the 
consortium and by completing the university's program of study relate 
to the knowledge and skills needed by the leadership personnel the 
applicant proposes to prepare. A proposed consortium must ensure that 
all scholars enrolled participate in and complete, in addition to the 
scholar's university program of study, a unique consortium curriculum 
designed to supplement and enhance each university's program of study 
by providing academic and professional opportunities and instruction. 
To address this requirement, the applicant must--
    (i) Identify the competencies needed by leadership personnel in 
postsecondary instruction, administration, policy development, 
professional practice, leadership, or research in order to provide, 
prepare others to provide, or supervise the provision of, effective 
interventions and services that improve outcomes for children with 
disabilities with high-intensity needs; and
    (ii) Provide the conceptual framework that will promote the 
acquisition of the identified competencies needed by leadership 
personnel, including knowledge of technologies designed to provide 
instruction, and how these competencies relate to the consortium's 
specialized preparation area. For more information on conceptual 
frameworks, please see www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
    (b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Quality of project services,'' how--
    (1) The project will recruit and support a minimum of 28 high-
quality scholars.\2\ Consortium scholars must be first-time enrollees 
in a doctoral training program in special education, early 
intervention, or related service areas (with the exception of clinical 
doctorates). The narrative must describe--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For the purposes of this priority, ``scholar'' is limited to 
an individual who (a) is pursuing a doctoral degree related to 
special education, early intervention, or related services; (b) 
receives scholarship assistance as authorized under section 662 of 
IDEA (34 CFR 304.3(g)); and (c) will be able to be employed in a 
position that serves children with disabilities for either 51 
percent of their time or case load. See https://pdp.ed.gov/OSEP/Home/Regulation for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) The selection criteria the applicant will use to identify high-
quality applicants for admission in the consortium;
    (ii) The recruitment strategies the applicant will use to attract 
high-quality applicants and any specific recruitment strategies 
targeting high-quality applicants from groups that are underrepresented 
in the teaching profession, including individuals with disabilities; 
and
    (iii) The approach the applicant will use to help all scholars, 
including individuals with disabilities, complete the program; and
    (2) The project is designed to promote the acquisition of the 
competencies needed by leadership personnel to promote high 
expectations and provide, prepare others to provide, or supervise the 
provision of, effective interventions and services that improve 
outcomes for children with disabilities with high-intensity needs. To 
address this requirement, the applicant must--
    (i) Describe how the components of the project, such as the 
consortium curriculum, work-based experiences aligned with project 
components (e.g., internships, current employment), research 
requirements, and other opportunities provided to scholars to analyze 
data, critique research and methodologies, and practice newly acquired 
knowledge and skills, will enable the scholars to acquire the 
competencies needed by leadership personnel for postsecondary 
instruction, administration, policy development, professional practice, 
leadership, or research in special education, early intervention, or 
related services;
    (ii) Describe how the components of the consortium curriculum are 
integrated within and across the individual university program 
curricula in order to support the acquisition and enhancement of the 
identified competencies needed by leadership personnel in special 
education, early intervention, or related services, including knowledge 
of technologies designed to provide instruction;
    (iii) Describe how the components of the project prepare scholars 
to promote high expectations and to provide, prepare others to provide, 
or supervise the provision of, effective interventions and services 
that improve outcomes for children with disabilities with high-
intensity needs in a variety of educational or early childhood and 
early intervention settings;
    (iv) Describe how the project will provide scholars with high-
quality work-based experiences (e.g., internships, current employment) 
in a public, non-traditional public, parochial, or private partnering 
agency, school, or program that includes a high-

[[Page 27317]]

need LEA,\3\ a high-poverty school,\4\ a school implementing a 
comprehensive support and improvement plan,\5\ a school implementing a 
targeted support and improvement plan \6\ for children with 
disabilities, an early childhood and early intervention program located 
within the geographical boundaries of a high-need LEA, or an early 
childhood and early intervention program located within the 
geographical boundaries of an LEA serving the highest percentage of 
schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement or 
implementing targeted support and improvement plans in the State;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For the purposes of this priority, ``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.
    \4\ For the purposes of this priority, ``high-poverty school'' 
means a school in which at least 50 percent of students are from 
low-income families as determined using one of the measures of 
poverty specified under section 1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). For middle and 
high schools, eligibility may be calculated on the basis of 
comparable data from feeder schools. Eligibility as a high-poverty 
school is determined on the basis of the most currently available 
data.
    \5\ For the purposes of this priority, ``school implementing a 
comprehensive support and improvement plan'' is a school identified 
for comprehensive support and improvement by the State under section 
1111(c)(4)(D) of the ESEA that includes (a) not less than the 
lowest-performing 5 percent of all schools receiving funds under 
title I, part A of the ESEA; (b) all public high schools in the 
State failing to graduate one third or more of their students; and 
(c) public schools in the State described under section 
1111(d)(3)(A)(i)(II) of the ESEA.
    \6\ For the purposes of this priority, ``school implementing a 
targeted support and improvement plan'' means a school identified 
for targeted support and improvement by a State that has developed 
and is implementing a school-level targeted support and improvement 
plan to improve student outcomes based on the indicators in the 
statewide accountability system as defined in section 1111(d)(2) of 
the ESEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (v) Describe how the project will partner with diverse stakeholders 
to inform project components;
    (vi) Describe how the project will use resources, as appropriate, 
available through technical assistance centers, which may include 
centers funded by the Department;
    (vii) Describe the approach that faculty members will use to mentor 
scholars with the goal of helping them acquire competencies needed by 
leadership personnel and advancing their careers in special education, 
early intervention, or related services; and
    (viii) Describe how the project is designed to ensure that scholars 
have opportunities to work with faculty and scholars from other 
universities within the consortium on research and analytical projects 
in order to support the acquisition of the competencies identified in 
paragraph (a)(2)(i).
    (c) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Quality of the project evaluation,'' how the applicant will--
    (1) Evaluate how well the goals or objectives of the proposed 
project have been met. The applicant must describe the outcomes to be 
measured for both the project and the scholars, particularly the 
acquisition of scholars' competencies and their impact on the services 
provided by future teachers, service providers, or administrators, and 
must describe the evaluation methodologies to be employed, including 
proposed instruments, data collection methods, and possible analyses;
    (2) Collect, analyze, and use data on current scholars and scholars 
who graduate from the program to improve the proposed program on an 
ongoing basis;
    (3) Develop a plan, to be refined and finalized in collaboration 
with the other consortia, to evaluate the consortium model;
    (4) Develop a plan to disseminate project outcomes, including the 
consortium structure and program components critical to attaining 
positive scholar competencies;
    (5) Dedicate sufficient resources toward revising, refining, and 
conducting evaluation activities; and
    (6) Report the evaluation results to OSEP in the applicant's annual 
and final performance reports.
    (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative under ``Required Project 
Assurances'' or appendices, that the following program requirements are 
met. The applicant must--
    (1) Ensure that the consortium is comprised of at least six IHEs 
with existing doctoral programs that will prepare scholars for 
leadership positions to address the needs of children with disabilities 
with high-intensity needs;
    (2) Include at least one doctoral preparation program that has not 
received funding under CFDA number 84.325D or CFDA number 84.325H at 
any point in the preceding five fiscal years (i.e., FY 2014-FY 2018);
    (3) Establish policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines for 
the work of the consortium, in consultation with and approved by the 
OSEP project officer prior to implementation, in the following areas:
    (i) Recruitment and selection of scholars who will be supported by 
the consortium;
    (ii) Distribution of tuition and stipends among participating 
scholars;
    (iii) Fiscal management;
    (iv) Measurement and reporting of scholar progress;
    (v) Contingency planning in case of scholar or consortium faculty 
losses;
    (vi) Governance of the consortium; and
    (vii) Sustainability plan;
    (4) Ensure that all scholars recruited into the consortium can 
graduate from the program by the end of the project period. The 
described scholar recruitment strategies, including recruitment of 
individuals with disabilities, the program components and their 
sequence, and proposed budget must be consistent with this requirement;
    (5) Ensure scholars will not be selected based on race or national 
origin/ethnicity. Per the Supreme Court's decision in Adarand 
Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200 (1995), the Department does 
not allow the selection of individuals on the basis of race or national 
origin/ethnicity. For this reason, grantees must ensure that any 
discussion of the recruitment of scholars based on race or national 
origin/ethnicity distinguishes between increasing the pool of 
applicants and actually selecting scholars;
    (6) Ensure that the project will meet the requirements in 34 CFR 
304.23, particularly those related to (a) informing all scholarship 
recipients of their service obligation commitment; and (b) disbursing 
scholarships. Failure by a grantee to properly meet these requirements 
is a violation of the grant award that may result in sanctions, 
including the grantee being liable for returning any misused funds to 
the Department;
    (7) Ensure that prior approval from the OSEP project officer will 
be obtained before admitting additional scholars beyond the number of 
scholars proposed in the application;
    (8) Ensure that scholars are full-time, reside in close proximity 
to the university, and remain active in their degree programs until 
completion of their degrees or until grant funding ends;
    (9) Ensure that at least 65 percent of the total budget over the 
project period will be used for scholar support;
    (10) Ensure that the IHE will not require scholars enrolled in the 
program to work (e.g., as graduate assistants) as a condition of 
receiving support (e.g., tuition, stipends) from the proposed project, 
unless the work is specifically related to the acquisition of scholars' 
competencies or the requirements for completion of their personnel 
preparation program. This prohibition on work as a condition of 
receiving

[[Page 27318]]

support does not apply to the service obligation requirements in 
section 662(h) of IDEA;
    (11) Ensure that annual data will be submitted on each scholar who 
receives grant support (OMB Control Number 1820-0686). The primary 
purposes of the data collection are to track the service obligation 
fulfillment of scholars who receive funds from OSEP grants and to 
collect data for program performance measure reporting under the 
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA). Applicants are 
encouraged to visit the Personnel Development Program Data Collection 
System (DCS) website at https://pdp.ed.gov/osep for further information 
about this data collection requirement. Typically, data collection 
begins in January of each year, and grantees are notified by email 
about the data collection period for their grant, although grantees may 
submit data as needed, year-round. This data collection must be 
submitted electronically by the grantee and does not supplant the 
annual grant performance report required of each grantee for 
continuation funding (see 34 CFR 75.590). Data collection includes the 
submission of a signed, completed Pre-Scholarship Agreement and Exit 
Certification for each scholar funded under an OSEP grant (see 
paragraph (6) of this section);
    (12) Ensure that scholar accomplishments (e.g., publications, 
awards) will be reported in annual and final performance reports;
    (13) Ensure that the project will meet the statutory requirements 
in section 662(e) through (h) of IDEA;
    (14) Ensure that the project will be operated in a manner 
consistent with nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. 
Constitution and the Federal civil rights laws;
    (15) Demonstrate, in the budget information (ED Form 524, Section 
B) and budget narrative, matching support for the proposed project at 
least 10 percent of the total amount of the grant. Applicants must 
propose the amount of cash or in-kind resources;
    Note: Under 34 CFR 75.562, educational training grants under this 
program have an 8 percent limit on indirect costs. The difference 
between a grantee's negotiated indirect cost rate and the 8 percent 
limit cannot be used to meet this requirement.
    Matching support can be either cash or in-kind donations. Under 2 
CFR 200.306, a cash expenditure or outlay of cash with respect to the 
matching budget by the grantee is considered a cash contribution. 
However, certain cash contributions that the organization normally 
considers an indirect cost should not be counted as a direct cost for 
the purposes of meeting matching support. Specifically, in accordance 
with 2 CFR 200.306(c), unrecovered indirect costs cannot be used to 
meet the non-Federal matching support. Under 2 CFR 200.434, third-party 
in-kind contributions are services or property (e.g., land, buildings, 
equipment, materials, supplies) that are contributed by a non-Federal 
third party at no charge to the grantee;
    (16) Ensure that the project director, key personnel, and scholars 
will actively participate in the cross-project collaboration, advanced 
trainings, and cross-site learning opportunities (e.g., webinars, 
briefings) supported by OSEP. This network is intended to promote 
opportunities for participants to share resources and generate new 
knowledge by addressing topics of common interest to participants 
across projects including Department priorities and needs in the field;
    (17) Ensure the project will establish and maintain a website 
containing relevant information and documents relating to the 
participating universities and faculty, components of the consortium 
curriculum, and scholar accomplishments. The project's website must be 
of high quality, with an easy-to-navigate design, that meets government 
or industry-recognized standards for accessibility;
    (18) Ensure that annual progress toward meeting project goals is 
posted on the project website or university website;
    (19) Ensure that the budget includes attendance by the project 
director at a three-day project directors' meeting in Washington, DC, 
during each year of the project. The budget should also provide for the 
attendance of scholars at the three-day project directors' meeting in 
Washington, DC, at least once during the project period;
    (20) Ensure that the budget includes two in-person meetings for 
project scholars and faculty each year of the project. Meetings may be 
scheduled to coincide with a professional conference or meeting but 
must include designated time for a meeting of project scholars and 
faculty; and
    (21) Ensure that each university program in the consortium 
dedicates sufficient resources (e.g., personnel, budget) to provide 
financial oversight and monitoring of project funds as established by 
the policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines of the consortium 
(see paragraph (3) of this section).
    Note: For additional information regarding group applications, 
refer to 34 CFR 75.127, 75.128, and 75.129.
    Competitive Preference Priorities: Within this absolute priority, 
we give competitive preference to applications that address the 
following priorities.
    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional three points 
to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 1; up to 
an additional five points to an application, depending on how well the 
application meets Competitive Preference Priority 2; and an additional 
two points to an application that meets Competitive Preference Priority 
3. Applicants should indicate in the abstract if one, two, or all three 
competitive preference priorities are addressed.
    These priorities are:
    Competitive Preference Priority 1 (0 or 3 points).
    Background:
    Under this competitive preference priority, we will award three 
competitive preference points to a project that proposes a doctoral 
training consortium that prepares leadership personnel who will address 
the needs of children who are deaf and hard of hearing with high-
intensity needs. Shortages in leadership personnel that have the 
skills, knowledge, and expertise to address the needs of children who 
are deaf and hard of hearing have been documented (e.g., Benedict, 
Johnson, & Antia, 2011). The lack of leadership personnel (e.g., 
faculty) has been stated to be a contributing factor to the decline in 
the number of preparation programs that prepare personnel to address 
the needs of children who are deaf and hard of hearing (Benedict et 
al., 2011; Johnson, 2013), and some States do not have programs (C. 
Howley, Howley, & Telfer, 2017). Another concern is that the shortage 
of leadership personnel will limit the field in advancing the knowledge 
base of effective interventions and services for this population 
(Benedict et al., 2011).
    Priority:
    A doctoral training consortium that prepares leadership personnel 
who will address the needs of children who are deaf and hard of hearing 
with high-intensity needs.
    To meet the competitive preference priority, a project must--
    (a) Establish a consortium comprised of IHEs with existing doctoral 
programs that prepare scholars to work as doctoral-level leaders in 
addressing the needs of children who are deaf and hard of hearing with 
high-intensity needs; and

[[Page 27319]]

    (b) Address in the project narrative how the opportunities provided 
to scholars through the consortium activities will promote the 
competencies needed to further advance the field on effective 
interventions and services to address the needs of children who are 
deaf or hard of hearing, including those with high-intensity needs.
    Note: We will award competitive preference points under Competitive 
Preference Priority 1 to not more than one application. The application 
that addresses this competitive preference priority and receives the 
highest score based on the selection criteria will be awarded an 
additional three points.
    Competitive Preference Priority 2 (Up to 5 points).
    An application that demonstrates matching support for the proposed 
project at--
    (a) 20 percent of the requested Federal award (1 point);
    (b) 40 percent of the total amount of the requested Federal award 
(2 points);
    (c) 60 percent of the total amount of the requested Federal award 
(3 points);
    (d) 80 percent of the total amount of the requested Federal award 
(4 points); or
    (e) 100 percent of the total amount of the requested Federal award 
(5 points).
    Competitive Preference Priority 3 (0 or 2 points).
    Applicants that propose projects that include at least two doctoral 
preparation programs that have not received funding under CFDA number 
84.325D or CFDA number 84.325H at any point in the preceding five 
fiscal years (i.e., FY 2014-FY 2018).

References

Benedict, K.M., Johnson, H., & Antia, S.D. (2011). Faculty needs, 
doctoral preparation, and the future of teacher preparation programs 
in the education of deaf and hard of hearing students. American 
Annals of the Deaf, 156, 35-46.
Browder, D.M., Wood, L., Thompson, J., & Ribuffo, C. (2014). 
Evidence-based practices for students with severe disabilities 
(Document No. IC-3). Retrieved from University of Florida, 
Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, 
and Reform Center website: http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tool/innovation-configurations/.
Bruce, S.M., & Borders, C. (2015). Communication and language in 
learners who are deaf and hard of hearing with disabilities: 
Theories, research, and practice. American Annals of the Deaf, 160, 
368-384.
Castillo, J.M., Curtis, M.J., & Tan, S.Y. (2014). Personnel needs in 
school psychology: A 10-year follow-up study on predicted personnel 
shortages. Psychology in the Schools, 51, 832-849.
Farmer, T.W., Sutherland, K.S., Talbott, E., Brooks, D.S., Norwalk, 
K., & Huneke, M. (2016). Special educators as intervention 
specialists: Dynamic systems and the complexity of intensifying 
intervention for students with emotional and behavioral disorders. 
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 24, 173-186.
Guralnick, M.J. (2017). Early intervention for children with 
intellectual disabilities: An update. Journal of Applied Research in 
Intellectual Disabilities, 30, 211-229.
Howley, C., Howley, A., & Telfer, D. (2017). National provisions for 
certification and professional preparation in low-incidence sensory 
disabilities: A 50-State study. American Annals of the Deaf, 162, 
277-294.
Johnson, H.A. (2013). Initial and ongoing teacher preparation and 
support: Current problems and possible solutions. American Annals of 
the Deaf, 157, 439-449.
Kruemmling, B., Hayes, H., & Smith, D.W. (2017). Enriching doctoral-
level preparation programs through a nationwide consortium model: 
The national leadership consortium in sensory disabilities. Journal 
of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 111, 557-567.
Lemons, C.J., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Kearns, D.M., & Sinclair, A.C. 
(2018). Envisioning an improved continuum of special education 
services for students with learning disabilities: Considering 
intervention intensity. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 
33, 131-143.
Montrosse, B.E., & Young, C.J. (2012). Market demand for special 
education faculty. Teacher Education and Special Education, 35, 140-
153.
Robb, S.M., Smith, D.D., & Montrosse, B.E. (2012). A context of the 
demand for special education faculty: A study of special education 
teacher preparation programs. Teacher Education and Special 
Education, 35, 128-139.
Roberts, M.Y., & Kaiser, A.P. (2015). Early intervention for 
toddlers with language delays: A randomized controlled trial. 
Pediatrics, 135, 686-693.
Smith, D.D., Montrosse, B.E., Robb, S.M., Tyler, N.C., & Young, C. 
(2011). Assessing trends in leadership: Special education's capacity 
to produce a highly qualified workforce. Claremont, CA: IRIS@CGU, 
Claremont Graduate University.
Smith, D.D., Robb, S.M., West, J., & Tyler, N.C. (2010). The 
changing education landscape: How special education leadership 
preparation can make a difference for teachers and their students 
with disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 33, 25-
43.
Woods, J., & Snyder, P. (2009). Interdisciplinary doctoral 
leadership training in early intervention. Infants & Young Children, 
22(1), 32-34.
Zwaigenbaum, L., Bauman, M.L., Choueiri, R., Kasari, C., Carter, A., 
Granpeesheh, D., . . . Natowicz, M.R. (2015). Pediatrics, 136, S60-
S81.

    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. 1462 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. (d) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR part 304.
    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
    Estimated Available Funds: $3,900,000.
    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: $1,100,000-$1,300,000 per year.
    Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1,200,000 per year.
    Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,300,000 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 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: IHEs and private nonprofit organizations.
    2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Cost sharing or matching is required 
for this competition.
    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.

[[Page 27320]]

    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 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 extent to which the proposed project will prepare personnel 
for fields in which shortages have been demonstrated;
    (ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely 
to be attained by the proposed project; and
    (iii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework 
underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and the 
quality of that framework.
    (b) Quality of project services (45 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 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;
    (ii) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a 
coherent, sustained program of training in the field; and
    (iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and 
effective practice.
    (c) Quality of the project evaluation (25 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 goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable;
    (iii) 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; and
    (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
timely guidance for quality assurance.
    (d) Quality of the management plan and adequacy of resources (20 
points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan and 
the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the management plan and the 
adequacy of resources, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of key project personnel;
    (ii) 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;
    (iii) 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;
    (iv) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization; and
    (v) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project.
    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

[[Page 27321]]

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 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.
    5. Performance Measures: Under GPRA, the Department has established 
a set of performance measures, including long-term measures, that are 
designed to yield information on the quality of the Personnel 
Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with 
Disabilities program. These measures include: (1) The percentage of 
preparation programs that incorporate scientifically or evidence-based 
practices into their curricula; (2) the percentage of scholars 
completing preparation programs who are knowledgeable and skilled in 
evidence-based practices for children with disabilities; (3) the 
percentage of scholars who exit preparation programs prior to 
completion due to poor academic performance; (4) the percentage of 
scholars completing preparation programs who are working in the area(s) 
in which they were prepared upon program completion; and (5) the 
Federal cost per scholar who completed the preparation program.
    In addition, the Department will gather information on the 
following outcome measures: (1) The percentage of scholars who 
completed the preparation program and are employed in high-need 
districts; (2) the percentage of scholars who completed the preparation 
program and are employed in the field of special education for at least 
two years; and (3) the percentage of scholars who completed the

[[Page 27322]]

preparation program and who are rated effective by their employers.
    Grantees may be asked to participate in assessing and providing 
information on these aspects of program quality.
    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 your search to documents published 
by the Department.

Johnny W. Collett,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2019-12317 Filed 6-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4000-01-P