[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 125 (Monday, June 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38801-38806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13158]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter II

[Docket ID ED-2020-OESE-0037]


Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection 
Criteria--Promise Neighborhoods (PN) Program

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of 
Education.

ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education 
proposes priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria 
under the PN program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) 
number 84.215N. The Assistant Secretary may use these priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for competitions in 
fiscal year (FY) 2020 and later years. We take this action to make 
program improvements based on lessons learned over the last decade and 
to improve program outcomes.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 29, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not 
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after 
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, 
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the 
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit 
your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, 
including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting 
comments, and viewing the docket is available on the site under ``How 
to use Regulations.gov'' in the Help section.
    Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you mail or 
deliver your comments about the proposed priorities, requirements, 
definitions, and selection criteria, address them to Adrienne Hawkins, 
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4W220, 
Washington, DC 20202.
    Privacy Note: The Department of Education's (Department) policy is 
to make all comments received from members of the public available for 
public viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include 
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly 
available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrienne Hawkins, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4W220, Washington, DC 20202. 
Telephone: (202) 453-5638. 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: 
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in 
developing the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria, we urge you to identify clearly the specific 
proposed priority, requirement, definition, or selection criterion that 
each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13371 and their 
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result 
from these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria. Please let us know of any further ways we could 
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving 
the effective and efficient administration of the program.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public 
comments about these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria at 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202 
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday 
through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
    Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the 
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate 
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who 
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the 
public rulemaking record for the proposed priorities, requirements, 
definitions, and selection criteria. If you want to schedule an 
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Purpose of Program: The PN program is authorized under the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every 
Student Succeeds Act (ESEA). The purpose of the PN program is to 
significantly improve the academic and developmental outcomes of 
children living in the most distressed communities of the United 
States, including ensuring school readiness, high school graduation, 
and access to a community-based continuum of high-quality services. The 
program serves neighborhoods with high concentrations of low-income 
individuals; multiple signs of distress, which may include high rates 
of poverty, childhood obesity, academic failure, and juvenile 
delinquency, adjudication, or incarceration; and schools implementing 
comprehensive support and improvement activities or targeted support 
and improvement activities under section 1111(d) of the ESEA. All 
strategies in the continuum of solutions must be accessible to children 
with disabilities and English learners.
    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7273-7274.

Proposed Priorities

    This document contains four proposed priorities.
    Background: Beginning in 2010, and in the FY 2017 competition, the 
PN program used absolute priorities for rural, Tribal, and non-rural, 
non-Tribal applicants to create three different funding slates. 
Multiple funding slates created a level playing field for different 
applicants by allowing applicants with similar challenges and 
circumstances to compete against one another. The three absolute 
priorities resulted in a mix of rural, Tribal, and non-rural, non-
Tribal grantees. Over the years, the PN program has awarded 54 grants 
to urban communities, 13 grants to rural communities, and 6 grants to 
Tribal communities. Without multiple slates there would have been much 
fewer rural and Tribal grants. Therefore, in this document the 
Department proposes to establish priorities for non-rural, non-Tribal 
and for Tribal communities under Proposed Priorities 1 and 2. The 
Secretary's Administrative Priorities (85

[[Page 38802]]

FR 13640), which are available for use in the PN program, already 
include a priority for rural applicants. In future competitions, 
separate slates will be utilized to determine rural, Tribal, and non-
rural, non-Tribal grantees.)
    Proposed Priority 1--Non-Rural and Non-Tribal Communities.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to implement a PN 
strategy that serves one or more non-rural or non-Tribal communities.
    Proposed Priority 2--Tribal Communities.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to implement a PN 
strategy that serves one or more Indian Tribes (as defined in this 
notice).
    Proposed Priority 3--Community-Level Opioid Abuse Prevention 
Efforts.
    Background: In 2017, in response to the opioid crisis \1\ plaguing 
many communities across the country, the Department created a priority 
for applicants that proposed to leverage other Federal resources 
available to fight opioid addiction. The Department awarded competitive 
preference points to applicants that demonstrated receipt of a Drug 
Free Communities (DFC) Support Program Grant from the Office of 
National Drug Policy to prevent opioid abuse (as one of its areas of 
focus) or a partnership with a DFC grantee as demonstrated by a 
memorandum of understanding. Of the 80 applications received in the 
2017 competition, 40 applicants addressed this priority as a need in 
their communities and all applicants who received awards in 2017 
addressed this priority. Funded grantees have leveraged these resources 
to provide direct support to families devastated by the opioid crisis 
through mental health support and drug prevention resources in schools 
where children are affected by this epidemic. Through Proposed Priority 
3, the Department seeks to continue to address the opioid crisis in PN 
communities while also expanding the eligibility pool beyond projects 
supported with Federal resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``STATCAST--Week of September 9, 2019.'' STATCAST, 2019, 
www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/20190911/20190911.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Proposed Priority 3:
    To meet this priority, an applicant must: (1) Demonstrate how it 
will partner with an organization that conducts high-quality, 
community-level activities to prevent opioid abuse, such as an 
organization supported by an Office of National Drug Control Policy, 
DFC Support Program grant, in PN communities; (2) describe the partner 
organization's record of success in approaching opioid abuse prevention 
at the community level; and (3) provide, in its application, a 
memorandum of understanding between it and the partner organization 
responsible for managing the effort. The memorandum of understanding 
must indicate a commitment on the part of the applicant to coordinate 
implementation and align resources to the greatest extent practicable.
    Proposed Priority 4--Evidence-Based Activities to Support Academic 
Achievement.
    Background: Over the last 10 years, PN grantees attempted to 
significantly improve the academic achievement of children served by 
providing supports external to classroom instruction. While most 
grantees achieved some success in improving the academic achievement of 
students in the neighborhoods served, other grantees experienced 
challenges due to external factors such as change of school 
administration, housing affordability, family mobility, and school or 
neighborhood safety issues. Although our grantees attempt to resolve 
these issues through partnerships, these issues take time to resolve 
individually and collectively. Grantees with success in supporting 
students' successful transition to the next grade level, and completion 
of postsecondary education attributed the success to providing 
evidence-based instructional and comprehensive service strategies.
    Proposed Priority 4:
    Projects that propose to use evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR 
77.1(c)) activities, strategies, or interventions that support teaching 
practices that will lead to increasing student achievement (as defined 
in this notice), graduation rates, and career readiness.
    Proposed Priority 5--Community-Based Crime Reduction Efforts.
    Background: In 2011, the Department responded to challenges many 
neighborhoods were facing with crime-- and specifically its effects on 
school safety, chronic absenteeism, and juvenile delinquency--by 
establishing a priority for the PN program focused on crime reduction. 
Through ongoing collaboration with the Department of Justice (DOJ), the 
Department provided supplemental funding to organizations with PN and 
Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation grants to further enhance community-
based crime prevention efforts. In 2017, recognizing these efforts 
could be expanded to the pool of applicants through the PN competition, 
the Department established a competitive preference priority to 
encourage ongoing collaboration between education and public safety 
efforts. Ultimately, we awarded two new grants to organizations 
partnering with a Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation grantee. These 
grantees have yielded results that have improved school safety and 
chronic absenteeism in their communities. In 2018, the DOJ renamed the 
Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation program to the Innovations in 
Community-Based Crime Reduction Program. Additionally, DOJ continues to 
implement the Formerly Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely 
Transitioning Every Person (FIRST STEP) initiative to support the re-
entry of formerly incarcerated individuals into their communities. This 
proposed priority would allow us to support the connection of these 
important community-based public safety initiatives to PN communities 
by aligning education and public safety efforts.
    Proposed Priority 5:
    To meet this priority, an applicant must: (1) Demonstrate how it 
will partner with an organization that conducts high-quality activities 
focused on the re-entry of formerly incarcerated individuals or on 
community-based crime reduction activities, such as an organization 
supported by a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Innovations in 
Community-Based Crime Reduction Program grant, a grant authorized under 
the Second Chance Act, as reauthorized under the. Formerly Incarcerated 
Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person (FIRST 
STEP) Act, or DOJ Office of Justice Programs competitive grants related 
to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention; (2) describe the 
partner organization's record of success with supporting the re-entry 
of formerly incarcerated individuals or community-based crime reduction 
and how their efforts will be coordinated with the PN activities of 
this grant; and (3) provide, in its application, a memorandum of 
understanding between it and a partner organization managing the 
effort. The memorandum of understanding must indicate a commitment on 
the part of the applicant to coordinate implementation and align 
resources to the greatest extent practicable.

Types of Priorities

    When inviting applications for a competition using one or more 
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal 
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
    Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only 
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).

[[Page 38803]]

    Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference 
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) 
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the 
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of 
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
    Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are 
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. 
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Proposed Requirements

    Background: The Assistant Secretary proposes application 
requirements to be used in conjunction with those in section 4624(a) of 
the ESEA. In general, the Department believes, based on past 
experiences administering this program, that these proposed 
requirements are necessary for the proper consideration of applications 
and would increase the likelihood of successful projects. Through the 
years, the program has pushed the field to embrace data-driven efforts 
to improve outcomes from cradle to career at the population level. Key 
elements proposed in this document would help us to further target PN 
funds on interventions in school, college, and career settings.
    In addition, through proposed enhanced application requirements the 
program seeks to better support applicants and grantees to report high-
quality site-level data. PN grantees have improved significantly in 
this area over the past several years through our technical assistance 
efforts, and we believe that the proposed application requirements 
would further support the Department's and grantees' ability to make 
data-informed decisions. The program seeks to clarify and enhance the 
statutory definitions and selection criteria to coincide with 
improvements to the overall purpose and structure of the PN program.
    The proposed application requirements are intended to: (1) Assist 
applicants with clearly demonstrating the need for the project and 
proposed solutions (activities, strategies, and interventions) specific 
to the neighborhood's need; (2) acknowledge the critical role and 
direct, ongoing involvement that local educational agencies (LEAs) and 
schools should have in identifying and implementing solutions, 
especially those specific to improving academic outcomes; (3) ensure 
that an applicant has a preexisting presence, as demonstrated by the 
applicant's past history providing programs and services, in the 
neighborhood to be served and is representative of that neighborhood; 
and (4) ensure that an applicant will design its project to prepare and 
empower families to be active in choosing the educational and other 
supports that best meet the needs of students in the community. We 
believe the proposed requirements would not only improve the 
application and review process but also improve program outcomes.

Proposed Application Requirements

    The Assistant Secretary proposes the following application 
requirements for this program. We may apply one or more of these 
requirements in any year in which this program is in effect.
    Proposed Application Requirements: To be considered for an award 
under this competition, an applicant must provide the following--
    (1) In addressing the application requirements in sections 
4624(a)(4),(5), and (7) of the ESEA, an applicant must clearly 
demonstrate needs, including, a segmentation analysis, gaps in 
services, and any available data from within the last 3 years to 
demonstrate needs. The applicant should also describe proposed 
activities that address these needs and the extent to which these 
activities are evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c). The 
applicant should also describe their, or partner organizations if 
applicable, experience providing these activities including any data 
demonstrating effectiveness.
    (2) In addressing the requirement in section 4624(a)(6) of the 
ESEA, an applicant must provide a description of the process used to 
develop the application, which must include the involvement of an 
LEA(s) (including but not limited to the LEA's or LEAs' involvement in 
the creation and planning of the application and a signed Memorandum of 
Understanding) and at least one public elementary or secondary school 
that is located within the identified geographic area that the grant 
will serve.
    (3) An applicant must demonstrate that its proposed project--
    (a) Is representative of the geographic area proposed to be served 
(as defined in this notice); and
    (b) Would provide a majority of the solutions from the applicant's 
proposed pipeline services in the geographic area proposed to be 
served.
    (4) In addressing the requirement in section 4624(a)(9) of the 
ESEA, an applicant must describe the process it will use to establish 
and maintain a family navigation system (as defined in this notice), 
including an explanation of the process the applicant will use to 
establish and maintain family and community engagement.

Proposed Definitions

    The Assistant Secretary proposes the following definitions for this 
program. We may apply one or more of these definitions in any year in 
which this program is in effect.
    Background: To ensure a common understanding of the proposed 
priorities, requirements, and selection criteria, we propose 
definitions that are critical to the statutory and policy purposes of 
the PN program. We propose these definitions in order to clarify 
expectations for applicants for PN program grants and to ensure that 
the review process for applications for PN grants remains as 
transparent as possible.

Proposed Definitions

    Family navigation system means a service delivery model that 
includes coordinators who teach, mentor, and collaborate with students 
and their families, as well as community members, to choose 
interventions, treatments, or solutions provided by the grantee and 
that best meet the needs of students and their families. Students and 
their families can select services and supports based on available 
services and individual needs, as well as advocate for additional 
services.
    Graduation rate means the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate 
or extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate as defined in section 
8101(25) and (23) of the ESEA.
    Indian Tribe means an Indian Tribe or Tribal Organization as 
defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-determination Act (25 U.S. 
450b).
    Indicators of need means currently available data that describe--
    (a) Education need, which means--
    (1) All or a portion of the neighborhood includes or is within the 
attendance zone of a low-performing school that is a high school, 
especially one in which the graduation rate (as defined in this notice) 
is less than 60 percent or a school that can be characterized as low-
performing based on another proxy indicator, such as students' on-time 
progression from grade to grade; and
    (2) Other indicators, such as significant achievement gaps between 
subgroups of students (as identified in section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi) of 
the ESEA), within a school or LEA, high teacher and principal turnover, 
or high student absenteeism; and

[[Page 38804]]

    (b) Family and community support need, which means--
    (1) Percentages of children with preventable chronic health 
conditions (e.g., asthma, poor nutrition, dental problems, obesity) or 
avoidable developmental delays;
    (2) Immunization rates;
    (3) Rates of crime, including violent crime;
    (4) Student mobility rates;
    (5) Teenage birth rates;
    (6) Percentage of children in single parent or no-parent families;
    (7) Rates of vacant or substandard homes, including distressed 
public and assisted housing; or
    (8) Percentage of the residents living at or below the Federal 
poverty threshold.
    Regular high school diploma has the meaning set out in section 
8101(43) of the ESEA.
    Representative of the geographic area proposed to be served means 
that residents of the geographic area proposed to be served have an 
active role in decision-making and that at least one-third of the 
applicant's governing board or advisory board is made up of--
    (a) Residents who live in the geographic area proposed to be 
served, which may include residents who are representative of the 
ethnic and racial composition of the neighborhood's residents and the 
languages they speak;
    (b) Residents of the city or county in which the neighborhood is 
located but who live outside the geographic area proposed to be served, 
and who earn less than 80 percent of the area's median income as 
published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development;
    (c) Public officials who serve the geographic area proposed to be 
served (although not more than one-half of the governing board or 
advisory board may be made up of public officials); or
    (d) Some combination of individuals from the three groups listed in 
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this definition.
    Segmentation analysis means the process of grouping and analyzing 
data from children and families in the geographic area proposed to be 
served according to indicators of need or other relevant indicators to 
allow grantees to differentiate and more effectively target 
interventions based on the needs of different populations in the 
geographic area.
    Student achievement means--
    (a) For tested grades and subjects--
    (1) A student's score on the State's assessments under the ESEA; 
and
    (2) As appropriate, other measures of student learning, such as 
those described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are 
rigorous and comparable across classrooms and programs; and
    (b) For non-tested grades and subjects, alternative measures of 
student learning and performance, such as student scores on pre-tests 
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language 
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement that 
are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
    Student mobility rate is calculated by dividing the total number of 
new student entries and withdrawals at a school, from the day after the 
first official enrollment number is collected through the end of the 
academic year, by the first official enrollment number of the academic 
year.

Proposed Selection Criteria

    Background: The Department has held six PN competitions since 2010. 
Our experience with administering these competitions, including 
feedback from peer reviewers, applicants, funded grantees, and experts, 
demonstrates the need to use program-specific selection criteria to 
evaluate specific program elements. We propose to modify two general 
Education Department General Administrative Regulations selection 
criteria--Need for Project and Quality of Project Design--to encourage 
applicants to fully address gaps and weaknesses in the full pipeline of 
solutions from cradle through college and a career.
    Under Need for Project, the Department proposes to add a program-
specific emphasis on the applicant's proposed pipeline of solutions. 
The Department recognized in past grant competitions that applicants 
were not connecting the identified gaps and weaknesses to the full 
pipeline of solutions. The Department considers it important for 
applicants to address and align the needs identified with the full 
pipeline of solutions.
    Also, under Quality of Project Design, the Department proposes to 
encourage applicants to discuss college or career and technical 
education training completion in addition to college and career 
readiness. Over the years, the Department has noticed that many 
applicants and funded grantees tend to end services prior to students 
in the community entering college or the workforce. The Department 
deems it important to ensure that services and supports are offered to 
program participants beyond high school completion.

Proposed Selection Criteria

    The Assistant Secretary proposes the following selection criteria 
for evaluating an application under this program. We may apply one or 
more of these criteria in any year in which this program is in effect.
    (a) Need for project. In determining the need for the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors--
    (1) The magnitude or severity of the problems to be addressed by 
the proposed project as described by indicators of need and other 
relevant indicators identified in part by the needs assessment and 
segmentation analysis; and
    (2) 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--
    (i) The nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses; and
    (ii) A pipeline of solutions addressing the identified gaps and 
weaknesses, including solutions targeted to early childhood, K-12, 
family and community supports, and college and career.
    (b) Quality of project design. In determining the quality of 
project design for the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or 
more of the following factors--
    (1) The extent to which the applicant describes a plan to create a 
complete pipeline of services, without time and resource gaps, that is 
designed to prepare all children in the neighborhood to attain a high-
quality education and successfully transition to college and a career;
    (2) The extent to which the project will significantly increase the 
proportion of students in the neighborhood that are served by the 
complete continuum of high-quality services; and
    (3) The extent to which the proposed family navigation system is 
high quality and provides students and their families sufficient 
services and supports based on available services and individual needs.

Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection Criteria

    We will announce the final priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria in the Federal Register. We will determine the 
final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria 
after considering responses to the proposed priorities, requirements, 
definitions, and selection criteria and other information available to 
the

[[Page 38805]]

Department. This document does not preclude us from proposing 
additional priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
    Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use these priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria, we invite applications through a notice in the 
Federal Register.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the 
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office 
of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 
defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to 
result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive order.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866.
    Under Executive Order 13771, for each new regulation that the 
Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates 
that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, 
and that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two 
deregulatory actions. For FY 2020, any new incremental costs associated 
with a new regulation must be fully offset by the elimination of 
existing costs through deregulatory actions. Because the proposed 
regulations are not a significant regulatory action, the requirements 
of Executive Order 13771 do not apply.
    We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under 
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the 
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review 
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, 
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria only on a reasoned determination that their 
benefits justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory 
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net 
benefits. The Department believes that this regulatory action is 
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those 
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities. 
The benefits include enhancing project design and quality of services 
to better prepare grantees to meet the objectives of the programs.

Clarity of the Regulations

    Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write 
regulations that are easy to understand.
    The Secretary invites comments on how to make the proposed 
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria easier to 
understand, including answers to questions such as the following:
     Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly 
stated?
     Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or 
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
     Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and 
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce 
their clarity?
     Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if 
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
     Could the description of the proposed regulations in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in 
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
     What else could we do to make the proposed regulations 
easier to understand?

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define 
``small entities'' as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total 
annual revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled 
by small governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities, 
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special 
districts), with a population of less than 50,000.
    The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would 
affect are State educational agencies; LEAs, including charter schools 
that operate as LEAs under State law; institutions of higher education; 
other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely 
associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal 
organizations; and for-profit organizations. We believe

[[Page 38806]]

that the costs imposed on an applicant by the proposed priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria would be limited to 
paperwork burden related to preparing an application and that the 
benefits of the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and 
selection criteria would outweigh any costs incurred by the applicant.
    Participation in the PN program is voluntary. For this reason, the 
proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria 
would impose no burden on small entities unless they applied for 
funding under the program. We expect that in determining whether to 
apply for PN program funds, an applicant would evaluate the 
requirements of preparing an application and any associated costs, and 
weigh them against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving a PN 
program grant. An applicant would probably apply only if it determines 
that the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an application.
    We believe that the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, 
and selection criteria would not impose any additional burden on a 
small entity applying for a grant than the entity would face in the 
absence of the proposed action. That is, the length of the applications 
those entities would submit in the absence of the proposed regulatory 
action and the time needed to prepare an application would likely be 
the same.
    This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant 
economic impact on a small entity once it receives a grant because it 
would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided 
under this program. We invite comments from small eligible entities as 
to whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a 
significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to 
support that belief.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection 
criteria contain information collection requirements that are approved 
by OMB under OMB control number 1894-0006; the proposed priorities, 
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria do not affect the 
currently approved data collection.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the 
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive 
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened 
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State 
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
financial assistance.
    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
actions for this program.

Assessment of Educational Impact

    In accordance with section 411 of General Education Provisions Act, 
20 U.S.C. 1221e-4, the Secretary particularly requests comments on 
whether the proposed regulations would require transmission of 
information that any other agency or authority of the United States 
gathers or makes available.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    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 Adobe 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.

Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-13158 Filed 6-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P