[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 83862-83868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28411]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter II

[Docket ID ED-2020-OESE-0172]


Proposed Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions--Expanding 
Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)--National 
Dissemination Grants

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

ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions.

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

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education 
proposes priorities, requirements, and definitions for the Expanding 
Opportunity Through Quality Charter Schools Program (CSP)--National 
Dissemination Grants, Assistance Listing Number 84.282T. We may use one 
or more of these priorities, requirements, and definitions for 
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2021 and later years. We take this 
action to ensure that CSP National Dissemination Grants are aligned 
with the statutory purposes of the CSP and address key national policy 
issues. Specifically, the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions focus on disseminating best practices for strengthening 
charter school authorizing and oversight; improving charter school 
access to facilities and facility financing; increasing educational 
choice for students with disabilities, English learners, and other 
traditionally underserved student groups, including Native American 
students and students in rural communities.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before January 22, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal

[[Page 83863]]

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 ``Help.''
     Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you 
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed priorities, 
requirements, and definitions, address them to Cheryl Ford, U.S. 
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207, 
Washington, DC 20202-5970.
    Privacy Note: The Department's 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: Cheryl Ford, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207, Washington, DC 20202-
5970. Telephone: (202) 401-1366. 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 
the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. To ensure that 
your comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final 
priorities, requirements, and definitions, we urge you to identify 
clearly the specific section of the proposed priority, requirement, or 
definition that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and their 
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result 
from these proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions. 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 the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions 
by accessing Regulations.gov. Due to the current COVID-19 public health 
emergency, the Department buildings are not open to the public. 
However, upon reopening, you may also inspect the comments in person at 
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E207, Washington, DC, 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, and 
definitions. 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 major purposes of the CSP are to expand 
opportunities for all students, particularly traditionally underserved 
students, to attend charter schools and meet challenging State academic 
standards; provide financial assistance for the planning, program 
design, and initial implementation of charter schools; increase the 
number of high-quality charter schools available to students across the 
United States; evaluate the impact of charter schools on student 
achievement, families, and communities; share best practices between 
charter schools and other public schools; encourage States to provide 
facilities support to charter schools; and support efforts to 
strengthen the charter school authorizing process.
    Through CSP National Dissemination Grants, the Department provides 
funds on a competitive basis to support efforts by eligible entities to 
help increase the number of high-quality charter schools available to 
our Nation's students by disseminating best practices regarding charter 
schools.
    Program Authority: Section 4305(a)(3)(B) of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 
7221d(a)(3)(B).
    Background: The Department last conducted a National Dissemination 
Grants competition in FY 2018. In that competition, we invited 
applications for projects designed to disseminate best practices for 
strengthening charter school authorizing and oversight or improving 
charter school access to facilities and facility financing, both key 
policy issues facing charter schools on a national scale. This document 
proposes similar priorities, requirements, and definitions as the last 
competition in order to continue to address these key policy issues. 
These priorities, requirements, and definitions take into consideration 
the continuing growth of charter schools across the Nation and the 
increasing need to support the capacity and oversight of all charter 
schools. The priorities also recognize the important role that charter 
schools can play in increasing educational choice for students with 
disabilities, English learners, and other traditionally underserved 
student groups including Native American students and students in rural 
communities.

Proposed Priorities

    This document contains four proposed priorities. These priorities 
are:
    Proposed Priority 1--Strengthening Charter School Authorizing and 
Oversight.
    Background: One of the statutory purposes of the CSP is to support 
efforts to strengthen the charter school authorizing process to improve 
performance management, including transparency, oversight and 
monitoring (including financial audits), and evaluation of charter 
schools. Also, the CSP supports quality, accountability, and 
transparency in the operational performance of all authorized public 
chartering agencies, including State educational agencies (SEAs), local 
educational agencies (LEAs), and other authorizing entities. 
Specifically, the CSP State Entity Grants program has a strong focus on 
authorizing, including a requirement that grantees reserve a portion of 
funds to provide technical assistance to authorized public chartering 
agencies and work with them to improve authorizing quality. This 
priority would support that emphasis by prioritizing projects that 
propose to develop, identify, or expand, and disseminate information on 
best practices in authorizing and the oversight of charter schools by 
authorized public chartering agencies.
    Authorizers are responsible for conducting rigorous application 
reviews to ensure new charter schools can be of high quality. They are 
also responsible for establishing clear and consistent policies to hold 
schools accountable for

[[Page 83864]]

meeting their academic, financial, and operational performance goals, 
as well as complying with all applicable laws--including civil rights 
laws requiring equal access. Through this priority, the Department 
expects that the implementation of strong authorizing practices will 
proliferate and continuously improve the quality of the charter school 
sector.
    Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to develop, identify, 
or expand, and disseminate information on best practices in authorizing 
and overseeing charter schools by authorized public chartering agencies 
in one or more of the following areas:
    (a) Conducting charter school application reviews.
    (b) Establishing governance standards and practices for charter 
schools.
    (c) Promoting and monitoring the compliance of charter schools and 
authorized public chartering agencies with Federal, State, and local 
academic, financial, governance, operational (including school safety), 
or other applicable requirements.
    (d) Evaluating the performance of charter schools or authorized 
public chartering agencies.
    (e) Facilitating the replication and expansion of high-quality 
charter schools.
    (f) Improving the academic, financial, or operational performance 
of charter schools.
    (g) Closing persistently underperforming charter schools.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to disseminate 
best-practices information in multiple locations in at least two States 
with a charter school law.
    Proposed Priority 2--Targeting Educational Agencies with the Most 
Need.
    Background: This priority would target information dissemination 
efforts toward those entities with the greatest need, which include 
States with new or significantly revised charter school laws or 
policies.
    To increase opportunities for authorized public chartering agencies 
to establish new, high-quality operational procedures, and because the 
period following enactment or revision of charter school laws and 
policies is most critical to their successful implementation, this 
priority would focus on States where new or revised charter school laws 
and policies have been adopted within the last five years. In addition, 
the priority would target dissemination efforts to aid the development 
of authorized public chartering agencies that support 10 or fewer 
schools and, accordingly, have limited resources related to economies 
of scale, or include struggling schools under their purview.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ National Organization of Charter School Authorizers(NACSA). 
(2009). A Report on NACSA's Authorizer Survey. Chicago: National 
Organization of Charter School Authorizers. Retrieved from 
www.qualitycharters.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/NACSA_2008-SOCA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through this priority, the Department would support projects that 
target information on best practices to improve the overall quality of, 
and the ability of State entities to grow, the charter school sector 
within their States.
    Proposed Priority: Projects that propose to target information 
dissemination to one or more of the following:
    (a) States that have enacted laws in the last five years allowing 
charter schools to open.
    (b) States that in the last five years have significantly changed 
their laws, regulations, or policies regarding authorizing or oversight 
of charter schools by authorized public chartering agencies.
    (c) Authorized public chartering agencies with fewer than 10 
charter schools.
    (d) Authorized public chartering agencies that authorize a 
significant number of charter schools experiencing significant low 
performance or non-compliance with Federal, State, or local academic, 
financial, governance, operational (including school safety), or other 
applicable requirements.
    Proposed Priority 3--Improving Charter School Access to Facilities 
and Facility Financing.
    Background: Limited access to adequate facilities and to funding 
for facilities, including per-pupil facilities aid, remains a 
significant issue impacting growth in the number of charter schools 
available to students throughout the United States. To help address 
this issue, this priority would support projects that develop, 
identify, or expand, and disseminate information on, best practices in 
supporting charter schools in accessing and financing facilities.
    Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to develop, identify, 
or expand, and disseminate information on, best practices in supporting 
charter schools in accessing and financing facilities, including in one 
or more of the following areas:
    (a) Access to public and private (including philanthropic) funding, 
including from a Qualified Opportunity Fund under section 1400Z-2 of 
the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (115 
Pub. L. 97), for one or more of the following, as needed to open or to 
replicate or expand a charter school:
    (1) The acquisition (by purchase, lease, donation, or otherwise) of 
an interest (including an interest held by a third party for the 
benefit of the school) in improved or unimproved real property.
    (2) The construction of new facilities, or the renovation, repair, 
or alteration of existing facilities.
    (3) The predevelopment costs required to assess sites for purposes 
of paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this priority.
    (4) The acquisition of other tangible property.
    (b) Access to public facilities, including the right of first 
refusal.
    (c) Access to per-pupil facilities aid to charter schools to 
provide the schools with funding that is dedicated solely to charter 
school facilities.
    (d) Access to credit enhancements and other subsidies.
    (e) Access to bonds or mill levies by charter schools, or by other 
public entities for the benefit of charter schools.
    (f) Planning for facility acquisition by charter schools, including 
comprehensive analysis of facility needs.
    To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to disseminate 
best-practices information in multiple locations in at least two States 
with a charter school law.
    Proposed Priority 4--Empowering Underserved Students and Their 
Families to Choose a High-Quality Education that Meets Their Unique 
Needs.
    Background: One of the statutory purposes of the CSP is to expand 
opportunities for children with disabilities, English learners, and 
other traditionally underserved students to attend charter schools and 
meet challenging State academic standards. This priority is intended to 
target funding to projects that help provide educational choice to 
these underserved student groups, which include educationally 
disadvantaged children, students who reside or attend schools in 
Qualifed Opportunity Zones (i.e., designated distressed communities), 
students who are Native American, and students who are served by rural 
local educational agencies.
    An applicant addressing this proposed priority would describe how 
its proposed project is designed to increase access to charter schools 
for one or more of these groups. An applicant might address this 
priority, for instance: (1) Through its plan to develop, identify, or 
expand best practices related to serving students in

[[Page 83865]]

one or more of these underserved groups; (2) through disseminating best 
practices in areas with high concentrations of one or more of these 
student groups; or (3) by targeting its project work in areas in which 
students in one or more of the student groups are at risk of 
educational failure or otherwise in need of special assistance or 
support.
    Proposed Priority: Projects that are designed to address increasing 
access to charter schools for one or more of the following groups of 
children or students:
    (a) Educationally disadvantaged children.
    (b) Children or students who reside or attend school in a Qualified 
Opportunity Zone, as designated by the Secretary of the Treasury under 
section 1400Z-1 of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended by the Tax 
Cuts and Jobs Act.
    (c) Students who are Native Americans. Specifically, projects 
serving students in this category must focus on addressing the unique 
educational needs of Native American students, such as through the use 
of instructional programs and teaching methods that reflect and 
preserve Native American language, culture, and history.
    (d) Children or students in communities served by rural local 
educational agencies.

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)).
    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: In an effort to improve project outcomes, the 
Department is proposing requirements that are necessary for the proper 
consideration of applications for National Dissemination Grants in 
order to increase the likelihood of success of applicants' proposed 
projects. In disseminating best practices regarding charter schools, 
grantees would contribute to the efficient use of taxpayer dollars in 
supporting the charter school sector and increasing the number of high-
quality charter schools available to our Nation's students. We also 
propose eligibility requirements, to ensure that grantees have the 
preparation and experience to implement a National Dissemination Grant 
successfully.
    Proposed Requirements: We propose the following requirements for 
this program. We may apply one or more of these requirements in any 
year in which this program is administered.
    Applicants for funds under this program must address one or more of 
the following application requirements:
    (a) Provide a project plan, including a logic model (as defined in 
34 CFR 77.1), that describes the purpose of the project; includes 
clearly specified, measurable project objectives that are aligned with 
the project purpose; and includes the specific strategies and 
initiatives that will be implemented to accomplish project objectives. 
For each project objective, the project plan must include one or more 
of the following--
    (i) Inputs and Resources: Identification of the specific costs that 
will be allocated to the proposed project. These costs must represent 
the inputs and resources (e.g., personnel, contracted services, 
supplies, and equipment) that are necessary to generate and support 
grant project activities, and are necessary to produce project outputs. 
Applicants must ensure that the total project costs, as identified in 
this section, are consistent with U.S. Department of Education Budget 
Information Non-Construction Programs Form 524, 34 CFR 75.210 and 
responses to applicable selection criteria;
    (ii) Project Activities: Identification of the specific activities 
proposed to be funded under the grant; the estimated cost of those 
activities under the grant project; and how these activities are linked 
to the target grant project outputs and outcomes;
    (iii) Project Outputs: Identification of the specific project 
deliverables, work products, and other outputs of the proposed project, 
including the cost of those outputs (if not already itemized in 
response to paragraph (a)(ii) Project Activities). Examples of outputs 
include--
    (1) Best practice publications and products;
    (2) Evaluation reports; and
    (3) Presentation of a session at a conference delivering best 
practices for stakeholders.
    (iv) Project Outcomes: Identification of the anticipated project 
outcomes or effects as a result of the proposed project.
    (b) Provide a management plan that describes clearly defined 
responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for executing the project 
and achieving project outcomes.
    (c) Provide a dissemination plan that includes the number and 
description of States, charter schools, or authorized public chartering 
agencies to which best-practices information will be disseminated, as 
well as a description of the mechanisms the applicant will use to 
disseminate information on its proposed projects.
    (d) Provide an evaluation plan that includes performance measures 
that are aligned to the project purpose, project objectives, and 
project outcomes as well as to the intended outcomes of the proposed 
project.
    Proposed Eligibility Requirements: Eligibility for a grant under 
this competition is limited to SEAs; State charter school authorizing 
boards; State Governors; charter school support organizations; 
authorized public chartering agencies; and public and private nonprofit 
organizations that operate, manage, or support charter schools.
    Eligible applicants may apply as a partnership or consortium and, 
if so applying, must comply with the requirements for group 
applications set forth in 34 CFR 75.127-129.
    Public and private nonprofit organizations that operate, manage, or 
support charter schools must apply in partnership with one or more 
SEAs, State charter school boards, State Governors, charter school 
support organizations, or authorized public chartering agencies.
    Proposed Funding Restrictions: Grant funds may be used only for 
activities that are related to the development, identification, 
expansion, and dissemination of information on best practices regarding 
the priority to which the applicant is responding and that are included 
in the grantee's approved application. Grantees may not use grant funds 
to conduct charter school authorizing activities, or to open new 
charter schools, or replicate or expand existing charter schools. 
Grantees may

[[Page 83866]]

not use grant funds to acquire or finance the acquisition of a charter 
school facility, including through credit enhancement, direct lending, 
or subgrants. Grantees may not use grant funds for general 
organizational operating support beyond the costs associated with this 
grant project. No more than 5 percent of grant funds may be used for 
direct administration of the grant project.

Proposed Definitions

    We propose the following definitions for this program. We may apply 
one or more of these definitions in any year in which the program is in 
effect.
    Background: In order to ensure a common understanding of the 
proposed priorities and requirements, we propose definitions that are 
critical to the policy and statutory purposes of the National 
Dissemination Grant program. We propose these definitions to clarify 
expectations for eligible entities applying for National Dissemination 
Grants and to ensure that the review process for applications for 
National Dissemination Grants remains as transparent as possible. The 
proposed definition for ``rural local educational agency'' is based on 
the definition from the Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities and 
Definitions for Discetionary Grant Programs published in the Federal 
Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096). The proposed definition for 
``educationally disadvantaged children'' is based on section 1115(c)(2) 
of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6315).
    Educationally disadvantaged children means a student in one or more 
of the categories described in section 1115(c)(2) of the ESEA, which 
include children who are economically disadvantaged, children with 
disabilities, migrant students, English learners, neglected or 
delinquent students, homeless students, and students who are in foster 
care.
    Native American means an Indian (including an Alaska Native), as 
defined in section 6151(3) of the ESEA, Native Hawaiian, or Native 
American Pacific Islander.
    Rural local educational agency means an LEA that is eligible under 
the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-
Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title V, Part B of the 
ESEA. Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is 
eligible for these programs by referring to information on the 
Department's website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formula-grants/rural-insular-native-achievement-programs/rural-education-achievement-program/.
    Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions: We will announce 
the final priorities, requirements, and definitions in a document 
published in the Federal Register. We will determine the final 
priorities, requirements, and definitions after considering responses 
to the proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions and other 
information available to the Department. This document does not 
preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements, 
definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable 
rulemaking requirements.
    Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, requirements, 
and definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal 
Register.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, 
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and 
subject to review by 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.
    OMB has determined that 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 rule 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 2021, any new incremental costs associated 
with a new rule must be fully offset by the elimination of existing 
costs through deregulatory actions. Because the proposed regulatory 
action is not significant, 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 these proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would 
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory 
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net 
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes 
that

[[Page 83867]]

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.

Discussion of Potential Costs and Benefits

    The Department believes that this proposed regulatory action would 
impose minimal costs on eligible entities, whose participation in this 
program is voluntary, and expects that participants would include in 
their proposed budgets a request for funds to support compliance with 
any cost-bearing requirements, if necessary. We believe any costs 
associated with this regulatory action would be outweighed by its 
benefits, which include helping ensure that CSP funds support the 
dissemination of best practices on topics critical to the charter 
school sector and contribute to an increased number of high-quality 
educational options available to the Nation's students.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies 
with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections 
of information, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that the public 
understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can 
provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden 
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are 
clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact 
of collection requirements on respondents.
    The proposed priorities, requirements, and definitions contain 
information collection requirements (ICR) for the program application 
package. As a result of the proposed priorities, requirements, and 
definitions, we will seek approval to use the 1894-0006 collection and 
34 CFR 75.210. In Table 1 below, we assume 15 applicants each spend 40 
hours preparing their applications.

                  Table 1--National Dissemination Grants Program Information Collection Status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Proposed action
      OMB control No.                 Expiration           Current burden    Proposed burden      under final
                                                           (total hours)      (total hours)        priorities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1894-0006..................  January 31, 2021...........                0  Applicants: 600     Obtain approval
                                                                            hours.              under 1894-0006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 these proposed 
priorities, requirements, and definitions 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?
    To send any comments that concern how the Department could make 
these proposed regulations easier to understand, see the instructions 
in the ADDRESSES section.
    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 (SBA) 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. Nonprofit 
institutions are defined as small entities if they are independently 
owned and operated and not dominant in their field of operation.
    Participation in this program is voluntary and limited to entities 
seeking to disseminate best-practice information regarding charter 
schools. The Department anticipates that approximately 15 entities will 
apply for National Dissemination Grants in a given year and estimates 
that fewer than half of these entities will be small entities. For this 
limited number of small entities, any cost-bearing requirements imposed 
by this regulatory action can be defrayed with grant funds, as 
discussed in the Regulatory Impact Analysis section of this document.
    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.
    Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities 
can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will 
provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich 
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, 
braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible 
format.
    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.

[[Page 83868]]

    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. 2020-28411 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P