[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9596-9603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03680]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities--National Technical Assistance Center to Support
Implementation and Scaling Up of Evidence-Based Practices
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2022 for the
National Technical Assistance Center to Support Implementation and
Scaling Up of Evidence-Based Practices, Assistance Listing Number (ALN)
84.326K. This notice relates to the approved information collection
under OMB control number 1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: February 22, 2022.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 25, 2022.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 22, 2022.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than February 28,
2022, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post details
on pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide technical
assistance (TA) to interested applicants. Links to the webinars may be
found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
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 December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979. Please note that these Common
Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and,
in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in
SAM.gov a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to the
implementation of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). More information
on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Coffey, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5134, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6673. Email:
[email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve
results for children with disabilities by providing TA, supporting
model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and
implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based
research.
Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable
activities specified in sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2022 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:
National Center to Support Implementation and Scaling Up of
Evidence-Based Practices.
Background:
The University of Washington's Implementation Science Resource Hub
defines ``implementation science'' as ``the scientific study of methods
and strategies that facilitate the uptake of evidence-based practice
and research into regular use by practitioners and policymakers.'' (The
University of Washington, 2021). Implementation science provides the
bridge between research and practice, supporting implementation of
effective interventions, programs, and practices that can improve
results for children with disabilities.
OSEP has supported the use of implementation science since 2007,
with the inception of a TA Center created to assist State educational
agencies (SEAs) in implementing and scaling up effective practices,
such as evidence-based reading, math, and behavior interventions. As a
result of this assistance, States are building infrastructure that
supports the use and scaling up of effective practices that improve
outcomes for children with disabilities (Ruedel et al., 2021). While
many of these States report using the frameworks and resources
developed and disseminated by OSEP's TA Center, they also report
significant challenges to their efforts to create a lasting
infrastructure that supports implementation (Ruedel et al., 2021). They
struggle to provide support to their districts while keeping an agency-
wide focus on building this infrastructure. When supported by a TA
Center, partnerships among the SEA, local educational agencies (LEAs),
institutions of higher education (IHEs), and regional TA providers can
build a lasting statewide infrastructure.
The magnitude of change that must occur at the State, district, and
school levels for large-scale use of implementation science requires a
specialist who can support collaboration and systemic alignment
(Kittelman et al., 2020). There is rarely a sufficient number of TA
providers trained in implementation science (Sanetti & Collier-Meek,
2019) to support each district in a State. The work of the SEA is also
made more challenging by staff turnover and overall lack of personnel
capacity (Weiss & McGuinn, 2017).
A new corps of implementation specialists could be developed
through the establishment of implementation science competencies
supported via micro-credentials. These implementation specialists would
then be available to assist the State, regional, and district levels of
the education system. Additionally, by integrating implementation
science into doctoral leadership programs, universities could support
the development of implementation science competencies in their
educator, leader, and scholar preparation programs.
This Center will advance the Secretary's priorities in the areas of
supporting a diverse educator workforce and their professional growth
to strengthen student learning and strengthening cross-agency
coordination and community engagement to advance systemic change. The
Center will
[[Page 9597]]
support States in implementing evidence-based practices that improve
results for children with disabilities. The Center will also expand
opportunities for educators to receive the implementation support they
need.
Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to
establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center to Support
Implementation and Scaling Up of Evidence-Based Practices. The Center
will support States' use of implementation science to create a
statewide infrastructure that supports implementation of evidence-based
\1\ practices (EBPs). The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the
following expected outcomes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Development of implementation science micro-credentials;
(b) A minimum of 25 individuals trained annually as implementation
science specialists through the completion of the micro-credentials;
(c) Creation of a TA hub for OSEP-funded doctoral programs that
results in at least five of these programs integrating implementation
science into their program of study;
(d) A community of practice (CoP) for IHE faculty interested in
learning about implementation science and how to integrate
implementation science into their curricula;
(e) Integration of implementation science into the program of study
of at least five OSEP-funded State leadership projects (ALN 84.325L);
(f) An infrastructure that facilitates scaling implementation
supports, including developing the capacity of regional TA providers,
in eight States; \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Florida, New Jersey, and Virginia currently receive TA from
the Center funded under the FY 2017 competition. The Center must
continue to provide TA to these States, if the States elect. Note
that each of the States that elects to continue receiving TA counts
as one of the 8 States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(g) A CoP for States interested in learning more about
implementation science, but that are not yet ready for full
implementation; and
(h) The integration of implementation science frameworks and
related resources into the provision of TA by at least five OSEP-funded
TA Centers.
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application
and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address gaps in State infrastructure to support full
implementation and scaling up of EBPs. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Present applicable national, State, regional, and local data,
and research addressing how SEAs, Regional Education Service Agencies
(RESAs), IHEs, and TA providers are integrating implementation science
into their services;
(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy
initiatives relating to implementation science and scaling up EBPs; and
(iii) Present information about the current level of use of
implementation science in the field of education; and
(2) Improve outcomes for children with disabilities by assisting
with the development of statewide infrastructure that supports full
implementation and scaling up of EBPs and indicate the likely magnitude
or importance of the improvements.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and
information; and
(ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model \3\ by which the proposed
project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum,
the goals and how they will be measured, activities, outputs, and
intended outcomes of the proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Logic model (34 CFR 77.1) (also referred to as a theory of
action) means a framework that identifies key project components of
the proposed project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are
hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and
describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the
key project components and relevant outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A)
to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying
concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as
the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any
empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: https://osepideasthatwork.org/find-a-resource/cipp-logic-model-outline; https://osepideasthatwork.org/find-a-resource/logic-models-and-performance-measures; and
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research and make use of EBPs. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) The current research on performance measurement related to
implementation science and the EBPs that States are supporting with
implementation science;
(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and
implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and
(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research
and EBPs in the development and delivery of its products and services;
(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant
must describe--
(i) How it proposes to identify or develop and expand the knowledge
base;
(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\4\ which must
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under
this approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in
minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time,
invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This
category of TA also includes information or products, such as
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the
TA center's website by independent users. Brief communications by TA
center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also
considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 9598]]
(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\5\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA services based on
needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively
individualized. A relationship is established between the TA
recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA
includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating
strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It
can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend
over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference
calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the
needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can
also be considered targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this
approach; and
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA
recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their
current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build
capacity at the local level; and
(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\6\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA
center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome.
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program,
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under
this approach;
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of the SEAs to
work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative,
alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure,
available resources, and ability of the SEAs to build capacity at the
local level;
(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs to build or enhance
training systems that include professional development based on adult
learning principles and coaching; and
(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the
education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, districts,
schools, families) to ensure that there is communication between each
level and that there are systems in place to support the use of EBPs;
(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize
efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the
intended project outcomes;
(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the
intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to
achieve the intended project outcomes; and
(7) Develop a dissemination plan that describes how the applicant
will systematically distribute information, products, and services to
varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies,
to promote awareness and use of the Center's products and services.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must
describe: Measures of progress in implementation, including the
criteria for determining the extent to which the project's products and
services have met the goals for reaching its target population;
measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's activities in
order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or
objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model,
have been met.
The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the
evaluation plan, it will--
(1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officer, a
project liaison with sufficient dedicated time, experience in
evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with
the Center to Improve Program and Project Performance (CIPP),\7\ the
project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and
oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large
discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per
year and required to participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP's
Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development;
Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology,
Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to
enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and
unbiased TA in designing the evaluations with due consideration of
the project's budget. CIPP does not function as a third-party
evaluator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Revise the logic model submitted in the application to provide
for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and
to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the
kick-off meeting;
(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in
the application consistent with the revised logic model and using the
most rigorous design suitable (e.g., prepare evaluation questions about
significant program processes and outcomes; develop quantitative or
qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of
progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate,
and the assessment of project outcomes; and identify analytic
strategies); and
(iii) Revise the evaluation plan submitted in the application such
that it--
(A) Clearly specifies the evaluation questions, measures, and
associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to answer these
questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a
timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments
for completing the evaluation activities;
(B) Clearly delineates the data expected to be available by the end
of the second project year for use during the project's evaluation (3+2
review) for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and
Fifth Years of the Project; and
(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project
officer, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the project
performance measures to be addressed in the project's annual
performance report;
(2) Dedicate sufficient staff time and other resources during the
first six months of the project to collaborate with CIPP staff,
including regular meetings (e.g., weekly, biweekly, or monthly) with
CIPP and the OSEP project officer, in order to accomplish the tasks
described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section; and
(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the
costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2)
of this section and revising and implementing the evaluation plan.
Please note in your budget narrative the funds dedicated for this
activity.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
[[Page 9599]]
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers,
researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must--
(1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines,
as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative;
(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or
virtually, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting
in Washington, DC, or virtually, with the OSEP project officer and
other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative;
(ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, or virtually, during each year of the project period;
(iii) One annual two-day trip, or virtually, to attend Department
briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as
requested by OSEP; and
(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, or
virtually, during the last half of the second year of the project
period;
(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of
5 percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those
needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP
project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the
project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside
no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;
(4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for
accessibility;
(5) Ensure that annual project progress toward meeting project
goals is posted on the project website; and
(6) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the
transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the
continuity of services to States during the transition to this new
award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:
In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a), including--
(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts
who have experience and knowledge in implementation science and EBPs.
This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that
will be held during the last half of the second year of the project
period;
(b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's
products and services and the extent to which the project's products
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.
Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards
or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive
carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The
Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and
substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue
funding accordingly.
References
Kittelman, A., Horner, R. H., & Rowe, D. A. (2020). Selecting
Evidence-Based Practices to Improve Learning and Behavior. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 53(2): 96-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920964684.
Ruedel, K., Thompson, A. L., Kuchle, L., & D'Agord, C. (2021).
Highlights from five years of reviewing State systemic improvement
plans. Unpublished Report.
Sanetti, L., & Collier-Meek, M. (2019). Increasing implementation
science literacy to address the research-to-practice gap in school
psychology. Journal of School Psychology, 76, 33-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.07.008.
The University of Washington. (2021). What is implementation
science? Implementation Science Resource Hub. https://impsciuw.org/implementation-science/learn/implementation-science-overview/.
Weiss, J., & McGuinn, P. (2017). The evolving role of the State
education agency in the era of ESSA and Trump: Past, present, and
uncertain future (CPRE Working Paper No. 14). Consortium for Policy
Research in Education. http://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_workingpapers/14/.
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 priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal
civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
[[Page 9600]]
$49,345,000 for the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve
Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program for FY
2022, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,200,000 for this
competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final
congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow
enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates
funds for this program.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2023 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,200,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter
schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public
agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and
outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require
cost sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
the Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the
Uniform Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may
contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with
2 CFR part 200.
4. Other General Requirements:
a. Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
b. 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 December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979, which contain requirements and
information on how to submit an application. Please note that these
Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13,
2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to
register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to the implementation of the UEI.
More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.
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 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 70 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 the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; 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 listed below:
(a) Significance (10 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses.
(ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project.
(b) Quality of project services (35 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice.
(iii) 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.
[[Page 9601]]
(iv) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the
use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project
resources.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project.
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of key project personnel.
(ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project.
(e) Quality of the management plan (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project.
(iii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of
perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed
project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community,
a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or
beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, 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 200.206(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.
6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115-
232) (2 CFR 200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize
[[Page 9602]]
use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United States (2
CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
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: For the purposes of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, we have established a set of performance measures,
including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on
various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical
Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for
Children With Disabilities program. These measures are:
Program Performance Measure 1: The percentage of technical
assistance and dissemination products and services deemed to be of high
quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified to review
the substantive content of the products and services.
Program Performance Measure 2: The percentage of special
education technical assistance and dissemination products and services
deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of
high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or
practice.
Program Performance Measure 3: The percentage of all
special education technical assistance and dissemination products and
services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to
be useful in improving educational or early intervention policy or
practice.
Program Performance Measure 4: The cost efficiency of the
Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results
for Children with Disabilities program includes the percentage of
milestones achieved in the current annual performance report period and
the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal year.
Long-term Program Performance Measure: The percentage of
States receiving special education technical assistance and
dissemination services regarding scientifically or evidence-based
practices for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities
that successfully promote the implementation of those practices in
school districts and service agencies.
The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by
OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department
(34 CFR 75.590).
The Department will also closely monitor the extent to which the
products and services provided by the Center meet needs identified by
stakeholders and may require the Center to report on such alignment in
their annual and final performance reports.
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, whether
the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving 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: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package 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
[[Page 9603]]
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.
Katherine Neas,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Delegated the authority to perform the
functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2022-03680 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P