[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12144-12152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and 
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program--Innovative 
Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing Children With Disabilities

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 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with 
Disabilities--Innovative Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing 
Children with Disabilities, Assistance Listing Number 84.327V. This 
notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control 
number 1820-0028.

DATES: 
    Applications Available: March 3, 2022.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 2, 2022.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 1, 2022.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than March 8, 2022, 
OSERS will post details on pre-recorded

[[Page 12145]]

informational webinars designed to provide technical assistance 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: Rebecca Sheffield, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5040E, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6725. 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 Educational Technology, 
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program (ETechM2 
Program) is to improve results for students with disabilities by: (1) 
Promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) 
supporting educational media activities designed to be of educational 
value in the classroom for students with disabilities; (3) providing 
support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for 
use in the classroom; and (4) providing accessible educational 
materials to students with disabilities in a timely manner.
    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 the statute (see sections 674(b)(2) and 681(d) 
of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 
1474(b)(2) 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:
    Innovative Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing Children with 
Disabilities.
    Background:
    Assessment is an essential component of being able to provide a 
high-quality education and learning opportunities to infants, toddlers, 
children, and youth with disabilities (children with disabilities). It 
involves regularly collecting information to be able to make 
individualized decisions about the services and supports needed to 
promote a child's development, learning, and achievement. The COVID-19 
pandemic caused a significant disruption to how children with 
disabilities were assessed and highlighted the need to leverage more 
equitable, innovative, reliable, and valid technology-based approaches 
for assessing children with disabilities.
    Traditionally, most assessments are completed in-person by early 
intervention providers, teachers, and school-based clinicians. The 
pandemic required early intervention service providers and local 
educational agency (LEA) staff to utilize remote assessments and 
identify technology-based approaches to assess children with 
disabilities. While this was done with varied levels of success, the 
pandemic demonstrated that technology-based approaches to assessment 
have the potential to enhance both in-person and remote assessment 
processes.
    Innovative technology-based approaches to assessment provide a 
number of benefits, including--
     Providing new sources of data on children's performance. 
For example, technology can expand opportunities to conduct authentic 
assessments and observations of children with disabilities in natural 
environments and in multiple settings, both in person and online, with 
greater involvement from families. This can allow teachers and service 
providers to prioritize different data when making decisions about 
necessary services and supports for a child with a disability.
     Enabling teachers and service providers to more 
efficiently collect, organize, and share data when monitoring 
children's performance and progress. This can lead to improved 
coordination, collaboration, and data-driven decision-making among team 
members, which can enhance children's outcomes.
     Improving access to high-quality assessments for children 
with disabilities. Increased access can be particularly important in 
rural and remote areas to connect children with disabilities to 
specialists from professions experiencing critical shortages (e.g., 
functional vision and orientation and mobility assessments for children 
who are visually impaired or deafblind) (Landa-Vialard et al., 2018).
     Connecting English learners with disabilities to providers 
who speak their home languages, to ensure appropriate and 
individualized support for children's cultural and linguistic needs 
(Hoover, 2018).
     Providing additional flexibility and innovative strategies 
for children with disabilities who are homebound, hospitalized, 
migratory, and experiencing homelessness.
    While there are many potential benefits to using technology-based 
assessment processes, there is limited knowledge of existing strategies 
and best practices for using technology to conduct assessments and 
deciding which types of technology-based approaches to use. Farmer et 
al. (2020) and Stifel et al. (2020) suggest that thorough analysis and 
guidance is necessary when using technical adaptations to assessments. 
Guidance is needed to support decision makers (i.e., school and program 
administrators, assessment administrators, teachers, and service 
providers) in examining the limitations of technology to ensure they 
maintain assessments' validity and reliability as well as meet legal 
requirements.
    Additionally, it is important for decision makers to understand and 
track how technology-based approaches to assessment could inadvertently 
magnify cultural and socioeconomic disparities. Families and schools in 
high-need communities or in rural or remote areas may have less access 
to needed technology equipment, unreliable internet, or less comfort 
and experience using technology (Hanrahan et. al, 2020).
    Finally, for technology-based approaches to assessment to be 
equitable, they must be accessible to children with various 
disabilities who use various communication modes (e.g., students with 
deafness, autism, visual impairment including blindness). Teachers and 
service providers need training, support, and professional development 
to successfully implement technology-based approaches to assessment. 
Although personnel

[[Page 12146]]

preparation programs may include standards to address the application 
of assessment tools and measures, these programs do not necessarily 
address the knowledge and skills involved in using remote or virtual 
assessment formats (Jenkins & Walker, 2021).
    The Department intends to fund two cooperative agreements to 
develop the knowledge base and disseminate information about 
technology-based approaches to assessment for children with 
disabilities. Through these agreements, the Department seeks to 
increase equitable access to high-quality assessment and build greater 
flexibility within assessment approaches, to respond to changing 
environments and technology.
    Priority:
    The purpose of this priority is to fund two cooperative agreements 
to establish and operate projects on Innovative Technology-Based 
Approaches for Assessing Children with Disabilities (projects). 
Projects must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:
    (a) Increased body of knowledge on equitable and innovative 
approaches for implementing and integrating technology into informal 
and formal assessments \1\ to gather valid and reliable information on 
children's strengths and needs; developmental, academic, and functional 
skills; and learning progress to inform IFSPs and IEPs, eligibility 
determinations, instruction, and interventions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For the purposes of this priority, ``assessment'' and 
``assessing'' refer to formal and informal methods to collect 
individualized data on children's strengths and needs; 
developmental, academic, and functional skills; and learning 
progress to inform individualized family service plans (IFSPs) and 
individualized education programs (IEPs), eligibility 
determinations, instruction, and interventions. Program-wide or 
school-wide assessments, such as large-scale State and district wide 
assessments or universal screening, are not within the scope of this 
priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Increased awareness of existing and project-developed tools, 
methods, and frameworks to support informed, systematic decision-making 
for technology-based approaches to assessments by early intervention 
service providers, school districts, educators, and families.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Note: This priority does not support the development or 
validation of procedures for technology-based administration of 
published standardized assessment tools.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Focus Areas:
    Within this absolute priority, the Secretary intends to support one 
project under each of the following focus areas: (A) Innovative 
Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing Infants, Toddlers, and 
Preschool-Age Children with Disabilities; and (B) Innovative 
Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing School-Age Children with 
Disabilities.
    Applicants must identify the specific focus area (i.e., A or B) 
under which they are applying as part of the competition title on the 
application cover sheet (SF 424, line 12 and Abstract). Applicants that 
apply under both focus areas must submit an application for each focus 
area.
    Focus Area A: Innovative Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing 
Infants, Toddlers, and Preschool-Age Children with Disabilities. A 
project in this focus area must develop the knowledge base and 
disseminate resources to support the effective use of technology-based 
approaches to assessments with infants, toddlers, and preschool-age 
children and their families referred to, or receiving, early 
intervention and early childhood special education services.
    Focus Area B: Innovative Technology-Based Approaches for Assessing 
School-Age Children with Disabilities. A project in this focus area 
must develop the knowledge base and disseminate resources to support 
the effective use of technology-based approaches to assessments of 
school-age children referred to, or receiving, special education 
services.
    Note: The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) may fund a 
high-quality application out of rank order to ensure that projects are 
funded in both focus areas.
    In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered 
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following 
application and administrative requirements in this priority:
    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Address the need in the field for knowledge and decision-making 
frameworks to support the effective use of technology-based approaches 
to assessments of children with disabilities, including technology-
based approaches to conduct assessments of children in hard-to-reach 
settings with limited access to technology, with users that may have 
difficulty engaging with technology, and for children requiring 
specialized assessments (e.g., disability-specific assessments 
requiring specially trained assessors and assessments delivered in 
languages other than English). To meet this requirement the applicant 
must--
    (i) Demonstrate knowledge of existing, and emerging trends in, 
technology-based approaches to assessment of children with 
disabilities;
    (ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational and policy issues 
and national initiatives relating to technology-based approaches to 
assessments of children with disabilities; and
    (iii) Demonstrate knowledge of the implementation supports that are 
needed to implement new technology-based approaches to assessment for 
children with disabilities (e.g., personnel preparation and 
professional development, ongoing consultation and coaching, data 
systems, and administrative supports); and
    (2) Develop the knowledge base to increase the capacity of local 
and State early intervention and special education systems to make 
informed decisions on technology-based approaches to assessment and 
indicate the importance of systems developing this capacity.
    (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 technical 
assistance (TA) and information;
    (ii) Ensure that services and products meet the needs of the 
intended recipients of the grant; and
    (iii) Address the needs of children with disabilities who live in 
rural or remote \3\ areas and high-need communities who may experience 
barriers to assessment due to scarcity of qualified personnel or 
limitations in internet connectivity, and children from racially and 
ethnically diverse backgrounds, including those who are English 
learners;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For the purposes of this priority, a ``rural or remote'' 
area or population is an area or population within one of the U.S. 
territories, freely associated States, or outlying areas or within a 
reservation, or that is served by a school district whose locale 
type is classified as rural according to 2019 or 2020 data from the 
National Center for Education Statistics locale classifications. 
Please see https://nces.ed.gov/programs/maped/LocaleLookup/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (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 \4\ by which the proposed 
project will

[[Page 12147]]

achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, 
activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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 website provides more information on logic 
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel.
    (4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based 
practices (EBPs).\5\ To meet this requirement, the applicant must 
describe--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For the purposes of this priority, ``evidence-based 
practices'' means practices that, at a minimum, demonstrate 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) The current research on practices to support assessment of 
children with disabilities, technology-based approaches to assessment, 
and the use of technology to improve access to assessment;
    (ii) The current research about adult learning principles and 
implementation science that will inform any proposed products; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research 
and practices in the development and delivery of its products and 
services;
    (5) Develop products and provide services that are of 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 and develop the knowledge base on--
    (A) Current best practices and tools for implementing and 
integrating technology into informal and formal assessments to gather 
valid and reliable information on children's strengths and needs; 
developmental, academic, and functional skills; and learning progress, 
to inform IFSPs and IEPs, eligibility determinations, instruction, and 
interventions;
    (B) Promising technology-based innovations and approaches to 
assessment, including practices and tools that could be used to gather 
valid and reliable information across a variety of settings and 
environments on children's strengths and needs; developmental, 
academic, and functional skills; and learning progress, to inform IFSPs 
and IEPs, eligibility determinations, instruction, and interventions. 
Promising innovations and approaches may involve how to--
    (1) Design accessibility and support features for technology-based 
assessment;
    (2) Individualize assessment strategies;
    (3) Identify and address participation barriers; and
    (4) Provide training and professional development to relevant 
stakeholders on innovative strategies for assessment and data-based 
decision-making;
    (C) The strengths, limitations, and potential outcomes of existing 
and emerging technology-based assessment tools and methods in a range 
of forms and contexts (e.g., early childhood settings, homes, virtual 
schools, traditional classrooms), and the available evidence for these 
strengths, limitations, and outcomes;
    (D) Technology-based approaches that increase equity in the 
assessment of children with disabilities, including approaches to 
observing children and families; collecting valid and reliable child 
performance and progress data; and understanding and applying 
assessment findings to inform the development of culturally and 
linguistically appropriate IEPs and IFSPs;
    (E) Practices and strategies to enhance the accessibility and 
equity of technology-based approaches to assessment for all children 
with disabilities, including strategies for users that may have 
difficulty engaging with technology; in settings with limited access; 
and for children requiring specialized assessments to promote equitable 
developmental, academic, and functional outcomes;
    (F) Existing and emerging methods and approaches for preparation of 
personnel to select, implement, and act upon the results of technology-
based assessments; and
    (G) Implementation supports and system capacity that are needed to 
implement technology-based approaches to assessment, including supports 
for administrators and other systems-level decision-makers to develop 
policies and procedures for State and local agencies regarding the 
selection, procurement, implementation, and use of technology-based 
approaches to assessments;
    (ii) How it proposes to develop, validate, and disseminate 
frameworks, based on research and identified promising practices, to 
support informed and effective decision-making on the systematic 
implementation and use of technology-based approaches to assessment, 
for use by practitioners, administrators, and local and State agencies; 
and
    (iii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\6\ 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 project proposes to make 
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under 
this approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided 
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in 
minimal interaction with project staff and including one-time, 
invited or offered conference presentations by project staff. This 
category of TA also includes information or products, such as 
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the 
project's website by independent users. Brief communications by 
project staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are 
also considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (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, the process 
by which the project will collaborate with OSEP-funded projects and 
centers, and the intended outcomes of the collaboration. Projects must 
collaborate with the other project funded under this priority; 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 to varied intended 
audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies.
    (c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of 
the project evaluation,'' include a detailed and complete description 
of the evaluation activities and measures to be incorporated into the 
proposed project's research plan and knowledge development activities. 
The description must include--
    (1) Formative and summative evaluation questions, including 
important process and outcome evaluation questions. These questions 
should be related to the project's proposed logic model required in 
paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this priority;
    (2) A formative evaluation plan to address evaluation questions, 
consistent with the project's logic model, that includes sources of 
data, a timeline for

[[Page 12148]]

data collection, analysis plans, and staff assignments for completing 
the plan. The plan must show how periodic review and feedback will be 
incorporated in the formative evaluation and used to improve the 
project during the performance period. These data will be reported in 
the annual performance report (APR). The plan also must outline how 
evaluation data will be reviewed by project staff, when they will be 
reviewed, and how they will be used during the course of the project to 
adjust the project's activities to increase and extend the usefulness 
and generalizability of the knowledge development activities; and
    (3) A summative evaluation plan, including a timeline and staff 
assignments for completing the plan, to collect and analyze data on 
stakeholder awareness of resources and decision-making frameworks 
developed and disseminated by the project. The plan must show how the 
knowledge development activities will be used to inform stakeholder 
decision-making about technology-based assessment approaches for 
children with disabilities.
    (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 
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. This must include how the proposed project will engage a 
technical work group (TWG) comprised of individuals with expertise in 
assessment of children with disabilities, including those from 
culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and technology-based 
approaches to assessment to provide technical advice and engage with 
stakeholders throughout the project period.
    (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 virtual kick-off meeting after receipt 
of the award, and an annual virtual meeting 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; and
    (ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in 
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period. If the 
conference will be conducted virtually, projects will be notified that 
they need to reallocate funds for travel no later than the end of the 
third quarter of each budget period;
    (3) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate 
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for 
accessibility;
    (4) Ensure that annual project progress toward meeting project 
goals is posted on the project website; and
    (5) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the 
transfer of pertinent resources and products during the transition to a 
new award at the end of this award period, as appropriate.
    References:

Farmer, R.L., McGill, R.J., Dombrowski, S.C., Benson, N.F., Smith-
Kellen, S., Lockwood, A.B., Powell, S., Pynn, C.P., & Stinnett, T.A. 
(2020). Conducting psychoeducational assessments during the COVID-19 
crisis: The danger of good intentions. Contemporary School 
Psychology, 25, 27-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-020-00293-x.
Hanrahan, B.V., Ma, N.F., Betanzos, E., & Savage, S. (2020, June). 
Reciprocal research: Providing value in design research from the 
outset in the rural United States. ICTD2020: Proceedings of the 2020 
International Conference on Information and Communications 
Technologies and Development, (31) 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392561.3397585.
Hoover, J.J., Erickson, J.R., Herron, S.R., & Smith, C.E. (2018). 
Implementing culturally and linguistically responsive special 
education eligibility assessment in rural county elementary schools: 
Pilot project. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(2), 90-102. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518761879.
Jenkins, M., & Walker, J.D. (2021, Spring). COVID-19 practices in 
special education: Stakeholder perceptions for teacher preparation. 
Teacher Educators' Journal, 14, 83-105. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1296277.pdf.
Landa-Vialard, O., Ely, M.S., & Lartz, M.N. (2018). Early learning 
visual impairment services training and advancement (EL VISTA) 
project: Leading the way for a new profession within a profession. 
Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 112(1), 103-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1811200110.
Stifel, S.W., Feinberg, D.K., Zhang, Y., Chan, M.-K., & Wagle, R. 
(2020). Assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic: Ethical, legal, and 
safety considerations moving forward. School Psychology Review, 
49(4), 438-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2020.1844549.

    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. 1474 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

[[Page 12149]]

part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost 
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 
part 3474.
    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants 
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
    Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of 
higher education (IHEs) only.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
    Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested 
$29,547,000 for the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for 
Individuals with Disabilities program for FY 2022, of which we intend 
to use an estimated $1,000,000 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 $500,000 for a 
single budget period of 12 months.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 2.
    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
    Project Period: Up to 36 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies (SEAs); State 
lead agencies under Part C of the IDEA; 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 
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 50 pages and (2) use the 
following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as 
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
     Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
     Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, 
Courier New, or Arial.
    The recommended page limit does not apply to 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 (15 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 potential contribution of the proposed project to increased 
knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, or 
effective strategies.
    (ii) 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.
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed project involves the 
development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, 
or are alternatives to, existing strategies.
    (b) Quality of the project design (35 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the 
proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

[[Page 12150]]

    (i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
    (ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project 
includes a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a 
high-quality plan for project implementation, and the use of 
appropriate methodological tools to ensure successful achievement of 
project objectives.
    (iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project 
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.
    (iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is 
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target 
population or other identified needs.
    (v) The extent to which performance feedback and continuous 
improvement are integral to the design of the proposed project.
    (c) Adequacy of resources and quality of the management plan (30 
points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources and the 
quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the adequacy of resources and the quality of the 
management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the 
following factors:
    (i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization.
    (ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
    (iii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project 
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are 
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed 
project.
    (iv) 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.
    (v) 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.
    (vi) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
and services from the proposed project.
    (d) 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 will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for 
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
    (iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the 
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and 
qualitative data to the extent possible.
    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

[[Page 12151]]

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 of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR 
200.216);
    (c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to 
maximize 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 purposes of Department reporting under 
34 CFR 75.110, the Department has established a set of performance 
measures, including long-term measures, that are designed to yield 
information on various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the 
ETechM2 Program. These measures are:
     Program Performance Measure 1: The percentage of ETechM2 
Program products and services judged to be of high quality by an 
independent review panel of experts qualified to review the substantial 
content of the products and services.
     Program Performance Measure 2: The percentage of ETechM2 
Program products and services judged to be of high relevance to 
improving outcomes for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with 
disabilities.
     Program Performance Measure 3: The percentage of ETechM2 
Program products and services judged to be useful in improving results 
for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
     Program Performance Measure 4.1: The Federal cost per unit 
of accessible educational materials funded by the ETechM2 Program.
     Program Performance Measure 4.2: The Federal cost per unit 
of accessible educational materials from the National Instructional 
Materials Accessibility Center funded by the ETechM2 Program.
     Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit 
of video description funded by the ETechM2 Program.
    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 project meet needs identified by 
stakeholders and may require the project to report on such alignment in 
its 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

[[Page 12152]]

Code of Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 
view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department 
published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format 
(PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 
available free at the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

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. 2022-04420 Filed 3-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P