[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41298-41305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14853]



[[Page 41298]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance on State Data 
Collection--The Rhonda Weiss National Technical Assistance Center To 
Improve State Capacity To Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate 
IDEA Data in Accessible Formats

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 
Rhonda Weiss National Technical Assistance Center to Improve State 
Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data in 
Accessible Formats, Assistance Listing Number 84.373Q. This notice 
relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 
1820-0028.

DATES: 
    Applications available: July 12, 2022.
    Deadline for transmittal of Applications: August 22, 2022.
    Pre-Application webinar information: No later than July 18, 2022, 
the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) 
will post pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide 
technical assistance (TA) to interested applicants. 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 Smith, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5038B, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 258-9436. Email: 
[email protected].
    If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and 
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance on 
State Data Collection program is to improve the capacity of States to 
meet the data collection and reporting requirements under Part B and 
Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). 
Funding for the program is authorized under section 611(c)(1) of IDEA. 
This section gives the Secretary authority to reserve not more than \1/
2\ of 1 percent of the amounts appropriated under Part B for each 
fiscal year to provide technical assistance (TA) activities authorized 
under section 616(i) of IDEA to improve the capacity of States to meet 
the data collection and reporting requirements under Parts B and C of 
IDEA. The maximum amount the Secretary may reserve under this set-aside 
for any fiscal year is $25,000,000, cumulatively adjusted by the rate 
of inflation. For FY 2022, the inflation adjusted amount is 
$37,300,000. Section 616(i) of IDEA requires the Secretary to review 
the data collection and analysis capacity of States to ensure that data 
and information determined necessary for implementation of section 616 
of IDEA are collected, analyzed, and accurately reported to the 
Secretary. It also requires the Secretary to provide TA, where needed, 
to improve the capacity of States to meet the IDEA Part B and Part C 
data collection requirements, which include the data collection and 
reporting requirements in sections 616 and 618 of IDEA. In addition, 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, gives 
the Secretary authority to use funds reserved under section 611(c) of 
IDEA to provide TA to States to improve their capacity to administer 
and carry out other services and activities to improve data collection, 
coordination, quality, and use under Parts B and C of IDEA.
    Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. This 
priority is from the notice of final priority and requirements 
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register (NFP).
    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:
    Technical Assistance on State Data Collection--The Rhonda Weiss \1\ 
National Technical Assistance Center to Improve State Capacity to 
Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data in Accessible 
Formats.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Center is named in remembrance of Rhonda Weiss, who was 
a senior attorney with the U.S. Department of Education, a staunch 
advocate for disability rights, and a champion for ensuring equity 
and accessibility for persons with disabilities. For more 
information on Rhonda and her work to ensure equity and 
accessibility for persons with disabilities please see 
www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/12/13/blind-government-lawyer-disabilities-rights/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Background:
    According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2019 American Community 
Survey, 12.7 percent of the U.S. population experiences disability 
(more than 1 in 8 people). Approximately 2.3 percent, or over 7.4 
million, U.S. citizens have a visual disability and 5.2 percent, or 
close to 16 million U.S. citizens, have a cognitive disability. 
Disability impacts people of all ages, races, ethnicities, geographies, 
and socioeconomic groups.
    The purpose of the Rhonda Weiss National Technical Assistance 
Center to Improve State Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use 
Accurate IDEA Data in Accessible Formats (Accessible Data Center) is to 
improve State capacity to accurately collect, report, analyze, and use 
the IDEA Part B and Part C data reported under IDEA sections 616 and 
618 in accessible formats for persons with disabilities, particularly 
those with blindness, visual impairments, motor impairments, and 
intellectual disabilities.
    Under the authority of IDEA sections 616 and 618, States are 
required to collect and analyze data on infants, toddlers, and children 
with disabilities and report on the data to the Department and the 
public. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 
(Rehabilitation Act), requires States to publish data in a manner that 
provides the same access and usability to persons with and without 
disabilities. Currently, States struggle to report data in accessible 
formats that also are dynamic and usable by data consumers with limited 
statistical knowledge. To meet the demands of both statutes, States 
generally rely on static data portrayals rather than dynamic 
visualizations. The lack of available software to develop accessible, 
dynamic, and manipulatable data products creates inequitable access for 
persons with disabilities, particularly those with blindness, visual 
impairments, motor impairments, and intellectual disabilities.

[[Page 41299]]

    The Accessible Data Center will increase the capacity of States to 
collect, report, analyze, and use the IDEA Part B and Part C data 
reported under IDEA sections 616 and 618 in accessible formats by: (1) 
developing an openly licensed software program that allows States to 
report and publish data products that are accessible, usable, and 
manipulatable by persons with disabilities, particularly those with 
blindness, visual impairments, motor impairments, and intellectual 
disabilities, as well as by those persons without disabilities; and (2) 
providing TA on accessible data reporting and publication. By 
developing an accessible and usable data reporting platform and 
supporting States as they revise their data collection tools and 
publish accessible data, both internal and external users will be 
better positioned to analyze and use the data. Hazen et al. (2017) note 
that both data analysis and data use by both internal and external 
users can be integrated into the data quality process and used as a 
tool for improving data quality. By increasing the capacity of States 
to report their data in formats that are both accessible and useable, 
the Accessible Data Center will aid in the improvement of data quality 
across the States and ensure equitable access to IDEA data for all 
stakeholders.
    Federal agencies have increasingly used open licensing to expand 
the impact and reach of materials developed with Federal funds, enable 
innovative use of those materials, and ensure that those materials and 
resources are available to the public (U.S Department of State, 2017). 
Open licensing gives permission to the public to use materials created 
under the terms of the license and attribute to the creator under 
copyright law. Pfenninger et al. (2017) note that open licensing allows 
the burden of the work to be distributed more broadly, avoids 
unnecessary duplication, supports learning from one another to get to 
solutions more quickly, and allows for research to be seen and used. 
Additionally, open licensing helps to improve educational research 
opportunities and systems, given the rapid pace of technological change 
and ongoing advances.
    Data visualizations can be difficult to access for persons with 
disabilities. This difficulty is not limited to persons who are blind 
and/or visually impaired, but also impacts those with cognitive and 
learning disabilities, and those with visual or motor disabilities who 
do not access their computers with a mouse or touchscreen. These 
barriers have been amplified by the growing interest in, and use of, 
infographics and interactive data displays and dashboards on websites 
and in social media. In addition to difficulty with use, persons with 
disabilities are often excluded as potential authors and designers of 
data visualizations due to the inaccessibility of the computer-based 
tools used to create and publish data displays. Despite legislation, 
including sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Title III 
of the Americans with Disabilities Act, potential data authors and 
consumers with disabilities continue to be excluded from the data 
sharing necessary for equal access and participation in civic 
conversations, education, advocacy, and employment.
    To extend the benefits and opportunities of data visualization 
equitably and inclusively to all people, new tools must be developed 
that prioritize access and usability for everyone. Developers and 
designers should engage with people with disabilities (including 
developers and designers with disabilities) to identify and integrate 
accessibility solutions. Accessibly designed software and data 
visualizations will increase access for those who have traditionally 
been excluded and increase opportunities for all consumers and authors 
to interact with data in new and preferred ways. Following the 
principles of universal design, everyone benefits when we expand the 
ability of people with disabilities to use and access information, 
products, programs, and spaces with greater convenience and enjoyment.
    In addition to equitable access and data availability, data 
reporters face a growing problem of how to meaningfully publish large 
datasets. Consumers need easy tools for conducting simple analyses, 
comparing variables, and searching for data-based answers to unique and 
changing questions. Interactive data visualizations increase confidence 
in data reliability and provide stakeholders with opportunities to look 
at data in new ways (Kirk, 2016).
    Modern, web-based data visualizations include the ability to 
select, link, filter, and reorganize data, as well as the delivery of 
3-D/multidimensional data representations that can be accessed from 
multiple perspectives (Cota et al., 2017). Challenges to producing 
interactive data visualizations include managing visual noise, fitting 
large amounts of data onto limited screen sizes, and satisfying the 
high-performance computation requirements behind dynamic visualizations 
(Hajirahimova & Ismayilova, 2018). Innovative data interactivity and 
manipulation solutions can also solve accessibility challenges. 
Accessibility solutions for static images (which usually involve 
written descriptions embedded in alt-tags in computer code) should 
become standard practice, while simultaneously being reimagined to 
accommodate responsive and animated representations of data.
    Priority:
    Under this priority, the Department provides funding for a 
cooperative agreement to establish and operate the Rhonda Weiss 
National Technical Assistance Center to Improve State Capacity to 
Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data in Accessible 
Formats (Accessible Data Center).
    The Accessible Data Center will provide TA to help States better 
meet current and future IDEA Part B and Part C data collection and 
reporting requirements, improve data quality, and analyze and use the 
data reported to provide equitable access and visualizations to persons 
with disabilities. The Accessible Data Center's work will comply with 
the privacy and confidentiality protections in the IDEA Part B and C 
regulations, which incorporate provisions in the Family Educational 
Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and include IDEA-specific provisions and 
will not provide the Department with access to child-level data. The 
Accessible Data Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following 
expected outcomes:
    (a) Improved accessibility of the IDEA Part B and Part C data 
reported and published under IDEA sections 616 and 618;
    (b) Increased capacity of States to collect, report, analyze, and 
use high-quality IDEA Part B and Part C data in accessible formats;
    (c) Development of an open license, accessible software program, 
for the publication of dynamic data products (consistent with the open 
licensing requirement in 2 CFR 3474.20); and
    (d) Development and documentation of a knowledge base related to 
the accessible reporting and dynamic presentation of data.
    In addition, the Accessible Data Center must provide a range of 
targeted and general TA products and services for improving States' 
capacity to accurately collect, report, analyze, and use IDEA section 
616 and section 618 data in accessible formats for persons with 
disabilities, particularly those with blindness, visual impairments, 
motor impairments, and intellectual disabilities. Such TA must include, 
at a minimum--
    (a) Working with the Department to develop open-source electronic 
tools to

[[Page 41300]]

assist States in reporting their IDEA data in accessible formats that 
allow for dynamic visualizations that can be manipulated for persons 
with and without disabilities. The tools must utilize accessibility 
best practices, exceed all Federal accessibility requirements, and be 
designed to accommodate continued enhancements to meet States' changing 
needs and updates in accessibility best practice;
    (b) Developing a plan to maintain appropriate functionality of the 
open-source electronic tools described in paragraph (a) as changes are 
made to data collections, reporting requirements, accessibility best 
practices, and accessibility requirements;
    (c) Developing universal TA products, including a user manual and 
instructions, and conducting training with State staff on use of the 
open-source electronic tools; and
    (d) Developing white papers and presentations that include tools 
and solutions to challenges in the collection, reporting, analysis, and 
use of IDEA data in accessible formats.
    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 of the Project,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Address State challenges in collecting, analyzing, reporting, 
and using the IDEA Part B and Part C data reported under IDEA sections 
616 and 618 in formats that are both accessible to persons with visual 
impairments and/or other disabilities and also dynamic, to promote 
enhanced data use that will improve data quality and identify 
programmatic strengths and areas for improvement. To meet this 
requirement the applicant must--
    (i) Demonstrate knowledge of IDEA data collections, including data 
required under IDEA sections 616 and 618;
    (ii) Demonstrate knowledge of accessible reporting and dynamic 
visualization, and document areas for further knowledge development;
    (iii) Present information about the difficulties State educational 
agencies (SEAs), State lead agencies (LAs), local educational agencies 
(LEAs), early intervention service (EIS) providers, and schools have 
encountered in meeting the requirements of section 504 of the 
Rehabilitation Act when reporting IDEA data; and
    (iv) Present information about the difficulties SEAs, State LAs, 
LEAs, EIS providers, and schools have in developing dynamic data 
visualizations for public use; and
    (2) Improve outcomes in collecting, analyzing, reporting, and using 
the IDEA Part B and Part C data in formats that are accessible to 
persons with visual impairments and/or other disabilities.
    (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 and end users for 
TA and information; and
    (ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the 
intended TA recipients and end users;
    (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 (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) by 
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that 
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended 
outcomes of the proposed project;
    (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/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf and 
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
    (4) Be based on current research and use evidence-based practices 
(EBPs).\2\ To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For purposes of these requirements, ``evidence-based 
practices'' (EBPs) means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale 
(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research findings 
or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention 
is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) The current research on the capacity of SEAs, State LAs, LEAs, 
and EIS providers to report and use data, specifically section 616 and 
section 618 data, in a manner that allows persons with vision and/or 
other disabilities, as well as those without, to access and dynamically 
manipulate data, as both a means of improving data quality and 
identifying strengths and areas for improvement;
    (ii) How it will analyze and incorporate the views of end users 
regarding the accessibility of tools currently available for data 
collection, reporting, analysis, and use. Specifically, how it will 
assess the overall accessibility, data manipulability, and the 
accessibility of dynamic data visualizations for persons with and 
without disabilities; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research, 
EBPs, and the needs of end users in the development and delivery of its 
products and services;
    (5) How it will 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 the knowledge base on 
the capacity needs of SEAs, State LAs, LEAs, and EIS programs/EIS 
providers to meet IDEA data collection and reporting requirements, data 
analysis, and use of the IDEA Part B and Part C data reported under 
IDEA sections 616 and 618 in a manner that allows individuals with 
vision and/or other disabilities, as well as those without, to access 
and dynamically manipulate data;
    (ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\3\ which must 
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided 
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in 
minimal interaction with Accessible Data Center staff and including 
one-time, invited or offered conference presentations by Accessible 
Data Center staff. This category of TA also includes information or 
products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, 
downloaded from the Accessible Data Center's website by independent 
users. Brief communications by Accessible Data Center staff with 
recipients, either by telephone or email, are also considered 
universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\4\ which 
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``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 Accessible Data 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.

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

[[Page 41301]]

    (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,\5\ which 
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided 
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between 
Accessible Data 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 under this 
approach;
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of SEA, State 
LAs, LEA, and EIS program/provider personnel to work with the project, 
including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the 
initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, 
and ability to build capacity at the SEA, State LA, LEA, and EIS 
program/provider levels;
    (C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs and State LAs (and LEAs, 
in conjunction with SEAs and EIS programs/providers, in conjunction 
with State LAs) to build or enhance training systems to meet IDEA Part 
B and Part C data collection and reporting requirements in a manner 
that allows individuals with vision and/or other disabilities, as well 
as those without, to access and dynamically manipulate data. This 
includes professional development based on adult learning principles 
and coaching;
    (D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the 
education system (e.g., SEAs, State LAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, 
EIS providers, schools, and families) to ensure there is communication 
between each level and there are systems in place to support the 
capacity needs of SEAs, State LAs, LEAs, and EIS providers to meet IDEA 
data collection and reporting requirements, as well as support data 
analysis and the use of IDEA Part B and Part C data, in a manner that 
allows individuals with vision and/or other disabilities, as well as 
those without, to access and dynamically manipulate data; and
    (E) Its proposed plan for collaborating and coordinating with 
Department-funded projects, including those providing data-related 
support to States, where appropriate, to align complementary work and 
jointly develop and implement products and services to meet the 
purposes of this priority. Such Department-funded projects include the 
IDEA Data Center (IDC), the Center for IDEA Early Childhood Data 
Systems (DaSy), the Center for IDEA Fiscal Reporting (CIFR), the Center 
for the Integration of IDEA Data (CIID), EdFacts, and the research and 
development investments of the Institute of Education Sciences/National 
Center for Education Statistics; and
    (6) Its proposed plan to 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.
    (c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of 
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project 
developed in consultation with and implemented by a third-party 
evaluator.\6\ The evaluation plan must--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A ``third-party'' evaluator is an independent and impartial 
program evaluator who is contracted by the grantee to conduct an 
objective evaluation of the project. This evaluator must not have 
participated in the development or implementation of any project 
activities, except for the evaluation activities, or have any 
financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Articulate 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 these requirements;
    (2) Describe how progress in and fidelity of implementation, as 
well as project outcomes, will be measured to answer the evaluation 
questions. Specify the measures and associated instruments or sources 
for data appropriate to the evaluation questions. Include information 
regarding reliability and validity of measures where appropriate;
    (3) Describe strategies for analyzing data and how data collected 
as part of this plan will be used to inform and improve service 
delivery over the course of the project and to refine the proposed 
logic model and evaluation plan, including subsequent data collection;
    (4) Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation and include 
staff assignments for completing the plan. The timeline must indicate 
that the data will be available annually for the annual performance 
report and at the end of Year 2 for the review process; and
    (5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the 
costs of developing or refining the evaluation plan in consultation 
with a third-party evaluator, as well as the costs associated with the 
implementation of the evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.
    (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Adequacy of resources,'' 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, and funds will be spent in a way that 
increases their efficiency and cost-effectiveness, including by 
reducing waste or achieving better outcomes.
    (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;

[[Page 41302]]

    (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:
    (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 Office of Special Education 
Programs (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; 
and
    (iii) Three annual two-day trips, or virtually, to attend 
Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other 
meetings, as requested by OSEP;
    (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; and
    (5) 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 timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (b) 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:

Cota, M.P., Rodr[iacute]guez, M.D., Gonz[aacute]lez-Castro, M.R. & 
Gon[ccedil]alves, R.M.M. (2017). Analysis of current visualization 
techniques and main challenges for the future. Journal of 
Information Systems Engineering & Management, 2(3), 19. https://doi.org/10.20897/jisem.201719.
Hajirahimova, M.S., & Ismayilova, M.I. (2018). Big data 
visualization: Existing approaches and problems. Problems of 
Information Technology, 1, 65-74.
Hazen, B.T., Weigel, F.K., Ezell, J.D., Boehmke, B.C., & Bradley, 
R.V. (2017). Toward understanding outcomes associated with data 
quality improvement. International Journal of Production Economics, 
193, 737-747.
Kirk, A. (2016). Data visualization: A handbook for data driven 
design. Sage Publications.
Pfenninger, S., DeCarolis, J., Hirth, L. Quoilin, S., & Staffell, I. 
(2017). The importance of open data and software: Is energy research 
lagging behind? Energy Policy, 101, 211-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.046.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). 2019 American Community Survey. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Disability&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S1810&hidePreview=true.
U.S. Department of State. (2017). Federal Open Licensing Playbook. 
https://eca.state.gov/files/bureau/open_licensing_playbook_final.pdf.

    Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c), 1416(i), 1418(c), 1442; and 
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260, 134 Stat. 
1182, 1601.
    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. (d) The NFP.
    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 agreement.
    Estimated Available Funds: $3,000,000.
    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 $3,000,000 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; State LAs 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

[[Page 41303]]

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. However, 
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to 
timely make an award.
    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 and need for project (10 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the significance of and need for the 
proposed project.
    (2) In determining the significance of and need for 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 and design (35 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be 
provided by, and the quality of the design of, 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 there is a conceptual framework underlying 
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of 
that framework.
    (iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and 
effective practice.
    (iv) 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.
    (v) 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 (15 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.
    (iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (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.
    (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

[[Page 41304]]

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 the project director or principal investigator.
    (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of key project personnel.
    (iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
    (iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator.
    (v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization.
    (vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
    (vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the 
proposed project.
    (viii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to 
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed 
project.
    (e) Quality of the management plan (25 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) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
and services from the proposed project.
    (iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives 
is 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 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.

[[Page 41305]]

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 
that are designed to yield information on various aspects of the 
effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance on State Data 
Collection program. These measures are:
     Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of TA and 
dissemination products and services deemed to be of high quality by an 
independent review panel of experts qualified or individuals with 
appropriate expertise to review the substantive content of the products 
and services.
     Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of TA and 
dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review 
panel of qualified experts or members of the target audiences to be of 
high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or 
practice.
     Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of all TA 
and dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review 
panel of qualified experts or members of the target audiences to be 
useful in improving educational or early intervention policy or 
practice.
     Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the 
Technical Assistance on State Data Collection 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.
    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 Accessible Data Center meet needs 
identified by stakeholders and may require the Accessible Data Center 
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 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. 2022-14853 Filed 7-8-22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P