[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77556-77563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27484]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and 
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program--National Center on 
Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies

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) 2023 for a 
National Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies, 
Assistance Listing Number 84.327T. This notice relates to the approved 
information collection under OMB control number 1820-0028.

DATES: 
    Applications Available: December 19, 2022.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 6, 2023.
    Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 3, 2023.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than December 27, 
2022, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post details 
on pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide technical 
assistance (TA) to interested applicants. Links to the webinars may be 
found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an 
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to 
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the 
Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede 
the version published on December 27, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Vermeer, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5076, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 987-0155. 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 Educational Technology, 
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program (ETechM2 
Program) is to improve results for children 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 children 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 children with disabilities in a timely manner.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants should note that other laws, including the 
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 
CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 
amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State 
educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) 
provide captioning, video description, and other accessible 
educational materials to students with disabilities when these 
materials are necessary to provide equally integrated and equally 
effective access to the benefits of the educational program or 
activity, or as part of a ``free appropriate public education'' as 
defined in 34 CFR 104.33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. In 
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable 
activities specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of the 
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 
1474(b)(2)(B) and 1481(d).
    Absolute Priority: For FY 2023 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.

[[Page 77557]]

    This priority is:
    National Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational 
Agencies.

Background

    Technology can transform learning experiences and create greater 
equity and access for all learners. With the goal of supporting 
students' diverse needs, education systems have embraced technology for 
its ability to customize learning more than ever before (Gray & Lewis, 
2021). However, whether a student with a disability requires assistive 
technology (AT) must be determined for each student individually.
    Despite the increase in technology used at the instructional level 
for all students, and the requirement in IDEA that students with 
disabilities be provided AT if deemed necessary for the provision of a 
free appropriate public education (FAPE), many SEAs and LEAs do not 
address AT in technology planning (Shaheen & Lazar, 2018). As a result, 
LEAs frequently vary in their ability to implement systems that support 
the effective use of AT and instructional technology by students with 
disabilities and their families. Individualized education program (IEP) 
Team members may lack knowledge of, or experience with the 
functionality of appropriate technology tools, systems of procurement, 
and supports for use of technologies in the homes, schools, and 
communities of students with disabilities (Atanga et al., 2020; Cohen & 
Popoff, 2022; Maylahan, 2022; U.S. Department of Education, 2022). In 
addition, policies and practices at the SEA and LEA levels, such as 
operability, privacy, and security concerns, may impact IEP Teams' 
decisions, access to appropriate AT, and the timeliness of services 
(Gray & Lewis, 2021; Maylahan, 2022).
    At the LEA level, systems need to be in place to support the 
identification, procurement, deployment, and effective use of assistive 
and instructional technology. These systems consist of interrelated 
components such as funding sources, professional development 
activities, data collection, program accountability, and quality 
improvement. To support the IEP Teams' decisions and the timely 
provision of AT services to students with disabilities, a sound and 
sustainable framework to implement a ``shared vision for how technology 
can support learning and how to secure appropriate resources to sustain 
technology'' is required and must align with SEA systems (U.S. 
Department of Education, 2017, p. 44). Implementing a framework 
requires partnerships with community stakeholders and leaders to 
address the digital divide and identify solutions to barriers such as 
those related to availability, affordability, and adoption for students 
with disabilities (U.S. Department of Education, 2022).

Priority

    The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to 
establish and operate a National Center on Technology Systems in Local 
Educational Agencies (Center). The Center will provide TA on a 
framework \2\ for LEAs to implement comprehensive and sustainable 
assistive and instructional technology \3\ systems to include (1) 
effective professional development and training for instructional and 
support personnel, administrators, families, and other decision makers 
in the use and acquisition of assistive and instructional technology by 
students with disabilities; (2) identification of funding sources for 
costly assistive and instructional devices and services; and (3) 
coordination of programs to acquire, maintain, and reuse assistive and 
instructional technology devices and services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For purposes of this priority, ``framework'' refers to the 
theories, knowledge base, policies, and practices that form the 
basic conceptual structure of effective systems. A framework is a 
guide to increase the capacity of LEAs to understand, improve, and 
implement effective systems.
    \3\ Section 602 of IDEA defines an ``assistive technology 
device'' as ``any item, piece of equipment, or product system, 
whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified or customized, 
that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional 
capabilities of a child with a disability.'' For the purposes of 
this priority, ``instructional technology'' is defined as technology 
processes and resources that facilitate learning and improve student 
performance for all students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected 
outcomes:
    (a) Increased knowledge of providers and decision-makers in LEAs 
about evidence-based \4\ assistive and instructional technology tools 
and practices (EBPs) for students with disabilities and their families;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For the purposes of this priority, ``evidence-based'' means, 
at a minimum, evidence that demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 
34 CFR 77.1), where a key project component included in the 
project's logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings 
that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant 
outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (b) Increased effective use of assistive and instructional 
technology in LEAs within comprehensive and sustainable SEA-aligned 
systems \5\ as applicable;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For the purposes of this priority, ``systems'' refers to 
interrelated components (e.g., funding, professional development, 
data collection, accountability, and quality improvement) that need 
to be in place to support the identification, procurement, 
deployment, and effective use of assistive and instructional 
technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Increased partnerships between LEAs and community stakeholders 
to support sustainable and comprehensive systems; and
    (d) Increased capacity of providers and decision-makers to sustain 
comprehensive LEA and State-aligned systems for the effective use of 
assistive and instructional technology by students with disabilities 
and their families.
    In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered 
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application 
and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:
    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Address the need for LEAs to build capacity to develop and 
sustain systems for the equitable and effective use of assistive and 
instructional technology by students with disabilities and their 
families. To meet this requirement, the applicant must--
    (i) Present applicable national data demonstrating LEA resource 
gaps and areas of need in supporting equitable and effective use of 
assistive and instructional technology by students with disabilities 
and their families;
    (ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy 
initiatives relating to the equitable and effective use of assistive 
and instructional technology by students with disabilities and their 
families;
    (iii) Present information about the current capacity of--
    (A) Providers and decision-makers in LEAs to use EBPs that improve 
the effective use of assistive and instructional technology by students 
with disabilities and their families; and
    (B) LEAs to implement components of comprehensive and sustainable 
systems that address barriers to the availability, affordability, and 
adoption of assistive and instructional technology by students with 
disabilities and their families; and
    (2) Improve outcomes in equitable and effective use of assistive 
and instructional technology by students with disabilities and their 
families and indicate the likely magnitude or importance of the 
improvements.
    (b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that 
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this

[[Page 77558]]

requirement, the applicant must describe how it will--
    (i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and 
information; and
    (ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the 
intended recipients of the grant;
    (2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet 
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
    (i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
    (ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (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 make use of EBPs. To meet this 
requirement, the applicant must describe--
    (i) The current research on readiness and capacity in LEAs to adopt 
a framework to address barriers to the availability, affordability, and 
adoption of assistive and instructional technology by students with 
disabilities and their families and related EBPs;
    (ii) The current research about adult learning principles and 
implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will use a framework and incorporate 
current research and EBPs in the development and delivery of its 
products and services;
    (5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality 
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes 
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant 
must describe--
    (i) How it proposes to increase the capacity of providers and 
decision-makers to use the framework in LEAs to--
    (A) Develop and implement comprehensive and sustainable SEA-aligned 
systems for the equitable and effective use of assistive and 
instructional technology practices for students with disabilities and 
their families;
    (B) Promote the sustained use of EBPs that improve equitable and 
effective use of assistive and instructional technology; and
    (C) Enhance LEA evaluation and data systems to make informed 
decisions about the selection and effectiveness of assistive and 
instructional technology;
    (ii) 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 under this 
approach to include--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    (A) A plan to disseminate the framework that incorporates theories, 
knowledge base, and effective practices, policies, and tools that LEAs 
can use to develop or enhance comprehensive and sustainable systems for 
the equitable and effective use of assistive and instructional 
technology. This plan must include--
    (1) Promoting the framework and products at national meetings or 
conferences;
    (2) Publishing the framework in national newsletters or on national 
partners' websites;
    (3) Promoting the framework and products to personnel preparation 
programs at institutions of higher education (IHEs); and
    (4) Collaborating with federally funded resources (e.g., OSEP TA 
Centers, Comprehensive Centers) and, where appropriate, State TA 
networks;
    (B) A website that houses all the project's products and encourages 
their use; and
    (C) A plan to identify and disseminate other relevant resources, 
including those currently housed by the Center on Inclusive Technology 
and Education Systems (https://cites.cast.org/), on evidence-based 
assistive and instructional practices for students with disabilities 
and their families;
    (iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\7\ to 
support a minimum of eight LEAs across three or more States in 
implementing the framework, which must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA services based on 
needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively 
individualized. A relationship is established between the TA 
recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA 
includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating 
strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It 
can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend 
over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference 
calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the 
needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can 
also be considered targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (A) The intended recipients, including the type(s) of LEAs, that 
will receive the products and services under this approach; and
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential 
LEAs 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,\8\ to 
support a minimum of two LEAs in implementing the framework, which must 
identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided 
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA 
center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as 
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. 
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, 
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or 
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach;
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of the LEAs 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 among the schools in 
the LEA;
    (C) Its proposed plan for assisting LEAs to build or enhance 
training systems that include professional development based on adult 
learning principles and coaching; and
    (D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the 
education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, districts, 
schools, families) to ensure that there is communication between each 
level and that there are systems in place to support the effective use 
of assistive and instructional technology by students with disabilities 
and their families;
    (6) Develop products and implement services that maximize 
efficiency. To

[[Page 77559]]

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 and 
initiatives to achieve the intended project outcomes; and
    (7) Develop a dissemination plan that describes how the applicant 
will systematically distribute information, products, and services to 
varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies, 
to promote awareness and use of the Center's products and services.
    (c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of 
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project 
developed in consultation with and implemented by a third-party 
evaluator.\9\ The evaluation plan must--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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, nor have any 
financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Articulate formative and summative evaluation questions, 
including important process and outcome evaluation questions to refine 
the framework and continuously improve the project's products and 
services. These questions should be related to the project's proposed 
logic model required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of the application and 
administrative requirements in this notice;
    (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 
of 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 (APR) and at the end of Year 2 for the review process described 
under the heading, Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project;
    (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 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.
    (f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant 
must--
    (1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, 
as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the 
narrative;
    (2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:
    (i) A one- and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or 
virtually, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting 
in Washington, DC, or virtually, with the OSEP project officer and 
other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.
    Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award 
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the 
grantee's project director or other authorized representative;
    (ii) A two- and one-half day project directors' conference in 
Washington, DC, or virtually, during each year of the project period;
    (iii) One annual two-day trip, or virtually, to attend Department 
briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as 
requested by OSEP; and
    (iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, or 
virtually, during the last half of the second year of the project 
period;
    (3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of 
five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are 
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those 
needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP 
project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the 
project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside 
no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;
    (4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate 
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for 
accessibility;
    (5) Ensure that annual project progress toward meeting project 
goals is posted on the project website; and
    (6) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the 
transfer of pertinent resources and products from the current Center on 
Inclusive Technology and Education Systems (CITES) and to maintain the 
continuity of services during the transition to this new award period 
and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project

    In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth 
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), including--
    (a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts 
who have experience and knowledge in

[[Page 77560]]

assistive and instructional technology. This review will be conducted 
during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last 
half of the second year of the project period;
    (b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's 
products and services and the extent to which the project's products 
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to 
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.
    Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards 
or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive 
carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The 
Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and 
substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue 
funding accordingly.

References

Atanga, C., Jones, B.A., Krueger, L.E., & Lu, S. (2020). Teachers of 
students with learning disabilities: Assistive technology knowledge, 
perceptions, interests, and barriers. Journal of Special Education 
Technology, 35(4), 236-248.
Cohen, L., & Popoff, E. (2022). 2022 State EdTech trends report. 
SETDA. www.setda.org/priorities/state-trends.
Gray, C., & Lewis, L. (2021). Use of educational technology for 
instruction in public schools: 2019-20 (NCES 2021-017). U.S. 
Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. 
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2021017.
Maylahan, P. (2022). EdTech leadership survey report. Consortium for 
School Networking. www.cosn.org/edtech-topics/state-of-edtech-leadership.
Shaheen, N.L., & Lazar, J. (2018). K-12 technology accessibility: 
The message from state governments. Journal of Special Education 
Technology, 33(2), 83-97.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. 
(2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 
National Education Technology Plan update. U.S. Department of 
Education. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. 
(2022). Advancing digital equity for all: Community-based 
recommendations for developing effective digital equity plans to 
close the digital divide and enable technology-empowered learning. 
U.S. Department of Education. https://tech.ed.gov/advancing-digital-equity-for-all/.

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

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
    Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested 
$29,547,000 for the ETechM2 Program for FY 2023, of which we intend to 
use an estimated $700,000 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 2024 from the list of 
unfunded applications from this competition.
    Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $700,000 for a 
single budget period of 12 months.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
    Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
    Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter 
schools that operate as 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 program does not require cost 
sharing or matching.
    b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an 
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding 
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please 
see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
    c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include 
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All 
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to 
the Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the 
Uniform Guidance.
    3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award 
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities 
described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may 
contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with 
2 CFR part 200.
    4. Other General Requirements:
    a. Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive 
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with 
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
    b. Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to 
the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute 
priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of 
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, 
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of 
IDEA).

IV. Application and Submission Information

    1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to 
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of 
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal 
Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to 
submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions 
supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.

[[Page 77561]]

    2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to 
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. 
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under 
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this 
competition.
    3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding 
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
    4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, 
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to 
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the 
application narrative to no more than 70 pages and (2) use the 
following standards:
     A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1'' 
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
     Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) 
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, 
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as 
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
     Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
     Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, 
Courier New, or Arial.
    The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the 
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the 
assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance 
provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the 
table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the 
reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the 
recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative, 
including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen 
shots.

V. Application Review Information

    1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition 
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
    (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 significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the 
proposed project;
    (ii) The likelihood that the proposed project will result in system 
change or improvement;
    (iii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build 
local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the 
needs of the target population; and
    (iv) The potential replicability of the proposed project or 
strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation 
in a variety of settings.
    (b) Quality of project services (30 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be 
provided by the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by 
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and 
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for 
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed 
project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or 
beneficiaries of those services;
    (ii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the 
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and 
effective practice;
    (iii) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the 
proposed project on the intended recipients of those services;
    (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 services to be provided by the proposed 
project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for 
maximizing the effectiveness of project services; and
    (vi) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the 
proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the 
use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project 
resources.
    (c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be 
conducted of the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
considers the following factors:
    (i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the 
proposed project;
    (ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation 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;
    (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 will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes; and
    (v) The extent to which the proposed project plan includes 
sufficient resources to conduct the project evaluation effectively.
    (d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (20 
points).
    (1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out 
the proposed project.
    (2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary 
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age, or disability.
    (3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
    (i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
of key project personnel;
    (ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and 
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors;
    (iii) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, 
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the 
lead applicant organization;
    (iv) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project; 
and
    (v) 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 (15 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;

[[Page 77562]]

    (ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project 
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are 
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed 
project;
    (iii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of 
perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed 
project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, 
a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or 
beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate; and
    (iv) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and 
continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
    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. 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

[[Page 77563]]

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.
    (c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee 
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In 
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
    5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of Department reporting 
under 34 CFR 75.110, we have established a set of performance measures, 
including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on 
various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the 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 Access Center funded by the ETechM2 Program.
     Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit 
of video description funded by the ETechM2 Program.
    Program Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 apply to projects funded 
under this competition, and grantees are required to submit data on 
Program Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 as directed by OSEP.
    Grantees will be required to report information on their project's 
performance in annual performance reports and additional performance 
data to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 75.591).
    The Department will also closely monitor the extent to which the 
products and services provided by the Center meet needs identified by 
stakeholders and may require the Center to report on such alignment in 
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. 2022-27484 Filed 12-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P