The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that interested members of the public and affected agencies have an opportunity to comment on information collection and recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice identifies an information collection that the Agency is submitting to OMB for revision.

Comments are invited on (a) whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumption used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques on other forms and information technology. Comments may be sent as follows:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and, in the “Search” box, type in the Docket No. RBS-23-BUSINESS-0013. A link to the Notice will appear. You may submit a comment here by selecting the “Comment” button or you can access the “Docket” tab, select the “Notice,” and go to the “Browse & Comment on Documents” Tab. Here you may view comments that have been submitted as well as submit a comment. To submit a comment, select the “comment” button, complete the required information, and select the “Submit Comment” button at the bottom. Information on using Regulations.gov , including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “FAQ” link at the bottom. Comments on this information collection must be received by August 7, 2023.

Title: Indigenous Animals and Harvesting Meat Processing Grant Program for Fiscal Year 2023.

OMB Control Number: 0570-NEW.

Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from date of approval.

Type of Request: New information collection.

Abstract: The Indigenous Animals Harvesting and Meat Processing Grant Program was authorized by section 1001 of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act of 2021 (Pub. L. 117-2), which assists U.S. states and territories to build resilience in the middle of the supply chain and strengthen local and regional food systems. The Rural Business-Cooperative Service (RBCS) administers this program, an agency within USDA Rural Development, in partnership with the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) and in consultation with the Office of Tribal Relations (OTR).

If successfully selected for an Indigenous Animals Grant award, respondents are not expected to spend more than 24 hours completing the information required. Grant applicants are required to submit their information via Grants.gov . Information collected as part of this one-time grant program, outlined in the RFA, includes the grant narrative (application) and standardized Federal forms (for which information is collected through Grants.gov ). Once grant recipients are determined, Rural Business Cooperative Service (RBCS) uses the award agreement form as its Notice of Award and Grant Agreement (NOA) as the binding contract with the Federal award recipient. The NOA outlines additional post-award requirements by which award recipients must comply, including Terms and Conditions, Administrative and National Policy Requirements (2 CFR 200.300), performance and financial reporting (AMS requires annual reporting in alignment with 2 CFR 200.329), and final close-out reporting requirements.

The program contain requirements that involve information collection activities, including approved OMB forms in chart below, SAM registration and general certifications, the project RFA, NEPA environmental checklist, organizational documents, Articles of Incorporation, design and construction documents, letters of support, evidence of land ownership, the NICRA, surety, technical services documents, final project and financial state report, project performance reports, inspection reports, and recordkeeping.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.29 hours per response.

Respondents: Indian Tribes.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 50.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 36.

Estimated Number of Responses: 1801.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours on Respondents: 2328.

Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Lynn Gilbert, Rural Development Innovation Center-Regulatory Team, at (202) 690-2682. Email: lynn.gilbert@usda.gov. All responses to this information collection and recordkeeping notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

Background

On May 31, 2022, we received multiple requests for an administrative review  1 of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on welded pipe from Korea for the POR. 2 On July 14, 2022, Commerce published the initiation of this administrative review for 25 producers/exporters of welded pipe from Korea. 3 On August 29, 2022, Commerce selected Hyundai RB Co., Ltd. (Hyundai RB) and SeAH Steel Corporation (SeAH Steel) as the mandatory respondents in this administrative review. 4 On January 6, 2023, Commerce extended the deadline for these preliminary results to no later than May 31, 2023. 5

For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 6 A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included at Appendix I to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The merchandise covered by the Order is welded pipe. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

On October 12, 2022, the domestic interested party timely withdrew its request for administrative review in its entirety. 7 However, Hyundai RB, SeAH Steel, and HiSteel Co., Ltd. continue to have outstanding review requests. As such, because there were no other active review requests for the 22 companies listed in Appendix II, we are rescinding this review, in part, with respect to these 22 companies, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(l)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we preliminarily determine that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that confers a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific. 8 For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

The statute and Commerce's regulations do not directly address the CVD rates to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination where Commerce limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(e)(2) of the Act. However, Commerce normally determines the rates for non-selected companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation. Section 777A(e)(2) of the Act provides that “the individual countervailable subsidy rates determined under subparagraph (A) shall be used to determine the all-others rate under section 705(c)(5) {of the Act}.” Section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act states that for companies not investigated, in general, we will determine an all-others rate by weight-averaging the countervailable subsidy rates established for each of the companies individually investigated, excluding zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely on the facts available.

As discussed above, we initiated an administrative review of 25 companies and are rescinding the review with respect to the 22 companies listed in Appendix II. In addition, Commerce selected Hyundai RB and SeAH Steel as mandatory respondents. As such, HiSteel Co., Ltd., is the only company subject to this review not selected for individual examination. Because we preliminarily determine that only Hyundai RB received countervailable subsidies at a rate above de minimis, we are preliminarily applying the net subsidy rate calculated for Hyundai RB to HiSteel Co., Ltd., as the non-selected rate.

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an individual net countervailable subsidy rate for Hyundai RB and SeAH. Commerce preliminarily determines that, during the POR, the net countervailable subsidy rates for the producers/exporters under review are as follows:

As provided in section 782(i)(3) of the Act, Commerce intends to verify the information relied upon for its final results of this review.

We intend to disclose to parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in reaching the preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of this notice. 9 Interested parties will be notified of the timeline for the submission of case briefs at a later date. 10 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 11 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with the argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, using Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS system within 30 days of publication of this notice. 12 Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; (3) whether any participant is a foreign national; and (4) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm the date and time of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

Parties are reminded that all briefs and hearing requests must be filed electronically using ACCESS and received successfully in their entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 13

Unless the deadline is extended pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in any written briefs, no later than 120 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results.

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we preliminarily assigned subsidy rates in the amounts shown above for the producers/exporters shown above. Upon completion of the administrative review, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.

For the companies for which this review is rescinded, we will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP for these companies no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the preliminary results of this review in the Federal Register .

For the companies remaining in the review, we intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce intends, upon publication of the final results, to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amounts calculated in the final results for each of the reviewed companies listed above on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review, except, where the rate calculated in the final results is zero or de minimis, no cash deposit will be required. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the all-others rate as established in the Order ( i.e., 9.29 percent)  14 or the most recent company-specific rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit instructions, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

These preliminary results of review are issued and published pursuant to sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4) and 351.221(b)(4).

Background

On July 14, 2022, based on timely requests for a review, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we initiated this administrative review of the antidumping duty order  1 on circular welded carbon steel standard pipe and tube products from Turkey, covering 19 companies. 2 On August 30, 2022, Commerce selected Borusan as the mandatory respondent for individual examination. 3 On October 12, 2022, Nucor Tubular Products Inc. (Nucor), a petitioner in this proceeding, withdrew its request for an administrative review with respect to every company except Borusan. 4

On January 13, 2023, Commerce extended the preliminary results of this review by 120 days, until May 31, 2023. 5 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 6

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. Nucor timely withdrew its requests for an administrative review with respect to each company listed in the Initiation Notice, other than Borusan. 7 No other party requested a review of these companies. Accordingly, we are rescinding this review, in part, with respect to these companies, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). The producers and/or exporters for which we are rescinding the administrative review are listed in Appendix II of this notice.

The merchandise covered by the Order is circular welded carbon steel standard pipe and tube products. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 9

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 10 A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included at Appendix I to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Between June 12 and August 15, 2022, 11 companies timely submitted letters to Commerce certifying that they had no sales, shipments, or entries of the subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. 11 However, as indicated above, because Commerce is rescinding this review for each company listed in the Initiation Notice, except Borusan, Commerce has not made a determination of no shipments for these companies.

With respect to Istikbal, one of the companies which certified no shipments during the POR, we continue to find it to be part of the Borusan single entity and we find no record evidence that warrants altering this treatment. 12 Therefore, because we find that Borusan had shipments during this POR, we have not made a preliminary determination of no shipments with respect to Istikbal.

We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period May 1, 2021, through April 30, 2022:

Upon issuance of the final results, Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. 13 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 14

Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where an examined respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate an importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the U.S. sales for a given importer to the total entered value of those sales. Where a mandatory respondent did not report entered value, we calculate the entered value in order to calculate the assessment rate. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Borusan for which it did not know that its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate such unreviewed entries pursuant to the reseller policy, 15 i.e., the assessment rate for such entries will be equal to the all-others rate established in the investigation ( i.e., 14.74 percent ad valorem ), 16 if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Borusan, which is listed above, will be equal to this company's weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review, (except if the ad valorem rate is de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(C)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero); (2) for previously investigated companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, or the underlying investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 14.74 percent, the all-others rate established in the underlying investigation. 17

These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days after the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 18 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the time limit for filing case briefs. 19 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 20 Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. 21 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS and must be served on interested parties. 22 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 23

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), any interested party who wishes to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance within 30 days of publication of this notice. Hearing requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. 24 Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS  25 and must also be served on interested parties. 26 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on the date that the document is due.

Unless otherwise extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

On March 1, 2023, Commerce published the notice of initiation of the fourth sunset review of the AD order on honey from China  1 pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 2

On March 15, 2023, the American Honey Producers Association and the Sioux Honey Association (collectively, the domestic interested parties) notified Commerce of their intent to participate within the 15-day period specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 3 The domestic interested parties claimed interested party status under sections 771(9)(C) and (E) of the Act as producers of domestic like product in the United States and as a trade association whose members are engaged in the business of producing honey in the United States.

On March 30, 2023, Commerce received an adequate substantive response to the Initiation Notice with respect to the Order from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day period specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 4 Commerce did not receive a substantive response from any other interested parties with respect to the Order covered by this sunset review. On April 20, 2023, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission that it did not receive an adequate substantive response from respondent interested parties in this sunset review. 5 Pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), Commerce conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the Order.

The scope of the Order is honey from China. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 6

A complete discussion of all issues raised in this sunset review is provided in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached as the appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(1) and (3) of the Act, Commerce determines that revocation of the Order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and that the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail would be weighted-average margins up to 183.80 percent.

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return/destruction or conversion to judicial protective order of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218 and 351.221(c)(5)(ii).

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. app., notice is hereby given that the ISPAB will meet Wednesday, July 12, 2023, from 10 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Eastern Time, and Thursday, July 13, 2023, from 10 a.m. until 4:00 p.m., eastern time. All sessions will be open to the public. The ISPAB is authorized by 15 U.S.C. 278g-4, as amended, and advises the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on information security and privacy issues pertaining to Federal government information systems, including through review of proposed standards and guidelines developed by NIST. Details regarding the ISPAB's activities are available at https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/ispab.

The agenda is expected to include the following items:

Note that agenda items may change without notice. The final agenda will be posted on the ISPAB event page: https://csrc.nist.gov/Events/2023/ispab-july-2023-meeting. Seating will be available for the public and media.

Public Participation : Written questions or comments from the public are invited and may be submitted electronically by email to Jeff Brewer at the contact information indicated in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice by 5 p.m., eastern time, on Tuesday, July 11, 2023.

The ISPAB agenda will include a period, not to exceed thirty minutes, for submitted questions or comments from the public between 3 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 12, 2023. Submitted questions or comments from the public will be selected on a first-come, first-served basis and limited to five minutes per person.

Members of the public who wish to expand upon their submitted statements, those who had wished to submit a question or comment but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend the meeting are invited to submit written statements. In addition, written statements are invited and may be submitted to the ISPAB at any time. All written statements should be directed to the ISPAB Secretariat, Information Technology Laboratory by email to: jeffrey.brewer@nist.gov.

Admittance Instructions: Pre-registration is required to attend this meeting due to security requirements in the building. It is recommended to allow thirty minutes to process through security. All visitors must enter the Udall Building through the C Street lobby, located between 18th and 19th Streets NW.

Any individual who wishes to attend the meeting should register via email at: jeffrey.brewer@nist.gov prior to the registration deadline of 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time, July 11, 2023.

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., notice is hereby given that the NAIAC will hold briefing sessions on Tuesday, June 20, 2023; Thursday, June 22, 2023; and Tuesday, June 27, 2023. The sessions will be open to the public and will be held virtually. Interested members of the public will be able to attend the sessions from remote locations. The purpose of these sessions is for invited experts to brief the Committee on topics of interest related to the Committee's year two efforts. Additional information, including the final agenda and link to register, will be available online at: ai.gov/naiac/.

The NAIAC is authorized by section 5104 of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Act of 2020 (Pub. L. 116-283), in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq. The Committee advises the President and the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative Office on matters related to the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative. Additional information on the NAIAC is available at ai.gov/naiac/.

Comments: Oral comments from the public will not be permitted during these virtual sessions. However, individuals and representatives of organizations may submit written comments and suggestions to the Committee at any time. Please note that all submitted comments will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection. All comments must be submitted via email with the subject line “YOUR NAME, YOUR ORGANIZATION NAME (if applicable), NAIAC Comments” to naiac@nist.gov.

Virtual Admittance Instructions: The sessions will be broadcast live via virtual teleconference. Registration is required to view each of the virtual sessions. To register, please visit ai.gov/naiac/. Members of the public that would like to view the virtual sessions must register by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday June 16, 2023, for the June 20, 2023 session; by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Tuesday, June 20, 2023, for the Thursday, June 22, 2023 session; and by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday June 23, 2023 for the Tuesday, June 27, 2023 session.

The purpose of this meeting is for the Advisory Panel to develop a fishery performance report (FPR) that describes recent performance of the bluefish commercial and recreational fisheries. The intent of the FPR is to facilitate a venue for structured input from the Advisory Panel for the bluefish specifications process. The FPR will be used by the MAFMC's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) and the Bluefish Monitoring Committee (MC) when recommending 2024-2025 management measures designed to achieve the recommended bluefish catch and landings limits.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Spedden at the Council Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Background Pacific Whiting Treaty Committees

The Pacific Whiting Act of 2006 (Pacific Whiting Act) (16 U.S.C. 7001-10) implements the Pacific Whiting Treaty. Among other provisions, the Pacific Whiting Act provides for the appointment of the United States representation on the JMC and AP.

The JMC reviews the advice of two scientific bodies and the AP, and recommends to the Parties the coast-wide total allowable catch of Pacific whiting each year. Four individuals represent the United States on the JMC; one official from NOAA, one member of the Pacific Fishery Management Council, one representative of the treaty Indian tribes with treaty fishing rights to Pacific whiting, and one representative from the commercial fishing sector of the whiting fishing industry concerned with the offshore whiting resource. NMFS is soliciting nominations for one representative of the commercial sector (16 U.S.C. 7002 (a)(1)) through this notice.

The AP advises the JMC on bilateral Pacific whiting management issues. Eight individuals represent the United States on the AP, and nominations for six of those individuals (16 U.S.C. 7005) are solicited through this notice. Members appointed to the U.S. sections of the AP and JMC will be reimbursed for necessary travel expenses in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations and sections 5701, 5702, 5704 through 5708, and 5731 of title 5 (16 U.S.C. 7008). NMFS anticipates that two meetings of the JMC and one meeting of the AP will be held annually, and these meetings will be held in the United States or Canada. AP and JMC members will need a valid U.S. passport.

The Pacific Whiting Act also states that while performing their appointed duties, members “other than officers or employees of the United States Government, shall not be considered to be Federal employees while performing such service, except for purposes of injury compensation or tort claims liability as provided in chapter 81 of title 5 and chapter 171 of title 28.” (16 U.S.C. 7008).

Information on the Pacific Whiting Treaty, including current committee members, can be found at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/laws-and-policies/pacific-hake-whiting-treaty#committees-and-panels.

Nomination packages for appointments should include:

(1) The name of the applicant or nominee, position they are being nominated for and a description of their interest in Pacific whiting; and

(2) A statement of background and/or description of how the following qualifications are met.

AP member nominees must be knowledgeable or experienced in the harvesting, processing, marketing, management, conservation, or research of the offshore Pacific whiting resource; and must not be employees of the United States government.

The JMC nominee for the commercial sector must be from the commercial sector of the Pacific whiting fishing industry concerned with the offshore Pacific whiting resource, and must be knowledgeable or experienced concerning the offshore whiting resource.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.

This meeting is being held under the provisions of Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App), the Government in the Sunshine Act (“the Sunshine Act”) (5 U.S.C. 552b), sections 102-3.140 and 102-3.150 of title 41, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Designated Federal Officer, the Defense Policy Board was unable to provide public notification required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a) concerning its June 13-14, 2023 meeting. Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement.

Purpose of the Meeting: To obtain, review, and evaluate classified information related to the DPB's mission to advise on (a) issues central to strategic DoD planning; (b) policy implications of U.S. force structure and modernization on DoD's ability to execute U.S. defense strategy; (c) U.S. regional defense policies; and (d) other defense policy topics of special interest to the DoD, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, or the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.

Agenda: On June 13, 2023, and June 14, 2023, the DPB will receive classified briefings and hold classified discussions on the long-term regional and global strategic implications of potential coercion by the People's Republic of China (PRC) across the Taiwan Strait, including implications for U.S. allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific and around the world. The DPB will: (1) conduct classified deliberations as a Board regarding the Information Operations terms of reference discussed at the December 13-14, 2022, and the March 7-8, 2023, meetings; (2) receive classified briefings on reactions by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) from the National Intelligence Officer for East Asia, National Intelligence Council, and Dr. Dale Rielage, Senior Director for Strategic Competition, OSD Red Team, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security; (3) deliberate as a Board on classified CCP and PLA scenarios; (4) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by Central & South American partners to these scenarios from GEN Laura Richardson (U.S. Army), Commander, U.S. Southern Command; (5) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by South Korea, Japan, and Australia from the National Intelligence Officer for Near East, National Intelligence Council, and Honorable Ely Ratner, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs; (6) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by India, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Indonesia, from the National Intelligence Officer for South Asia, National Intelligence Council, and Hon. Ely Ratner, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs; (7) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by NATO Allies from AMB Julie Smith, U.S. Ambassador to NATO, and Ms. Rachel Ellehuss, U.S. NATO Defense Advisor; (8) conduct classified deliberations as a Board regarding the Taiwan topic terms of reference; (9) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by African Partners from Gen Michael Langley (USMC), Commander, U.S. Africa Command; (10) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by Russia and Iran from the National Intelligence Officer for Russia & Eurasia, National Intelligence Council; (11) receive a classified briefing regarding reactions by North Korea from the National Intelligence Officer for North Korea, National Intelligence Council; (12) discuss these briefings in a classified session with the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense; and (13) finally conduct a final classified deliberation as a Board regarding the Taiwan topic terms of reference.

Meeting Accessibility: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 1009(d) and 41 CFR 102-3.155, the DoD has determined that this meeting shall be closed to the public. The Under Secretary of Defense (Policy), in consultation with the DoD FACA Attorney, has determined in writing that this meeting be closed to the public because the discussions fall under the purview of 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) of title and are so inextricably intertwined with unclassified material that they cannot reasonably be segregated into separate discussions without disclosing classified material.

Written Statements: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 1009(a)(3) and 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140(c), the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the membership of the DPB at any time regarding its mission or in response to the stated agenda of a planned meeting. Written statements should be submitted to the DPB's DFO, which is listed above in this notice or can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database— https://www.facadatabase.gov/. Written statements that do not pertain to a scheduled meeting of the DPB may be submitted at any time. However, if individual comments pertain to a specific topic being discussed at a planned meeting, then these statements must be submitted no later than five business days prior to the meeting in question. The DFO will review all submitted written statements and provide copies to all members.

Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program, which further aligns resources provided by the Department with the policies in the Native American Languages Act (NALA), 25 U.S.C. 2901 et seq., is to support establishing, strengthening, and operating one or more Native American language resource centers.

Background: Congress recently emphasized the need to support the use of Native American languages as a medium of instruction for a variety of age levels, academic content areas, and types of schools, including Native American language medium education by passing the Native American Language Resource Center Act of 2022 (NALRCA) (20 U.S.C. 7457). According to a 2011 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS), it is estimated that during 2006-2010 there were fewer than 372,095 Native language speakers in the United States. 1 One out of every four Native students, in fourth or eighth grade, has had no exposure to a Native American language. 2

The NALRC Program supports projects that will preserve, protect, and promote the rights and freedom of Native Americans to use, practice, and develop Native American languages in furtherance of the policies in NALA and the United States trust responsibility to Tribal Nations. Native American language resource centers supported by the NALRC Program will be staffed by individuals with relevant expertise and experience, including staff who speak American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian languages and have worked in Native language education in a preschool, elementary school, secondary school, adult education, or higher education program. For FY 2023, this competition includes two absolute priorities, one for regional centers and one for a national center, to advance policies set forth in NALA, including the rights of Native Americans to express themselves through Native American languages in any public proceeding, including publicly supported education programs. 25 U.S.C. 2904. This competition also includes a competitive preference priority for projects that are led by a Tribal college or university (TCU).

Tribal Consultation: This competition was informed by Tribal consultation with elected Tribal leaders or their officially designated proxies. The Department held a virtual Tribal consultation on January 10, 2023, and announced the opportunity through various external community listservs.

The Department requested input from Tribal Nations on whether the program should be administered through a contractual agreement or grant competition. The majority of Tribal leaders favored using contractual agreements, depending on the functions of the NALRC Program. Other Tribal leaders noted potential inequities in grant competitions because some Tribal Nations have greater access to high-quality grant writers. After considering the comments received, the Department will administer the program through a grant competition and may convert awards to cooperative agreements at any point if the grantee agrees. This competition includes a competitive preference priority for TCU lead applicants to address Tribal leader concerns regarding access to high-quality grant writers.

The Department requested input from Tribal Nations on what priorities would strengthen implementation of the program. The majority of Tribal leaders expressed the importance of regional representation of Native language needs and that such needs must inform the work of the NALRC Program. Other Tribal leaders also expressed the need for the NALRC Program to advance the purpose of NALA and support immersion schools where Native language is used as a medium of instruction. A consortium representing 33 Tribal Nations provided written comments recommending that program administration be designed in an equitable and regional manner. In response to the comments received, the Department has incorporated two absolute priorities to advance the authorized activities outlined in the NALRCA, including a priority for the implementation of regional centers.

The Department requested input from Tribal Nations on how the Department can better ensure resource coordination and avoid duplication of effort across the Federal government. The majority of Tribal leaders expressed that the Department should carefully consider existing research and promising practices to ensure Tribal Nations have access to meaningful resources. Other Tribal leaders expressed that ongoing communication with Native language practitioners is paramount to ensure emergent programs can benefit from the experiences of existing programs.

Priorities: This notice includes two absolute priorities and one competitive preference priority. We are establishing these priorities in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2.

The Secretary intends to create two funding slates for NALRC Program applications—one for applications that meet Absolute Priority 1 and one for applications that meet Absolute Priority 2. As a result, the Secretary may fund applications out of the overall rank order, but the Secretary is not bound to do so.

Note: The Department prefers that an eligible entity apply for either the National Center or a Regional Center. The Department will, however, consider multiple, separate applications from one entity applying for one or more Regional Centers and the National Center as long as the entity submits a separate application for each Center. If an applicant submits multiple applications that fall within the funding range, after review and comparison of those applications, the Department may choose not to fund all applications that propose using the same project personnel or providing the same services as other fundable applications.

These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1 : Regional Centers.

To meet this priority, applicants must propose a regional Native American language resource center that supports the provision of high-quality capacity-building services to Tribal clients and recipients to identify, implement, and sustain effective programs, practices, and interventions that—

(a) Encourage and support the use of Native American languages within educational systems in the same manner as other world languages, including by encouraging State educational agencies, local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education (IHEs) to offer Native American language courses for the same full academic credit as courses in other world languages;

(b) Support the development, adoption, and use of assessments, qualifications, and processes based on promising practices in Native American language medium education;

(c) Provide technical assistance to Native American language programs seeking other Federal resources; and

(d) Provide technical assistance to Native American communities and school systems to support the development of Native American language medium education programs in preschool, elementary school, secondary school, or adult education programs.

In a single application, an applicant must propose to operate a Regional Center in one and only one of the following regions:

1. Appalachia (Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia).

2. Central (Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming).

3. Mid-Atlantic (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania).

4. Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin).

5. Northeast and Islands (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the Virgin Islands).

6. Northwest (Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington).

7. Pacific (American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Hawaii, Palau, and Republic of the Marshall Islands).

8. Southeast (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina).

9. Southwest (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas).

10. West (Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah).

Note: To ensure geographic diversity, the Department will not fund more than one project that proposes to serve clientele in a single region.

Absolute Priority 2 : National Center .

To meet this priority, an applicant must propose a project that supports a National Center that will provide high-quality capacity-building services to Regional Centers, other Department-funded technical assistance centers, Tribal clients and recipients, and IHEs, including TCUs, to identify, implement, and sustain effective programs, practices, and interventions that—

(a) Encourage and support educator preparation programs, as well as appropriate alternative pathways to teacher certification, that prepare teachers to teach Native American languages and to use Native American languages as a medium of instruction, including by disseminating promising practices and developing pedagogical programming;

(b) Provide information and resources on promising practices in—

(1) The use and revitalization of Native American languages in Native American communities, including use in educational institutions; and

(2) The use of technology in school and community-based Native American language programs to support the retention, use, and teaching of Native American languages;

(c) Support the use of distance learning technologies in Native American language acquisition and related training for parents, students, teachers, and learning support staff associated with Native American language programs, including through—

(1) The compilation and curation of digital libraries and other online resources for Native American languages, except that any materials collected by the center may only be materials provided by a Native American language program or Native American community;

(2) The development of optional distance learning curricula appropriate for preschool, elementary school, secondary school, adult education, and postsecondary education; and

(3) Pedagogical training for Native American language teachers; and

(d) Support regional centers, Native American language programs, and Native American communities in—

(1) Accessing international best practices, resources, and research in indigenous language revitalization; and

(2) Gathering and sharing technical assistance, promising practices, and experiences.

Competitive Preference 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 a competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an additional 2 points to an application that meets the competitive preference priority.

This priority is:

Tribal College or University Lead Applicants (0 or 2 points).

To meet this priority, an application must be submitted by a TCU (as defined in this notice) that is eligible to participate in the NALRC Program. A consortium application that is submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-129 is eligible to receive the preference only if the lead applicant for the consortium is the TCU.

Application Requirements: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, applicants must meet the following application requirements. Application Requirement 1 is from the NALRCA, and we are establishing Application Requirement 2 in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA.

Each applicant must—

1. Native Language Expertise Assurance. Include an assurance that the proposed center will be staffed by individuals with relevant expertise and experience, including staff who speak American Indian and Alaska Native languages and the Native Hawaiian language and have worked in language education in the American Indian and Alaska Native languages and the Native Hawaiian language in a preschool, elementary school, secondary school, adult education, or higher education program.

2. Description of Program Requirements. Describe how the proposed project will meet the program requirements.

Program Requirements: We are establishing these requirements for the FY 2023 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, grantees must adhere to the following program requirements.

Applicants under either absolute priority must carry out activities to:

(a) Improve the capacity to teach and learn Native American languages;

(b) Further Native American language use and acquisition;

(c) Preserve, protect, and promote the rights and freedom of Native Americans to use, practice, and develop Native American languages in furtherance of—

(1) The policies set forth in the Native American Languages Act (25 U.S.C. 2901 et seq. ); and

(2) The United States trust responsibility to Native American communities;

(d) Address the effects of past discrimination and ongoing inequities experienced by Native American language speakers;

(e) Support the revitalization and reclamation of Native American languages;

(f) Support the use of Native American languages as a medium of instruction for a wide variety of age levels, academic content areas, and types of schools, including Native American language medium education; and

(g) Support the operation of intensive programs, including summer institutes, to train Native American language speakers, to provide professional development, and to improve Native American language instruction through preservice and in-service language training for teachers.

ISDEAA Statutory Hiring Preference:

(a) Awards that are primarily for the benefit of Indians are subject to the provisions of section 7(b) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Pub. L. 93-638) (ISDEAA). That section requires that, to the greatest extent feasible, a grantee—

(1) Give to Indians preferences and opportunities for training and employment in connection with the administration of the grant; and

(2) Give to Indian organizations and to Indian-owned economic enterprises, as defined in section 3 of the Indian Financing Act of 1974 (25 U.S.C. 1452(e)), preference in the award of contracts, subcontracts, and subgrants, in connection with the administration of the grant.

(b) For purposes of this preference, an Indian is a member of any federally recognized Indian Tribe.

Definitions: The terms “elementary school,” “local educational agency,” “secondary school,” and “State educational agency” are from section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 7801). The terms “Native American” and “Native American language” are from section 103 of the Native American Languages Act. The term “institution of higher education” is from section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA). The term “Tribal College or University” is from section 316(b)(3) of the HEA.

Elementary school means a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public elementary charter school, that provides elementary education, as determined under State law.

Institution of higher education means an educational institution in any State that—

(a) Admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate, or persons who meet the requirements of 20 U.S.C. 1091(d);

(b) Is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education;

(c) Provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor's degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or awards a degree that is acceptable for admission to a graduate or professional degree program, subject to review and approval by the Secretary;

(d) Is a public or other nonprofit institution; and

(e) Is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted preaccreditation status by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the granting of preaccreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time.

Local educational agency —

(a) In General. The term “local educational agency” means a public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools or secondary schools.

(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.

(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does not have a student population that is smaller than the student population of the local educational agency receiving assistance under the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational agency other than the Bureau of Indian Education.

(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies.

(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the State educational agency in a State in which the State educational agency is the sole educational agency for all public schools.

Native American means an Indian, Native Hawaiian, or Native American Pacific Islander. For purposes of this definition, the term “Indian” has the meaning given to such term under 20 U.S.C. 7491(3).

Native American language means the historical, traditional languages spoken by Native Americans.

Secondary school means a nonprofit institutional day or residential school, including a public secondary charter school, that provides secondary education, as determined under State law, except that the term does not include any education beyond grade 12.

State educational agency means the agency primarily responsible for the State supervision of public elementary schools and secondary schools.

Tribal College or University means an institution that—

(a) Qualifies for funding under the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. ) or the Navajo Community College Act (25 U.S.C. 640a note); or

(b) Is cited in section 532 of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7451; 20 U.S.C. 7457.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria. Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking requirements, regulations governing the first grant competition under a new or substantially revised program authority. This is the first grant competition for the NALRC Program under the NALRCA, and therefore qualifies for this exemption. The Secretary has decided to forgo public comment under the waiver authority in section 437(d)(1) of GEPA in order to ensure timely grant awards.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 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.

Type of Award: Discretionary grants/cooperative agreements.

Estimated Available Funds: $2,900,000.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in future years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards:

For a Regional Center, $250,000-$350,000 per year.

For a National Center, $1,000,000-$1,300,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards:

For a Regional Center, $300,000 per year.

For a National Center, $1,150,000 per year.

Estimated Number of Awards: 6-7. The Department intends to support 5-6 Regional Centers under this competition. One award will support the National Center.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

1. Eligible Applicants: The following entities are eligible to apply under this competition:

(a) An institution of higher education (as defined in this notice);

(b) An entity within an institution of higher education with dedicated expertise in Native American language and culture education; or

(c) A consortium that includes one or more entities described in paragraph (a), or one or more entities described in paragraph (b).

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses a training indirect cost rate. This limits indirect cost reimbursement to an entity's actual indirect costs, as determined in its negotiated indirect cost rate agreement, or 8 percent of a modified total direct cost base, whichever amount is less. For more information regarding training indirect cost rates, see 34 CFR 75.562. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this competition may award subgrants—to directly carry out project activities described in its application—to the following types of entities: IHEs, nonprofit organizations, professional organizations, or businesses. The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in the approved application or that it selects through a competition under procedures established by the grantee.

4. a. Reasonable and Necessary Costs: Applicants must ensure that all costs included in the proposed budget are reasonable and necessary to meet the goals and objectives of the proposed project. Any costs determined by the Secretary to be unreasonable or unnecessary will be removed from the final approved budget.

b. Audits: (i) A non-Federal entity that expends $750,000 or more during the non-Federal entity's fiscal year in Federal awards must have a single or program-specific audit conducted for that year in accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200. (2 CFR 200.501(a))

(ii) A non-Federal entity that expends less than $750,000 during the non-Federal entity's fiscal year in Federal awards is exempt from Federal audit requirements for that year, except as noted in 2 CFR 200.503 (Relation to Other Audit Requirements), but records must be available for review or audit by appropriate officials of the Federal agency, pass-through entity, and Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2 CFR 200.501(d)).

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 7504), 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.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the NALRC Program grant competition, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended). Because we plan to post on our website a selection of funded abstracts and applications' narrative sections, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

3. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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 program. Please note that, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we have shortened the standard 60-day intergovernmental review period in order to make awards by the end of FY 2023.

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 30 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, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

• 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 one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, the letter(s) of support, or the signed consortium agreement. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative. An application will not be disqualified if it exceeds the recommended page limit.

5. Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to review grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number of applicants that intend to apply and the region they represent. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of their intent to submit an application. To do so, please email the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT with the subject line “Intent to Apply,” and include the applicant's name, a contact person's name and email address, and the region they represent. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information provided.

6. Award Basis: In determining whether to approve a grant award and the amount of such award, the Department will take into consideration, among other things, the applicant's performance and use of funds under a previous or existing award under any Department program (34 CFR 75.217(d)(3)(ii) and 75.233(b)). In assessing the applicant's performance and use of funds under a previous or existing award, the Secretary will consider, among other things, the outcomes the applicant has achieved and the results of any Departmental grant monitoring, including the applicant's progress in remedying any deficiencies identified in such monitoring.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210. The source of each selection criterion, and the maximum score for addressing each criterion and factor within each criterion, is included in parentheses. The maximum score for these criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is included in parentheses following the title of the specific selection criterion. Each criterion also includes the factors that reviewers will consider in determining the extent to which an applicant meets the criterion. Taken together with the competitive preference priority, an applicant can receive up to a total of 102 points.

The selection criteria are as follows:

(a) Need for project (6 points).

The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) 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. (Up to 3 points)

(2) The extent to which the proposed project will prepare personnel for fields in which shortages have been demonstrated. (Up to 3 points)

(b) Quality of project design (36 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. (Up to 12 points)

(2) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target population or other identified needs. (Up to 6 points)

(3) The extent to which performance feedback and continuous improvement are integral to the design of the proposed project. (Up to 6 points)

(4) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (Up to 12 points)

(c) Quality of project services (13 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the project services. 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. (Up to 2 points)

In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (Up to 7 points)

(2) 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. (Up to 4 points)

(d) Quality of project personnel (12 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project. 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. (Up to 2 points)

In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director or principal investigator. (Up to 5 points)

(2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel. (Up to 5 points)

(e) Adequacy of resources (8 points).

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project. (Up to 4 points)

(2) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project. (Up to 4 points)

(f) Quality of the management plan (15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) 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. (Up to 5 points)

(2) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products and services from the proposed project. (Up to 5 points)

(3) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project. (Up to 5 points)

(g) Quality of the project evaluation (10 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. (Up to 5 points)

(2) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about effective strategies suitable for replication or testing in other settings. (Up to 5 points)

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 also 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).

For the FY 2023 NALRC Program competition, all applications will be assigned to peer review panels. The Department will select applications for funding consideration based on their ranking in the competition.

3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this program 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.

4. 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.

5. 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).

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 or subgrantee 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 in 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. If a grantee is provided additional funding for this purpose, the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

Note: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.315(b) and other applicable law, the Department may make reports, deliverables, outputs, or materials produced by the Native American Language Resource Centers publicly available and may request that the Native American Language Resource Centers disseminate reports, deliverables, outputs, or materials to a wide audience ( e.g., through their websites, social media, or other public-facing channels).

5. Performance Measures: The following measures have been established for the purpose of Department reporting under 34 CFR 75.110 and will be used to evaluate the success of the NALRC Program:

(a) The percentage of the annual measurable objectives, as described in the application, that are met by grantees;

(b) The annual increase in the number of Tribes supported; and

(c) The annual increase in the number of languages supported.

These measures constitute the Department's indicators of success for this program. Consequently, we advise an applicant for a grant under this program to carefully consider these measures in conceptualizing the approach to, and evaluation for, its proposed project. Each grantee will be required to provide, in its annual performance and final reports, data about its progress in meeting these measures.

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).

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, 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.

Purpose of Program: The FSCS program, established under sections 4621-4623 and 4625 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA), provides support for the planning, implementation, and operation of full-service community schools that improve the coordination, integration, accessibility, and effectiveness of services for children and families, particularly for children attending schools with concentrated poverty, including rural schools.

Program Authority: Sections 4621-4623 and 4625 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7271-7273, 7275.

We published a notice of proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program in the Federal Register on January 12, 2022 (87 FR 1709) (the NPP). That document contained background information and rationale for proposing the priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria, including a priority for participation in a national evaluation of the program's effectiveness using a randomized controlled trial ( i.e., experimental) design. We then published a notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program in the Federal Register on July 13, 2022 (87 FR 41675) (the 2022 FSCS NFP). In the 2022 FSCS NFP, we discussed a plan to conduct additional outreach before finalizing a priority on a national evaluation.

Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPP, 19 parties submitted comments pertinent to the proposed national evaluation priority, which were addressed in the 2022 FSCS NFP. In the 2022 FSCS NFP, the Department communicated our appreciation for the comments, concerns, and support shared by the field regarding a national evaluation of the FSCS program. We committed to working with grantees and other stakeholders to design and conduct the national evaluation required under section 4625(f) of the ESEA. To allow more time to conduct outreach with the field, the Department delayed launching the national evaluation.

We discuss substantive issues under each priority or requirement to which they pertain. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes or suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make. In addition, we do not address comments that are outside the scope of the proposed priority and requirements.

Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and of any changes in the priority and requirements related to the proposed national evaluation priority follows.

Proposed Priority 4—Participation in a National Evaluation.

Comments: We summarized the 19 comments received related to Priority 4 in the 2022 FSCS NFP.

Discussion: As discussed in the 2022 FSCS NFP, the Department appreciates the comments, concerns, and support shared by the field regarding a national evaluation of the FSCS program and we are committed to working with grantees and other stakeholders to design and implement the national evaluation required under section 4625(f) of the ESEA, which requires the Department's Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to conduct an evaluation of the effectiveness of the FSCS program grants. To allow more time to conduct outreach with the field, the Department did not begin the national evaluation with the FY 2022 grant competition.

In response to comments expressing concern about the design of the national evaluation, section 4625(f) of the ESEA requires a national evaluation that assesses the effectiveness of the grants. Section 4625(g) of the ESEA requires that grantees conduct local evaluations to assess annual progress achieved, refine and improve activities, and make the results publicly available. The local and national evaluations are separate but complementary, and one cannot be used in place of the other. The alternative designs suggested by commenters for a national evaluation would not meet the requirements in section 4625(f). While a national evaluation of the program's implementation would be useful and is included in the randomized controlled trial design described in the national evaluation priority, a national evaluation of implementation alone would not fulfill the mandate for evaluating the program's effectiveness. While two of the 19 comments received supported conducting a randomized controlled trial evaluation beginning in 2022, the majority of commenters and stakeholders that provided input through subsequent outreach shared that it would be useful to the field to learn about the implementation of FSCS grants prior to assessing their effectiveness. We have decided to first conduct a national evaluation of program implementation and will share those implementation findings with the field. We will use the interim implementation findings to inform and enhance the design and execution of a subsequent national evaluation of the program's effectiveness using a randomized controlled trial.

Another commenter suggested that an alternative design, a quasi-experimental study, would be very challenging to execute with sufficient scientific rigor at a national level. A quasi-experimental design would require the identification of a comparison group of non-FSCS funded schools that are very similar at baseline to the schools receiving grant funds. It would likely be very difficult to find schools not implementing community schools strategies that are similar enough to schools receiving FSCS grant funds and willing to provide the detailed data required for the evaluation. While such a quasi-experimental design approach has been used in evaluating community schools within more limited contexts, such as a single city or one or two States, it would be much more difficult to identify credible comparison schools for each FSCS-funded school given the diverse and widespread distribution of schools receiving FSCS grant funds. Even if an ostensibly suitable comparison group at baseline could be identified, it would not be possible to fully determine whether there are factors in the comparison schools that make them more or less likely to have better outcomes over time and to disentangle those factors from the effects of the FSCS grant funds.

One commenter asked how the Department will ensure that the outcomes measured go beyond test scores and include outcomes such as student physical and mental health and a range of key non-cognitive competencies, such as social and emotional learning and increased sense of safety and well-being. Using a national evaluation of implementation to inform the national evaluation of effectiveness required under section 4625(f) of the ESEA provides the Department with an opportunity to better understand what can be measured, including outcomes related to health, social emotional learning, safety, and well-being. Further, the 13 program indicators that were included in the 2022 FSCS NFP include measures related to attendance, school climate, discipline, expanded learning time, and family engagement, among others.

The Department agrees with commenters that requiring applicants to propose at least four schools to receive grant funding could exclude some districts. Therefore, in the priority for a national evaluation of effectiveness using a randomized controlled trial, we are reducing the minimum number of proposed schools from four to two.

In response to comments that a randomized controlled trial would be unfair, the Department disagrees. In all FSCS competitions, there is not sufficient funding for every interested and eligible school. Whatever total grant funds are available in any year, under a randomized controlled trial design, more applicants and localities would receive FSCS grants, though not every one of their interested schools could participate or benefit from that funding. Without a randomized controlled trial, fewer localities receive grants, though all interested schools can participate in FSCS funding. Therefore, whether there is a randomized controlled trial or not, there will be schools that will not receive grant funds or participate under a funded grant. In either case, the Department would be awarding the same total amount of money to support FSCS nationally.

Regarding comments related to data collection, the Department agrees that it is vital to engage stakeholders in a variety of ways, in part to ensure that any national evaluation plans are well-informed and reflect the reality of grantee variation. Since receiving feedback on the national evaluation priority, we interviewed key community schools researchers and practitioners. We synthesized the interview findings and shared updated evaluation plans in a webinar with the field in February 2023. We will continue to seek stakeholder input and incorporate multiple perspectives, as feasible and aligned with the theory of action, in all national evaluations.

Regarding recommendations that the Department engage a technical advisory group, we also agree there is substantial value in obtaining multiple perspectives on any national evaluation of FSCS. The evaluation currently has a Technical Working Group comprised of community schools researchers and practitioners. This group met in October 2020 to advise on initial evaluation plans. We will continue to consult these experts, or experts with similar expertise, as the design and execution of a national evaluation of FSCS implementation and effectiveness moves forward. The Department agrees that mandatory participation in any national evaluation is essential for the results to reflect the diversity of grantees and their efforts.

Following the publication of the 2022 FSCS NFP and after discussions with FSCS grantees and other stakeholders, the Department has determined that a robust national evaluation of FSCS grantee implementation, as recommended in comments received on the NPP, will help the field learn about implementation, provide information to the Department to help us target supports for applicants and grantees, and inform a subsequent national evaluation of effectiveness that meets the statutory requirement. Accordingly, and as discussed in more detail below, we are establishing requirements that applicants include an assurance to participate in the national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program and that grantees participate in the national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program.

To meet the statutory requirement, the Department will use information learned about implementation of FSCS grants to develop a rigorous national evaluation of effectiveness. In order to conduct a subsequent effectiveness study, we are establishing a priority for participation in a future national evaluation of effectiveness using a randomized controlled trial design.

Changes: The Department has finalized a priority for participation in a national evaluation of effectiveness of the FSCS program using a randomized controlled trial design that requires applicants to propose at least two, rather than four, schools to potentially receive grant funding.

Comments: We summarized comments received related to FSCS program requirements in the 2022 FSCS NFP.

As discussed in connection with the national evaluation proposed priority from the 2022 FSCS NPP, numerous commenters recommended that the Department conduct an evaluation using a design other than a randomized controlled trial design. There were four comments related to differences in implementation of full-service community schools across schools because the strategy is specific to the needs and assets of individual communities and schools.

Discussion: We agree that it is important to study how grantees are implementing their FSCS grants. In order to ensure that FSCS applicants are fully prepared to participate in a national evaluation of the implementation of the FSCS program, the Department is establishing an application requirement and a program requirement that grantees must work with IES during the assessment of implementation of the FSCS program.

Changes: The Department has added an application requirement that applicants include an assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program and a program requirement that grantees will work with IES during the assessment of implementation of the FSCS program.

This document contains one final priority.

Participation in a National Evaluation of Effectiveness Using a Randomized Controlled Trial Design.

Projects in which the applicant agrees to—

(a) Carry out the FSCS grant in a manner consistent with a randomized controlled trial evaluation design developed by the Department and its national evaluator;

(b) Propose at least two schools to potentially receive grant funding in the national evaluation of effectiveness. The proposed schools can be elementary, middle, and/or high schools;

(c) Not currently be fully implementing all four pillars of full-service community schools (as defined in the 2022 FSCS NFP) in any of the schools proposed for the grant;

(d) Consent to the evaluator's random assignment of approximately one-half of the schools proposed by the applicant to receive funding and begin implementing the FSCS approach; and the other half of schools to not receive funding from any FSCS grant for 3 years following random assignment;

(e) Not promote or begin using grant funds for the implementation of the FSCS approach in any proposed schools until the grantee receives notification from the national evaluator about the random assignment of its schools to receive FSCS grant funding or not; and

(f) Cooperate, consistent with applicable privacy requirements, with evaluation data collection activities, including: surveys of grantee directors, principals of both groups of proposed schools (those randomly assigned to receive grant funding and schools assigned to not receive grant funding), and a representative sample of parents/guardians of students attending the two groups of grantee schools; and provision of district administrative records on educators ( e.g., credentials, experience) and students ( e.g., academic assessment scores, course taking and credit accumulation, attendance) in the two groups of grantee schools. These data collections will be carried out at multiple points over the grant period.

Note: From among the proposed schools, applicants may designate one group of two or more schools that serve the same grade levels as “highest need.” If the applicant receives a grant, the national evaluation of effectiveness will ensure that at least one of the schools in the group receives FSCS funding.

Types of Priorities: When inviting applications for a competition using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal Register . The effect of each type of priority follows:

Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105C(3)).

Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).

Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

This document does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register .

This document contains two final requirements.

Assurance of Participation in a National Evaluation Assessing the Implementation of the FSCS Program.

Each applicant must include an assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(b) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(c) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(d) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(e) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation of implementation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts.

Participate in a National Evaluation Assessing the Implementation of the FSCS Program.

Each grantee must participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(b) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(c) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(d) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(e) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation of implementation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts.

Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) must determine whether this regulatory action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094, defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action likely to result in a rule that may—

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more (adjusted every 3 years by the Administrator of OIRA for changes in gross domestic product); or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, territorial, or Tribal governments or communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would meaningfully further the President's priorities or the principles stated in the Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.

This final regulatory action is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 (as amended by Executive Order 14094). Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq. ), OIRA designated this rule as not a “major rule,” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

We have also reviewed this final regulatory action under Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency—

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify);

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into account—among other things and to the extent practicable—the costs of cumulative regulations;

(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);

(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and

(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including economic incentives—such as user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired behavior, or provide information that enables the public to make choices.

Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” OIRA has emphasized that these techniques may include “identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.”

We are issuing the final priority and requirements only on a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.

We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.

In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.

Summary of Costs and Benefits: The Department believes that the final priority and requirements will not impose significant costs on the entities eligible to apply for FSCS. We also believe that the benefits of implementing the final priority and requirements outweigh any associated costs.

The potential costs are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.

The priority and requirements give the Department the opportunity to conduct a national evaluation of the FSCS program, as required in section 4625(f) of the ESEA.

Because the final priority and requirements would neither expand nor restrict the universe of eligible entities for any Department grant program, and since application submission and participation in our discretionary grant programs is voluntary, there are no costs associated with this priority and requirements for applicants; grantees would use grant funds for participation in evaluation activities.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification: The Secretary certifies that this final regulatory action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define “small entities” as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total annual revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled by small governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts), with a population of less than 50,000.

The small entities that this regulatory action will affect are local educational agencies, the Bureau of Indian Education, and community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, and other public or private entities that may apply. We believe that the costs imposed on an applicant by the final priority and requirements will be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application and that the benefits of implementing this final priority and requirements will outweigh any costs incurred by the applicant. Grantees will incur costs related to participating in the national evaluation and implementation study; however, grant funds will be available to meet those costs. Therefore, we do not believe that the final priority and requirements will significantly impact small entities beyond the potential for receiving additional support should the small entity receive a competitive grant from the Department.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections of information, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that: The public understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact of collection requirements on respondents.

The final priority and requirements contain information collection requirements that are approved by OMB under OMB control number 1894-0006.

Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.

This document provides early notification of our specific plans and actions for this program.

Accessible Format: On request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text format, 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 Adobe 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.

Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The FSCS program is authorized by sections 4621-4623 and 4625 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). This program provides support for the planning, implementation, and operation of full-service community schools that improve the coordination, integration, accessibility, and effectiveness of services for children and families, particularly for children attending high-poverty schools, including high-poverty rural schools.

Background: Meeting the needs of the whole child is essential to helping America's students grow academically and improve their well-being. The Biden-Harris Administration's commitment to increasing and supporting the adoption of community school models across the country has resulted in an increase in funding from $25 million in 2020 to $150 million in FY 2023, from 42 grantees in 2020 to 129 grantees in 2023, which includes 42 grants made to local educational agencies (LEAs) (as defined in this notice), nonprofit (as defined in this notice) organizations, institutions of higher education, and government organizations in FY 2022. To further demonstrate its commitment to community schools, the White House worked with nine Federal agencies to identify how funding across the Federal government can be used to support community schools. These efforts resulted in the publication of a Fact Sheet  1 and Toolkit  2 designed to assist community school leaders, coordinators, advocates, and other stakeholders to understand the current scope of Federal funding that can be used to support community schools.

Full-service community schools (as defined in this notice) meet the unique needs of the neighborhoods they serve by leveraging local nonprofit, private sector, and public partnerships to bring wraparound services into school buildings, such as mental health supports, dental services, and assistance with shelter and nutrition. They operate with the assistance of school staff who coordinate with school administrators, stakeholders, and local organizations to deliver these services and more to students, their families, and members of the community. Research  3 has shown that comprehensive community school interventions have increased student attendance, on-time grade progression, and high school graduation rates.

The growing interest at the State and local levels in community schools, 4 known as full-service community schools, coincides with a moment in which schools are urgently focused on supporting students' holistic needs as they help them recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and the Nation is grappling with violence in and around schools. In his January 2023 speech, Secretary Miguel Cardona encouraged all stakeholders to raise the bar in education. “Raise the Bar: Lead the World”  5 is the Department's call to action to transform preschool through grade 12 education and unite around evidence-based (as defined in this notice) strategies that advance educational equity and excellence for all students. Raising the bar in education focuses on building the skills that all students need to thrive inside and outside of school, and supporting students to excel in the classroom, in their careers, and in their enriched lives and communities, making a positive difference in the world, for generations to come.

In addition to the funding made available under FSCS, the ESEA offers flexibilities at the State and local levels to implement strategies supported by community schools, such as coordination of school and community resources (ESEA sections 1114(b)(5) and 1115(b)(2)) and after-school programming and support for a community school coordinator (ESEA section 4108(5)(H)). If a State educational agency (SEA) (as defined in this notice) or LEA lacks the resources to implement community schools at scale, it can productively begin in neighborhoods where community schools are most needed and, therefore, students are most likely to benefit. 6 In addition to a community school approach being an allowable use of funding under title I of ESEA as an evidence-based approach to school improvement, full-service community schools have been well-positioned to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on student's academic needs and well-being, including by working closely with partner organizations to address community needs such as summer programming, food and nutrition programs, tutoring, mentoring, mental and physical health services, COVID-19 vaccine access, family engagement strategies, and opportunities to accelerate learning both inside and outside the classroom. Accordingly, community schools are an allowable use of American Rescue Plan Act funds. In addition, through the FSCS program, the Department provides catalytic support for the planning and capacity building, development, implementation, operation, and coordination of effective services for children and families, particularly in urban and rural areas with high rates of poverty.

Research  7 shows that community schools that include certain design features show improvements in teaching, learning, and student outcomes. The evidence-based features, or pillars, include providing (1) integrated supports ( e.g., social and emotional learning, access to health and nutrition services); (2) expanded and enriched learning time ( e.g., after-school enrichment and summer school); (3) active family and community engagement; and (4) collaborative leadership and practices to support high-quality teaching. Full-service community schools should create and implement these evidence-based strategies as part of a comprehensive set of services that are designed to reflect and be tailored to local contexts. These four pillars are supported by the Science of Learning and Development Alliance  8 and can be used to address the needs of the whole child, including those children and youth whom schools and community partners determine to be most underserved. Continued inclusion of the four pillars in this year's FSCS competition allows applicants to develop projects with greater fidelity to evidence-based practices  9 that have been shown to be associated with improvements in teaching, learning, and student outcomes, and prepares the FSCS program and its grantees for future national evaluation efforts. For example, in a January 2020 study of New York City community schools, assuming strong social capital, stable leadership, and a strong instructional program, community schools have been associated with improved attendance, on-time grade progression, student achievement in math, and fewer disciplinary incidents. 10

Building upon the work and progress of the field, as well as the lessons learned from reviews and evaluations of community school strategies and implementation, the Department published a notice of final priority and requirements for the FSCS program elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register (2023 FSCS NFP). The final requirements are included in this notice and require that grantees under this competition commit to and participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program.

In this FSCS competition, through two competitive preference priorities, the Department seeks applications that consider how classroom practices and school designs that are focused on the whole learner can be incorporated into community school supports and strategies. Recognizing the impact of school and community safety on learning, the Department is also interested in projects that propose to coordinate across multiple agencies and organizations to address community violence prevention and intervention. Through an invitational priority, the Department encourages projects that support effective transition practices, continuity of services and supports, and aligned instruction for students as they transition from preschool and other early childhood settings into kindergarten and from kindergarten into the early grades. Under the ESEA, FSCS grantees must provide pipeline services (as defined in this notice), which includes access to high-quality early childhood education programs. While FSCS grantees are also required to support a child's transition between elementary, middle, and high schools, they are not required to support effective transitions between early childhood education and elementary school settings, which research suggests is a critical point for addressing the achievement gap before it is further entrenched. 11 Furthermore, instructional alignment from prekindergarten to first grade is associated with a sustained benefit for a student's language, literacy, and math skills through first grade. 12 To facilitate a smooth transition to kindergarten and support educational continuity across the preschool to third grade continuum, we include the invitational priority.

Priorities: This notice contains five absolute priorities, two competitive preference priorities, and one invitational priority. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), Absolute Priority 1 is from section 4625(b)(1)(A) of the ESEA, and Absolute Priority 2 is from section 4625(b)(1)(A) and (B) of the ESEA. Absolute Priorities 3, 4, and 5 are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published in the Federal Register on July 13, 2022 (87 FR 41675) (2022 FSCS NFP). Competitive Preference Priorities 1 and 2 are from the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grants Programs published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612) (Supplemental Priorities).

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2 and one additional absolute priority (Absolute Priority 3, Absolute Priority 4, or Absolute Priority 5).

Absolute Priorities 3, 4, and 5 constitute their own funding categories under Absolute Priority 1 and under Absolute Priority 2. Consequently, there will be separate funding slates for each of the following categories of applications:

• Absolute Priorities 1 and 3;

• Absolute Priorities 1 and 4;

• Absolute Priorities 1 and 5;

• Absolute Priorities 2 and 3;

• Absolute Priorities 2 and 4; and

• Absolute Priorities 2 and 5.

The Secretary intends to award grants under each of these funding categories, provided that applications of sufficient quality are submitted. To ensure that applicants are considered for the correct type of grant, applicants must clearly identify the specific absolute priorities that the proposed project addresses in the one-page abstract. If an entity is interested in proposing separate projects ( e.g., one that addresses Absolute Priorities 1 and 3 and another that addresses Absolute Priorities 1 and 4), separate applications must be submitted.

These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1—Title IA Schoolwide Program Eligibility .

To meet this priority, applicants must propose to serve a minimum of two or more full-service community schools eligible for a schoolwide program (as defined in this notice) under section 1114(b) of the ESEA, as part of a community- or district-wide strategy.

Absolute Priority 2—Title IA Schoolwide Program Eligibility and Rural Districts—Small and Rural or Rural and Low-Income .

To meet this priority, applicants must propose to: (1) serve a minimum of two or more full-service community schools eligible for a schoolwide program under section 1114(b) of the ESEA, as part of a community- or district-wide strategy; and (2) include an LEA that satisfies the requirements of the Small Rural School Achievement program (ESEA section 5211(b)(1)(A), (B), or (C)) or the Rural and Low-Income School program (ESEA section 5221(b)(1)(A), (B), or (C)).

Note: Applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to information on the following Department website: https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formula-grants/rural-insular-native-achievement-programs/rural-education-achievement-program/.

Note: An LEA includes a public charter school that operates as an LEA.

Absolute Priority 3—Capacity Building and Development Grants .

To meet this priority, applicants must propose projects to (a) conduct initial development and coordination activities, including extensive community engagement, that leverage the findings of their needs assessment—which may be completed during or before the grant period—to develop the infrastructure, activities, and partnerships to implement full-service community schools in two or more schools, and (b) gather data on performance indicators.

Absolute Priority 4—Multi-Local Educational Agency Grants .

To meet this priority, applicants must propose projects to implement and sustain full-service community schools in two or more LEAs. As outlined in section 4622(1)(B) of the ESEA, an eligible entity for any FSCS grant is a consortium of one or more LEAs or the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and one or more community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, or other public or private entities. The project must, with the exception of LEAs that oversee a single school, coordinate and provide services at two or more full-service community schools in each LEA.

Absolute Priority 5—FSCS State Scaling Grants. 13

Applications submitted under Priority 5 must include a written commitment of the SEA to participate in the partnership and to sustain the program beyond 2 years after the term of the grant, which can be submitted in the required preliminary memorandum of understanding (MOU) that includes the roles and responsibilities of the SEA and other partners identified at the time of the application. The applicant, in partnership with the SEA, determines the number and percentage of State LEAs, and the number and percentage of schools across those LEAs, that will develop, support, and expand full-service community schools over the 5-year grant performance period.

Applications under Priority 5 must also identify or establish a State steering committee (which may be a previously existing body) that represents relevant community schools' stakeholders, including educators and other school staff, community school initiative leaders, education union or association designees, family leaders participating in community school programs, community partners such as service providers, early childhood education providers such as Head Start, and community school coordinators from schools already implementing full-service community schools in the State. In addition to serving as an advisory committee, the steering committee also has the authority to make decisions about the design, implementation, and evaluation for the grant, which may include identification or selection of LEAs that will partner in the development and implementation of two or more community schools in each LEA, with the exception of LEAs that oversee a single school. The roles and responsibilities of the steering committee must be included in the required preliminary MOU.

As outlined in section 4622(1)(B) of the ESEA, an eligible entity for any FSCS grant is a consortium of one or more LEAs or the BIE and one or more community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, or other public or private entities.

Competitive Preference Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an additional 10 points to an application, depending on how well the application meets one or both of these priorities; the total possible points for each competitive preference priority are noted in parentheses. Applicants may apply under one, both, or none of the competitive preference priorities. If an applicant chooses to address one or both of the competitive preference priorities, the applicant must identify in the one-page abstract the competitive preference priorities they are addressing in order to receive those points. The applicant must respond to the competitive preference priorities it chooses to address in the application narrative section of its application.

These priorities are:

Competitive Preference Priority 1—Meeting Student Social, Emotional, and Academic Needs. (up to 5 points)

Projects that are designed to improve students' social, emotional, academic, and career development, with a focus on underserved students, through one or more of the following priority areas:

(1) Creating education or work-based settings that are supportive, positive, identity-safe, and inclusive with regard to race, ethnicity, culture, language, and disability status, through developing trusting relationships between students (including underserved students), educators, families, and community partners.

(2) Providing multi-tiered systems of supports that address learning barriers both in and out of the classroom, that enable healthy development and respond to students' needs and which may include evidence-based trauma-informed practices and professional development for educators on avoiding deficit-based approaches.

(3) Creating and implementing comprehensive schoolwide frameworks (such as small schools or learning communities, advisory systems, or looping educators) that support strong and consistent student and educator relationships.

Competitive Preference Priority 2—Strengthening Cross-Agency Coordination and Community Engagement to Advance Systemic Change. (up to 5 points)

The Secretary gives priority to projects that are designed to take a systemic evidence-based approach to improving outcomes for underserved students in coordinating efforts with Federal, State, or local agencies, or community-based organizations, that support students, to address community violence prevention and intervention.

Invitational Priority: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this is an invitational priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets this invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications. If an applicant chooses to address the invitational priority, the applicant must identify so in the one-page abstract. The applicant must respond to the invitational priority in the application narrative section of its application.

This priority is:

Supporting Effective Transition Practices, Continuity of Services and Supports, and Aligned Instruction for Students from Preschool and Other Early Childhood Settings into Kindergarten and from Kindergarten into the Early Grades (K-3) .

The Secretary is particularly interested in projects that include policies and procedures informed by developmentally appropriate practices that support cross-sector collaboration and family engagement across early learning and early elementary grades to support continuity of relationships and services from preschool through grade three, designed to lead to increased and improved educational opportunities for students, and include implementation of one or more of the following: (1) early learning through early elementary grades instructional alignment and educator and school leader support to promote academic recovery; (2) promotion of effective and informed attendance strategies in early learning and the early elementary grades; and (3) capacity building to promote effective family engagement for students in early learning and the early elementary grades.

Application Requirements: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, the following requirements apply. Applications for FSCS grant funds must address the following application requirements. Applicants must respond to the requirements that correspond to the absolute priority that they are addressing. The application requirements are from section 4625(a) of the ESEA, the 2022 FSCS NFP, and the 2023 FSCS NFP. The source of each requirement is provided in the parentheses following each requirement. An applicant may choose to respond to each requirement separately or in the context of the applicant's response to the selection criteria in Section V.1. of this notice.

Absolute Priority 3—Capacity Building and Development Grants.

In order to receive funding, applicants for grants under Absolute Priority 3 Capacity Building and Development Grants must address the following application requirements.

(1) A description of the eligible entity. (4625(a)(1))

(2) A preliminary MOU among all partner entities of the eligible entity, identified at the time of application, that will assist the eligible entity to plan, develop, coordinate, provide, and evaluate pipeline services and that describes the roles and responsibilities that the partners, including the broadly representative consortium (as defined in this notice), will assume. (4625(a)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(3) A description of the capacity of the eligible entity to coordinate and provide pipeline services at two or more full-service community schools. (4625(a)(3))

(4) A comprehensive plan that includes descriptions of the following:

(A) The student, family, and school community to be served, including demographic information; (4625(a)(4)(A))

(B) A plan for conducting the needs assessment that identifies the academic, physical, nonacademic, health, mental health, and other needs of students, families, and community residents; (4625(a)(4)(B)) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(C) A plan for developing annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes, including an increase in the number and percentage of families and students targeted for services each year of the program, in order to ensure that children are—

(i) Prepared for kindergarten;

(ii) Achieving academically; and

(iii) Safe, healthy, and supported by engaged parents. (4625(a)(4)(C) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(D) A plan for identifying and developing pipeline services, including existing and additional pipeline services, to be coordinated and provided by the eligible entity and its partner entities, including an explanation of:

(i) Why such services have been selected;

(ii) How such services will improve student academic achievement; and

(iii) How such services will address the annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes established under paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement. (4625(a)(4)(D) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(E) A description of the pillars of full-service community schools (as defined in this notice) that they have in place or how they will establish these pillars, or how they will implement these pillars with partners, including community-based organizations and collaborating with school leadership and staff. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(F) Plans to ensure that each full-service community school site has a full-time coordinator of pipeline services at such school, including a description of the applicable funding sources, plans for professional development for the personnel managing, coordinating, or delivering pipeline services, and plans for joint utilization and management of school facilities. (4625(a)(4)(E))

(G) Plans for an annual evaluation based upon attainment of the performance objectives and outcomes described in paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement.

An applicant must, in addition to providing the information and assurances required by section 4625(a)(4)(F) of the ESEA, commit to an independent evaluation that includes a design and implementation evaluation that will, at a minimum, (1) include annual evaluations of progress achieved with the grant; (2) be used to refine and improve activities carried out through the grant; (3) collect and report data that includes, but is not limited to, the following indicators: student chronic absenteeism rates; student discipline rates, including suspensions and expulsions; school climate information, which may come from student, parent, or teacher surveys; provision of integrated student supports and stakeholder services; expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities; family and community engagement efforts and impact; information on the number, qualifications, and retention of school staff, including the number and percentage of fully certified teachers, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, rates of teacher turnover, and teacher experience; graduation rates; changes in school spending information; collaborative leadership and practice strategies, which may include building the capacity of educators, principals, other school leaders, and other staff to lead collaborative school improvement structures, such as professional learning communities; regularly convening or engaging all initiative-level partners, such as LEA representatives, city or county officials, children's and youth's cabinets, nonprofit service providers, public housing agencies, and advocates; regularly assessing program quality and progress through individual student data, participant feedback, and aggregate outcomes to develop strategies for improvement; and organizing school personnel and community partners into working teams focused on specific issues identified in the needs and assets assessment; and (4) make results of the evaluation publicly available. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(H) Plans for sustaining the programs and services described in section 4625(a) of the ESEA after the grant period. (4625(a)(4)(G))

(5) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(A) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(B) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(C) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(D) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(E) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation of implementation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts. (2023 FSCS NFP)

(6) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will focus services on schools eligible for a schoolwide program under section 1114(b) of the ESEA. (4625(a)(5))

Absolute Priority 4—Multi-Local Educational Agency Grants.

In order to receive funding, applicants for grants under Absolute Priority 4 Multi-Local Educational Agency Grants must address the following application requirements.

(1) A description of the eligible entity. (4625(a)(1))

(2) A preliminary MOU among all partner entities of the eligible entity, identified at the time of the application, that will assist the eligible entity to plan, develop, coordinate, provide, and evaluate pipeline services and that describes the roles and responsibilities that the partners, including the broadly representative consortium, will assume. (4625(a)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(3) A description of the capacity of the eligible entity to coordinate and provide pipeline services at two or more full-service community schools in each LEA. (4625(a)(3) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(4) A comprehensive plan that includes descriptions of the following:

(A) The student, family, and school community to be served, including demographic information. (4625(a)(4)(A))

(B) A needs assessment that identifies the academic, physical, nonacademic, health, mental health, and other needs of students, families, and community residents. (4625(a)(4)(B))

(C) Annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes, including an increase in the number and percentage of families and students targeted for services each year of the program, in order to ensure that children are—

(i) Prepared for kindergarten; (4625(a)(4)(C)(i))

(ii) Achieving academically; (4625(a)(4)(C)(ii)) and

(iii) Safe, healthy, and supported by engaged parents. (4625(a)(4)(C)(iii))

(D) Pipeline services, including existing and additional pipeline services, to be coordinated and provided by the eligible entity and its partner entities, including an explanation of:

(i) Why such services have been selected;

(ii) How such services will improve student academic achievement; and

(iii) How such services will address the annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes established under paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement. (4625(a)(4)(D))

(E) A description of the pillars of full-service community schools that they have in place or how they will establish these pillars, or how they will implement these pillars with partners, including community-based organizations and collaborating with school leadership and staff. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(F) Plans to ensure that each full-service community school site has a full-time coordinator of pipeline services at such school, including a description of the applicable funding sources, plans for professional development for the personnel managing, coordinating, or delivering pipeline services, and plans for joint utilization and management of facilities. (4625(a)(4)(E))

(G) Plans for an annual evaluation based upon attainment of the performance objectives and outcomes described in paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement.

An applicant must, in addition to providing the information and assurances required by section 4625(a)(4)(F) of the ESEA, commit to an independent evaluation that includes a design and implementation evaluation that will, at a minimum, (1) include annual evaluations of progress achieved with the grant; (2) be used to refine and improve activities carried out through the grant; (3) collect and report data that includes, but is not limited to, the following indicators: student chronic absenteeism rates; student discipline rates, including suspensions and expulsions; school climate information, which may come from student, parent, or teacher surveys; provision of integrated student supports and stakeholder services; expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities; family and community engagement efforts and impact; information on the number, qualifications, and retention of school staff, including the number and percentage of fully certified teachers, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, rates of teacher turnover, and teacher experience; graduation rates; changes in school spending information; collaborative leadership and practice strategies, which may include building the capacity of educators, principals, other school leaders, and other staff to lead collaborative school improvement structures, such as professional learning communities; regularly convening or engaging all initiative-level partners, such as LEA representatives, city or county officials, children's and youth's cabinets, nonprofit service providers, public housing agencies, and advocates; regularly assessing program quality and progress through individual student data, participant feedback, and aggregate outcomes to develop strategies for improvement; and organizing school personnel and community partners into working teams focused on specific issues identified in the needs and assets assessment; and (4) make results of the evaluation publicly available. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(H) Plans for sustaining the programs and services described in section 4624(a) of the ESEA after the grant period. (4625(a)(4)(G))

(5) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(A) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(B) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(C) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(D) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(E) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts. (2023 FSCS NFP)

(6) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will focus services on schools eligible for a schoolwide program under section 1114(b). (4625(a)(5))

Absolute Priority 5—State Scaling Grants.

In order to receive funding, applicants for grants under Absolute Priority 5 State Scaling Grants must address the following application requirements.

(1) A description of the eligible entity. (4625(a)(1))

(2) A preliminary MOU among all partner entities of the eligible entity, identified at the time of the application, that will assist the eligible entity to plan, develop, coordinate, provide, and evaluate pipeline services and that describes the roles and responsibilities that the partners, including the broadly representative consortium, will assume. (4625(a)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

Applications submitted under Priority 5 FSCS State Scaling Grants must also include in the preliminary MOU a description of the State steering committee and the SEA's commitment to and partnership in the consortium, including the roles, responsibilities, and commitment of the SEA to the partnership and the scaling of full-service community schools to a percentage of State LEAs implementing schoolwide Title IA programs and where there is a commitment to sustain the program beyond 2 years after the term of the grant. (4625(a)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(3) A description of the capacity of the eligible entity to coordinate and provide pipeline services at two or more full-service community schools in each of the LEAs included in the application. (4625(a)(3) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(4) A comprehensive plan that includes descriptions of the following:

(A) The student, family, and school community to be served, including demographic information. (4625(a)(4)(A))

(B) A needs assessment that identifies the academic, physical, nonacademic, health, mental health, and other needs of students, families, and community residents. (4625(a)(4)(B))

(C) Annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes, including an increase in the number and percentage of families and students targeted for services each year of the program, in order to ensure that children are—

(i) Prepared for kindergarten; (4625(a)(4)(C)(i))

(ii) Achieving academically; (4625(a)(4)(C)(ii)) and

(iii) Safe, healthy, and supported by engaged parents. (4625(a)(4)(C)(iii))

(D) Pipeline services, including existing and additional pipeline services to be coordinated and provided by the eligible entity and its partner entities, including an explanation of:

(i) Why such services have been selected; (4625(a)(4)(D)(ii))

(ii) How such services will improve student academic achievement; (4625(a)(4)(D)(ii)) and

(iii) How such services will address the annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes established under paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement. (4625(a)(4)(C)(iii))

(E) A description of the pillars of full-service community schools that they have in place or how they will establish these pillars, or how they will implement these pillars with partners, including community-based organizations and collaborating with school leadership and staff. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(F) Plans to ensure that each full-service community school site has a full-time coordinator of pipeline services at such school, including a description of the applicable funding sources, plans for professional development for the personnel managing, coordinating, or delivering pipeline services, and plans for joint utilization and management of facilities. (4625(a)(4)(E))

(G) Plans for an annual evaluation based upon attainment of the performance objectives and outcomes described in paragraph (4)(C) of this requirement.

An applicant must, in addition to providing the information and assurances required by section 4625(a)(4)(F) of the ESEA, commit to an independent evaluation that includes a design and implementation evaluation that will, at a minimum, (1) include annual evaluations of progress achieved with the grant; (2) be used to refine and improve activities carried out through the grant; (3) collect and report data that includes, but is not limited to, the following indicators: student chronic absenteeism rates; student discipline rates, including suspensions and expulsions; school climate information, which may come from student, parent, or teacher surveys; provision of integrated student supports and stakeholder services; expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities; family and community engagement efforts and impact; information on the number, qualifications, and retention of school staff, including the number and percentage of fully certified teachers, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, rates of teacher turnover, and teacher experience; graduation rates; changes in school spending information; collaborative leadership and practice strategies, which may include building the capacity of educators, principals, other school leaders, and other staff to lead collaborative school improvement structures, such as professional learning communities; regularly convening or engaging all initiative-level partners, such as LEA representatives, city or county officials, children's and youth's cabinets, nonprofit service providers, public housing agencies, and advocates; regularly assessing program quality and progress through individual student data, participant feedback, and aggregate outcomes to develop strategies for improvement; and organizing school personnel and community partners into working teams focused on specific issues identified in the needs and assets assessment; and (4) make results of the evaluation publicly available. (2022 FSCS NFP)

(H) Plans for sustaining the programs and services described in this subsection after the grant period. (4625(a)(4)(G))

(5) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(A) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(B) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(C) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(D) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(E) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts. (2023 FSCS NFP)

(6) An assurance that the eligible entity and its partner entities will focus services on schools eligible for a schoolwide program under section 1114(b). (4625(a)(5))

Program Requirements: FSCS grantees must meet the following program requirements. These requirements are from sections 4623 and 4625 of the ESEA, the 2022 FSCS NFP, and the 2023 FSCS NFP. The source of each requirement is provided in the parentheses following each requirement. For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, the following requirements apply.

(1) Matching Funds. Each grantee shall provide matching funds from non-Federal sources, which may be provided in part with in-kind contributions. The BIE may meet the matching requirement using funds from other Federal sources. (ESEA section 4623(d)(2))

(2) Use of Funds. Each grantee shall use the grant funds for the following grant activities:

(A) Each grantee may use not more than 10 percent of the total amount of grant funds for planning purposes during the first year of the grant. (ESEA section 4625(c))

(B) Each grantee shall use the grant funds for the following grant activities:

(i) Coordinate not less than three existing pipeline services, as of the date of the grant award, and provide not less than two additional pipeline services at two or more public elementary schools or secondary schools; (ESEA section 4625(e)(1))

(ii) To the extent practicable, integrate multiple pipeline services, at two or more public elementary schools or secondary schools. Under Absolute Priorities 4 and 5, to the extent practicable, integrate multiple pipeline services at two or more public elementary schools or secondary schools in each LEA; (ESEA section 4625(e)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP) and

(iii) If applicable, coordinate and integrate services provided by community-based organizations and government agencies with services provided by specialized instructional support personnel. (ESEA section 4625(e)(3))

(3) Evaluation. Each grantee shall include an independent evaluation to do the following:

(A) Conduct an annual evaluation of the progress achieved with the grant toward the purpose described in section 4621(2) of the ESEA; (ESEA section 4625(g)(1) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(B) Use the evaluation to refine and improve activities carried out through the grant and annual measurable performance objectives and outcomes under section 4625(a)(4)(C); (4625(g)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP) and

(C) Make the results of the evaluation publicly available, including by providing public notice of such availability. (ESEA section 4625(g)(3) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

(4) Participate in a National Evaluation Assessing the Implementation of the FSCS Program.

Each grantee must participate in a national evaluation assessing the implementation of the FSCS program, which may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(A) Completing surveys of grantee organizations (which may include service provider partners), grantee schools (which may include multiple individuals within each school such as the principal and the service coordinator), and potentially a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(B) Participating in interviews of grantee organizations, grantee schools, and/or a sample of teachers within grantee schools;

(C) Providing administrative data, such as student absenteeism rates and high school graduation rates;

(D) Cooperating with data collection at several points during the grant period, such as shortly after grant award (baseline round of data collection), during the middle of the grant period (interim round of data collection), and toward the end of the grant period (final round of data collection); and

(E) Assisting in facilitating connections between each grantee's local evaluator and the national evaluation of implementation to ensure efficiency and coordination between the evaluation efforts. (2023 FSCS NFP)

(5) Final MOU. At the end of the first year of the grant, each grantee must submit a final MOU among all partner entities in the eligible entity that will assist the eligible entity to plan, develop, coordinate, provide, and evaluate pipeline services and that describes the roles and responsibilities that the partners, including the broadly representative consortium, will assume. (4625(a)(2) and 2022 FSCS NFP)

Definitions: The definitions of “Community-based organization,” “Eligible entity,” “Evidence-based,” “Full-service community school,” “Local educational agency,” “Pipeline services,” and “State educational agency” are from sections 4622 and 8101 of the ESEA. The definitions of “Baseline,” “Demonstrates a rationale,” “Experimental study,” “Logic model,” “Moderate evidence,” “Nonprofit,” “Performance measure,” “Performance target,” “Project,” “Project component,” “Promising evidence,” “Quasi-experimental design study,” “Relevant outcome,” “Strong evidence,” and “What Works Clearinghouse Handbook” are from 34 CFR 77.1. The definition of “School eligible for a schoolwide program” is from 34 CFR 200.25(b). The definitions of “Broadly representative consortium,” Full-service community school coordinator,” “History of effectiveness,” and “Pillars of full-service community schools” are from the 2022 FSCS NFP. The definitions of “Children or students with disabilities,” “Disconnected youth,” “Early learning,” “Educator,” “English learner,” “Military- or veteran-connected student,” and “Underserved student” are from the Supplemental Priorities.

Baseline means the starting point from which performance is measured and targets are set.

Broadly representative consortium means stakeholders representing broad groups of people working together for the best interest of children; such stakeholders may include, but are not limited to, families and family leadership, schools, nonprofits, government, philanthropy, and the business community.

Children or students with disabilities means children with disabilities as defined in section 602(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1401(3)) and 34 CFR 300.8, or students with disabilities as defined in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 705(37), 705(20)(B)).

Community-based organization means a public or private nonprofit organization of demonstrated effectiveness that—

(a) Is representative of a community or significant segments of a community; and

(b) Provides educational or related services to individuals in the community.

Demonstrates a rationale means 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.

Disconnected youth means an individual, between the ages 14 and 24, who may be from a low-income background, experiences homelessness, is in foster care, is involved in the justice system, or is not working or not enrolled in (or at risk of dropping out of) an educational institution.

Early learning means any (a) State-licensed or State-regulated program or provider, regardless of setting or funding source, that provides early care and education for children from birth to kindergarten entry, including, but not limited to, any program operated by a child care center or in a family child care home; (b) program funded by the Federal Government or State or local educational agencies (including any IDEA-funded program); (c) Early Head Start and Head Start program; (d) non-relative child care provider who is not otherwise regulated by the State and who regularly cares for two or more unrelated children for a fee in a provider setting; and (e) other program that may deliver early learning and development services in a child's home, such as the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program; Early Head Start; and Part C of IDEA.

Educator means an individual who is an early learning educator, teacher, principal, or other school leader, specialized instructional support personnel ( e.g., school psychologist, counselor, school social worker, early intervention service personnel), paraprofessional, or faculty.

Eligible entity means a consortium of one or more LEAs, or the Bureau of Indian Education, and one or more community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, or other public or private entities.

English learner means an individual who is an English learner as defined in section 8101(20) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended, or an individual who is an English language learner as defined in section 203(7) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

Evidence-based, when used with respect to a State, local educational agency, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that—

(i) Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on—

(I) Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study;

(II) Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study; or

(III) Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias; or

(ii)(I) Demonstrates a rationale 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; and

(II) Includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group that does not. Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending on their design and implementation ( e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbooks (as defined in this notice):

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group).

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being evaluated using a measured variable ( e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of outcomes.

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case ( e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the treatment.

Full-service community school means a public elementary school or secondary school that—

(a) Participates in a community-based effort to coordinate and integrate educational, developmental, family, health, and other comprehensive services through community-based organizations and public and private partnerships; and

(b) Provides access to such services in school to students, families, and the community, such as access during the school year (including before- and after-school hours and weekends), as well as during the summer.

Full-service community school coordinator means an individual in a full-time position at each community school who serves to plan, integrate, coordinate, and facilitate the delivery of pipeline services at each school. The coordinator may also lead the school and community assessment of needs and assets and identify ways to sustain the services and partnerships beyond the duration of the grant.

History of effectiveness means an eligible entity demonstrating the ability to successfully implement programs and policies. Such programs and policies must include, but shall not be limited to, successfully implementing with other organizations grants, policies, and programs for students from high-need schools (as defined in section 2221 of the ESEA).

Local educational agency (LEA):

(a) In General. The term “local educational agency” means a public board of education or other public authority legally constituted within a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a State, or of or for a combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public elementary schools or secondary schools.

(b) Administrative Control and Direction. The term includes any other public institution or agency having administrative control and direction of a public elementary school or secondary school.

(c) Bureau of Indian Education Schools. The term includes an elementary school or secondary school funded by the Bureau of Indian Education but only to the extent that including the school makes the school eligible for programs for which specific eligibility is not provided to the school in another provision of law and the school does not have a student population that is smaller than the student population of the LEA receiving assistance under the ESEA with the smallest student population, except that the school shall not be subject to the jurisdiction of any State educational agency other than the Bureau of Indian Education.

(d) Educational Service Agencies. The term includes educational service agencies and consortia of those agencies.

(e) State Educational Agency. The term includes the SEA in a State in which the SEA is the sole educational agency for all public schools.

Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project ( i.e., the active “ingredients” that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes.

Military- or veteran-connected student means one or more of the following:

(a) A child participating in an early learning program, a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12, or a student enrolled in career and technical education or postsecondary education who has a parent or guardian who is a member of the uniformed services (as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101), in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Space Force, National Guard, Reserves, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or Public Health Service or is a veteran of the uniformed services with an honorable discharge (as defined by 38 U.S.C. 3311).

(b) A student who is a member of the uniformed services, a veteran of the uniformed services, or the spouse of a service member or veteran.

(c) A child participating in an early learning program, a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12, or a student enrolled in career and technical education or postsecondary education who has a parent or guardian who is a veteran of the uniformed services (as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101).

Moderate evidence means that there is evidence of effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “positive effect” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental design study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that—

(A) Meets WWC standards with or without reservations;

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive ( i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site ( e.g., State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs (iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D).

Nonprofit , as applied to an agency, organization, or institution, means that it is owned and operated by one or more corporations or associations whose net earnings do not benefit, and cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity.

Performance measure means any quantitative indicator, statistic, or metric used to gauge program or project performance.

Performance target means a level of performance that an applicant would seek to meet during the course of a project or as a result of a project.

Pillars of Full-Service Community Schools means all of the following:

(A) Integrated student supports at a community school that provide in- and out-of-school support for students, address well-being, and address out-of-school barriers to learning through partnerships with social and health service agencies, including mental and behavioral health agencies and providers, and coordinated by a community school coordinator, which may include—

(i) Medical, dental, vision care, and mental and behavioral health services, including mental health literacy for students and staff, and trauma-informed services to prevent, intervene, and mitigate adverse childhood experiences (ACEs); and

(ii) Individuals to assist with housing, transportation, nutrition, citizenship preparation, or criminal justice issues and other services.

(B) Expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities, through evidence-based strategies, including before-school, after-school, during-school, weekend, and summer programs that provide additional academic instruction, individualized academic support, enrichment activities, or learning opportunities, for students at a community school that—

(i) May emphasize real-world project-based learning where students can apply their learning to contexts that are relevant and engaging; and

(ii) May include art, music, drama, creative writing, hands-on experience with engineering or science (including computer science), career and technical education, tutoring that is aligned with classroom success and homework help, and recreational programs that enhance and are consistent with the school's curriculum.

(C) Active family and community engagement that—

(i) Brings parents and families of students at the community school and community members and leaders into the school as partners in students' education, including meaningfully involving parents and families in the community school's decision-making processes;

(ii) Makes the community school a hub for services, activities, and programs, for students, families, and members of the neighborhood that the community school serves;

(iii) Provides adults with desired educational and employment opportunities and other supportive services; and

(iv) Provides centralized supports for families and communities in community schools, which may include English as a second language classes, citizenship preparation, computer skills, art, housing assistance, child abuse and neglect prevention supports, health and mental health, literacy programs, digital literacy training, or other programs that bring community members into a school building for meetings, events, or programming.

(D) Collaborative leadership and practices that build a culture of professional learning, collective trust, and shared responsibility for each community school using strategies that—

(i) At a minimum, include a school-based leadership team with representation of student, parent and family leaders and a community voice; a community school coordinator; and a community-wide leadership team; and

(ii) May include other leadership or governance teams, community school steering committees, or other community coalitions, educator learning communities, and other staff to manage the multiple, complex joint work of school and community organizations.

Pipeline services means a continuum of coordinated supports, services, and opportunities for children from birth through entry into and success in postsecondary education, and career attainment. Such services shall include, at a minimum, strategies to address through services or programs (including integrated student supports) the following:

(a) High-quality early childhood education programs.

(b) High-quality school and out-of-school-time programs and strategies.

(c) Support for a child's transition to elementary school, from elementary school to middle school, from middle school to high school, and from high school into and through postsecondary education and into the workforce, including any comprehensive readiness assessment determined necessary.

(d) Family and community engagement and supports, which may include engaging or supporting families at school or at home.

(e) Activities that support postsecondary and workforce readiness, which may include job training, internship opportunities, and career counseling.

(f) Community-based support for students who have attended the schools in the area served by the pipeline, or students who are members of the community, facilitating their continued connection to the community and success in postsecondary education and the workforce.

(g) Social, health, nutrition, and mental health services and supports.

(h) Juvenile crime prevention and rehabilitation programs.

Project means the activity described in an application.

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of project components ( e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).

Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a “positive effect” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that—

(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias ( e.g., a study using regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group); and

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive ( i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome.

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation ( e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbooks.

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program.

School eligible for a schoolwide program means any school eligible under 34 CFR 200.25(b) to operate a schoolwide program. Specifically,

(1) A school may operate a schoolwide program if—

(i) The school's LEA determines that the school serves an eligible attendance area or is a participating school under section 1113 of the ESEA; and

(ii) Except as provided under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section, for the initial year of the schoolwide program—

(A) The school serves a school attendance area in which not less than 40 percent of the children are from low-income families; or

(B) Not less than 40 percent of the children enrolled in the school are from low-income families.

(iii) A school that does not meet the poverty percentage in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section may operate a schoolwide program if the school receives a waiver from the State to do so, after taking into account how a schoolwide program will best serve the needs of the students in the school in improving academic achievement and other factors.

(2) In determining the percentage of children from low-income families under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, the LEA may use a measure of poverty that is different from the measure or measures of poverty used by the LEA to identify and rank school attendance areas for eligibility and participation under this subpart.

State educational agency (SEA) means the agency primarily responsible for the State supervision of public elementary schools and secondary schools.

Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “strong evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks reporting a “positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks, as appropriate, and that—

(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive ( i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1, 3.0, 4.0, or 4.1 of the WWC Handbooks; and

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site ( e.g., State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs (iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy the requirement in this paragraph (iii)(D).

Underserved student means a student (which may include children in early learning environments, students in K-12 programs, students in postsecondary education or career and technical education, and adult learners, as appropriate) in one or more of the following subgroups:

(a) A student who is living in poverty or is served by schools with high concentrations of students living in poverty.

(b) A student of color.

(c) A student who is a member of a federally recognized Indian Tribe.

(d) An English learner.

(e) A child or student with a disability.

(f) A disconnected youth.

(g) A technologically unconnected youth.

(h) A migrant student.

(i) A student experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.

(j) A lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, or intersex (LGBTQI+) student.

(k) A student who is in foster care.

(l) A student without documentation of immigration status.

(m) A pregnant, parenting, or caregiving student.

(n) A student impacted by the justice system, including a formerly incarcerated student.

(o) A student who is the first in their family to attend postsecondary education.

(r) A student who is enrolled in or is seeking to enroll in postsecondary education who is eligible for a Pell Grant.

(s) A student performing significantly below grade level.

(t) A military- or veteran-connected student.

What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks (WWC Handbooks) means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Standards Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, and WWC Procedures Handbook, Versions 4.0 or 4.1, or in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (all incorporated by reference, see § 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the WWC Handbooks documentation.

Note: The What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 4.1), as well as the more recent What Works Clearinghouse Handbooks released in August 2022 (Version 5.0), are available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Handbooks.

Program Authority: Sections 4621-4625 of the ESEA, 20 U.S.C. 7271-7273, 7275.

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) 34 CFR 200.25. (e) The 2022 FSCS NFP. (f) The 2023 FSCS NFP. (g) The Supplemental Priorities.

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 only.

Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds: $74,000,000.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards later in FY 2023 or in subsequent years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards: Under Absolute Priority 3, $275,000 to $500,000 for each 12-month budget period; $1,375,000 to $2,500,000 for the entire project period. Under Absolute Priority 4, $1,000,000 to $3,000,000 for each 12-month budget period; $5,000,000 to $15,000,000 for the entire project period. Under Absolute Priority 5, $5,000,000 to $10,000,000 for each 12-month budget period; $25,000,000 to $50,000,000 for the entire project period.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: Under Absolute Priority 3, $450,000 for each 12-month period. Under Absolute Priority 4, $2 million for each 12-month period. Under Absolute Priority 5, $7.5 million for each 12-month period.

Maximum Award: Under Absolute Priority 3, we will not make an award exceeding $2.5 million for the entire project period. Under Absolute Priority 4, we will not make an award exceeding $15 million for the entire project period. Under Absolute Priority 5, we will not make an award exceeding $50 million for the entire project period.

Minimum Award: The Secretary is prohibited by section 4625(d) of the ESEA from making a grant under the FSCS program in an amount that is less than $75,000 for each year of the grant. Therefore, we will reject any application that proposes an amount that is less than $75,000 for any budget period.

Estimated Number of Awards: 45.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

1. Eligible Applicants: A consortium of—

(a)(i) One or more LEAs; or

(ii) The BIE; and

(b) One or more community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, or other public or private entities.

A consortium must comply with the provisions governing group applications in 34 CFR 75.127 through 75.129.

Note: If you are a nonprofit organization, under 34 CFR 75.51, you may demonstrate your nonprofit status by providing: (1) proof that the Internal Revenue Service currently recognizes the applicant as an organization to which contributions are tax deductible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code; (2) a statement from a State taxing body or the State attorney general certifying that the organization is a nonprofit organization operating within the State and that no part of its net earnings may lawfully benefit any private shareholder or individual; (3) a certified copy of the applicant's certificate of incorporation or similar document if it clearly establishes the nonprofit status of the applicant; or (4) any item described above if that item applies to a State or national parent organization, together with a statement by the State or parent organization that the applicant is a local nonprofit affiliate.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: To be eligible for an award, an applicant shall provide matching funds through non-Federal contributions, either in cash or in-kind donations. The applicant must propose the amount of cash or in-kind resources to be contributed for each year of the grant.

The BIE may meet the matching requirement using funds from other Federal sources.

b. Supplement not Supplant: This competition involves supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. Grantees must use FSCS grant funds to supplement, and not supplant, any other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise have been available to carry out activities authorized under section 4625 of the ESEA.

c. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses a restricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.

d. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities described in its application.

Note: Nothing in section 4625 of the ESEA shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect the rights, remedies, and procedures afforded school or LEA employees under Federal, State, or local laws (including applicable regulations or court orders) under the terms of collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of understanding, or other agreements between such employees and their employers.

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 (84 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.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the FSCS program, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11, we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended).

Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

3. Intergovernmental Review: This program 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.

4. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

5. 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 100 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A “page” is 8.5″ × 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, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

• 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 required preliminary MOU; the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.

6. Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to review grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number of applications that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of their intent to submit an application. Applicants may access this form using the link available on the Notice of Intent to Apply section of the competition website: https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/full-service-community-schools-program-fscs/fy-2023-fscs-grant-competition/. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information provided.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for applicants submitting applications under Absolute Priority 3—Capacity Building and Development Grants are listed in paragraph (a) of this section. The selection criteria for applicants submitting applications under Absolute Priority 4—Multi-Local Educational Agency Grants are listed in paragraph (b) of this section. The selection criteria for applicants submitting applications under Absolute Priority 5—State Scaling Grants are listed under paragraph (c) of this section. The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and the 2022 FSCS NFP. The points assigned to each criterion are indicated in the parentheses next to the criterion. An applicant may earn up to a total of 100 points based on the selection criteria for the application.

Points awarded under these selection criteria are in addition to any points an applicant earns under the competitive preference priorities in this notice. The maximum score that an application may receive under the competitive preference priorities and the selection criteria is 110 points.

In evaluating a FSCS application, the Secretary considers the following criteria:

(a) Selection Criteria for Absolute Priority 3—Capacity Building and Development Grants.

(1) Need for Project (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project will provide support, resources, and services; close gaps in educational opportunity; or otherwise address the needs of the targeted population, including addressing the needs of underserved populations most impacted by the issue, challenge, or opportunity to be addressed by the proposed project. (2022 FSCS NFP) (10 points)

(2) Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects relevant and evidence-based findings from existing literature and includes a high-quality plan for project implementation integrating the four pillars of full-service community schools and the use of appropriate evaluation methods to ensure successful achievement of project objectives. (2022 FSCS NFP) (15 points)

(B) The extent to which the proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in this notice). (34 CFR 75.210) (10 points)

(3) Quality of the Project Services (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project. In determining the quality of project services, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives are brought to bear in the design and operation of the proposed project, including those of students, youth, families, educators and staff, beneficiaries of services, school leadership, and community leadership. (2022 FSCS NFP) (10 points)

(B) The extent to which the services provided reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(4) Adequacy of Resources (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the grantee has plans for a full-time coordinator at each school, including a plan to sustain the position beyond the grant period and a description of how this position will serve to plan, integrate, coordinate, and facilitate programs and services at each school. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) Potential for continued support for the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(5) Quality of the Management Plan (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the grantee has, or demonstrates a strong plan to have, a broadly representative consortium that reflects the needs of the community and its stakeholders, and a description of the roles and responsibilities of the broadly representative consortium outlined in the required preliminary MOU. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates a history of effectiveness in working with a diverse range of stakeholders, including students and families. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(C) 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. (34 CFR 75.210) (15 points)

(6) Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors—

(A) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(C) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(b) Selection Criteria for Absolute Priority 4—Multi-Local Educational Agency Grants.

(1) Need for Project (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project will provide support, resources, and services; close gaps in educational opportunity; or otherwise address the needs of the targeted population, including addressing the needs of underserved populations most impacted by the issue, challenge, or opportunity to be addressed by the proposed project. (2022 FSCS NFP) (10 points)

(2) Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors—

(A) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects relevant and evidence-based findings from existing literature and includes a high-quality plan for project implementation integrating the four pillars of full-service community schools and the use of appropriate evaluation methods to ensure successful achievement of project objectives. (2022 FSCS NFP) (15 points)

(B) The extent to which proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)). (34 CFR 75.210) (10 points)

(3) Quality of the Project Services (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project. In determining the quality of project services, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives is brought to bear in the design and operation of the proposed project, including those of students, youth, families, educators and staff, beneficiaries of services, school leadership, and community leadership. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the services provided reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(C) The extent to which the services to be provided are focused on those with greatest need. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points).

(4) Adequacy of Resources (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the grantee has plans for a full-time coordinator at each school, including a plan to sustain the position beyond the grant period and a description of how this position will serve to plan, integrate, coordinate, and facilitate programs and services at each school. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) Potential for continued support for project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(5) Quality of the Management Plan (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the grantee has, or demonstrates a strong plan to have, a broadly representative consortium that reflects the needs of the community and its stakeholders, and a description of the roles and responsibilities of the broadly representative consortium outlined in the required preliminary MOU. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates a history of effectiveness in working with a diverse range of stakeholders, including students and families. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(C) 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. (34 CFR 75.210) (15 points)

(6) Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors—

(A) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(C) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(c) Selection Criteria for Absolute Priority 5—State Scaling Grants.

(1) Need for Project (up to 5 points).

The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project. In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed project will provide support, resources, and services; close gaps in educational opportunity; or otherwise address the needs of the targeted population, including addressing the needs of underserved populations most impacted by the issue, challenge, or opportunity to be addressed by the proposed project. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(2) Quality of the Project Design (up to 25 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects relevant and evidence-based findings from existing literature and includes a high-quality plan for project implementation integrating the four pillars of full-service community schools and the use of appropriate evaluation methods to ensure successful achievement of project objectives. (2022 FSCS NFP) (15 points)

(B) The extent to which proposed project demonstrates a rationale (as defined in this notice). (34 CFR 75.210) (10 points)

(3) Quality of the Project Services (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project. In determining the quality of project services, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives is brought to bear in the design and operation of the proposed project, including those of students, youth, families, educators and staff, beneficiaries of services, school leadership, and community leadership. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the services provided reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(C) The extent to which the services to be provided are focused on those with greatest need. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(4) Adequacy of Resources (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(A) The extent to which the grantee has plans for a full-time coordinator at each school, including a plan to sustain the position beyond the grant period and a description of how this position will serve to plan, integrate, coordinate, and facilitate programs and services at each school. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) Potential for continued support for project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(5) Quality of the Management Plan (up to 20 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors—

(A) The extent to which the grantee has, or demonstrates a strong plan to have, a broadly representative consortium that reflects the needs of the community and its stakeholders, and a description of the roles and responsibilities of the broadly representative consortium outlined in the required preliminary MOU. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates a history of effectiveness in working with a diverse range of stakeholders, including students and families. (2022 FSCS NFP) (5 points)

(C) 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. (34 CFR 75.210) (10 points)

(6) Quality of the Project Evaluation (up to 15 points).

The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors—

(A) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(B) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(C) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide valid and reliable performance data on relevant outcomes. (34 CFR 75.210) (5 points)

(7) Strategy to Scale (up to 10 points).

The Secretary considers the applicant's strategy to scale the proposed project. In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant demonstrates its commitment and strategy to scale full-service community schools at the statewide level. In determining the applicant's capacity to scale the proposed project, the Secretary considers the number and percentage of LEAs, and the number and percentage of schools within each LEA, the applicant, the SEA, and other partners propose to serve, the applicant's capacity ( e.g., in terms of qualified personnel, financial resources, or management capacity) to further develop, implement, bring to scale, and sustain additional full-service community schools in multiple LEAs, and the applicant's capacity to work with others, including the broadly representative consortium and the State steering committee, to ensure that the proposed process, products, strategies, or practices can be further developed and brought to scale, based on the regular findings of the proposed project and its independent evaluation. (2022 FSCS NFP) (10 points)

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. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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).

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 also may notify you informally.

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 or subgrantee 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 https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: Section 4625(a)(4)(C) of the ESEA provides the basis for one performance measure for the FSCS program: the percentage and number of individuals targeted for services and who receive services during each year of the project period. The 2022 FSCS NFP established an additional set of indicators: student chronic absenteeism rates; student discipline rates, including suspensions and expulsions; school climate information, which may come from student, parent, or teacher surveys; provision of integrated student supports and stakeholder services; expanded and enriched learning time and opportunities; family and community engagement efforts and impact; information on the number, qualifications, and retention of school staff, including the number and percentage of fully certified teachers, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, and rates of teacher turnover; graduation rates; changes in school spending information; collaborative leadership and practice strategies, which may include building the capacity of educators, principals, other school leaders, and other staff to lead collaborative school improvement structures, such as professional learning communities; regularly convening or engaging all initiative-level partners, such as LEA representatives, city or county officials, children's cabinets, nonprofit service providers, public housing agencies, and advocates; regularly assessing program quality and progress through individual student data, participant feedback, and aggregate outcomes to develop strategies for improvement; and organizing school personnel and community partners into working teams focused on specific issues identified in the needs and assets assessment.

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).

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, 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 Department documents 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 Department documents 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.

This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through January 31, 2024. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

This notice allows 60 days for public comments. Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets .

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate forms of information technology. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

Abstract: EPA adopted the Tier 4 marine diesel engine standards in June 2008, under the authority of the Clean Air Act (73 FR 37096). The Tier 4 standards were phased in, with an effective date beginning in 2016 through 2018 for most engines. In August 2020, EPA amended those regulations in response to industry concerns about the availability of suitable Tier 4 certified engines for installation in certain kinds of high-speed vessels. The amendments provided focused relief for qualifying engines and vessels in two phases, depending on engine and vessel size. Builders of qualifying vessels were required to submit to EPA information describing their need for regulatory relief and demonstrating that their vessels met the size and power conditions.

• Phase One was available through 2021 and was limited to propulsion engines with maximum power output up to 1,400 kW and power density of at least 27.0 kW per liter displacement. Additionally, the relief is limited to vessels up to 65 feet waterline length with total nameplate propulsion power at or below 2,800 kW. This includes vessels such as lobster fishing boats, pilot boats, and some research boats.

• Phase Two is available through 2023 and is limited to vessels with a single propulsion engine with maximum power output up to 1,000 kW and power density of at least 35.0 kW per liter displacement, where the vessel is made with a nonmetal hull and has a maximum length of 50 feet. These vessels are expected to be primarily lobster or other fishing boats. EPA also adopted a waiver provision that can be applied for, if necessary, beginning in 2024, if suitable engines continue to be unavailable; this waiver requires the vessel builder to submit an application which would be reviewed by EPA before issuing the waiver.

This information collection request renewal covers the reporting burden associated with applying for the waiver for vessels meeting the criteria for Phase 2 relief.

EPA will use the information requested under this collection to determine if a boat builder qualifies for a regulatory waiver from the marine diesel Tier 4 standards, allowing that manufacturer to install Tier 3 engines on a qualifying vessel.

The information described in this ICR will be collected by EPA's Compliance Division (CD) within the Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ), Office of Air and Radiation (OAR). It will be used by CD to evaluate whether companies qualify for using engines meeting less stringent standards. It is collected electronically and stored in CD's databases.

Manufacturers may assert a claim of confidentiality over information provided to EPA. Confidentiality is provided in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act and EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 2. We will release this information only as permitted or required under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 2 and part 1068. Non-confidential portions of the information submitted to CD are available to trade associations, importers, environmental groups, members of the public, and State and local government organizations.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Respondents are manufacturers that sell or import into the United States new marine diesel engines and manufactures that produce for sale in the United States certain high-speed marine vessels.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Respondents (boat manufacturers) are required to respond only if they seek a waiver from the marine diesel engine Tier 4 standards due to the unavailability of suitable engines for installation on the boats they manufacture.

Estimated number of respondents: 20 (total).

Frequency of response: Respondents would apply for a Tier 4 waiver for a specific vessel or vessels. The frequency of response will depend on whether an additional waiver is needed for future vessels due to the continued unavailability of suitable engines.

Total estimated burden: 380 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

Total estimated cost: $39,707 (per year); there are no annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 380 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to the end of the automatic delay for application of the Tier 4 standards to affected boats and the need to request a waiver from EPA to allow use of a Tier 3 engine if a suitable Tier 4 engine continues to be unavailable.

I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

This action applies to the public in general. As such, the EPA has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0068, is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (202) 566-0294. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Under this contract number, the contractor will perform the following: The Contractor shall perform any IRM-related work under this contract in accordance with the IRM policies, standards, and procedures set forth on the Office of Environmental Information policy website. Upon receipt of a work request ( i.e., delivery order, task order, or work assignment), the Contractor shall check this listing of directives. The applicable directives for performance of the work request are those in effect on the date of issuance of the work request. The 2100 Series (2100-2199) of the EPA's Directive System contains the majority of the EPA's IRM policies, standards, and procedures.

These contracts involve no subcontractors.

OPP has determined that the contracts described in this document involve work that is being conducted in connection with FIFRA, in that pesticide chemicals will be the subject of certain evaluations to be made under this contract. These evaluations may be used in subsequent regulatory decisions under FIFRA.

Some of this information may be entitled to confidential treatment. The information has been submitted to EPA under FIFRA sections 3, 4, 6, and 7 and under FFDCA sections 408 and 409.

In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3), the contracts with Industrial Economics, Inc., prohibits use of the information for any purpose not specified in these contracts; prohibits disclosure of the information to a third party without prior written approval from the EPA; and requires that each official and employee of the contractor sign an agreement to protect the information from unauthorized release and to handle it in accordance with the FIFRA Information Security Manual. In addition, Industrial Economics, Inc., is required to submit for EPA approval a security plan under which any CBI will be secured and protected against unauthorized release or compromise. No information will be provided to Industrial Economics, Inc., until the requirements in this document have been fully satisfied. Records of information provided to Industrial Economics, Inc., will be maintained by EPA Contracting Officer's Representatives for these contracts. All information supplied to Industrial Economics, Inc., by EPA for use in connection with these contracts will be returned to EPA when Industrial Economics, Inc., has completed its work.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.; 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the FCC seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”

OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.

Title: Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) Transparency Data Collection.

Form Number: FCC Form 5651.

Type of Review: New information collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,755 respondents; 1,755 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 31 hours.

Frequency of Response: Annual reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in section 904 of Division N, Title IX of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-260, 134 Stat. 1182, as amended by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58, section 60502(c), 135 Stat. 429, 1243 (2021) and 47 U.S.C. 1752.

Total Annual Burden: 54,405 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No Cost.

Needs and Uses: On November 15, 2021, the President signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021), which appropriated $14.2 billion to expand and modify the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program in the form of a new, longer-term broadband affordability program called the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). The Affordable Connectivity Program provides qualifying low-income households with a monthly discount of up to $30 per month (or up to $75 per month for households on qualifying Tribal Lands) for broadband services, and a one-time $100 discount on a connected device (tablet, laptop, or desktop computer) from the participating provider with a co-pay of more than $10 but less than $50.

The Infrastructure Act also directed the Commission to “issue final rules regarding the annual collection by the Commission of data relating to the price and subscription rates of each internet service offering of a participating provider under the Affordable Connectivity Program . . . to which an eligible household subscribes.” Infrastructure Act, section 60502(c)(1). On November 23, 2022, the Commission adopted a Fourth Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WC Docket No. 21-450, FCC 22-87 (Fourth Report and Order) establishing the ACP Data Collection to satisfy the statutory collection requirement. The data collection also will allow the Commission to determine the value being provided by the affordable connectivity benefit.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0161.

Title: Section 73.61, AM Directional Antenna Field Strength Measurements.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business and other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 2,268 respondents and 2,268 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 4-50 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 36,020 hours.

Total Annual Cost: None.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in Sections 154(i) and 303 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements contained in 47 CFR 73.61 require that each AM station using directional antennas to make field strength measurement as often as necessary to ensure proper directional antenna system operation. Stations not having approved sampling systems make field strength measurements every three months. Stations with approved sampling systems must take field strength measurements as often as necessary. Also, all AM stations using directional signals must take partial proofs of performance as often as necessary. The FCC staff used the data in field inspections/investigations. AM licensees with directional antennas use the data to ensure that adequate interference protection is maintained between stations and to ensure proper operation of antennas.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0783.

Title: Section 90.176, Coordination Notification Requirements on Frequencies Below 512 MHz, at 769-775/799-805 MHz, or at 1427-1432 MHz.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 17 respondents; 8,840 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement and third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection (IC) is contained in sections 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 161, 303(g), 303(r) and 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 4,420 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality.

Needs and Uses: This collection will be submitted as an extension after this 60 day comment period to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in order to obtain the full three-year clearance.

Section 90.176 requires each Private Land Mobile frequency coordinator to provide, within one business day, a listing of their frequency recommendations to all other frequency coordinators in their respective pool, and if requested, an engineering analysis.

Any method can be used to ensure this compliance with the “one business day requirement” and must provide, at a minimum, the name of the applicant; frequency or frequencies recommended; antenna locations and heights; and effective radiated power; the type(s) of emissions; the description of the service area; and the date and time of the recommendation. If a conflict in recommendations arises, the effected coordinators are jointly responsible for taking action to resolve the conflict, up to and including notifying the Commission that an application may have to be returned.

This requirement seeks to avoid situations where harmful interference is created because two or more coordinators recommend the same frequency in the same area at approximately the same time to different applicants.

The meeting will be held Wednesday, June 28 from 2:00 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. ET in person in the Commission Meeting Room of the Federal Communications Commission, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC and via the internet at http://www.fcc.gov/live. While the meeting is open to the public, the FCC headquarters building is not open access, and all guests must check in with and be screened by FCC security at the main entrance on L Street. Attendees will not be required to have an appointment but must otherwise comply with protocols outlined at: https://www.fcc.gov/visit. Additionally, the meeting will be available to the public via live feed from the FCC's web page at http://www.fcc.gov/live. Open captioning will be provided online for this event. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Requests for such accommodations should be submitted via email to fcc504@fcc.gov or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530. Such requests should include a detailed description of the accommodation needed. In addition, please include a way for the FCC to contact the requester if more information is needed to fill the request. Please allow at least five days' advance notice for accommodation requests; last minute requests will be accepted but may not be possible to accommodate. Members of the public may submit comments to the NANC in the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, ECFS, at www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Comments to the NANC should be filed in WC Docket No. 23-1. This is a summary of the Commission's document in WC Docket No. 23-1, DA 23-471, released June 1, 2023.

Proposed Agenda: At the June meeting, the NANC will consider and vote on two reports and recommendations from the Numbering Administration Oversight Working Group: (1) the Numbering Administration Performance Review; and (2) the North American Numbering Plan Fund Size Projections and Contribution Factor. The NANC will also hear a report from the Billing & Collection Agent, Welch LLP, and routine status reports from the North American Portability Management, LLC, and the Secure Telephone Identity Governance Authority. (5 U.S.C. App 2 10(a)(2))

I. Comments

FHFA seeks public comments on a new system of records and will take all comments into consideration. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(e)(4) and (11). In addition to referencing “Comments/No. 2023-N-7,” please reference “FHFA-31, Biographies.” FHFA will make all comments timely received available for examination by the public through the electronic comment docket for this notice, which is located on the FHFA website at https://www.fhfa.gov. All comments received will be posted without change and will include any personal information you provide, such as name, address (mailing and email), telephone numbers, and any other information you provide.

This notice informs the public of FHFA's proposal to establish and maintain a new system of records. This notice satisfies the Privacy Act requirement that an agency publishes a system of records notice in the Federal Register when establishing a new or making a significant change to an agency's system of records. Congress has recognized that application of all requirements of the Privacy Act to certain categories of records may have an undesirable and often unacceptable effect upon agencies in the conduct of necessary public business. Consequently, Congress established general exemptions and specific exemptions that could be used to exempt records from provisions of the Privacy Act. Congress also required that exempting records from provisions of the Privacy Act would require the head of an agency to publish a determination to exempt a record from the Privacy Act as a rule in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act. Records and information in this system of records are not exempt from the requirements of the Privacy Act.

As required by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), and pursuant to section 7 of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-108, “ Federal Agency Responsibilities for Review, Reporting, and Publication under the Privacy Act ,” prior to publication of this notice, FHFA submitted a report describing the system of records covered by this notice to the OMB, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate.

The information in this system of records will be used to facilitate the dissemination of photographs and biographical information of FHFA OGC personnel, including Federal employees, detailees, and contractors.

On June 15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collections of information conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. The OMB inventory, as well as copies of the PRA Submission, supporting statements (which contain more detailed information about the information collections and burden estimates than this notice), and approved collection of information instrument(s) are available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. These documents are also available on the Federal Reserve Board's public website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportingforms/home/review or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears above.

Collection title: Survey of Small Business and Farm Lending.

Collection identifier: FR 2028.

OMB control number: 7100-0061.

Effective Date: September 30, 2023, as of date with the transmission period beginning on October 1, 2023, based on loan activity over the third quarter 2023.

General description of collection: The Survey of Small Business and Farm Lending (SSBFL) comprises the following three reports:

The SSBFL collects unique information concerning price and certain nonprice terms of loans made to businesses and farmers each quarter (February, May, August, and November) from a sample of banks. The FR 2028B collects detailed data on individual loans funded during the first full business week of the mid-month of each quarter, and the FR 2028S collects the prime interest rate for each day of the survey week from FR 2028B respondents. The FR 2028D provides focused and enhanced information on small business lending including rates, terms, credit availability, and reasons for their changes. The FR 2028D collects quarterly average quantitative data on terms of small business loans and qualitative information on changes and the reasons for changes in the terms of lending. From these sample SSBFL data, estimates of the terms of business loans and farm loans extended are constructed. The aggregate estimates for business loans are published in the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City's quarterly release, Small Business Lending Survey, and aggregate estimates for farm loans are published in the statistical release, Agricultural Finance Databook.

Frequency: Quarterly.

Respondents: The FR 2028B and FR 2028S panels have an authorized size of 250 domestically chartered commercial banks. The panel of banks has been drawn from a random sample of banks stratified according to farm loan volumes since 1989. The authorized panel for the FR 2028D panel is 398 domestically chartered commercial banks. The size is based on obtaining survey results with a 95% confidence level and 5% standard error, allowing for a 10% nonresponse rate. The panel of banks is a random sample of banks stratified according to the dollar volumes of commercial and industrial loans with original amounts of $1,000,000 or less.

Total estimated number of respondents:

FR 2028B—250.

FR 2028S—250.

FR 2028D—398.

Estimated average hours per response:

FR 2028B—1.4.

FR 2028S—0.1.

FR 2028D—2.8.

Total estimated change in burden: (318).

Total estimated annual burden hours: 5,958. 1

Current actions: On March 1, 2023, the Board published a notice in the Federal Register (88 FR 12934) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, with revision, of the FR 2028. The Federal Reserve proposed to revise the FR 2028D form and instructions, to be effective for the September 30, 2023, as of date with the transmission period beginning on October 1, 2023, based on loan activity over the third quarter 2023. The proposed revisions would add clarity in reporting instructions and requirements, improve data quality, and make slight reductions in reporting burden. These changes include removing items related to credit card lending and net drawdowns on lines of credit. A question requesting information on how respondents define small businesses for the purposes of small business lending would be added. Additionally, three questions were modified to add open-ended text fields offering respondents the opportunity to provide additional information on reasons for changes in lending. Minor wording changes are proposed to the form and instructions to add clarity to the survey or address changes to the form. Additionally, minor changes are proposed to the Frequently Asked Questions section to increase clarity of form definitions. The comment period for this notice expired on May 1, 2023. The Board did not receive any comments. The revisions will be implemented as proposed.

On June 15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collections of information conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. The OMB inventory, as well as copies of the PRA Submission, supporting statements (which contain more detailed information about the information collections and burden estimates than this notice), and approved collection of information instrument(s) are available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. These documents are also available on the Federal Reserve Board's public website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportingforms/home/review or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears above.

Collection title: Registration of Mortgage Loan Originators.

Collection identifier: CFPB G.

OMB control number: 7100-0328.

Effective Date: July 7, 2023.

General description of collection: In accordance with the Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) Regulation G requires residential mortgage loan originators (MLOs) to register with the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System (NMLS), 1 maintain this registration, obtain a unique identifier, and disclose to consumers upon request and through the NMLS their unique identifier and the MLO's employment history and publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions. The CFPB's regulation also requires the institutions employing MLOs to adopt and follow written policies and procedures to ensure that their employees comply with these requirements and to conduct annual independent compliance tests.

Frequency: Annually.

Respondents: The Board's CFPB G panel comprises state member banks (SMBs) with $10 billion or less in total assets that are not affiliates of insured depository institutions with total assets of more than $10 billion; subsidiaries of such SMBs that are not functionally regulated within the meaning of section 5(c)(5) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956; branches and agencies of foreign banks (other than federal branches, federal agencies, and insured state branches of foreign banks); commercial lending companies owned or controlled by foreign banks (collectively, banking organizations); and the employees of these banking organizations who act as residential MLOs.

Total estimated number of respondents: 17,467.

Total estimated change in burden: (63,951).

Total estimated annual burden hours: 23,366. 2

Current actions: On January 27, 2023, the Board published an initial notice in the Federal Register (88 FR 5343) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, with revision, of the CFPB G. The Board proposed to revise the CFPB G to (1) account for Section 1007.103(e) banking organization disclosure of registration information requirements burden separately from Section 1007.104 banking organization recordkeeping requirements burden, (2) revise the average annual estimated hourly burden per banking organization (for both banking organizations already subject to these requirements and banking organizations newly subject to these requirements) associated with Section 1007.103(e) disclosure of registration information, and (3) reflect the information collection burden associated with Section 1007.105 requirements as disclosure requirements instead of as recordkeeping requirements, as was done previously.

The comment period for this notice expired on March 28, 2023. The Board did not receive any comments. The revisions will be implemented as proposed.

On June 15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collections of information conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. The OMB inventory, as well as copies of the PRA Submission, supporting statements (which contain more detailed information about the information collections and burden estimates than this notice), and approved collection of information instrument(s) are available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. These documents are also available on the Federal Reserve Board's public website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportingforms/home/review or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears above.

Collection title: Filings Related to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Collection identifiers: FR 4010, FR 4011, FR 4012, FR 4017, FR 4019, FR 4023.

OMB control number: 7100-0292.

General description of collection: The reporting and recordkeeping requirements in this collection, which are related to amendments made by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 and the Federal Reserve Act, are composed of the following parts:

There are no formal reporting forms for these information collections (the FR designations are for internal purposes only). In each case, the information required to be filed is described in the Board's regulations. The reporting and recordkeeping requirements are necessary to enable the Board to determine eligibility, provide appropriate determinations and interpretations, stay appraised of financial conditions, and asses that certain activities are done in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondents: Bank holding companies, savings and loan holding companies, foreign banks, and state member banks, as well as other interested parties with respect to the FR 4011.

Total estimated number of respondents: 87.

Total estimated annual burden hours: 1,698. 1

Current actions: On January 27, 2023, the Board published a notice in the Federal Register (88 FR 5340) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the FR 4010, FR 4011, FR 4012, FR 4017, FR 4019, FR 4023. The comment period for this notice expired on March 28, 2023. The Board did not receive any comments.

On June 15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collections of information conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. The OMB inventory, as well as copies of the PRA Submission, supporting statements (which contain more detailed information about the information collections and burden estimates than this notice), and approved collection of information instrument(s) are available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. These documents are also available on the Federal Reserve Board's public website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportingforms/home/review or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears above.

Collection title: Notification of Nonfinancial Data Processing Activities.

Collection identifier: FR 4021.

OMB control number: 7100-0306.

General description of collection: Generally, a bank holding company (BHC) may, directly or through a subsidiary, engage in data processing activities if, among other requirements, the company or subsidiary earns not more than 49 percent of its data processing revenue from nonfinancial data processing activities. However, the Board has stated that a BHC may file with the Board a request for permission to administer this 49 percent revenue limit on a business-line or multiple-entity basis, rather than on a company-by-company basis. The FR 4021 information collection consists of this filing for prior approval.

Frequency: As needed.

Respondents: BHCs.

Total estimated number of respondents: 1.

Total estimated annual burden hours: 2. 1

Current actions: On January 27, 2023, the Board published a notice in the Federal Register (88 FR 5343) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, without revision, of the FR 4021. The comment period for this notice expired on March 28, 2023. The Board did not receive any comments.

The GSA FAI Online University (GSA/OAP-5) is no longer stores any PII data.

I. Background

Section 106(g) of the No Surprises Act, enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, div. BB, tit. I, Public Law 116-260 (Dec. 27, 2020), requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of the Transportation (the Secretaries) to establish and convene an advisory committee for the purpose of reviewing options to establish quality, patient safety, and clinical capability standards for each clinical capability level of air ambulances. The Advisory Committee is governed by the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463 (Oct. 6, 1972), as amended, 5 United State Code Appendix.

The Advisory Committee, established on August 24, 2022, is tasked with reviewing options to establish quality, patient safety, and clinical capability standards for each clinical capability level of air ambulances. As outlined in Section 106(g) of the No Surprises Act, the Advisory Committee shall study and make recommendations, as appropriate, to the Congress regarding each of the following with respect to air ambulance services:

• Qualifications of different clinical capability levels and tiering of such levels.

• Patient safety and quality standards.

• Options for improving service reliability during poor weather, night conditions, or other adverse conditions.

• Differences between air ambulance vehicle types, services, and technologies, and other flight capability standards, and the impact of such differences on patient safety.

• Clinical triage criteria for air ambulances.

The Advisory Committee must submit these recommendations no later than 180 days after the date of its first meeting.

The Advisory Committee shall consist of not more than 13 members, including:

• The Secretary of Health and Human Services, or the Secretary's designee, who shall serve as Chair of the Committee;

• The Secretary of the Transportation, or the Secretary's designee;

• One representative, to be appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, of each of the following:

++ State insurance regulators;

++ Health care providers;

++ Group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage;

++ Patient advocacy groups;

++ Accrediting bodies with experience in quality measures.

• Three representatives of the air ambulance industry, to be appointed by the Secretary of Transportation, and

• Three additional representatives, not covered above, as determined necessary and appropriate by the Secretary of Health and Human Services and Secretary of Transportation.

Individuals applying for membership should keep in mind that Committee members will be selected based on their ability and willingness to effectively represent the interests of all stakeholders in their category, as distinct from their parochial or personal interests. For example, an individual selected to serve on the Committee as a representative of consumer advocacy groups would represent not only his or her own organization, but all consumer advocacy groups. As such, the individual would be expected to consult with other consumer groups in bringing issues to the table and making decisions on proposals before the Committee.

The Secretaries are requesting nominations for membership on the Advisory Committee. Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified individuals for membership on the Advisory Committee. Self-nominations are also accepted. Nominations must include, in full, the following materials to be considered for membership. Failure to submit the required information may disqualify a candidate from the review process.

• A letter of nomination that contains contact information for both the nominator and nominee (if not the same).

• A statement from the nominee that they are willing to serve on the Advisory Committee for its duration and an explanation of interest in serving on the Advisory Committee. The nominee should also indicate which category or categories they are willing to represent. (For self-nominations, this information may be included in the nomination letter.)

• A biography, including professional and academic credentials.

• A resume or curriculum vitae that indicates the nominee's educational experience, as well as relevant professional experience.

• Two letters of reference that support the nominee's qualifications for participation on the Advisory Committee. (For nominations other than self-nominations, a nomination letter that includes information supporting the nominee's qualifications may be counted as one of the letters of reference.)

• For health care providers applying for the HHS appointments, nominees should include physicians, other clinicians, and health care operations professionals experienced with air ambulance critical care transport services and/or experience in addressing the challenges associated with transport in rural areas.

• For nominees applying for the DOT appointments, please address the following:

++ Current experience with a Part 135 operator, operating helicopters and/or airplanes in air ambulance operations. Preference will be given to those with experience operating both helicopters and airplanes in air ambulance operations.

++ Whether the applicant currently holds a management or operational position with a part 135 certificate holder operating air ambulance aircraft.

++ Knowledge of the differences between air ambulance vehicle types, services, and technologies, and other flight capability standards, and the impact of such differences on patient safety.

++ Size and scope of the operations from which operational experience was obtained.

Finally, nominees should state their previous experience on a Federal advisory committee and/or aviation rulemaking committee (if any), their level of knowledge in the stakeholder groups listed above, and the size of their constituency they represent or are able to reach.

Materials submitted should total five pages or less. Should more information be needed, Department staff will contact the applicant/nominee, obtain information from the applicant's/nominee's past affiliations, or obtain information from publicly available sources.

The Secretaries will make every effort to appoint members to serve on the Advisory Committee from among those candidates determined to have the technical expertise required to meet specific statutory categories and Departmental needs, and in a manner to ensure an appropriate balance of membership. Selection of committee members will be consistent with achieving the greatest impact, scope, and credibility among diverse stakeholders. The diversity in such membership includes, but is not limited to, race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

The Secretaries reserve discretion to appoint members to serve on the Advisory Committee who did not respond to this notice if necessary to meet specific statutory categories and Departmental needs in a manner to ensure an appropriate balance of membership.

The Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Chiquita Brooks-LaSure, having reviewed and approved this document, authorizes Evell J. Barco Holland, who is the Federal Register Liaison, to electronically sign this document for purposes of publication in the Federal Register .

Description: This notice is specific to a request for an extension of data collection activities for the PREP Performance Measures Study component, which includes collection and analysis of performance measure data from State PREP (SPREP), Tribal PREP (TPREP), Competitive PREP (CPREP), and Personal Responsibility Education Innovative Strategies (PREIS) grantees. PREP grants support evidence-based programs to reduce teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. The programs are required to provide education on both abstinence and contraceptive use and to offer information on adulthood preparation subjects. Data will be used to determine if the PREP grantees are meeting their programs' mission and priorities. This request includes revisions to the program-level data collection forms (Instruments 3 and 4) to no longer require grantees to aggregate participant survey data to the program level for submission.

Respondents: SPREP, TPREP, CPREP, and PREIS grantees; their subrecipients; and program participants.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 41,053.

Authority: Sec. 50503, Pub. L. 115-123.

Section 564 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-3) allows FDA to strengthen the public health protections against biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological agents. Among other things, section 564 of the FD&C Act allows FDA to authorize the use of an unapproved medical product or an unapproved use of an approved medical product in certain situations. With this EUA authority, FDA can help ensure that medical countermeasures may be used in emergencies to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by biological, chemical, nuclear, or radiological agents when there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. On March 12, 2021, FDA issued an Authorization (EUA 096) to B. Braun Melsungen for Propofol-Lipuro 1% emulsion, subject to the terms of the Authorization. Notice of the issuance of the Authorization was published in the Federal Register on June 23, 2021 (86 FR 32938), as required by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act.

Because B. Braun Melsungen has notified FDA that it does not intend to offer the Propofol-Lipuro 1% emulsion in the United States anymore and requested FDA revoke the EUA for the Propofol-Lipuro 1% emulsion, FDA has determined that it is appropriate to protect the public health or safety to revoke this authorization. The revocation in its entirety follows and provides an explanation of the reasons for revocation, as required by section 564(h)(1) of the FD&C Act.

An electronic version of this document and the full text of the Authorizations and revocation are available on the internet at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/emergency-preparedness-drugs/emergency-use-authorizations-drugs-and-non-vaccine-biological-products.