[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48230-48237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15849]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance on State Data
Collection--National Technical Assistance Center To Improve State
Capacity To Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data To
Address Significant Disproportionality
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for
Technical Assistance on State Data Collection--National Technical
Assistance Center to Improve State Capacity to Collect, Report,
Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data to Address Significant
Disproportionality, Assistance Listing Number 84.373E. This notice
relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number
1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: July 26, 2023.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 11, 2023.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than July 31, 2023,
the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will post
details on pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide
technical assistance to interested applicants. Links to the webinars
may be found at https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554. Please note that these Common
Instructions supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richelle Davis, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5076, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: 202-245-7401. Email:
[email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance on
State Data Collection program is to improve the capacity of States to
meet the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data
collection and reporting requirements. Funding for the program is
authorized under section 611(c)(1) of IDEA, which gives the Secretary
authority to reserve not more than \1/2\ of 1 percent of the amounts
appropriated under Part B for each fiscal year to provide technical
assistance (TA) activities, where needed, to improve the capacity of
States to meet the data collection and reporting requirements under
Parts B and C of IDEA. The maximum amount the Secretary may reserve
under this set-aside for any fiscal year is $25,000,000, cumulatively
adjusted by the rate of inflation. Section 616(i) of IDEA requires the
Secretary to review the data collection and analysis capacity of States
to ensure that data and information determined necessary for
implementation of section 616 of IDEA are collected, analyzed, and
accurately reported to the Secretary. It also requires the Secretary to
provide TA, where needed, to improve the capacity of States to meet the
data collection requirements, which include the data collection and
reporting requirements in sections 616 and 618 of IDEA. In addition,
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law 117-328, gives
the Secretary authority to use funds reserved under section 611(c) of
IDEA to ``administer and carry out other services and activities to
improve data collection, coordination, quality, and use under Parts B
and C of the IDEA.'' Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law
117-328, Div. H, Title III, 136 Stat. 4459, 4891 (2022).
Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. This
priority is from the notice of final priority and requirements (NFP)
for this program published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register.
Absolute Priority: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
National Technical Assistance Center To Improve State Capacity To
Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data To Address
Significant Disproportionality
Background:
Under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA, States are required to collect,
report, analyze, and use data regarding students with disabilities.
These activities are intended to support improved educational results
and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities, and to
ensure that States meet IDEA requirements, with an emphasis on those
requirements most closely related to improving educational results for
children with disabilities. Additionally, IDEA section 618(d) requires
States and the Department of the Interior to collect and examine data
to determine if significant disproportionality on the basis of race and
ethnicity is occurring in the State and the local educational agencies
(LEAs) of the State with respect to (1) identification of children as
children with disabilities, including by disability category; (2)
placement of children with disabilities by educational settings; and
(3) the incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary actions,
including suspensions and expulsions. There are 98 separate factors for
determining whether significant disproportionality exists in an LEA
(i.e., 14 categories of analysis with respect to identification,
placement, and disciplinary removal, cross-tabulated with seven racial
and ethnic groups).
In December 2016, the Department published a final rule \1\ on
significant disproportionality in special education to further clarify
the statute. The final rule established a standard methodology that
State educational agencies (SEAs) must use to determine whether
significant disproportionality on the
[[Page 48231]]
basis of race and ethnicity is occurring in the State and its LEAs. The
final rule also clarified the requirements for the review of policies,
practices, and procedures when significant disproportionality is
identified, and it requires LEAs to identify the factors contributing
to the significant disproportionality and address them, including by
reserving 15 percent of their IDEA Part B funds for comprehensive
coordinated early intervening services (CCEIS). SEAs were required to
begin implementing the regulation by reporting on significant
disproportionality beginning in 2020 for the 2018-2019 school year.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The full text of the final rule can be found at 81 FR 92376
(https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/19/2016-30190/assistance-to-states-for-the-education-of-children-with-disabilities-preschool-grants-for-children). Please also see
Significant Disproportionality Essential Questions and Answers at
https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/significant-disproportionality-qa-03-08-17.pdf for additional information on significant
disproportionality requirements.
\2\ On July 3, 2018, the Department postponed the date for
States to comply with these regulations until July 1, 2020. On March
7, 2019, the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia vacated the Department's delay. Council of Parent Attorneys
and Advocates, Inc. v. DeVos, 365 F. Supp. 3d 28 (D.D.C. 2019). The
regulations took effect immediately after that judicial decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since that time, the IDEA section 618 data reported by SEAs in the
Maintenance of Effort Reduction and Coordinating Early Intervening
Services collection (which include the number of LEAs required to
reserve 15 percent of their IDEA Part B funds due to being identified
as having significant disproportionality) \3\ reflected the following:
For school year (SY) 2018-2019 (reported by SEAs in May 2020), SEAs
reported that 417 LEAs, across 31 States, were required to reserve 15
percent of their IDEA Part B funds due to significant
disproportionality. Over the following two school years, the IDEA
section 618 data submitted by SEAs reflected an increase in both the
number of LEAs identified with significant disproportionality and the
overall number of States that identified LEAs. For SY 2020-2021 (the
most recent IDEA section 618 data available, reported by SEAs in May
2022), SEAs identified 825 LEAs, across 39 States, with significant
disproportionality. While this number represents only 5 percent of all
LEAs in the country, it is a significant increase from the number of
LEAs identified in SY 2018-2019. Of the 825 LEAs identified in SY 2020-
2021, 648 LEAs had not been identified with significant
disproportionality in the previous two school years and 99 LEAs had
been repeatedly identified in all three reporting years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ An LEA that is identified as having significant
disproportionality must reserve 15 percent of its IDEA, Part B funds
to provide CCEIS. Please see questions C-3-1 to C-3-10 in
Significant Disproportionality Essential Questions and Answers at
https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/significant-disproportionality-qa-03-08-17.pdf for more information on CCEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department's analysis of the above data--i.e., the simultaneous
increase in the number of LEAs identified by the State for the first
time and the number of LEAs that have continued to be identified with
significant disproportionality--is that SEAs have varying needs for TA
to correctly use their IDEA data to both identify and address
significant disproportionality in their LEAs. In particular, SEAs with
LEAs that have been identified as having significant disproportionality
in multiple years may require additional TA to assist LEAs in
conducting more robust root cause analyses, including using various
data to identify and address the factors contributing to the
significant disproportionality. In addition, SEAs with LEAs newly
identified as having significant disproportionality may require
additional TA on how to support LEAs, whether in reviewing their
policies, practices, and procedures in the area in which the
significant disproportionality was identified, or in conducting a
robust root cause analysis to identify and address factors contributing
to the significant disproportionality.
Additionally, based on a review of IDEA Part B State Performance
Plans (SPPs)/Annual Performance Reports (APRs) submitted by SEAs since
2016, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has found
multiple instances of States confusing the methodologies used to
calculate significant disproportionality with those used to calculate
data under SPP/APR Indicator 4 (Suspension/Expulsion) and SPP/APR
Indicators 9 and 10 (Disproportionate Representation). While there may
be some similarities in these data sets and methodologies, the data
analysis required for each is different and based on separate, distinct
provisions of IDEA. The significant disproportionality provision in
IDEA section 618(d) requires SEAs to determine whether significant
disproportionality on the basis of race and ethnicity is occurring in
the State and its LEAs, as it relates to identification, placement, and
discipline. In contrast, the reporting under SPP/APR Indicator 4 is
based on IDEA section 612(a)(22), which requires SEAs to identify
significant discrepancies, including by race and ethnicity, in the
rates of long-term suspensions and expulsions of children with
disabilities among the LEAs in the State or compared to rates for
nondisabled children in those LEAs. SPP/APR Indicator 9 is based on
IDEA section 616(a)(3)(C) and requires SEAs to identify LEAs with
disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special
education and related services that is the result of inappropriate
identification. SPP/APR Indicator 10, also based on IDEA section
616(a)(3)(C), requires SEAs to identify LEAs with disproportionate
representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability
categories that is the result of inappropriate identification. In
addition to providing data that is not valid and reliable to the
Department, SEA confusion with implementing the methodologies for
significant disproportionality and Indicators 4, 9, and 10, may lead to
incorrect identification or non-identification of significant
disproportionality, significant discrepancy, and disproportionate
representation. OSEP has determined that SEAs, and LEAs through their
work with SEAs, require additional assistance and resources to help
them (1) collect high-quality data and analyze it according to the
SEA's standard methodology; (2) understand what their significant
disproportionality data mean in relation to data collected under IDEA,
section 616; (3) conduct root cause analysis of the data to identify
the potential causes and contributing factors of the significant
disproportionality; (4) evaluate policies, practices, and procedures
that may be contributing to the significant disproportionality; (5)
make changes, including through the expenditure of IDEA funds for
CCEIS, in any policy, practice, or procedure, and address any other
factors, identified as contributing to the significant
disproportionality; and (6) to provide data in timely, usable,
accessible, and understandable formats for parents, families,
advocates, and other stakeholders.
To meet the array of complex challenges regarding the collection,
reporting, analysis, and use of data by States, OSEP published an NFP
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register to establish and
operate the National Technical Assistance Center to Improve State
Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data to
Address Significant Disproportionality.
Priority:
The purpose of the National Technical Assistance Center to Improve
State Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Data
to Address Significant Disproportionality (Center) is to promote equity
by improving State capacity to accurately collect, report, analyze, and
use section 618 data to address issues of significant
disproportionality. The Center will also work to increase the capacity
of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
[[Page 48232]]
SEAs, to use their data to conduct robust root cause analyses and
identify evidence-based strategies for effectively using funds reserved
for CCEIS.
The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected
outcomes:
(a) Increased capacity of SEAs to analyze and use their data
collected and reported under section 618 of IDEA to accurately identify
significant disproportionality in the State and the LEAs of the State;
(b) Increased capacity of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
SEAs, to use data collected and reported under section 618 of IDEA, as
well as other available data, to conduct root cause analyses in order
to identify the potential causes and contributing factors of an LEA's
significant disproportionality;
(c) Improved capacity of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
SEAs, to review and, as necessary, revise policies, practices, and
procedures identified as contributing to significant
disproportionality, and to address any other factors identified as
contributing to the significant disproportionality;
(d) Improved capacity of SEAs to assist LEAs, as needed, in using
data to drive decisions related to the use of funds reserved for CCEIS;
(e) Increased capacity of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
SEAs, to use data to address disparities revealed in the data they
collect;
(f) Improved capacity of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
SEAs, to accurately collect, report, analyze, and use data related to
significant disproportionality and apply the State methodology for
identifying significant disproportionality, including distinguishing
data collected under section 616 of IDEA (specifically, SPP/APR
Indicator 4 (Suspension/Expulsion) and SPP/APR Indicators 9 and 10
(Disproportionate Representation);
(g) Increased capacity of SEAs to use data to evaluate their own
methodology for identifying significant disproportionality;
(h) Improved capacity of SEAs to assist LEAs to engage parents,
families, advocates, and other stakeholders to use data to address
disparities revealed in the data they collect; and
(i) Improved capacity of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with
SEAs, to provide data in timely, usable, accessible, and understandable
formats for parents, families, advocates, and other stakeholders.
In addition, to be considered for funding under this competition,
applicants must meet the following requirements:
Applicants must--
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address State challenges in collecting, analyzing, reporting,
and using their data collected under section 618 of IDEA to correctly
identify and address significant disproportionality. To meet this
requirement the applicant must--
(i) Demonstrate knowledge of IDEA data collections, including data
required under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA, as well as the
requirements related to significant disproportionality in section
618(d) of IDEA;
(ii) Present applicable national, State, and local data to
demonstrate the capacity needs of SEAs, and LEAs through their work
with SEAs, to analyze and use their data collected under section 618 of
IDEA to identify and address significant disproportionality;
(iii) Describe how SEAs, and LEAs through their work with SEAs, are
currently analyzing and using their data collected under section 618 of
IDEA to identify and address significant disproportionality; and
(iv) Present information about the difficulties SEAs, and LEAs
through their work with SEAs, including a variety of LEAs such as urban
and rural LEAs and charter schools that are LEAs, have in collecting,
reporting, analyzing, and using their IDEA section 618 data to address
significant disproportionality; and
(2) Result in improved IDEA data collection, reporting, analysis,
and use in identifying and addressing significant disproportionality.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and
information; and
(ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) by
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
(3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A)
to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying
concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as
the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any
empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf and
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based
practices (EBPs).\4\ To meet this requirement, the applicant must
describe--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For purposes of these requirements, ``evidence-based
practices'' (EBPs) means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale
(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research findings
or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention
is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) The current capacity of SEAs to use IDEA section 618 data to
correctly identify significant disproportionality and assist LEAs as
they conduct root cause analyses and review LEA policies, practices,
and procedures;
(ii) Current research on effective practices to address
disproportionality, particularly through the provision of CCEIS; and
(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research
and EBPs in the development and delivery of its products and services;
(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant
must describe--
(i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base on
the capacity needs of SEAs, and LEAs through their work with SEAs, to
collect, report, analyze, and use IDEA section 618 data in a manner
that correctly identifies and addresses significant disproportionality
in States and LEAs;
(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\5\ which must
[[Page 48233]]
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this
approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in
minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time,
invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This
category of TA also includes information or products, such as
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the
TA center's website by independent users. Brief communications by TA
center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also
considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\6\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA services based on
needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively
individualized. A relationship is established between the TA
recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA
includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating
strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It
can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend
over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference
calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the
needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can
also be considered targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this
approach; and
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA
recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their
current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build
capacity at the local level; and
(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\7\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA
center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome.
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program,
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this
approach;
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of SEA personnel
to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative,
alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure,
available resources, and ability to build capacity at the SEA level;
(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs to build or enhance
training systems related to the use of IDEA section 618 data to
correctly identify and address significant disproportionality that
include professional development based on adult learning principles and
coaching;
(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the
education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, schools, and
families) to ensure that there is communication between each level and
that there are systems in place to support the capacity needs of SEAs,
and LEAs through their work with SEAs, to collect, report, analyze, and
use IDEA section 618 data to correctly identify and address significant
disproportionality; and
(E) Its proposed plan for collaborating and coordinating with
Department-funded projects, including those providing data-related
support to States (e.g., the IDEA Data Center, the Center for IDEA
Fiscal Reporting, the National Center for Systemic Improvement) and
equity-related support to States (e.g., Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports, Regional Equity Assistance Centers), where
appropriate, in order to align complementary work and jointly develop
and implement products and services to meet the purposes of this
priority;
(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize
efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the
intended project outcomes;
(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the
intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to
achieve the intended project outcomes.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project
developed in consultation with and implemented by a third-party
evaluator.\8\ The evaluation plan must--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A ``third-party'' evaluator is an independent and impartial
program evaluator who is contracted by the grantee to conduct an
objective evaluation of the project. This evaluator must not have
participated in the development or implementation of any project
activities, except for the evaluation activities, or have any
financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Articulate formative and summative evaluation questions,
including important process and outcome evaluation questions. These
questions should be related to the project's proposed logic model
required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of these requirements;
(2) Describe how progress in and fidelity of implementation, as
well as project outcomes, will be measured to answer the evaluation
questions. Specify the measures and associated instruments or sources
for data appropriate to the evaluation questions. Include information
regarding reliability and validity of measures where appropriate;
(3) Describe strategies for analyzing data and how data collected
as part of this plan will be used to inform and improve service
delivery over the course of the project and to refine the proposed
logic model and evaluation plan, including subsequent data collection;
(4) Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation and include
staff assignments for completing the plan. The timeline must indicate
that the data will be available annually for the APR and at the end of
Year 2 for the review process; and
(5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the
costs of developing or refining the evaluation plan in consultation
with a third-party evaluator, as well as the costs associated with the
implementation of the evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of resources,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits, and funds will be spent in a way that
increases their efficiency and cost-effectiveness, including by
reducing waste or achieving better outcomes.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are
[[Page 48234]]
appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers,
researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements:
(1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines,
as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative;
(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one- and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or
virtually, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting
in Washington, DC, or virtually, with the OSEP project officer and
other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: The project must reallocate unused travel funds no later than
the end of the third quarter if the kick-off or planning meetings are
conducted virtually.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative;
(ii) A two- and one-half day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, or virtually, during each year of the project period;
and
Note: The project must reallocate unused travel funds no later
than the end of the third quarter of each budget period if the
conference is conducted virtually.
(iii) Three annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP;
(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of
5 percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those
needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP
project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the
project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside
no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;
(4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for
accessibility; and
(5) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the
transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the
continuity of services to States during the transition to this new
award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:
In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a), including--
(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts
with knowledge and experience in data collection and significant
disproportionality. This review will be conducted during a one-day
intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second
year of the project period;
(b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's
products and services and the extent to which the project's products
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.
Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards
or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive
carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The
Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and
substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue
funding accordingly.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c), 1416(i), 1418(c), 1418(d),
1442; Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, Public Law 117-328, Div.
H, Title III, 136 Stat. 4459, 4891 (2022).
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in
Federal civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The NFP. (e) The regulations for this program in 34 CFR
part 300.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $1,500,000 in year one, $2,500,000 in
year two, and $3,500,000 in years three through five.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2024 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,500,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months in year one, $2,500,000 for a single
budget period of 12 months in year two, and $3,500,000 for a single
budget period of 12 months in years three through five.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State lead agencies under Part C of
IDEA; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered LEAs
under State law; institutions of higher education (IHEs); other public
agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and
outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require
cost sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, of the Uniform
Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under
this competition may award subgrants--to directly carry out project
activities
[[Page 48235]]
described in its application--to the following types of entities: IHEs,
nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the activities proposed
in the application, and public agencies. The grantee may award
subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application or
that it selects through a competition under procedures established by
the grantee, consistent with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2).
4. Other General Requirements:
(a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect
to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute
priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, on December 7, 2022 (87 FR
75045), and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554, which
contain requirements and information on how to submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this
competition. However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental
review in order to make an award by the end of FY 2023.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to no more than 70 pages and (2) use the
following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the
assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance
provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the
table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the
reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the
recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative,
including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen
shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed below:
(a) Significance (10 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses.
(ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project.
(b) Quality of project services (35 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(ii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework.
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice.
(iv) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services.
(v) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the
use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project
resources.
(vi) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project.
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator.
[[Page 48236]]
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of key project personnel.
(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
(iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience,
and independence, of the evaluator.
(v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization.
(vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project.
(viii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed
project.
(e) Quality of the management plan (25 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project.
(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project.
(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant
if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
[[Page 48237]]
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This
dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
5. Performance Measures: For the purpose of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, the Department has established a set of
performance measures that are designed to yield information on various
aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance on
State Data Collection program. These measures are:
Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of TA and
dissemination products and services deemed to be of high quality by an
independent review panel of experts qualified or individuals with
appropriate expertise to review the substantive content of the products
and services.
Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of TA and
dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review
panel of qualified experts or members of the target audiences to be of
high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or
practice.
Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of TA and
dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review
panel of qualified experts or members of the target audiences to be
useful in improving educational or early intervention policy or
practice.
Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the
Technical Assistance on State Data Collection Program includes the
percentage of milestones achieved in the current annual performance
report period and the percentage of funds spent during the current
fiscal year.
The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by
OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department
(34 CFR 75.590).
The Department will also closely monitor the extent to which the
products and services provided by the Center meet the needs identified
by stakeholders and may require the Center to report on such alignment
in their annual and final performance reports.
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, whether
the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the performance
targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an
accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text
format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of this Department published
in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF you must have 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.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2023-15849 Filed 7-24-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P