[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 14, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11257-11266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02973]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities--Model Demonstration Projects to Develop Equitable Family
Engagement With Underserved Families of Children With Disabilities
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2024 for
Model Demonstration Projects to Develop Equitable Family Engagement
with Underserved Families
[[Page 11258]]
of Children with Disabilities, Assistance Listing Number 84.326M. This
notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control
number 1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: February 14, 2024.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 24, 2024.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 24, 2024.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmen Sanchez, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4A10, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 987-0117. 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 and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve
results for children with disabilities by providing technical
assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating
useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by
scientifically based research.
Priorities: This competition includes one absolute priority and,
within that absolute priority, one competitive preference priority. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority is from
allowable activities specified in or otherwise authorized in sections
663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d)).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2024 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:
Model Demonstration Projects to Develop Equitable Family Engagement
with Underserved Families of Children with Disabilities.
Background
Model demonstrations to improve early intervention, educational, or
transitional results for children with disabilities and their families
have been authorized under the IDEA since the law's inception. For the
purposes of this priority, a model is a set of existing evidence-based
practices, including interventions and implementation strategies (i.e.,
core model components), that research suggests will improve outcomes
for children, families, personnel, administrators, or systems, when
implemented with fidelity. Model demonstrations involve investigating
the degree to which a given model can be implemented and sustained in
real-world settings, by staff employed in those settings, while
achieving outcomes similar to those attained under research conditions.
The work of the proposed models is consistent with the Secretary's
Supplemental Priorities, published in the Federal Register on December
10, 2021 (86 FR 70612), as well as ``Raise the Bar: Lead the
World'',\1\ through its focus on promoting equity in student access to
educational resources and opportunities; meeting student social,
emotional, and academic needs; and strengthening cross-agency
coordination and community engagement to advance systemic change.
Proposed models may also address a competitive preference priority that
builds on the absolute priority by being responsive to the focus in the
First Lady's Joining Forces initiative \2\ whose mission is to support
military families, including families of service members and veterans,
caregivers, and survivors. The initiative includes a focus on military
child education, and specifically advancing programming to support
military-connected children in their classrooms and help ease the
burdens created by the highly mobile military lifestyle. For military-
connected children with disabilities this includes simplifying and
streamlining the onboarding process into a new school system,
facilitating the transfer of individualized education programs (IEPs)
from students' previous schools into their new schools, and providing
required services to children and families without disruptions in
educational programming when there is a change in duty station. This
focus is aligned with the Department's focus on supporting military-
connected and other highly mobile children with disabilities outlined
in a February 2022 Letter to State Directors of Special Education on
Ensuring a High-Quality Education for Highly Mobile Children, which
provided resources and guidance for States, school districts, school
staff, parents, families, and others on ensuring that highly mobile
children with disabilities receive required special education and
related services designed to meet their unique needs in a timely
manner.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ www.ed.gov/raisethebar/.
\2\ www.whitehouse.gov/joiningforces/.
\3\ See https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/letter-to-state-directos-of-special-education-on-ensuring-a-high-quality-education-for-highly-mobile-children-november-10-2022/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decades of research have shown the positive relationship between
family engagement and improved outcomes for children (Fan & Chen, 2001;
Henderson & Mapp, 2002; Hill & Tyson, 2009; Jeynes, 2005, 2007, 2012;
Kim & Hill, 2015). The growing evidence base indicates that children
with disabilities benefit when their families are systemically engaged
in their education in ways that are responsive to the families'
strengths, needs, cultures, and experiences. While not independently
explored in the research, it stands to reason that systematic and
responsive family engagement is particularly important when supporting
military families with their unique strengths, needs, cultures, and
experiences.
IDEA, through its emphasis on empowering parents to understand
their rights and responsibilities under the law and by placing families
at the center of the individualized education program process, has
emphasized the importance of engaging families of children with
disabilities. Furthermore, IDEA places families as vital partners with
schools, districts, and States in creating systemic change through the
development and implementation of comprehensive strategies to improve
outcomes for children with disabilities (section 650(2) of IDEA; 20
U.S.C. 1450(c)).
Schools often have difficulty effectively supporting family
engagement practices and instead focus on narrow ideas of family
participation (e.g., participating in back-to-school nights or parent
teacher organization fundraisers) that disengage many families, and
particularly disempower and exclude underserved families of children
with disabilities (Baquedano-Lopez et al., 2013; Doucet, 2011; Dyrness,
2009; Lareau & Horvat, 1999; Olivos, 2006; Xu, 2020). Family
disempowerment and inequity, created when schools do not account for
the lived realities of underserved families
[[Page 11259]]
within their communities, mirrors the deep educational inequities in
their children's experiences, (Buren et al., 2020) and can increase the
disproportionate representation of underserved children in some
disability categories, disproportionate discipline, and placement in
more restrictive and segregated settings (Kramarczuk Voulgarides et
al., 2017).
To support the engagement of underserved families, research points
to the need to create ongoing, dynamic, and equitable collaborations
that reorganize power structures, develop sustainable relationships
(Ishimaru, 2020), and are culturally and linguistically responsive and
trauma informed. Equitable collaborations between schools, underserved
families, and their communities show promise in creating sustainable
structural changes that improve educational outcomes for underserved
children, including children with disabilities (Ishimaru, 2020).
To improve outcomes for children with disabilities, including
military-connected children with disabilities, the Department is
funding school-based models of equitable family engagement that
systemically involve underserved families of children with disabilities
as partners and leaders in creating more equitable and inclusive
schools that are responsive to the families' priorities, strengths, and
needs.
Priority
The purpose of this priority is to fund four cooperative agreements
to establish and operate evidence-based \4\ model demonstration
projects. The models must implement sustainable, schoolwide policies,
practices, and strategies that systemically engage underserved families
\5\ of children with disabilities as partners and leaders in creating
more equitable and inclusive schools that lead to improved outcomes for
children with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For purposes of this priority, ``evidence-based'' means the
proposed project component is supported by promising evidence, which
is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in
improving a ``relevant outcome'' (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1), based
on a relevant finding from one of the sources identified under
``promising evidence'' in 34 CFR 77.1.
\5\ For the purposes of this priority, ``underserved families''
refers to foster, kinship, migrant, technologically unconnected, and
military- or veteran-connected families; and families of color,
living in poverty, without documentation of immigration status,
experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity, or impacted by the
justice system, including the juvenile justice system. Underserved
families also refers to families that include: members of a
federally or State recognized Indian Tribe; English learners; adults
who experience a disability; members who are lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, queer or questioning, or intersex (LGBTQI+); adults in
need of improving their basic skills or with limited literacy; and
disconnected adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The models must address the infrastructure (e.g., implementation
teams, data systems) and ongoing supports needed to foster the
development, implementation, and evaluation of sustainable, schoolwide
family engagement \6\ policies, practices, and strategies that
systemically involve underserved families of children with disabilities
to create more equitable and inclusive schools that are responsive to
the priorities, strengths and needs of underserved families of children
with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For the purposes of this priority, ``family engagement''
refers to the systematic inclusion of families in activities and
programs that promote children's development, learning, and
wellness, including in the planning, development, and evaluation of
such activities, programs, and systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The models must demonstrate methods for identifying evidence-based
strategies that build the capacity of school personnel and underserved
families of children with disabilities to jointly develop and implement
sustainable, equitable, and inclusive systemic change.
The models must capture information about challenges to
implementation and determine what system supports may assist in meeting
those challenges. Additionally, the models must use data to provide
information about how the models affect family engagement policies,
strategies, and practices within schools; school personnel's capacity
to engage with underserved families of children with disabilities and
their communities; underserved families' engagement and leadership in
school activities; and systemic change that leads to more equitable and
inclusive schools that improve outcomes for underserved children with
disabilities.
The model demonstration projects must assess how models can--
(a) Increase the sustainable implementation of school policies,
strategies, and practices that support the engagement of underserved
families of children with disabilities;
(b) Increase the capacity of school personnel, underserved families
of children with disabilities and their communities to build trusting
relationships that support children with disabilities' learning and
achievement;
(c) Increase the capacity of underserved families of children with
disabilities to be leaders in partnership with school personnel in
setting policy, making decisions, and implementing practices;
(d) Increase the engagement of underserved families of children
with disabilities and their children with disabilities in school and
extracurricular activities; and
(e) Improve the academic, social, emotional, and behavioral
development and outcomes for underserved children with disabilities;
increase access for underserved children with disabilities to general
education and extracurricular activities with their peers without
disabilities; and decrease disproportionality in the identification,
placement, and discipline of underserved children with disabilities.
Applicants must propose models that meet the following
requirements:
(a) The model's core intervention components must include--
(1) Family engagement practices based on evidence;
(2) Practices to build the capacity of underserved families of
children with disabilities to engage with school personnel and act as
leaders in systemic change;
(3) Practices to build the capacity of school personnel to engage
with underserved families of children with disabilities and their
communities;
(4) Practices that enable school personnel, underserved families of
children with disabilities and their communities to jointly develop and
implement systemic changes reflective of families' priorities,
strengths, and needs;
(5) Methods for implementing capacity building activities for
school personnel and underserved families of children with disabilities
and their communities;
(6) Methods for measuring the impact of the model, including
fidelity measures on the implementation of the practices, and data on
increased equitable engagement between school personnel and underserved
families of children with disabilities; decreased disproportionate
application of practices in identification, placement, and discipline
for underserved children with disabilities; and improved outcomes of
children with disabilities;
(7) Measures of the model's social validity, i.e., measures of
school personnel's and underserved families', satisfaction with the
model components, processes, and outcomes; and
(8) Procedures to refine the model based on data from the ongoing
fidelity measures on the implementation of the practices, and the data
collected on improved outcomes and increased capacity.
(b) The model's core implementation components must include--
[[Page 11260]]
(1) Criteria and strategies used to select \7\ and recruit a
minimum of three sites, which include demographic information,
community context, and school initiatives, including approaches to
introducing the model to, and promoting the model among, site
participants.\8\ Applicants are encouraged to choose sites in a variety
of communities (e.g., urban, rural, suburban). The sites must include
various families and underserved families, whether defined by race,
ethnicity, socioeconomic status, religious affiliation, family
composition, or military connection among others; and have the need to
improve equity and inclusion as demonstrated by disproportionality in
the identification, placement, discipline, or outcomes of underserved
children with disabilities. The selected sites can include any
combination of grades from Pre-K through high school.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For factors to consider when selecting model demonstration
sites, the applicant should refer to Assessing Sites for Model
Demonstration: Lessons Learned for OSEP Grantees at mdcc.sri.com/documents/MDCC_Site_Assessment_Brief_09-30-11.pdf. The document also
contains a site assessment tool.
\8\ For factors to consider when preparing for model
demonstration implementation, the applicant should refer to
Preparing for Model Demonstration Implementation at mdcc.sri.com/documents/MDCC_PreparationStage_Brief_Apr2013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) A staggered implementation design, which allows for model
development and refinement at the first site in year one of the project
period, with sites two and three implementing a revised model based on
data from the first site beginning in subsequent project years;
(3) A professional development component that includes a strategy
to work with school personnel and underserved families of children with
disabilities, to enable sites to implement, with fidelity, models of
schoolwide equitable family engagement that systemically involve
underserved families of children with disabilities as partners and
leaders; and
(4) Measures of the results of the professional development
required by paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(c) The core strategies for sustaining the model must include--
(1) Procedures and materials that permit current and future site-
based staff to replicate or appropriately tailor and sustain the model
at any site;
(2) Guidelines and procedures to--
(i) Provide professional development activities to build school
personnel's capacity to systematically and equitably engage with
underserved families of children with disabilities, and build
underserved families' leadership capacity;
(ii) Implement system changes to improve equitable engagement and
shared leadership between school personnel and underserved families of
children with disabilities;
(iii) Administer activities that allow underserved families of
children with disabilities to take on leadership roles within schools;
(iv) Identify and establish collaborations with the communities to
which the underserved families belong;
(v) Identify the strengths, needs, and priorities of underserved
families of children with disabilities through the collaborative
collection and analysis of data by school personnel and underserved
families of children with disabilities and their communities;
(vi) Create and implement sustainable, equitable, and inclusive
systemic changes that reflect the strengths, needs, and priorities of
underserved families of children with disabilities; and
(vii) Collect, analyze, and use data regarding the engagement of
underserved children with disabilities in schools and the impact of
that engagement on--
(A) Academic, social, emotional, and behavioral development and
outcomes for underserved children with disabilities;
(B) Increased access for underserved children with disabilities to
general education and extracurricular activities with their peers
without disabilities; and
(C) Decreased disproportionality in the identification, placement,
and discipline of underserved children with disabilities;
(3) Strategies for the grantee to develop a manual, toolkit and
other user-friendly and widely accessible resources for disseminating
information on the final version of the model by the end of the grant
period, such as developing easily accessible online products that
specify model core components critical for improving outcomes,
professional development materials, fidelity measures, key outcomes
from the model (e.g. increases in the equity of referrals), and
implementation procedures for disseminating the model and its
components; and
(4) Strategies for the grantee to assist schools and school
districts to scale up a model and its components.
To be considered for funding under this absolute priority,
applicants must meet the requirements contained in this priority.
Application Requirements
An applicant must include in its application--
(a) A detailed review of the literature addressing the proposed
evidence-based model or its implementation components and the proposed
processes to develop equitable and schoolwide family engagement with
underserved families of children with disabilities that systemically
involve them as partners and leaders;
(b) A logic model \9\ that depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and outcomes (described in the requirements in
paragraph (a) under the heading Priority) of the proposed model
demonstration project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ As defined in 34 CFR 77.1, ``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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The following websites provide resources for constructing
logic models: 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;
(c) A description of the activities and measures to be incorporated
into the proposed model demonstration project (i.e., the project
design) to develop equitable and schoolwide family engagement with
underserved families of children with disabilities that systemically
involve them as partners and leaders. A detailed and complete
description must include the following:
(1) Each of the capacity building, collaboration, and data
gathering components;
(2) The existing and proposed measures of fidelity of the
implementation of equitable and schoolwide family engagement and
capacity building activities as well as social validity measures. The
measures must be described as completely as possible, referenced as
appropriate, and included, when available, in Appendix A;
(3) Each of the implementation components, including, at a minimum,
those listed under requirements paragraph (b) under the heading
Priority. The existing or proposed implementation fidelity measures
must be described as completely as possible, referenced as appropriate,
and included, when available, in Appendix A. In addition, this
description must include--
[[Page 11261]]
(i) Demographics of the sites that have been identified and
successfully recruited as implementation sites for the purposes of
completing an application using the selection and recruitment
strategies described in requirements paragraph (b)(1) under the heading
Priority. The demographic data should include the race and ethnicity,
socioeconomic status, military connectedness, and primary home language
of all families; the number of families of children with disabilities
in the schools' catchment area, and the larger school community; and
indicators of the extent to which schools are equitable and inclusive,
including identification rates for special education, placement data,
discipline data, and outcomes of underserved children with
disabilities;
Note: Applicants are encouraged to identify, to the extent
possible, the sites willing to participate in the applicant's model
demonstration. Final site selection will be determined in consultation
with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer
following the kick-off meeting described in paragraph (f)(1) of these
application requirements; and
(ii) The staggered implementation design for implementation
consistent with the requirements in paragraph (b)(2) under the heading
Priority;
(4) Each of the strategies to promote sustaining and replicating
the model, including, at a minimum, those listed under requirements
paragraph (c) under the heading Priority; and
(5) The cost of the fully developed model and its implementation,
including the resources used by the model as well as their actual or
estimated costs; \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See the IES Cost Analysis Starter Kit at https://ies.ed.gov/seer/cost_analysis.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) A description of the evaluation activities and measures to be
incorporated into the proposed model demonstration project. A detailed
and complete description must include--
(1) A formative evaluation plan, consistent with the project's
logic model, that includes evaluation questions, sources of data, a
timeline for data collection, and analysis plans. The plan must show
how the outcome data (e.g., engagement, capacity, and social validity
measures) and implementation data (e.g., fidelity, effectiveness of
school personnel professional development and capacity building
activities, effectiveness of family capacity building, and
effectiveness of activities that result in systemic changes) will be
used separately or in combination to improve the project during the
project period. These data will be reported in the annual performance
report (APR). The plan also must outline how these data will be
reviewed by project staff, when they will be reviewed, and how they
will be used during the course of the project to adjust the model or
its implementation to increase the model's usefulness,
generalizability, and potential for sustainability; and
(2) A summative evaluation plan, including a timeline, to collect
and analyze data on changes in the engagement of underserved families
of children with disabilities, student outcomes, and systems
improvements over time that can be reasonably attributable to project
activities. The plan must show how the family, student, or system
outcome and implementation data collected by the project will be used
separately or in combination to demonstrate the promise of the model;
(e) A plan to disseminate the results of the project, including the
findings that show the model had a beneficial effect on outcomes, the
final version of the implemented model, and its associated products
(such as curricula, professional development materials, implementation
procedures, measures and assessments, guides, and toolkits). The
dissemination plan must include the audiences who would most likely
benefit from implementing the model and detailed strategies for
reaching these audiences.
(1) In disseminating the results of the project, grantees must, at
a minimum, conduct at least four of the following six activities:
(i) Promote the model to potential users through the grant's
website or social media;
(ii) Promote the model to potential users through presentations at
national meetings or conferences or publishing journal articles;
(iii) Promote the model in personnel preparation programs at
institutions of higher education;
(iv) Promote the model to Department-funded dissemination networks
(e.g., OSEP TA Centers, Regional Education Labs, Comprehensive
Centers);
(v) Provide training on model implementation to State educational
agencies (SEAs), local educational agencies (LEAs), schools, early
childhood programs or other new sites; and
(vi) Apply for additional funding to continue model dissemination
and scale up to new sites.
(2) To facilitate implementation of the model in new sites,
grantees may also consider collaborating with OSEP-funded TA centers,
personnel preparation programs, and OSEP-funded State Personnel
Development Grant projects; providing webinars, training sessions, or
workshops to State and local agencies; and engaging with other
federally funded TA centers, research networks, or Regional Educational
Laboratories; and
(f) A budget for attendance at the following:
(1) A one and one-half day virtual kickoff meeting, after receipt
of the award;
(2) A three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period. The project must reallocate
funds for travel to the project directors' conference no later than the
end of the third quarter of each budget period if the conference is
conducted virtually; and
(3) Four travel days spread across years two through four of the
project period to attend planning meetings, Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
Other Project Activities
To meet the requirements of this priority, each project, at a
minimum, must--
(a) Communicate and collaborate on an ongoing basis with other
Department-funded projects, consistent with paragraph (e) under the
heading Application Requirements;
(b) Maintain ongoing telephone and email communication with the
OSEP project officer and the other model demonstration projects funded
under this priority;
(c) Provide information annually using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection and the process of
implementing the model in the sites.
Note: The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/.
(d) If the project maintains a website, include relevant
information about the model, the intervention, and the demonstration
activities and ensure that the website meets or exceeds government- or
industry-recognized standards for accessibility; and
(e) Ensure that annual progress toward meeting project goals is
posted on a public website.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48
months to disseminate the results of the project if the grantee is
achieving the intended
[[Page 11262]]
outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data gathered as part of
the project evaluation) and making a positive contribution to
identifying the system supports needed to implement the model. Each
applicant must include in its application a plan for the full 60-month
period. The fifth year should be budgeted at $100,000. In deciding
whether to continue funding the project for the fifth year, the
Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a),
including--
(a) The recommendations of a review team consisting of the OSEP
project officer and other experts who have experience and knowledge in
family engagement and children with disabilities. This review will be
held during the first half of the fourth year of the project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The degree to which the project's activities have contributed
to changed practices and improved outcomes for children with
disabilities.
Competitive Preference Priority: Within this absolute priority, we
give competitive preference to applications that address the following
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an additional 9
points to an application that meets the competitive preference
priority. Applicants should indicate in the abstract whether the
competitive preference priority is addressed.
The competitive preference priority is:
Models in Schools with High Percentages of Military-Connected
Students (0, 5, 7, or 9 points).
(a) Under this priority, applicants will receive five points if
they propose to locate one site for the model in a school with a high
percentage of military-connected \11\ students, seven points if they
propose to locate two sites for the model in schools with a high
percentage of military-connected students, and nine points if they
propose to locate three or more sites for the model in schools with a
high percentage of military-connected students. Applicants must include
a letter of commitment from the proposed sites describing how the
unique needs of military-connected families--including simplifying and
streamlining the onboarding process into the new school system,
facilitating the transfer of IEPs without a major disruption in service
delivery, and providing required services to children without
disruptions in educational programming--will be addressed in the
implementation of the model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ A military-connected student is defined as a student whose
parent or guardian is on active duty, in the National Guard, or in
the Reserve components of the United States military services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) For the purpose of this priority, a high percentage of
military-connected students is 20 percent or higher of the school
population.
References
Baquedano-Lopez, P., Alexander, R.A., & Hernandez, S.J. (2013). Equity
issues in parental and community involvement in schools: What teacher
educators need to know. Review of Research in Education, 37, 149-182.
www.jstor.org/stable/24641960.
Buren, M., Maggin, D., & Brown, C. (2020). Meta-synthesis on the
experiences of families from nondominant communities and special
education collaboration. Exceptionality, 28(4), 259-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2018.1480953.
Doucet, F. (2011). (Re)Constructing home and school: Immigrant parents,
agency, and the (un)desirability of bridging multiple worlds. Teachers
College Record, 113(12), 2705-2738. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301201.
Dyrness, A. (2009). Cultural exclusion and critique in the era of good
intentions: Using participatory research to transform parent roles in
urban school reform. Social Justice, 36(4)(118), 36-53. www.jstor.org/stable/29768560.
Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental involvement and students' academic
achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 1-
22. www.jstor.org/stable/23358867.
Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The
impact of school, family, and community connections on student
achievement. National Center for Family and Community Connections with
Schools, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED536946.
Hill, N.E., & Tyson, D.F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle
school: A meta-analytic assessment of the strategies that promote
achievement. Development Psychology, 45(3), 740-763. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015362.
Ishimaru, A.M. (2020). Just schools: Building equitable collaborations
with families and communities. Teachers College Press.
Jeynes, W.H. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relation of parental
involvement to urban elementary school student academic achievement.
Urban Education, 40(3), 237-269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085905274540.
Jeynes, W.H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and
urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis.
Urban Education, 42(1), 82-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085906293818.
Jeynes, W.H. (2012). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of different types
of parental involvement programs for urban students. Urban Education,
47(4), 706-742. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912445643.
Kim, S.W., & Hill, N.E. (2015). Including fathers in the picture: A
meta-analysis of parental involvement and students' academic
achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 919-934.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000023.
Kramarczuk Voulgarides, C., Fergus, E., & King Thorius, K.A. (2017).
Pursuing equity: Disproportionality in special education and the
reframing of technical solutions to address systemic inequities. Review
of Research in Education, 41(1), 61-87. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X16686947.
Lareau, A., & Horvat, E.M. (1999). Moments of social inclusion and
exclusion race, class, and cultural capital in family-school
relationships. Sociology of Education, 72(1), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.2307/2673185.
Olivos, E.M. (2006). The power of parents: A critical perspective of
bicultural parent involvement in public schools. Peter Lang New York.
Xu, Y. (2020). Engaging families of young children with disabilities
through family-school-community partnerships. Early Child Development
and Care, 190(12), 1959-1968. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1552950.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section
681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the
APA inapplicable to the priorities in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent
[[Page 11263]]
with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil
rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
$55,345,000 for the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve
Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program for FY
2024, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,600,000 for this
competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final
congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow
enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates
funds for this program.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2025 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $300,000 to $400,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $350,000.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,600,000 per
project for a project period of 60 months.
Note: Applicants must describe, in their applications, the amount
of funding being requested for each 12-month budget period. The fifth-
year budget period should be budgeted at $100,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including charter schools that
are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies;
private nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated
States; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
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: 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 described in its application--to the following types of
entities: IHEs, nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the
activities proposed in the application, and other 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, published in the Federal
Register 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.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to no more than 50 pages and (2) use the
following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5 x 11, on one side
only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the
assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the
[[Page 11264]]
guidance provided in the application package for completing the
abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements,
the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, or the
appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of
the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables,
figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The potential contribution of the proposed project to increased
knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, or
effective strategies;
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build
local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the
needs of the target population;
(iii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in
teaching and student achievement; and
(iv) The likely utility of the products (such as information,
materials, processes, or techniques) that will result from the proposed
project, including the potential for their being used effectively in a
variety of other settings.
(b) Quality of the project design (35 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the
proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable;
(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project
includes a thorough, high-quality review of the relevant literature, a
high-quality plan for project implementation, and the use of
appropriate methodological tools to ensure successful achievement of
project objectives;
(iii) The quality of the proposed demonstration design and
procedures for documenting project activities and results;
(iv) The extent to which the design for implementing and evaluating
the proposed project will result in information to guide possible
replication of project activities or strategies, including information
about the effectiveness of the approach or strategies employed by the
project; and
(v) The extent to which performance feedback and continuous
improvement are integral to the design of the proposed project.
(c) Adequacy of resources and quality of the management plan (25
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources and the
quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
(2) In determining the adequacy of resources and the quality of the
management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization;
(ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project;
(iii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project;
(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate; and
(v) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(d) Quality of the project evaluation (25 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes;
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies;
(iv) The extent to which the evaluation will provide guidance about
effective strategies suitable for replication or testing in other
settings; and
(v) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications.
[[Page 11265]]
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant
if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This
dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must 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 APR
that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure
information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The
Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34
CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to
www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection, analysis, and reporting.
In this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Model Demonstration Projects to Improve Services and
Results for Infants, Toddlers, and Children with Disabilities under the
Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results
for Children With Disabilities program. These measures are:
Current Program Performance Measure: The percentage of
effective evidence-based program models developed by model
demonstration projects that are promoted to States and their partners
through the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network;
Pilot Program Performance Measure: The percentage of
effective program models developed by Model Demonstration Grants that
are sustained beyond the life of the model demonstration project and
promoted to other potential users.
The current program performance measure and the pilot program
performance measure 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).
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee
has
[[Page 11266]]
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.
Dant[eacute] Allen,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration, Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2024-02973 Filed 2-13-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P