[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50462-50470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20698]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities--Model Demonstration Projects for English Learners With or
at Risk of Having a Disability
AGENCY: Office of Special Education Programs, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview Information: Technical Assistance and Dissemination To
Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Model
Demonstration Projects for English Learners With or At Risk of Having a
Disability; Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year
(FY) 2011.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326M.
DATES: Applications Available: August 15, 2011.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 14, 2011.
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.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority
is from allowable activities specified in the statute or otherwise
authorized in the statute (see 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 2011 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards based on the list of unfunded applicants 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 for English Learners With or At Risk of
Having a Disability (84.326M).
Background:
By the year 2030, English Learners \1\ will comprise an estimated
40 percent of the K-12 student population in the United States
(National Symposium on Learning Disabilities in English Language
Learners, 2003). While total enrollment of students in schools has
increased by 20 percent over 15 years, there has been a 160-percent
growth of English Learners enrolled in schools
[[Page 50463]]
during the same time period (National Clearinghouse for English
Language Acquisition [NCELA], 2008). Some States experienced up to a
700-percent growth in the number of English Learners in their schools
between 1994-1995 and 2004-2005 (Pay[aacute]n & Nettles, n.d.). Given
this growth in the number of English Learners enrolled in schools, we
expect the number of English Learners with disabilities to increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ States use the definition of Limited English Proficient
(LEP) from Section 9101(25) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 7801(25), as a basis for
their definition of LEP students or English Learners. This
definition is as follows:
The term ``limited English proficient,'' when used with respect
to an individual, means an individual--(A) Who is aged 3 through 21;
(B) who is enrolled or preparing to enroll in an elementary school
or secondary school; (C)(i) Who was not born in the United States or
whose native language is a language other than English; (ii)(I) Who
is a Native American or Alaska Native, or a native resident of the
outlying areas; and (II) who comes from an environment where a
language other than English has had a significant impact on the
individual's level of English language proficiency; or (iii) who is
migratory, whose native language is a language other than English,
and who comes from an environment where a language other than
English is dominant; and (D) whose difficulties in speaking,
reading, writing, or understanding the English language may be
sufficient to deny the individual--(i) The ability to meet the
State's proficient level of achievement on State assessments
described in section 1111(b)(3); (ii) the ability to successfully
achieve in classrooms where the language of instruction is English;
or (iii) the opportunity to participate fully in society.
For purposes of this priority, the term English Learners refers
to those students considered to be Limited English Proficient (LEP)
students or English Learners, as those terms are defined under ESEA
and in the State in which the grantee implements its model
demonstration projects under this priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identifying English Learners with disabilities poses unique
challenges for educators. This is because of the difficulty in
determining whether a student's lack of academic development in reading
is due to a disability or due to English not being the student's first
language. As a group, English Learners receive lower grades and have
higher dropout rates compared to their non-English Learner peers
(Ballantyne, Sanderman, & Levy, 2008; McCardle, MeleMcCarthy, Cutting,
Leos, & D'Emilio, 2005; Nation's Report Card, 2007). Many English
Learners also exhibit low vocabulary levels in English and, therefore,
do not always benefit from reading comprehension and writing supports
that have proven effective in improving reading achievement \2\ with
their English-speaking counterparts (Francis, Rivera, Lesaux, Kieffer,
& Rivera, 2006). While an English Learner's low vocabulary levels may
be due to the fact that English is not the student's first language,
educators need to evaluate whether low vocabulary levels, low reading
achievement scores, or other performance measures are indicators that a
child has, or is at risk of having, a disability. However, due to the
difficulty in determining if an English Learner's lack of academic
progress in reading is due to a disability or due to English not being
the student's first language, practitioners may wait up to five years
to allow an English Learner to develop language skills before assessing
whether the student has a learning disability (Limbos & Geva, 2001).
For English Learners with, or at risk of having, a learning disability,
waiting to intervene can negatively affect their academic progress--
that is, delaying the identification of a student as a student with a
disability delays the delivery of special education and related
services that can help the student make academic progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ For the purpose of this priority, when we refer to a
student's ``academic progress,'' ``reading achievement,'' or
``language development,'' or to test score outcomes, we are
referring to the student's academic progress, reading achievement,
or language development, or test score outcomes in content or a
focus of study that is delivered in the English language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, local educational agencies (LEAs) face two immediate
challenges: improving the reading achievement of English Learners and
then appropriately identifying those English Learners with, or at risk
of having, a disability. There is emerging evidence supporting the use
of multi-tiered instructional frameworks that include an emphasis on
progress monitoring and culturally responsive principles to assist LEAs
in addressing both challenges (Zehr, 2010).
A multi-tiered instructional framework integrates assessment and
intervention to maximize student achievement. With a multi-tiered
instructional framework, schools screen students to identify those at
risk for poor learning outcomes, monitor student progress, provide
evidence-based interventions, and adjust the intensity and nature of
those interventions depending on a student's responsiveness to
instruction (Office of Special Education Programs, 2011). Multi-tiered
instructional frameworks include a varying number of tiers (or levels)
of intensity of instruction. Commonly used frameworks typically
describe three tiers. The primary level includes high-quality core
instruction. The secondary level includes evidence-based
intervention(s) of moderate intensity. The tertiary level includes
individualized intervention(s) of increased intensity for students who
show minimal response to instruction at the secondary level. At all
levels, attention should be on fidelity of implementation, with
consideration for cultural and linguistic responsiveness and
recognition of student strengths (National Center on Response to
Intervention, 2011).
Progress monitoring. Progress monitoring is an important component
of a multi-tiered instructional framework that includes formative
assessments administered at regular intervals to inform instructional
decisionmaking and to determine if the interventions are meeting the
needs of students. Progress monitoring has demonstrated promise as a
means for early identification of students with disabilities,
particularly students with learning disabilities (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006;
Kamps & Greenwood, 2005; Shapiro, Zigmond, Wallace, & Marston, 2011;
Vaughn, 2003). In addition, researchers highly recommend progress
monitoring as a means for working with English Learners and for
assisting struggling readers (Gersten, Compton, Connor, Dimino,
Santoro, Linan-Thompson, Tilly, 2008; Gersten, Baker, Shanahan, Linan-
Thompson, Collins, P., Scarcella, 2007).
Culturally-responsive principles. Culturally responsive principles
promote ``redesigning the learning environments'' and can support the
development and success of all students, including English Learners.
Some examples of incorporating culturally responsive principles into
learning environments include communicating high expectations to all
students, incorporating students' cultural and home experiences into
lessons by reshaping the curriculum to reflect students' experiences,
and engaging students in activities where they can converse with one
another on topics that tap into their background knowledge and
experiences (Gay, 2000; King, Artiles, & Kozleski, 2010). Culturally
responsive principles can be applied to progress monitoring.
In 2006, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) funded
model demonstration projects that identified, developed, and refined
exemplars of progress monitoring. Under those previously funded model
demonstration projects, OSEP required a multi-tiered instructional
framework that included universal screening, progress monitoring, and
instructional interventions at varying levels of intensity. In those
model demonstration projects, progress monitoring within a multi-tiered
framework showed evidence of effectiveness in increasing reading
achievement of students with and without disabilities in classrooms
where the models were implemented (Shapiro, Zigmond, Wallace, &
Marston, 2011). Through this priority, we seek to support projects that
will systematically implement and evaluate multi-tiered instructional
frameworks, which include progress monitoring, incorporate culturally
responsive principles into the learning environment, and provide
reading instruction and reading interventions at varying levels of
intensity to improve outcomes for English Learners with, or at risk of
having, a disability.
Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to support the establishment and
operation of three model demonstration projects that will adapt,
refine, and evaluate multi-tiered instructional frameworks as well as
their components--progress monitoring, culturally responsive
principles, reading instruction, and reading interventions--to
determine if and to what extent the multi-tiered instructional
frameworks: (1) Help to improve reading achievement and language
development for English Learners with, or at risk of having, a
[[Page 50464]]
disability and (2) are useful in assisting educators to determine if
English Learners who are experiencing reading difficulties have a
disability.
To be considered for funding under this absolute priority,
applicants must meet the application requirements contained in this
priority. Each model demonstration project (Project) funded under this
absolute priority also must meet the programmatic and administrative
requirements specified in the priority.
Application Requirements. An applicant must include in its
application--
(a) A logic model that depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed Project. A logic
model communicates how a Project will achieve its outcomes and provides
a framework for both the formative and summative evaluations of the
Project to be conducted by the grantee;
Note: The following Web sites provide more information on logic
models: http://www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html and http://www.tadnet.org/model_and_performance.
(b) A plan to implement the activities described in the Project
Activities section of this priority;
(c) A plan, linked to the proposed Project's logic model, for a
formative evaluation of the proposed Project's activities. The plan
must describe how the formative evaluation will use clear performance
objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the
proposed Project, including objective measures of progress in
implementing the Project and ensuring the quality of products and
services. This formative evaluation must be distinct from any
independent evaluation the Department may conduct of the Project;
(d) A description of the proposed model demonstration that must
include a multi-tiered instructional framework that uses progress
monitoring and incorporates culturally responsive principles into the
learning environment to address the needs of English Learners with, or
at risk of having, a disability. In addition, a description of all
other components within the multi-tiered instructional framework,
including reading instruction and reading interventions provided at
varying intensity levels;
(e) A description of the research evidence that supports the
effectiveness of the proposed multi-tiered instructional framework as a
whole, as well as each of its components;
(f) A description of the methods to be used for recruiting and
selecting at least five elementary schools with kindergarten through
third grade (K-3) students, of which at least 40 percent and no fewer
than 100 K-3 students have been identified as English Learners. To the
extent the applicant identifies in its application schools willing to
participate in the applicant's model demonstration, include a
description of the demographics of the student population typically
served by these schools, including information about the cultural and
linguistic diversity of the students enrolled in the schools;
Note: As specified in paragraph (b) of the Project Activities
section of this priority, participating schools will be randomly
assigned either to a pilot group or a non-pilot group. The pilot groups
will be comprised of three schools that will participate in the
applicant's model demonstration and the non-pilot groups will be
comprised of at least two schools that do not participate in the
applicant's model demonstration (see paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of
the Project Activities). Final site selection will be determined in
consultation with the OSEP Project Officer following the kick-off
meeting. Random assignment to the pilot or non-pilot groups will be
conducted by an independent entity, such as the OSEP-funded Model
Demonstration Coordination Center (MDCC). Pilot schools will
participate in a continuous evaluation of the applicant's model
demonstration. Evaluation data from schools in the non-pilot group will
be limited to available district data; and
(g) A budget for attendance at the following:
(1) A 1\1/2\-day kick-off meeting to be held in Washington, DC
within 4 weeks after receipt of the award and a 1-day annual planning
meeting held in Washington, DC with the OSEP Project Officer during
each subsequent year of the project period. At the kick-off meeting,
OSEP personnel and the grantees, in consultation with MDCC, will assign
responsibilities for the literature review, outline a project data
coordination plan, identify cross-project data collection instruments,
and determine common evaluation questions. As part of the cross-project
coordination, projects funded under this priority must collect data
across common measures that may or may not be the same as those
proposed by the applicant. In addition to the measures listed here,
other common measures may include observations or data that provide
information that can be used to describe the context of schools,
classrooms, or students participating in the project, as well as
schools, classrooms, or students who are not part of the project. These
data will support the formative and summative evaluations of the
Projects and will provide information on the contexts in which models
are implemented and to determine the usefulness and generalizability of
the models.
(2) A 3-day Project Directors' Conference in Washington, DC during
each year of the project period.
(3) Two 2-day trips annually to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this priority, each
Project, at a minimum, must conduct the following activities:
(a) During year one of the Project, collaborate with other Projects
funded under this priority and prepare a literature review (a plan for
this review will be discussed during the kick-off meeting described
above) that synthesizes the research on policies and practices related
to progress monitoring, culturally responsive principles, reading
instruction, and reading interventions at varying intensity levels for
English Learners with or at risk of having a disability. In conducting
this literature review, the Projects must use standards that are
consistent with those used by the What Works Clearinghouse and the
definitions of strong and moderate evidence contained in the Notice of
Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant
Programs published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2010 (75 FR
78486). If the Projects determine that they cannot conduct the review
using these standards, they must develop and use other rigorous
standards. The literature review prepared under this paragraph must
present the research in a format accessible to the Projects' relevant
audiences, including State educational agencies (SEAs), LEAs, and
schools. The literature review must be subject to external peer review
and must include a summary of research on the effectiveness of multi-
tiered instructional frameworks that use progress monitoring and
incorporate culturally responsive principles into the learning
environment and include reading instruction and reading interventions
at varying intensity levels to--
(a)(1) Improve reading achievement and language development of
English Learners with or at risk of having a disability; and
(2) Assist educators in determining if English Learners
experiencing reading difficulties have or are at risk of having a
disability.
[[Page 50465]]
(b) Implement, after consultation with the OSEP Project Officer and
the MDCC, a random assignment design with longitudinal data collection
in at least five elementary schools with grades K-3 (schools A, B, C,
D, E, etc.), using the following approach:
(1) Three of the schools will be randomly assigned to a pilot group
that participates in the Project's model demonstration (pilot group).
School A in the pilot group will begin in year one of the project
period and will implement the Project's model demonstration for at
least three years. Schools B and C of the pilot group will begin
implementing the Project's model demonstration in year two and will
implement the model demonstration for two years.
(2) The remaining schools (schools D, E, etc.) will be assigned to
a non-pilot group that will continue ``business as usual'' (non-pilot
group) during the years the schools in the pilot group implement the
Project's model demonstration.
(3) Cooperate with any Department-sponsored independent evaluation
of the model demonstration by providing the Department or its
contractor with district administrative records on the participating
schools and their students.
(c) In grades K-3 in the three elementary schools in the pilot
group, implement model demonstrations that--
(1) Use multi-tiered instructional frameworks that--
(i) Use progress monitoring and incorporate culturally responsive
principles in the learning environment; and
(ii) Include reading instruction and reading interventions at
varying intensity levels;
(2) Assess the usefulness of progress monitoring, culturally
responsive principles, reading interventions, and reading instruction
at varying intensity levels in improving reading achievement and
language development of all students who participate in the Project's
model demonstration;
(3) Assess the usefulness of progress monitoring and culturally
responsive principles in assisting educators in determining if English
Learners experiencing reading difficulties have or are at risk of
having a disability; and
(4) Describe the unique characteristics of the school and the
cultural and linguistic diversity of the students that may affect
reading achievement and language development of the students who
participate in the Project's model demonstration.
(d) In accordance with the data coordination plan for the funded
projects, which will be developed at the kick-off meeting described in
paragraph (g)(1) of the Application Requirements, collect formative
data on the following factors:
(1) Reading achievement and language development, including
trajectories of reading achievement and language development, of all
students who participate in the Project's model demonstration as well
as the individual and contextual factors that affect reading
achievement and language development.
(2) The usefulness of progress monitoring and culturally responsive
principles to assist educators in determining if English Learners
experiencing reading difficulties have or are at risk of having a
disability.
(3) Quality of instruction, the language of instruction, the types
of academic and language support available in grades K-3 at the schools
in the pilot groups.
(4) Student engagement, instructional decisionmaking (including the
use of data in making instructional decisions), and classroom social
climate.
(5) Estimates of the cost of implementing the model, including
costs of the various components of the model;
(e) Develop a framework for educators that would provide
developmental benchmarks in reading and language development and
contribute to appropriate identification of English Learners with or at
risk of having a disability;
(f) Provide initial and ongoing professional development to general
educators, special educators, related services providers, and
administrators who are implementing the model demonstration at the
schools in the pilot groups. Establish a process for providing feedback
to these personnel on their implementation of the components (e.g.,
progress monitoring, culturally responsive principles, reading
instruction and reading interventions that are provided at varying
intensity levels) of the instructional framework used in the model
demonstration; and
(g) Implement a formative evaluation plan that includes a detailed
description of the Project's model demonstration and its components, a
description of the school and district characteristics required to
successfully implement and continue use of the model demonstration
after the end of the Project period, and the processes for collecting
and analyzing--in accordance with its data coordination plan--common
cross-project data related to the extent to which the Project's model
demonstration--
(1) Contributes to improved English Learners' reading achievement
and language development;
(2) Assists educators to determine if English Learners who are
experiencing reading difficulties have a disability;
(3) Is implemented with fidelity with acceptable variations based
on school contexts and the cultural and linguistic diversity of
students that may affect their reading achievement and language
development;
(4) Provides effective professional development to personnel
implementing the model demonstration.
(h) Participate in discussions, facilitated by the MDCC, with the
three projects about developing a data coordination plan, cross site
data collection instruments, common evaluation questions, how to
synthesize and analyze the data collection, monitor fidelity of
implementation, ensure reliability of data, and foster dissemination of
information.
(i) Identify methods for ongoing communication and collaboration
among families, students, school staff, and project staff to support
the implementation and evaluation of the model demonstration;
(j) Communicate and collaborate on an ongoing basis with
Department-funded projects, including the National Center on Response
to Intervention (http://rti4success.org) and the Center on Instruction
(http://www.centeroninstruction.org) to share information on successful
strategies and implementation challenges regarding progress monitoring,
reading instruction, reading interventions, culturally responsive
principles for English Learners with or at risk of having a disability;
(k) Prior to developing any new product, submit a proposal for the
product to the TACC database for approval from the OSEP Project
Officer. The development of new products should be consistent with the
product definition and guidelines posted on the TACC Web site (http://www.tadnet.org);
(l) Maintain ongoing telephone and e-mail communication with the
OSEP Project Officer and other Projects funded under this priority; and
Note: The MDCC will provide support for monthly teleconferences
with all projects to discuss cross-project activities.
(m) If the Project maintains a Web site, include relevant
information about the model demonstration and documents in a form that
meets government or industry recognized standards for accessibility.
[[Page 50466]]
References
Ballantyne, K.G., Sanderman, A.R., Levy, J. (2008). Educating
English language learners: Building teacher capacity. Washington,
DC: National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition.
Available from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/practice/mainstream_teachers.htm.
Francis, D., Rivera, M., Lesaux, N., Kieffer, M., & Rivera, H.
(2006). Practical guidelines for the education of English language
learners: Research-Based recommendations for instruction and
academic interventions. Retrieved from http://www.centeroninstruction.org/practical-guidelines-for-the-education-of-english-language-learners-research-based-recommendations-for-serving-adolescent-newcomers.
Fuchs, D. & Fuchs, L.S. (2006). New directions in research
introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid
is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1).
Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research,
and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C.M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L.,
Linan-Thompson, S., and Tilly, W.D. (2008). Assisting students
struggling with reading: Response to intervention and multi-tier
intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide.
(NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences,
U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf.
Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins,
P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language
instruction for English learners in the elementary grades: A
practice guide (NCEE 2007-4011). Washington, DC: National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/20074011.pdf.
Kamps, D., & Greenwood, C.R. (2005). Formulating secondary-level
reading interventions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(6), 500-
509.
King, A., Artiles, A.J., & Kozleski, E. (2010). Professional
learning for culturally responsive teaching. Retrieved from http://www.equityallianceatasu.org/sites/default/files/Website_files/exemplarFINAL.pdf.
Limbos, M.M. & Geva, E. (2001). Accuracy of teacher assessments of
second-language students at risk for reading disability. Journal of
Learning Disabilities 34(2), 136-151.
McCardle, P., Mele-McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D'Emilio,
T. (2005). Learning disabilities in English language learners:
Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice,
20(1), 1-5.
The Nation's Report Card, Reading Report. Retrieved from http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2007/r0015.asp.
National Center on Response to Intervention. Retrieved from http://rti4success.org/categorycontents/ multi-level--prevention--system.
National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition. Elementary
and secondary enrollment of ELL students in U.S., 1989-90 to 2005-
2006. Retrieved from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/rcd/BE021773/How_Has_The_Limited_English.pdf.
Office of Special Education Programs. Memo: A Response to
Intervention (RTI) Process Cannot Be Used to Delay-Deny an
Evaluation for Eligibility Under the Individuals with Disabilities
Act (IDEA) to the State Directors of Education. 21 Jan. 2011.
Pay[aacute]n, R.M., & Nettles, M.T. (n.d.). Current state of
English-language learners in the U.S. K-12 student population.
Retrieved on December 21, 2010, from http://www.ets.org/Media/Conferences_and_Events/pdf/ELLsympsium/ELL_factsheet.pdf.
Shapiro, E.S., Zigmond, N., Wallace, T., & Marston D. (Eds.),
(2011). Models for implementing response to intervention: Tools,
outcomes, and implications. New York: Guilford Press.
Vaughn, S. (2003). How many tiers are needed for response to
intervention to achieve acceptable prevention outcomes? Presented at
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities RTI Symposium,
Kansas City, MO. Retrieved May 14, 2010, from The National Research
Center on Learning Disabilities Web site: http://www.nrcld.org/symposium2003/vaughn/vaughn.pdf.
Zehr, M. (2010). RTI said to pay off in gains for English Learners.
Retrieved on March 11, 2011 from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/01/22/19rtiells_ep.h29.html?tkn=W[YCLqVUfF0pqicVwkwTVkZdlSyTBmx7rRRb.
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 and
requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
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: $1,200,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2012 from the list of
unfunded applicants from this competition.
Estimated Average Size of Award: $400,000.
Estimated Range of Awards: $375,000-$400,000.
Maximum Awards: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $400,000 for a single budget period of 12 months. The
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal
Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 48 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public 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.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Other: General Requirements--(a) The projects funded under this
competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
IDEA).
(b) Applicants and grant recipients funded under this competition
must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals
with disabilities ages birth through 26 in planning, implementing, and
evaluating the projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address To Request Application Package: You can obtain an
application package via the Internet, from the Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs), or from the program office.
To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address:
http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. To obtain a
copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S.
Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304.
Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. Fax: (703) 605-6794. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call, toll free: 1-877-
576-7734.
[[Page 50467]]
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: http://www.EDPubs.gov or at its e-mail address: [email protected].
If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to
identify this program or competition as follows: CFDA number 84.326M.
To obtain a copy from the program office, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition. Page
Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where
you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use
to evaluate your application. You must limit the application narrative
to the equivalent of no more than 70 pages, using the following
standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography, the references, or the letters of support.
However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative
section (Part III).
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit or if
you apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the page limit.
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: August 15, 2011.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 14, 2011.
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site, or in paper format by
mail or hand delivery. For information (including dates and times)
about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format
by mail or hand delivery, please refer to section IV. 7. Other
Submission Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
4. 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.
5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, and Central Contractor Registry: To do business with the
Department of Education, you must--
a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the Central
Contractor Registry (CCR), the Government's primary registrant
database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active CCR registration with current information
while your application is under review by the Department and, if you
are awarded a grant, during the project period.
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number
can be created within one business day.
If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or
organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service.
If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal
Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a
new TIN, please allow 2-5 weeks for your TIN to become active.
The CCR registration process may take five or more business days to
complete. If you are currently registered with the CCR, you may not
need to make any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN
associated with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will
need to update your CCR registration on an annual basis. This may take
three or more business days to complete.
In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov,
you must (1) Be designated by your organization as an Authorized
Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with
Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the
following Grants.gov Web page: http://www.Grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp.
7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under
this competition may be submitted electronically or in paper format by
mail or hand delivery.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
We are participating as a partner in the Governmentwide Grants.gov
Apply site. Model Demonstration Projects on the Use of Progress
Monitoring for English Learners (including those with disabilities) to
Improve Reading Achievement and Language Development and to Support
Disability Identification competition, CFDA number 84.326M, is included
in this project. We request your participation in Grants.gov.
If you choose to submit your application electronically, you must
use the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at http://www.Grants.gov.
Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the
application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit
your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant
application to us.
You may access the electronic grant application for the Model
Demonstration Projects on the Use of Progress Monitoring for English
Learners (including those with disabilities) to Improve Reading
Achievement and Language Development and to Support Disability
Identification competition at http://www.Grants.gov. You must search
for the downloadable application package for this program by the CFDA
number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search
(e.g., search for 84.326, not 84.326M).
[[Page 50468]]
Please note the following:
Your participation in Grants.gov is voluntary.
When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find
information about submitting an application electronically through the
site, as well as the hours of operation.
Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must
be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as
otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if
it is received--that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov
system--after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply
with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from
Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application
because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after
4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.
The amount of time it can take to upload an application
will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
You should review and follow the Education Submission
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures
pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5
system home page at http://www.G5.gov.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you submit your application in paper format.
If you submit your application electronically, you must
submit all documents electronically, including all information you
typically provide on the following forms: the Application for Federal
Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental
Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-Construction Programs
(ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications.
If you submit your application electronically, you must
upload any narrative sections and all other attachments to your
application as files in a .PDF (Portable Document) format only. If you
upload a file type other than a .PDF or submit a password-protected
file, we will not review that material.
Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send
a second notification to you by e-mail. This second notification
indicates that the Department has received your application and has
assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified
identifying number unique to your application).
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues
With the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
If you are prevented from electronically submitting your
application on the application deadline date because of technical
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension
until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing
instructions described elsewhere in this notice.
If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC
time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this
notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you
experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk
Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a
technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that
problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. The
Department will contact you after a determination is made on whether
your application will be accepted.
Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply
only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the
Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed
to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before
the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem
you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the
U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must mail the
original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.326M), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with
your local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery,
you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of
your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date,
to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number
84.326M), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between
[[Page 50469]]
8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays,
Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper
Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the
Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by the
Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix
letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your
application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification
of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this
notification within 15 business days from the application deadline
date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application
Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
of Education (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 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 the 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. However, if the Department
decides to select an equal number of applications in each group for
funding, this may result in different cut-off points for fundable
applications in each group.
4. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary
may impose special 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 34 CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has not fulfilled
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.
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). 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. 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 multi-year 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 http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), 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 Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve
Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program. These
measures focus on the extent to which projects provide high-quality
products and services, the relevance of project products and services
to educational and early intervention policy and practice, and the use
of products and services to improve educational and early intervention
policy and practice.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).
5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.253, the extent to which a
grantee has made ``substantial progress toward meeting the objectives
in its approved application.'' This consideration includes the review
of a grantee's progress in meeting the targets and projected outcomes
in its approved application, and whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and
budget. In making a continuation grant, 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. Agency Contact
For Further Information Contact: Dr. Grace Zamora Dur[aacute]n,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4088,
Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202)
245-7328.
If you use a TDD, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free,
at 1-800-877-8339.
[[Page 50470]]
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by
contacting the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS,
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System
at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document,
as well as all other documents of this Department published in the
Federal Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: http://www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: August 9, 2011 .
Alexa Posny,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2011-20698 Filed 8-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P