[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59074-59085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24563]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Subtitle B, Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2011-OS-0005]
RIN 1894-AA02
State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program and Discretionary and
Other Formula Grant Programs
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed revisions to certain data collection and
reporting requirements, and proposed priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary of Education (Secretary) established
requirements for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) program in
a notice of final requirements, definitions, and approval criteria
published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2009 (November 2009
Notice). In this notice, the Secretary proposes to revise some of those
requirements. In a separate notice of interim final requirement, the
Secretary is extending to January 31, 2012, the deadline by which a
State must collect and publicly report data and information under the
SFSF program.
In addition, the Secretary proposes in this notice to establish a
priority that the U.S. Department of Education (Department) may use, as
appropriate, in any future discretionary grant competitions. The
Department would give a priority to States that have developed and
implemented the statewide longitudinal data system (SLDS) required
under SFSF Indicator (b)(1) on or before the applicable deadline.
Through this notice, we also remind grantees that under its current
authority, the Department may identify grantees as high risk and impose
sanctions on them for failing to meet programmatic requirements. In
addition, the Department is proposing that it may take enforcement
action against a State educational agency (SEA) under certain
circumstances where a State fails to meet the requirements of
Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12).
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before October 24, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments by fax or by e-mail. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your comments only one time. In
addition, please include the Docket ID and the term ``State Fiscal
Stabilization Fund--Proposed Revisions'' at the top of your comments.
[[Page 59075]]
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov to submit your comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on
the site under ``How To Use This Site.''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed revisions to certain
data collection and reporting requirements and proposed priority,
address them to Office of the Deputy Secretary (Attention: State Fiscal
Stabilization Fund Proposed Revisions Comments), U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 7E214, Washington, DC 20202-
6200.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy for comments
received from members of the public (including comments submitted by
mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery) is to make these
submissions available for public viewing in their entirety on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to include in their comments only
information that they wish to make publicly available on the Internet.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Butler, State Fiscal
Stabilization Fund Program, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Ave., SW., room 7E214, Washington, DC 20202-0008. Telephone: (202) 260-
9737 or by e-mail: SFSFcomments@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final revisions to certain data collection and
reporting requirements, and final priority, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific proposal that each comment addresses.
We invite you also to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 and
their overall requirements of reducing regulatory burden that might
result from these proposed revisions to certain data collection and
reporting requirements and proposed priority. Please suggest further
ways we could reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits
while preserving the effective and efficient administration of the
program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about this notice by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also
inspect the public comments in person in room 7E214, 400 Maryland
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal
holidays.
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The SFSF program provided approximately $48.6
billion in formula grants to States to help stabilize State and local
budgets in order to minimize and avoid reductions in education and
other essential services, in exchange for a State's commitment to
advance education reform in four key areas: (1) Achieving equity in the
distribution of teachers; (2) improving the collection and use of data;
(3) standards and assessments; and (4) supporting struggling schools.
Program Authority: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009, Division A, Title XIV--State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, Pub.
L. 111-5; 20 U.S.C. 1221e-3 and 3474.
Proposed Revisions to Reporting Requirements
Background
Section 14005(d) of Division A of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) requires a State receiving funds under
the SFSF program to provide assurances in four key areas of education
reform: (1) Achieving equity in teacher distribution; (2) improving
collection and use of data; (3) standards and assessments; and (4)
supporting struggling schools. In the November 2009 Notice (74 FR
58436), we established specific data and information requirements
(assurance indicators and descriptors) that a State must meet with
respect to the statutory assurances. We also established specific
requirements for the plans that a State had to submit as part of its
application for the second phase of funding under the SFSF program,
describing the steps it would take to collect and publicly report the
required data and other information. As we explained in the November
2009 Notice, these two sets of requirements provide transparency on the
extent to which a State is implementing the actions for which it
provided the assurances. Increased access to and focus on these data
better enable States and other stakeholders to identify strengths and
weaknesses in education systems and to determine where concentrated
reform effort is warranted.
We are taking this action in response to the January 18, 2011
Executive Order 13563 entitled ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review'' and the February 28, 2011 Memorandum from the President to
executive departments and agencies entitled ``Administrative
Flexibility, Lower Costs, and Better Results for State, Local, and
Tribal Governments.'' These documents direct each Federal executive
department and agency to review periodically its existing significant
regulations in order to determine whether any of those regulations
should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed so as to make
the department's or agency's regulatory program more effective or less
burdensome in achieving regulatory objectives. These proposed
modifications would address concerns raised by some States regarding
their capacity to meet the requirements in the November 2009 Notice.
As a result of a regulatory review of the SFSF program
requirements, the Secretary is publishing elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register an IFR that extends to January 31, 2012 the
deadline for States to collect and publicly report data and information
under the program. In addition, in this notice, the Secretary proposes
to: (1) Eliminate the requirement for States to report data annually
for Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9) and (d)(1) through (d)(6); (2)
extend to December 31, 2012, upon submission of an approvable request
by a State, the deadline for meeting the requirements under Indicators
(b)(1) and (c)(12); (3) extend to December 31, 2012, upon submission of
an approvable request by a State, the deadline for publicly reporting
or developing the capacity to collect and publicly report student
enrollment data under Indicator (c)(11) for high school graduates who
enroll in an in-State public institution of higher education (IHE); and
(4) apply an alternative standard, upon submission of an approvable
request by a State, by which a State may meet the Indicator (c)(11)
data collection and reporting requirements for high school graduates
who enroll in private or out-of-State public IHEs. The Secretary
proposes to establish December 31, 2012 as the
[[Page 59076]]
deadline by which a State must meet the requirements of the Indicator
(c)(11) alternative standard.
In addition to these revisions, the Secretary proposes to establish
a priority that the Department may use in future discretionary grant
competitions, for States that have met the requirements of Indicator
(b)(1) on or before the applicable deadline. The Secretary also is
reminding States of possible sanctions that may be imposed on them for
failing to meet SFSF collection and reporting requirements. Further,
the Secretary is proposing to have the authority to extend those
sanctions to SEAs in States that have received an extension of the
deadline to December 31, 2012 for Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), or
(c)(12) but fail to meet the revised deadline or that have received
permission to use the alternative standard for Indicator (c)(11) but
fail to meet the requirements of that standard by the deadline.
We note that other than the revised January 31, 2012 deadline for
collecting and publicly reporting data that has been established in the
IFR, or unless specifically referenced in this notice, we are not
proposing to modify any other SFSF requirements and those requirements
remain in effect as originally established.
In addition, we note that where the SFSF indicators make use of
information in ``Existing Collections'' (see column 4 of the table in
Section I of State Fiscal Stabilization Fund: Summary of Final
Requirements at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/statestabilization/summary-requirements.doc), the modification of an SFSF indicator does not
affect other Federal requirements for those collections that are
established under separate legal authority. Some of the data that
States submit through the Department's EDFacts system to meet
requirements established under other authorities (e.g., Title I
accountability data) are also reported publicly by States to meet the
requirements of certain SFSF indicators. Those requirements established
by other authorities are not affected by the modification of any SFSF
indicator.
Proposed Revisions
Proposed Elimination of Annual Reporting Requirements for Indicators
(c)(1) Through (c)(9) and (d)(1) Through (d)(6)
Currently, each State is required to collect and publicly report,
at least annually, the data and other information required by
Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9) and (d)(1) through (d)(6). Indicators
(c)(1) through (c)(9) (standards and assessments indicators) require
each State to collect and publicly report data and other information
annually on, among other things, whether students are provided high-
quality State assessments; whether students with disabilities and
limited English proficient students are included in State assessment
systems; and whether the State makes information available regarding
student academic performance in the State compared to the academic
performance of students in other States.
Indicators (d)(1) through (d)(6) (supporting struggling schools
indicators) require a State to collect and publicly report data and
other information annually on, among other things, the progress of
certain groups of schools in the State on State assessments in reading/
language arts and mathematics and on the extent to which reforms to
improve student academic achievement are implemented in the
persistently lowest-achieving schools in the State.
A majority of States have collected and publicly reported the data
and information required by Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9) and (d)(1)
through (d)(6). The data and information highlight the progress each
State is making to address potential inequities in standards and
assessments and to inform the public on the extent to which reforms to
improve student academic achievement are implemented in the
persistently lowest-achieving schools in the State. However, much of
these data are now also collected through other Department information
collections. For example, data on the participation of students with
disabilities, by assessment type, is provided by States as part of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Consolidated State
Performance Report (CSPR) and the annual assessment data reporting
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The CSPRs are
available at http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/consolidated/sy08-09part1/index.html. Data are also available to the public about the
participation of students with disabilities by assessment type at
https://www.ideadata.org/PartBData.asp. In addition, data about the
performance of students on statewide assessments, by subgroup
(including students with disabilities and limited English proficient
students), are publicly available at http://www.eddataexpress.ed.gov/.
Under the IFR, States have until January 31, 2012, to collect and
publicly report the data and information required under the SFSF
indicators and descriptors, including Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9)
and (d)(1) through (d)(6). However, given the availability of these
data through other sources, we do not believe it continues to be
necessary to have States separately collect and report data for
Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9) and Indicators (d)(1) through (d)(6)
more than one time under the SFSF program. Any State that has already
collected and publicly reported these data would not be required to
take any further actions relative to these indicators for the purposes
of the SFSF program. Any State that has not already provided data under
these Indicators must do so by the January 31, 2012 deadline.
Proposed Extension of Deadline for Indicators (b)(1) and (c)(12)
Indicator (b)(1) requires a State to identify which of the 12
elements in section 6401(e)(2)(D) of the America COMPETES Act are
included in its SLDS. Any State that did not have an SLDS that included
all 12 elements was required to provide the Department, as part of its
SFSF Phase 2 application, a plan for fully developing and implementing
such a system by September 30, 2011.
Indicator (c)(12) requires each State to collect and publicly
report course completion data for high school graduates who enroll in a
public IHE in the State.\1\ If, at the time of submission of its SFSF
Phase 2 application, a State lacked the capacity to collect and
publicly report the specified course completion data it had to provide
the Department with a plan for how it would collect and report those
data or develop the capacity to do so by September 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Specifically, Indicator (c)(12) requires each State to
provide for the State, for each LEA in the State, for each high
school in the State and, at each of these levels, by student
subgroup (consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA),
of the students who graduate from high school consistent with 34 CFR
200.19(b)(1)(i) who enroll in a public IHE (as defined in section
101(a) of the Higher Education Act) in the State within 16 months of
receiving a regular high school diploma, the number and percentage
(including numerator and denominator) who complete at least one
year's worth of college credit (applicable to a degree) within two
years of enrollment in the IHE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Department noted in its November 2009 Notice, timely and
reliable information from across sectors will facilitate program
evaluation and help determine whether a program is improving outcomes
for students. Thus, it is imperative that States complete the
development and implementation of an SLDS that includes the 12 elements
required under the America COMPETES Act. Further, a State must have an
SLDS to be able to report the course
[[Page 59077]]
completion data required under Indicator (c)(12) that provides
information on how effectively schools in the State are preparing their
students for postsecondary education.
The Department recognizes the challenges and competing priorities
that many States have faced in trying to meet the requirements of
Indicators (b)(1) and (c)(12) by the September 30, 2011 deadline.
During program monitoring, States have expressed concerns about their
ability to fully develop and implement an SLDS by the established
deadline. In addition, many States indicated in their March 2011
Amended Application for Funding Under the State Fiscal Stabilization
Fund Program that they still had not fully incorporated the following
elements into their SLDS: (1) Student-level transcript information,
including data on courses completed and grades earned (Element 9); (2)
information regarding the extent to which students transition
successfully from secondary school to postsecondary education,
including whether students enroll in remedial coursework (Element 11);
and (3) other information determined necessary to address alignment and
adequate preparation for success in postsecondary education (Element
12). Further, most States reported in their amended SFSF application
that they do not yet have the capacity to collect and publicly report
the course completion data required under Indicator (c)(12).
As a result, in the IFR, the Department is extending to January 31,
2012 the deadline by which States must meet the requirements of the
SFSF indicators and descriptors, including Indicators (b)(1) and
(c)(12). Further, the Department proposes in this notice to extend to
December 31, 2012, upon submission of an approvable request by a State,
the deadline for the development and implementation of an SLDS that
includes the 12 elements included in the America COMPETES Act. In
addition, the Department proposes to extend to December 31, 2012, upon
submission of an approvable request by a State, the deadline by which a
State must have the capacity to collect and publicly report the
required course completion data under Indicator (c)(12).
The Department proposes that, to be approvable, an extension
request must provide the specific information described under the
heading Proposed Requirements for Requests for Extensions to December
31, 2012, of Deadlines for Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use
of the Indicator (c)(11) Alternative Standard.
Proposed Revisions to Requirements Under Indicator (c)(11)
Under the requirements for Indicator (c)(11) established in the
November 2009 Notice, each State must (1) Collect and publicly report,
by September 30, 2011, data on the number and percentage of high school
graduates who enroll in IHEs--public or private, in-State or out-of-
State; or (2) submit to the Department a plan describing how the State
would develop, by September 30, 2011, the capacity to do so. Further,
under those requirements, each State must submit to the Department, by
September 30, 2011, evidence demonstrating that it has developed the
capacity to collect and publicly report the data.
A number of States have raised concerns about the challenges in
collecting and publicly reporting student enrollment data. In their
March 2011 SFSF amended applications, 43 States indicated that they did
not yet have the capacity to collect and publicly report those data.
Therefore, in the IFR, the Department is extending until January 31,
2012, the deadline for States to comply with the SFSF indicators and
descriptors, including Indicator (c)(11). Further, in this notice the
Department proposes to extend to December 31, 2012, upon submission of
an approvable request by a State, the deadline by which a State must
collect and publicly report or have the capacity to collect and
publicly report the student enrollment data required under Indicator
(c)(11) for high school graduates who attend an in-State public IHE.
The Department would grant an extension to December 31, 2012 only to a
State that submits a request that contains the specific information
proposed under the heading Proposed Requirements for Requests for
Extensions to December 31, 2012, of Deadlines for Indicator (b)(1),
(c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use of the Indicator (c)(11) Alternative
Standard.
The Department acknowledges that obtaining student enrollment data
from private and out-of-State public IHEs can be particularly
challenging. Therefore, the Department also proposes to establish an
alternative standard by which a State may meet the Indicator (c)(11)
data collection and reporting requirements with respect to high school
graduates who enroll in private or out-of-State public IHEs. While such
data are essential in determining how well an LEA or secondary school
is preparing its students for postsecondary education, some States may
need additional time to develop fully the capacity to collect and
report these data. Under the alternative standard, a State would have
to increase, by December 31, 2012, its current capacity to collect and
publicly report the required student enrollment data for high school
graduates who attend a private or an out-of-State public IHE. A State
would not be required to be fully capable of collecting and reporting
these data by December 31, 2012. For the purposes of the alternative
standard, a State would be considered to be making acceptable progress
in increasing its capacity to collect and publicly report student
enrollment data for high school graduates who enroll in private or out-
of-State public IHEs through such activities as: (1) Entering into data
reciprocity agreements with private in-State IHEs that receive any
State funds, including those for student financial aid, research, or
any other activities; (2) entering into data reciprocity agreements
with private in-State IHEs over which the State exercises significant
oversight, such as serving as an accrediting body; (3) entering into
data reciprocity agreements with geographically contiguous States or
States with which it has tuition reciprocity agreements; or (4)
conducting a data analysis to determine the out-of-State IHEs where
large numbers of the State's high school graduates enroll.
The Department proposes that States that use the alternative
standard for Indicator (c)(11) be required to publicly report, by
December 31, 2012, the following--
(1) For each in-State private IHE--
(a) Whether the State provides funding to the IHE;
(b) Whether the State has a data-sharing agreement in place with
the IHE and, if so, whether the data-sharing agreement enables the
State to track its recent high school graduates; and
(2) For each out-of-State private or out-of-State public IHE with
which the State has a data-sharing agreement--
(a) Whether the State provides funding to the IHE; and
(b) Whether the data-sharing agreement enables the State to track
its recent high school graduates.
The Department proposes to permit a State that provides the
specific information described under the heading Proposed Requirements
for Requests for Extensions to December 31, 2012, of Deadlines for
Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use of the Indicator (c)(11)
Alternative Standard to use the alternative standard.
[[Page 59078]]
Proposed Requirements for Requests for Extensions to December 31, 2012,
of Deadlines for Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use of the
Indicator (c)(11) Alternative Standard
Because of an SEA's significant role in carrying out education
reform activities in a State, including developing and implementing an
SLDS, the Department proposes that any request for an extension to
December 31, 2012, of the deadline for Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or
(c)(12), as well as any request to use the alternative standard for
Indicator (c)(11), must be submitted jointly by the Governor and the
Chief State School Officer. Further, the Secretary proposes that an
extension request or a request to use the alternative standard must be
submitted by the deadline that the Department will establish in the
notice of final revisions to certain data collection and reporting
requirements, and final priority. The additional requirements for these
requests are as follows:
A. Indicator (b)(1) Extension Requests
The Secretary proposes that a State must provide the following
information when requesting an extension of the deadline for developing
and implementing an SLDS under Indicator (b)(1) that includes the 12
elements required by the America COMPETES Act:
(1) An identification of the elements in the America COMPETES Act
that the State has implemented to date as part of its SLDS; and
(2) An assurance signed by the Governor and the Chief State School
Officer that the State will--
(i) Incorporate the remaining elements into its SLDS by the
December 31, 2012, deadline; and
(ii) Provide, within 60 days of submission of the request, a
revised plan for incorporating those elements by the deadline.
B. Indicator (c)(11) Extension Requests
The Secretary proposes that a State must provide the following
information when requesting an extension of the deadline for collecting
and publicly reporting under Indicator (c)(11) student enrollment data
for high school graduates who enroll in an in-State public IHE:
(1) A description of the State's current capacity to collect and
publicly report such student enrollment data; and
(2) An assurance signed by the Governor and the Chief State School
Officer that the State will--
(i)(A) Collect and publicly report by December 31, 2012, student
enrollment data for high school graduates who attend an in-State public
IHE; or
(B) Develop the capacity to collect and publicly report those data
by December 31, 2012; and
(ii) Provide, within 60 days of submission of the request, a
revised plan for how the State will--
(A) Collect and publicly report the data by December 31, 2012; or
(B) Develop the capacity to collect and publicly report those data
by December 31, 2012.
C. Indicator (c)(12) Extension Requests
The Secretary proposes that a State must provide the following
information when requesting an extension of the deadline for collecting
and publicly reporting under Indicator (c)(12) course completion data
for high school graduates who enroll in an in-State public IHE:
(1) A description of the State's current capacity to collect and
publicly report such course completion data; and
(2) An assurance signed by the Governor and the Chief State School
Officer that the State will--
(i)(A) Collect and publicly report, by December 31, 2012, course
completion data for high school graduates who attend an in-State public
IHE; or
(B) Develop the capacity to collect and publicly report, by
December 31, 2012, such data; and
(ii) Provide, within 60 days of submission of the request, a
revised plan for how the State will--
(A) Collect and publicly report the data by December 31, 2012; or
(B) Develop the capacity to collect and publicly report such data
by December 31, 2012.
D. Indicator (c)(11) Alternative Standard Requests
The Secretary proposes that a State must provide the following
information when requesting permission to use the alternative standard
to satisfy the Indicator (c)(11) requirements to collect and publicly
report student enrollment data for high school graduates who enroll in
private or out-of-State public IHEs:
(1) A description of the State's current capacity to collect and
publicly report such student enrollment data; and
(2) An assurance signed by the Governor and the Chief State School
Officer that the State will--
(i)(A) Collect and publicly report, by December 31, 2012, student
enrollment data for high school graduates who enroll in private or out-
of-State public IHEs; or
(B) Increase its current capacity to collect and publicly report
such data by December 31, 2012, and, by that date, publicly report, the
following--
(1) For each in-State private IHE--
(a) Whether the State provides funding to the IHE;
(b) Whether the State has a data-sharing agreement in place with
the IHE and, if so, whether the data-sharing agreement enables the
State to track its recent high school graduates; and
(2) For each out-of-State private or out-of-State public IHE with
which the State has a data-sharing agreement, whether individually or
through a State agency or consortium--
(a) Whether the State provides funding to the IHE; and
(b) Whether the data-sharing agreement enables the State to track
its recent high school graduates;
(ii) Provide, within 60 days of submission of the request, a
revised plan for how the State will--
(A) Collect and publicly report the data by December 31, 2012; or
(B) Increase its current capacity to collect and report those data
by December 31, 2012.
Proposed Requirements for Revised Plans for Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11),
or (c)(12)
The Department proposes that the revised plans for Indicator
(b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) must include the following information:
(a) A detailed description of the steps that the State will take to
ensure that the requirements of the indicator will be met by December
31, 2012, including a reasonable timeline for those actions;
(b) Identification of the agency or agencies in the State
responsible for the development and implementation of the revised plan;
and
(c) An overall budget, including the funding sources, that is
sufficient to support the development and implementation of the revised
plan.
Proposed Priority
This notice contains one proposed priority.
Proposed Priority--Developing and Implementing a Statewide Longitudinal
Data System That Includes the 12 Required Elements
Background: A State that develops and implements an SLDS that
includes the 12 elements required under the America COMPETES Act is
more likely to effectively implement education reforms. As a result, a
State that meets the SLDS requirements of the SFSF program is more
likely to meet the goals of other Federal programs that support efforts
to improve the quality of instruction and raise student academic
achievement.
[[Page 59079]]
Given the importance of full implementation of a complete SLDS
system, the Secretary is proposing a priority for a State that has met
the requirements of Indicator (b)(1) as established under the SFSF
program.
Proposed Priority: The Secretary is proposing a priority for a
State that has met the requirements of SFSF Indicator (b)(1) on or
before the applicable deadline.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Enforcement of SFSF Requirements; Proposed Authority To Take
Enforcement Action Against SEAs
The Department only extends the deadline for complying with program
requirements when appropriate. The Department is proposing to extend
the deadline under this notice to ensure full implementation of key
SFSF program requirements. For example, the development and
implementation of an SLDS are integral to State and local efforts to
improve student academic achievement. In light of the proposed deadline
extension, we remind States that the Department has a wide range of
actions that it can take to enforce program requirements. For example,
the Department has the authority under the provisions of Part E of the
General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) (20 U.S.C. 1234 et seq.) to
take the following enforcement actions: the recovery of funds (section
452 of GEPA), the withholding of funds (section 455 of GEPA), or the
establishment of a compliance agreement (section 457 of GEPA).
Additionally, under 34 CFR 80.12, the Department may designate a
grantee as high risk for a number of reasons, including failure to
comply with the terms and conditions of an award. We also note that,
under 34 CFR 75.217, the Department may consider the performance of a
grantee when awarding funds in future discretionary grant programs.
As stated previously, the Department proposes that the SEA must
jointly request with the Office of the Governor an extension to
December 31, 2012, of the January 31, 2012 deadline for Indicators
(b)(1), (c)(11), and (c)(12) or the authority to use the alternative
standard for Indicator (c)(11). In those cases in which the State has
received an extension of a deadline to January 31, 2012 or the
authority to use the alternative standard for Indicator (c)(11) but
fails to meet the extended deadline or alternative standard, the
Department also proposes that it may take enforcement actions against
the SEA, including designation as high risk. In such instances the
Department would have the authority also to elect not to award funds in
a future discretionary grant competition to the SEA.
When implementing enforcement actions, the Department takes into
account the specific circumstances of the grantee and the severity of
the non-compliance.
Final Revisions to Certain Data Collection and Reporting Requirements
and Final Priority
We will announce the final revisions to the SFSF requirements and
final priority in a notice in the Federal Register. We will determine
the final revisions to the requirements and the final priority after
considering any comments submitted in response to this notice and other
information available to the Department. This notice does not preclude
us from proposing additional revisions to the requirements or
additional priorities, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking
requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use the priority proposed in this notice, we
invite applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether
this regulatory action is significant and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive Order and to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to result
in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an economically significant rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive Order.
It has been determined that this regulatory action is significant
under paragraph (f)(4) of the Executive order. Accordingly, we have
assessed the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative and
qualitative--of this proposed regulatory action and determined that the
benefits justify the costs. Additionally, the Department has determined
that this regulatory action would not unduly interfere with State,
local, and tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental
functions.
In this regulatory impact analysis, we discuss the need for
regulatory action, the regulatory alternatives we considered, and the
potential costs and benefits of the proposed action.
Need for Federal Regulatory Action
The proposed revisions in this notice are the result of a
regulatory review \2\ of the SFSF requirements established in the
November 2009 Notice and also a response to concerns raised by States
regarding their capacity to implement those requirements fully. The
proposed revisions would eliminate requirements that have been
identified through the regulatory review as overly burdensome or
unnecessary for the achievement of the intended purposes of the SFSF
program. The proposed revisions would also modify requirements that
have been identified by certain States as not
[[Page 59080]]
feasible to meet by the currently established deadline, by extending
the deadline for establishing compliance or providing an alternative
compliance standard for States that seek that flexibility. The
Secretary believes that these revisions are needed in order for the
Department to administer the SFSF program in a manner that enables
States to provide sufficient transparency on the extent to which they
are implementing education reform actions consistent with the
assurances provided in their SFSF applications while affording them an
appropriate amount of time and flexibility to implement those actions.
The Secretary further believes that this notice's proposed requirements
for requesting an extension of the deadline for Indicator (b)(1),
(c)(11), or (c)(12) or using the Indicator (c)(11) alternative
standard, as well as the proposed requirements for revising plans for
those indicators, are necessary to ensure that States' actions are
consistent with the requirements for those indicators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ As discussed elsewhere in this notice, the regulatory review
was conducted in response to the January 18, 2011 Executive Order
13563 entitled ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' and
the February 28, 2011 Memorandum from the President to executive
departments and agencies entitled ``Administrative Flexibility,
Lower Costs, and Better Results for State, Local, and Tribal
Governments.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
An alternative to promulgation of the proposed revisions in this
notice would be to take no regulatory action and, instead, take
enforcement action, such as recovering or withholding Department funds
or establishing compliance agreements, against States that fail to
comply with the relevant SFSF requirements established in the November
2009 Notice. In general, the Secretary believes that the latter
approach would unfairly punish States that the Department believes,
based on available information on implementation of SFSF plans, are
making a good-faith effort to fully develop their statewide
longitudinal data systems and their capacity to collect and report data
on student postsecondary enrollment and persistence, but need more time
to comply with the SFSF requirements. That said, the Secretary
believes, for reasons discussed elsewhere in this notice, that States
must fully develop statewide longitudinal data systems and may place on
high-risk status those States that fail to comply with the requirements
of Indicator (b)(1) by the current or (if approved for the State)
extended deadline.
With respect to Indicator (c)(11), the Department considered
proposing only an extension of the deadline for collecting and
reporting student enrollment data for high school graduates who attend
IHEs, but concluded that extending the deadline for the public, in-
State IHEs and providing additional flexibility with the proposed
alternative standard for collecting and publicly reporting student
enrollment data for high school graduates who attend private and out-
of-State public IHEs would better address the capacity concerns raised
by States.
Summary of Costs and Benefits
Proposed Revisions to SFSF Indicator Requirements
In the November 2009 Notice, the Department provided detailed
estimates of the costs to States, LEAs, and IHEs of complying with the
SFSF requirements. We have assessed the potential costs and benefits of
the proposed revisions to those requirements in this notice and
determined that they would impose no net additional costs to States,
LEAs, or IHEs.
On the contrary, the proposed revisions would produce potential net
cost savings.\3\ For instance, the proposed elimination of the annual
reporting requirements for Indicators (c)(1) through (c)(9) and (d)(1)
through (d)(6) would confer savings by reducing collection and
reporting burden on States and LEAs. Although it would confer some new
cost (as discussed in more detail later in this section), the proposed
Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard would confer net savings to
States using the standard (and to affected LEAs and IHEs) by no longer
requiring that those States, at a minimum, fully develop the capacity
to collect and report, by September 30, 2011, enrollment data for high
school graduates who enroll in private or out-of-State public IHEs. The
proposed extensions of the compliance deadlines for Indicators (b)(1),
(c)(11), and (c)(12) would not add to the costs of complying with the
associated requirements and might result in marginal savings
(calculated on a present-value basis) as States would be able to spread
the compliance costs over a longer period of time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ We have not provided estimates of potential cost savings in
this notice because we cannot reasonably estimate the amount of
funds States have already spent to meet the applicable SFSF
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apart from potential cost savings, the benefits of the proposed
revisions are, as discussed elsewhere in this notice, simplified and
more streamlined SFSF requirements that still provide the Department
and the public with useful information on whether States are
implementing education reforms consistent with the statutorily required
assurances.
States using the proposed Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard
would incur minimal new costs. Under the standard, a State would be
required to publicly report, by December 31, 2012, information on the
extent to which it has data-sharing agreements with private and out-of-
State public IHEs that enable the State to track its recent high school
graduates and demonstrate certain concrete steps it had taken to
increase its capacity to track its high school graduates who enrolled
in private and out-of-State public IHEs. We estimate that a State would
need, on average, 40 hours to collect and report this information. At
$30 per hour, the average cost of doing so is an estimated $1,200.
Based on information available from States on implementation of
their SFSF plans, we estimate that 43 States will request use of the
Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard. The total estimated cost to
States for complying with the proposed Indicator (c)(11) alternative
standard reporting requirements is accordingly $51,600 ($1,200 times 43
States).
Proposed Requirements for Requests for Extensions of Deadlines for
Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use of the Indicator (c)(11)
Alternative Standard, and Proposed Requirements for Revised Plans for
Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12)
The costs for complying with these proposed requirements would, in
general, be minimal. Because States that do not meet the requirements
associated with an SFSF indicator or descriptor were already required
to submit a plan for achieving compliance that includes progress
tracking and providing regular public progress reports, we do not
believe that any new effort would be needed in order for a State to
determine whether to request an extension of the deadline for Indicator
(b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or use of the Indicator (c)(11) alternative
standard.
In requesting a deadline extension or use of the alternative
standard, a State would be required to provide a description of its
current capacity with respect to the applicable indicator and a signed
assurance that it will comply with the revised requirements for the
indicator and will submit its plan for doing so to the Department
within 60 days of the request. The level of effort needed to meet these
requirements would be minimal. We estimate that a State would need, on
average, eight hours to complete such a request. At $30 per hour, the
average cost of completing a request is an estimated $240.
Based on information available from States on implementation of
their SFSF plans, we estimate that 40 States will request an extension
of the deadline for
[[Page 59081]]
Indicator (b)(1), 43 States will request an extension of the deadline
for Indicator (c)(11), 47 States will request an extension of the
deadline for Indicator (c)(12), and 43 States will request use of the
Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard. In total, States will complete
an estimated 173 requests. At $240 per request, the total estimated
cost to States for complying with the proposed requirements for
requests is $41,520 ($240 times 173 requests).
A State requesting a deadline extension or the use of the Indicator
(c)(11) alternative standard would then be required to submit to the
Department, within 60 days, a revised plan with respect to the
applicable indicator that includes the specific steps the State will
take to meet the revised requirements for the indicator, the budget for
developing and implementing the revised plan, and the responsible
agency or agencies. The cost of meeting these proposed plan revision
requirements should also be minimal. We estimate that a State would
need, on average, eight hours to complete a plan revision consistent
with the requirements. At $30 per hour, the average cost of completing
a plan revision is an estimated $240.
As discussed above, States will complete an estimated 173 total
requests for deadline extensions or for use of the Indicator (c)(11)
alternative standard. Accordingly, we estimate that States will
complete, at most, 173 plan revisions.\4\ At $240 per revision, the
total estimated cost to States for complying with the proposed plan
revision requirements is $41,520 ($240 per revision times 173
requests).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A State requesting both an extension of the deadline for
Indicator (c)(11) (as it applies to data on student enrollment in
in-State public IHEs) and use of the alternative standard for that
indicator (as it applies to data on student enrollment in private
and out-of-State public IHEs) could address both of these requests
in a single plan revision for the indicator. Consequently, the total
number of completed plan revisions will almost certainly be lower
than this estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total estimated cost for complying with the proposed
requirements for requests and for plan revisions is accordingly
$83,040.
The November 2009 notice detailed the cost of collecting and
reporting the information and data associated with Indicators (b)(1),
(c)(11), and (c)(12) on an annual basis. We expect that the cost of
meeting these requirements will be reduced because most States have
completed a substantial amount of the work related to collecting and
reporting the required information. However, States requesting an
extension of Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) will need to report
the information and data for an additional year. We discuss the costs
associated with reporting these indicators for an additional year
below.
We estimate that, on average, a State would need one hour to
collect and report the information associated with Indicator (b)(1).
This is a one hour reduction from the estimate in the November 2009
Notice because States have indicated that, on average, they have
completed 50 percent of the work associated with collecting and
reporting this information. Based on information available from States
on implementation of their SFSF plans, we expect that 40 States will
need to collect and report this information. At $30 per hour, the
average cost for collecting and reporting this information is $30. The
total estimated cost for complying with the Indicator (b)(1) reporting
requirements is $1,200 ($30 per hour times 40 States).
As 9 States have already met the requirement for Indicator (c)(11),
we expect that 43 States will need to collect and report the
information associated with it, or provide evidence that they have
developed the capacity to do so, for students who attend in-State,
public IHEs. We estimate that, on average, a State would need 40 hours
to meet this requirement. This is a reduction from the average hours
per response in the November 2009 Notice because this estimate only
includes reporting on students who attend in-State, public IHEs rather
than all students enrolled in an IHE. The remaining students will be
covered under the (c)(11) alternative standard. At $30 per hour, we
estimate that the average cost of meeting this requirement is $1,200.
The total estimated cost for States to comply with the requirements for
Indicator (c)(11) is $51,600 ($1,200 per State times 43 States).
The 13,409 LEAs located in those 43 States would need to provide
information associated with Indicator (c)(11). Based on an estimate of
the total number of students enrolled in public IHEs in their home
State,\5\ and based on the assumption that LEAs could provide this
information at a rate of 20 students per hour, we estimate that these
LEAs will require a total of 84,584 hours to comply with the
requirements for Indicator (c)(11) at a total cost of $2,114,597.
Divided by the total number of affected LEAs, we estimate that each LEA
would require 6.31 hours to provide this information. This would be a
reduction from the average hours per response in the November 2009
Notice because the current estimate only relates to students who attend
in-State, public IHEs rather than all students attending an IHE.
Information on the remaining students will be covered under the (c)(11)
alternative standard. At $25 per hour, the average cost per LEA of
meeting the requirements of this Indicator is approximately $158.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ According to the Digest of Education Statistics, 2009,
2,240,414 first-time freshmen enrolled in public, degree-granting
IHEs in fall 2008, which represented 74 percent of all first-time
freshmen. See http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_199.asp. Also in fall 2008, 2,109,931 freshmen who graduated from
high school within the last 12 months attended degree-granting IHEs
in their home State, which represented 81 percent of all freshmen.
See http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_223.asp. 1.
An estimate of the number of first-time freshmen enrolled in public,
degree-granting IHEs in their home State can be derived two ways.
Applying the percentage of first-time freshmen attending public
degree-granting IHEs to the number of first-time freshmen attending
an IHE in their home State yields an estimate of 1,508,484, and
applying the percentage of first-time freshmen attending an IHE in
their home State to the number of first-time freshmen attending
public degree-granting IHEs yields an estimate of 2,169,077. For the
purposes of this estimate, the Department chooses the midpoint of
these figures, which is 1,838,780. Applying the estimate (described
earlier) that 94 percent of all first-time postsecondary students
graduated from public schools, the Department estimates that
1,691,678 public high school graduates enroll in public degree-
granting IHEs in their home State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, based on our estimate of the total number of students
enrolled in public IHEs in their home State and the assumption that
IHEs could provide this information at a rate of 20 students per hour,
we estimate that a total of 84,584 hours would be required for the
1,676 IHEs in the 43 affected States to respond to this requirement. On
average, each IHE would need 50.47 hours to collect and report the
information associated with Indicator (c)(11). This would be an
increase in the average hours per response in the November 2009 Notice
because this estimate only relates to students who attend in-State
public IHEs rather than all students attending an IHE. The remaining
students will be covered under the (c)(11) alternative standard. The
average burden per response increased from the burden estimated in the
November 2009 Notice because the analysis now accounts for in-State
public IHEs in the 43 States that have not yet met this requirement.
Since 74 percent of freshmen attend in-State public IHEs, the burden in
this notice is higher because it is no longer shared with private and
out-of-State IHEs, which led to lower overall burden that we estimated
for all IHEs in the November 2009 Notice. We expect that 1,676 IHEs
will need to provide this information. At $25 per hour, the average
cost per IHE for collecting and reporting this information is
$1,261.75. The total estimated cost for IHEs to
[[Page 59082]]
comply with the reporting requirements for Indicator (c)(11) is
$2,114,597.
The total estimated cost for complying with the reporting
requirements in Indicator (c)(11) is $4,280,794.
Based on information provided by the States, we expect that 47
States will need to collect and report the information associated with
Indicator (c)(12). We estimate that, on average, a State would need 20
hours to collect and report the information. This represents a 20 hour
reduction from our estimate in the November 2009 Notice because States
have indicated that, on average, they have completed 50 percent of the
work associated with this Indicator. At $30 per hour, the average cost
for collecting and reporting this information is $600. The total
estimated cost for States to comply with the reporting requirements for
Indicator (c)(12) is $28,200 ($600 per State times 47 States).
The 1,555 IHEs located in these States would be required to report
information on the number of students who have completed at least one
year's worth of college credit within two years of enrollment in the
IHE. Based on data from the Digest of Education Statistics, we estimate
that 1,140,855 first-time freshmen are enrolled in degree-granting in-
State public IHEs in the 47 States that have not yet met this
requirement. We estimate that IHEs could provide this information at a
rate of 20 students per hour, which leads to approximately 57,043 hours
of total effort across the affected IHEs at an estimated cost of
$1,426,069. By dividing this total number of hours by the 1,555 public
IHEs in the 47 States, we estimate that, on average, an IHE would need
36.68 hours to collect and report the information associated with
Indicator (c)(12). This represents a reduction from the average hours
per response that we estimated in the November 2009 Notice because some
States with higher than average percentages of in-State students have
already completed this work. We estimate a reduced average response
time after excluding the IHEs from States that have completed the work
from the calculation. At $25 per hour of IHE effort, we estimate that
the average cost for collecting and reporting this information is $917
per IHE.
The total estimated cost for complying with the reporting
requirements in Indicator (c)(12) is $1,454,269. The total estimated
cost for complying with the collection and reporting requirements
associated with (b)(1), (c)(11), and (c)(12) is accordingly $5,736,263.
The total estimated cost for complying with those collection and
reporting requirements and the proposed requirements in this notice is
$5,870,903.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this regulatory action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The small entities that this regulatory action will affect are small
LEAs receiving funds under this program and small IHEs.
This regulatory action will not have a significant economic impact
on small LEAs because they will be able to meet the costs of compliance
with this regulatory action using the funds provided under this
program.
With respect to small IHEs, the U.S. Small Business Administration
Size Standards define these institutions as ``small entities'' if they
are for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total annual revenue
below $5,000,000 or if they are institutions controlled by small
governmental jurisdictions, which are comprised of cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts,
with a population of less than 50,000. Based on data from the
Department's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), up
to 427 small IHEs with revenues of less than $5 million may be affected
by these requirements; only 33 of these IHEs are public. These small
IHEs represent only 13 percent of degree-granting IHEs. In addition,
only 98,032 students (0.5 percent) enrolled in degree-granting IHEs in
fall 2007 attended these small institutions; just 11,830 of these
students are enrolled in small, degree-granting public IHEs. As the
burden for indicators (c)(11) and (c)(12) is driven by the number of
students for whom IHEs would be required to submit data, small IHEs
will require significantly less effort to adhere to these requirements
than will be the case for larger IHEs. Based on IPEDS data, the
Department estimates that 1,873 of these students are first-time
freshmen. As stated earlier in the Summary of Costs and Benefits
section of this notice, the Department estimates that, as required by
indicator (c)(11), IHEs will be able to confirm the enrollment of 20
first-time freshmen per hour. Applying this estimate to the estimated
number of first-time freshmen at small IHEs, the Department estimates
that these IHEs will need to spend 94 hours to respond to this
requirement at a total cost of $2,350 (assuming a cost of $25 per
hour).
The effort involved in reporting the number of students enrolling
in a public IHE in their home State who complete at least one year's
worth of college credit applicable toward a degree within two years as
required by indicator (c)(12) will also apply to small IHEs, but will
be limited to students who enroll in public IHEs in their home State.
As discussed earlier in the Summary of Costs and Benefits section of
this notice, the Department estimates that 81 percent of first-time
freshmen who graduate from public high schools enroll in degree-
granting IHEs in their home State. Applying this percentage to the
estimated number of first-time freshmen enrolled in small public IHEs
(1,873), the Department estimates that small IHEs will be required to
report credit completion data for a total of 1,517 students. For this
requirement, the Department also estimates that IHEs will be able to
report the credit completion status of 20 first-time freshmen per hour.
Again, applying this data entry rate to the estimated number of first-
time freshmen at small public IHEs in their home State, the Department
estimates that these IHEs will need to spend 76 hours to respond to
this requirement at a total cost of $1,900. The total cost of these
requirements for small IHEs is, therefore, $4,250; $2,068 of this cost
will be borne by small private IHEs, and $2,182 of the cost will be
borne by small public IHEs. Based on the total number of small IHEs
across the Nation, the estimated cost per small private IHE is
approximately $10, and the estimated cost per small public IHE is $66.
The Department has, therefore, determined that the requirements will
not represent a significant burden on small not-for-profit IHEs. It is
also important to note that States may use their Government Services
Fund allocations to help small IHEs meet the costs of complying with
the requirements that affect them, and public IHEs may use Education
Stabilization Fund dollars they receive for that purpose.
In addition, the Department believes the benefits provided under
this regulatory action will outweigh the burdens on these institutions
of complying with the requirements. One of these benefits will be the
provision of better information on student success in postsecondary
education to policymakers, educators, parents, and other stakeholders.
The Department believes that the information gathered and reported as a
result of these requirements will improve public accountability for
performance; help States, LEAs, and schools learn from one another and
improve their decision-making; and inform Federal policymaking.
A second major benefit is that better public information on State
and local progress in the four reform areas will
[[Page 59083]]
likely spur more rapid progress on those reforms, because States and
LEAs that appear to be lagging in one area or another may see a need to
redouble their efforts. The Department believes that more rapid
progress on the essential educational reforms will have major benefits
nationally, and that these reforms have the potential to drive dramatic
improvements in student outcomes. The requirements that apply to IHEs
should, in particular, spur more rapid implementation of pre-K-16 State
longitudinal data systems.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, the Department conducts a preclearance consultation program to
provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to
comment on proposed and continuing collections of information in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that: The public understands the
Department's collection instructions; respondents can provide the
requested data in the desired format; reporting burden (time and
financial resources) is minimized; collection instruments are clearly
understood; and the Department can properly assess the impact of
collection requirements on respondents.
This notice of proposed revisions contains information collection
requirements previously approved under OMB control number 1810-0695,
revisions to which are proposed herein. The Department has
contemporaneously published a notice of interim final requirements that
extends the deadline for reporting under the existing performance
indicators (See RIN 1894-AA03). Under the PRA the Department has
submitted both the information collection contained in the IFR and the
revised information collection requirements contained in this notice to
OMB for its review.
A Federal agency cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of
information unless OMB approves the collection under the PRA and the
corresponding information collection instrument displays a currently
valid OMB control number. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person is required to comply with, or is subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information if the collection
instrument does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
In the final requirements, we will display the control number
assigned by OMB to any information collection requirement proposed in
this notice of proposed revisions and adopted in the final
requirements.
Revisions to SFSF Indicator (c)(11) Requirements
Under the proposed Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard, a State
would be required to publicly report, by December 31, 2012, information
on the extent to which it has data-sharing agreements with private and
out-of-State public IHEs that enable the State to track its recent high
school graduates. We estimate that a State would need, on average, 40
hours to collect and report this information.
Based on information available from States on implementation of
their SFSF plans, we estimate that 43 States will request use of the
Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard. The total estimated hours for
States to comply with the proposed Indicator (c)(11) alternative
standard reporting requirements is accordingly an increase of 1,720
hours (40 hours per request times 43 requests) under collection 1810-
0695.
Proposed Requirements for Requests for Extensions of Deadlines for
Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or Use of the Indicator (c)(11)
Alternative Standard, and Proposed Requirements for Revised Plans for
Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), and (c)(12)
Because States that did not meet the requirements associated with
an SFSF indicator or descriptor were required to submit a plan for
achieving compliance that includes progress tracking and providing
regular public progress reports, we do not believe that any new effort
would be needed in order for a State to determine whether to request an
extension of the deadline for Indicator (b)(1), (c)(11), or (c)(12) or
use of the Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard.
In requesting a deadline extension or use of the alternative
standard, a State would be required to provide a description of its
current capacity with respect to the applicable indicator and a signed
assurance that it will comply with the revised requirements for the
indicator and will submit its plan for doing so to the Department
within 60 days of the request. The level of effort needed to meet these
requirements would be minimal. We estimate that a State would need, on
average, eight hours to complete such a request.
Based on information available from States on implementation of
their SFSF plans, we estimate that 40 States will request an extension
of the deadline for Indicator (b)(1), 43 States will request an
extension of the deadline for Indicator (c)(11), 47 States will request
an extension of the deadline for Indicator (c)(12), and 43 States will
request use of the Indicator (c)(11) alternative standard. In total,
States will complete an estimated 173 requests. The total estimated
hours for States to comply with the proposed requirements for requests
is an increase of 1,384 hours (eight hours per request times 173
requests) under collection 1810-0695.
A State requesting a deadline extension or the use of the Indicator
(c)(11) alternative standard would then be required to submit to the
Department, within 60 days, a revised plan with respect to the
applicable indicator that includes the specific steps the State will
take to meet the revised requirements for the indicator, the budget for
developing and implementing the revised plan, and the responsible
agency or agencies. We estimate that a State would need, on average,
eight hours to complete a plan revision consistent with the
requirements.
As discussed above, States will complete an estimated 173 total
requests for deadline extensions or for use of the Indicator (c)(11)
alternative standard. Accordingly, we estimate that States will
complete, at most, 173 plan revisions.\6\ At eight hours per revision,
the total estimated burden to States for complying with the proposed
plan revision requirements is an increase of 1,384 hours (eight hours
per request times 173 requests) under collection 1810-0695.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ A State requesting both an extension of the deadline for
Indicator (c)(11) (as it applies to data on student enrollment in
in-State public IHEs) and use of the alternative standard for that
indicator (as it applies to data on student enrollment in private
and out-of-State public IHEs) could address both of these requests
in a single plan revision for the indicator. Consequently, the total
number of completed plan revisions will likely be lower than this
estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total estimated burden for complying with the proposed
requirements for requests and for plan revisions is accordingly 2,768
hours.
After requesting an extension and providing a plan, a State would
be required to collect and report the information associated with
Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), and (c)(12) by December 31, 2012. Based on
information available from States on implementation of their SFSF plan,
we estimate that 40 States will need to report and collect the
information associated with Indicator (b)(1). At an estimated one hour
per collection and report, the total estimated burden to States is an
increase of 40 hours (one hour per State times 40 States) under
collection 1810-0695. The average response time of one hour per
collection is a one hour reduction from the estimates we provided in
the November 2009 Notice because States
[[Page 59084]]
have indicated that, on average, they have completed 50 percent of the
work associated with reporting on this indicator.
As 9 States have already met the requirement for Indicator (c)(11),
we expect that 43 States will need to collect and report the
information associated with Indicator (c)(11), or provide evidence that
they have developed the capacity to do so, for students who attend in-
State, public IHEs. We estimate that, on average, a State would need 40
hours to meet this requirement. This is a reduction from the average
hours per response that we estimated in the November 2009 Notice
because the current estimate only relates to students who attend in-
State, public IHEs rather than all students enrolled in an IHE. The
remaining students will be covered under the (c)(11) alternative
standard. The current estimate would equal a 1,720 hour (40 hours per
State times 43 States) increase under collection 1810-0695.
The 13,409 LEAs located in those 43 States would need to provide
information associated with Indicator (c)(11). Based on an estimate of
the total number of students enrolled in public IHEs in their home
State,\7\ and based on the assumption that LEAs could provide this
information at a rate of 20 students per hour, we estimate that these
LEAs will require a total of 84,584 hours to comply with the
requirements for Indicator (c)(11). Divided by the total number of
affected LEAs, we estimate that each LEA would require 6.31 hours to
provide this information. This would be a reduction from the average
hours per response estimated in the November 2009 Notice because the
current estimate only relates to students who attend in-State, public
IHEs rather than all students attending an IHE. Information on the
remaining students will be covered under the (c)(11) alternative
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ According to the Digest of Education Statistics, 2009,
2,240,414 first-time freshmen enrolled in public, degree-granting
IHEs in fall 2008, which represented 74 percent of all first-time
freshmen. See http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_199.asp. Also in fall 2008, 2,109,931 freshmen who graduated from
high school within the last 12 months attended degree-granting IHEs
in their home State, which represented 81 percent of all freshmen.
See http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/tables/dt09_223.asp. 1.
An estimate of the number of first-time freshmen enrolled in public,
degree-granting IHEs in their home State can be derived two ways.
Applying the percentage of first-time freshmen attending public
degree-granting IHEs to the number of first-time freshmen attending
an IHE in their home State yields an estimate of 1,508,484, and
applying the percentage of first-time freshmen attending an IHE in
their home State to the number of first-time freshmen attending
public degree-granting IHEs yields an estimate of 2,169,077. For the
purposes of this estimate, the Department chooses the midpoint of
these figures, which is 1,838,780. Applying the estimate (described
earlier) that 94 percent of all first-time postsecondary students
graduated from public schools, the Department estimates that
1,691,678 public high school graduates enroll in public degree-
granting IHEs in their home State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, based on our estimate of the total number of students
enrolled in public IHEs in their home State and the assumption that
IHEs could provide this information at a rate of 20 students per hour,
we estimate that, a total of 84,584 hours would be required for the
1,676 IHEs in the 43 affected States to respond to this requirement. On
average, each IHE would need 50.47 hours to provide the information
associated with Indicator (c)(11). This would be an increase in the
average hours per response estimated in the November 2009 Notice
because this estimate only relates to students who attend in-State
public IHEs rather than all students attending an IHE. The remaining
students will be covered under the (c)(11) alternative standard. The
average burden per response increased from the burden estimated in the
November 2009 Notice because the analysis now accounts for in-State
public IHEs in the 43 States that have not yet met this requirement.
Because 74 percent of freshmen attend in-State public IHEs, the burden
under these proposed revisions is higher because it is no longer shared
with private and out-of-State IHEs, which led to an estimate of a lower
overall burden for all IHEs in the November 2009 Notice. We expect that
1,676 IHEs will need to provide this information.
The total estimated hours for complying with the requirements of
Indicator (c)(11) is 170,888.
We estimate that the State burden for collecting and reporting the
information associated with Indicator (c)(12), or providing evidence
that the State has developed the capacity to do so, will be
approximately 20 hours per State. This is a 20 hour reduction from the
estimates in the November 2009 Notice because States have indicated
that they have, on average, completed 50 percent of the work for this
Indicator. Based on information provided by the States, we expect that
47 States will need to provide this information. Accordingly, the total
burden to States is an increase of 940 hours (20 hours per State times
47 States) under collection 1810-0695.
The 1,555 IHEs located in these States would be required to report
information on the number of students who have completed at least one
year's worth of college credit within two years of enrollment in the
IHE. Based on data from the Digest of Education Statistics, we estimate
that 1,140,855 first-time freshmen are enrolled in degree-granting in-
State public IHEs in the 47 States that have not yet met this
requirement. We estimate that IHEs could provide this information at a
rate of 20 students per hour, which leads to approximately 57,043 hours
of total effort across the affected IHEs. By dividing the total number
of hours by the 1,555 public IHEs in the 47 States, we estimate that,
on average, an IHE would need 36.68 hours to collect and report the
information associated with Indicator (c)(12). The average hours per
response is less than the estimate in the November 2009 Notice because
some States with higher than average percentages of in-State students
have already completed this work. Excluding the IHEs from these States
from the calculations led to a reduced average response time.
The total estimated burden hours for complying with the collection
and reporting requirements for Indicator (c)(12) is 57,983.
The estimated burden hours for complying with the collection and
reporting requirements associated with the proposed Indicator (c)(11)
alternative standard is discussed above.
The total estimated burden hours for complying with the proposed
collection and reporting requirements associated with Indicators
(b)(1), (c)(11) and (c)(12) is accordingly 228,911 hours.
The total estimated burden for complying with the proposed
requirements in this notice is an increase of 233,399 hours under
collection 1810-0695.
[[Page 59085]]
Collection of Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information collection OMB Control No. and estimated change in burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice of proposed revisions OMB 1810-0695.
proposes an extension for collecting The burden would increase by 233,399 hours.
and reporting information associated
with Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), and
(c)(12); an alternative standard for
Indicator (c)(11); proposes
requirements for requests for
extensions of deadlines for Indicators
(b)(1), (c)(11), and (c)(12); and
proposes requirements for revised plans
for Indicators (b)(1), (c)(11), and
(c)(12).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to comment on the proposed information collection
requirements, please send your comments to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for U.S.
Department of Education. Send these comments by e-mail to OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov or by fax to (202) 395-6974. You may also send a
copy of these comments to the Department contact named in the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble.
We have prepared an Information Collection Request (ICR) for this
collection. In preparing your comments you may want to review the ICR,
which we maintain in the Education Department Information Collection
System (EDICS) at http://edicsweb.ed.gov. Click on Browse Pending
Collections. This proposed collection is identified as proposed
collection 1810-0695.
We consider your comments on this proposed collection of
information in--
Deciding whether the proposed collection is necessary for
the proper performance of our functions, including whether the
information will have practical use;
Evaluating the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of
the proposed collection, including the validity of our methodology and
assumptions;
Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the
information we collect; and
Minimizing the burden on those who must respond. This
includes exploring the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information contained in these proposed regulations between 30 and 60
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, to ensure that OMB gives your comments full consideration,
it is important that OMB receives your comments on the proposed
collection within 30 days after publication. This does not affect the
deadline for your comments to us on the proposed regulations.
Assessment of Educational Impact
In accordance with section 411 of the General Education Provisions
Act, 20 U.S.C. 1221e-4, the Department invites comment on whether these
requirements require transmission of information that any other agency
or authority of the United States gathers or makes available.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Numbers: 84.394
(Education Stabilization Fund) and 84.397 (Government Services
Fund).
Dated: September 19, 2011.
Arne Duncan,
Secretary of Education.
[FR Doc. 2011-24563 Filed 9-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P