[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5330-5337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01418]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
Proposed Priorities and Definitions--NIDRR DRRP--Community Living
and Participation, Health and Function, and Employment of Individuals
With Disabilities
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CFDA Numbers: 84.133A-3, 84.133A-4, and 84.133A-5.
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services proposes funding priorities and definitions for
the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program
administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this document proposes priorities for a
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP) on Community
Living and Participation of Individuals with Disabilities (Proposed
Priority 1), a DRRP on Health and Function of Individuals with
Disabilities (Proposed Priority 2), and a DRRP on Employment of
Individuals with Disabilities (Proposed Priority 3). If an applicant
proposes to conduct research under these priorities, the research must
be focused on one of the four stages of research. This document
proposes definitions for the four stages of research: exploration and
discovery, intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-
up evaluation. The Assistant Secretary may use one or more of these
priorities and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2013
and later years. We take this action to focus research attention on
areas of national need. We intend these priorities and definitions to
contribute to improved employment and independent living outcomes for
individuals with disabilities.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before February 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this document to Marlene Spencer,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5133,
Potomac
[[Page 5331]]
Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700.
If you prefer to send your comments by email, use the following
address: marlene.spencer@ed.gov. You must include the phrase ``Proposed
Priorities for Combined RRTC Notice'' in the subject line of your
electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245-
7532 or by email: marlene.spencer@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: This notice of proposed priorities and
definitions is in concert with NIDRR's currently approved Long-Range
Plan (Plan). The currently approved Plan, which was published in the
Federal Register on February 15, 2006 (71 FR 8165), can be accessed on
the Internet at the following site: http://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2006-1/021506d.pdf.
Through the implementation of the currently approved Plan, NIDRR
seeks to: (1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and
rehabilitation research; (2) foster an exchange of expertise,
information, and training to facilitate the advancement of knowledge
and understanding of the unique needs of traditionally underserved
populations; (3) determine best strategies and programs to improve
rehabilitation outcomes for underserved populations; (4) identify
research gaps; (5) identify mechanisms of integrating research and
practice; and (6) disseminate findings.
This document proposes three priorities and four definitions that
NIDRR intends to use for a DRRP competition in FY 2013 and possibly
later years. However, nothing precludes NIDRR from publishing
additional priorities and definitions, if needed. Furthermore, NIDRR is
under no obligation to make an award using any of these priorities. The
decision to make an award will be based on the quality of applications
received and available funding.
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this document. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific priority or definition that each comment
addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and its overall requirement of
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed
priorities and definitions. Please let us know of any 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 document in Room 5133, 550 12th Street SW., PCP,
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 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 document. 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 purpose of the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is to plan and
conduct research, demonstration projects, training, and related
activities, including international activities, to develop methods,
procedures, and rehabilitation technology, that maximize the full
inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent living,
family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals
with disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe
disabilities, and to improve the effectiveness of services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
The purpose of NIDRR's DRRPs, which are funded through the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is
to improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act by developing methods, procedures, and
rehabilitation technologies that advance a wide range of independent
living and employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities,
especially individuals with the most severe disabilities. DRRPs carry
out one or more of the following types of activities, as specified and
defined in 34 CFR 350.13 through 350.19: Research, training,
demonstration, development, dissemination, utilization, and technical
assistance.
An applicant under this program must demonstrate in its application
how it will address, in whole or in part, the needs of individuals with
disabilities from minority backgrounds (34 CFR 350.40(a)). The
approaches an applicant may take to meet this requirement are found in
34 CFR 350.40(b). Additional information on the DRRP program can be
found at: www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/res-program.html#DRRP.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(a).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
Proposed Priorities
This document contains three proposed priorities. Each priority
reflects a major area or domain of NIDRR's research agenda. These
domains include community living and participation, health and
function, and employment of individuals with disabilities.
If the applicant proposes to conduct research under these
priorities, the research must be focused on a specific stage of
research. If the DRRP is to conduct research that can be categorized
under more than one stage, or research that progresses from one stage
to another, those stages must be clearly specified. For purposes of
these priorities, the stages of research (i.e., exploration and
discovery, intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-
up evaluation) are defined in the DEFINITIONS section of this document.
Proposed Priority 1--Disability Rehabilitation Research Project on
Community Living and Participation of Individuals With Disabilities
Background
The United States Supreme Court's Olmstead decision, 527 U.S. 581
(1999), requires States to provide services ``in the most integrated
setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with
disabilities,'' except in the rare instances where the individual
objects or competent professionals consider it inappropriate. Id. at
607. Federal efforts to support the implementation of this decision
have included, among others, the New Freedom Initiative, the Year of
Community Living, Community First Choice, and the Money Follows the
Person demonstration program. Despite these national efforts,
individuals with disabilities of all ages continue to experience
significant barriers to living in the community and participating in
the typical educational, employment, recreational, and civic and social
activities (Reinhart, et al., 2011;
[[Page 5332]]
Houtenville et al., 2011; Brault, 2008; National Council on Disability
(NCD), 2004; Rimmer et al., 2004; Gibson, 2003). Barriers to community
living and participation include, but are not limited to, insufficient
affordable home and community-based long-term services and supports
(LTSS), such as personal assistance, assistance for family caregivers,
assistive technologies and devices, and home modifications; shortages
of affordable and accessible housing; inadequate transportation
services; limited personal knowledge of community resources; and poor
health status (Cooper, O'Hara & Zovistowski, 2011; Reinhart et al.,
2011; NCD, 2004; Rimmer, et al., 2004; Gibson, 2003).
U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that an estimated 8 million adults
in the non-institutionalized population need personal assistance with
activities of daily living (e.g., bathing, dressing, and toileting)
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). By 2030, this number is estimated to
increase to between 8.8 million and 12.3 million (U.S. Census Bureau,
2009). In addition, while studies show that most adults requiring
assistance with daily activities prefer to live with support in their
own homes (Salomon, 2010; Gibson, 2003), there is a growing disparity
between the need for and supply of paid and informal direct care
workers and family caregivers (Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute
(PHI), 2008; Hewitt et al., 2008; U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, 2003). In a 2007 national survey, 86 percent of States
considered the shortage of direct care workers to be a serious issue
affecting their ability to meet the growing demand for long-term
services and supports among adults with disabilities (PHI, 2009).
Individuals with disabilities, especially those with more
significant disabilities, report feeling socially isolated and lonely
in their communities (Price, Stephenson, Krantz & Ward, 2011). They are
less satisfied with their community participation than their
counterparts without disabilities (National Organization on Disability,
2000; Sheppard-Jones, Prout & Kleinert, 2005), and participate in fewer
community activities than their counterparts without disabilities. For
example, despite the evidence of benefits of regular physical activity
for health and functioning, individuals with disabilities are far less
likely to engage in physically active lifestyles than are individuals
without disabilities (Rimmer, et al., 2004; Spivock, et al., 2008).
Similarly, individuals with disabilities are much less likely than
those without disabilities to be actively engaged in the workforce.
Approximately 18 percent of individuals with disabilities who are age
16 or older are employed, compared to 64 percent of those without
disabilities (U.S. Department of Labor, 2012). To address disparities
in community participation, and to improve the opportunities and
abilities of individuals with disabilities to live as integrated
members of their communities, NIDRR proposes to fund one or more
Disability Rehabilitation Research Project(s) (DRRPs) on Community
Living and Participation for Individuals with Disabilities.
NIDRR has funded a wide range of disability research and
development projects related to the community living and participation
of individuals with disabilities. In accordance with NIDRR's Plan,
NIDRR seeks to build on these investments by supporting innovative and
well-designed research and development projects that fall under one or
more of NIDRR's general ``community living and participation'' priority
areas, as described in the following proposed priority. NIDRR hopes to
increase competition and innovation by allowing applicants to specify
the research topics under the broad priority areas within the community
living and participation domain. If an applicant proposes to conduct
research activities, the applicant must identify the relevant priority
area or areas, indicate the stage or stages of the proposed research
(i.e., exploration and discovery, intervention development,
intervention efficacy, and scale-up evaluation), justify the need and
rationale for research at the proposed stage or stages, and describe
fully an appropriate methodology or methodologies for the proposed
research.
References
Brault, M.W. (2012) Americans with Disabilities: 2010. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. Economics and
Statistics Administration, July 2012.
Brault, M.W. (2008) Americans with Disabilities. Current Population
Reports. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census
Bureau.
Cooper, E., O'Hara, A., Zovistoski, A. (2011). Priced Out: The
Housing Crisis for People with Disabilities. Technical Assistance
Collaborative, Inc. Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities,
Housing Task Force. Available from: www.tacinc.org/downloads/Priced%20Out%202010/PricedOut2010.pdf.
Gibson M.J. (2003) Beyond 50.03: A Report to the Nation on
Independent Living and Disability. Washington, DC: AARP Public
Policy Institute (PPI). Available from: http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/il/beyond_50_il_1.pdf.
Hewitt, A, Larson, S., Edelstein, S., Seavey, D., Hoge, M., Morris,
J. (2008). A Synthesis of Direct Service Workforce Demographics and
Challenges Across Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities, Aging,
Physical Disabilities, and Behavioral Health. National Direct
Service Workforce Resource Center. Available from:
www.dswresourcecenter.org.
Houtenville, A., Ruiz, T., Gould, P., Guntz, N., Gianino, M.,
Paradis, J., Kurtz, M., Abraham, D., Brucker, D. (2011) 2011 Annual
Disability Statistics Compendium. Durham NH: University of New
Hampshire, Institute on Disability.
National Council on Disability (NCD). (2004) Livable Communities for
Adults with Disabilities. National Council on Disability:
Washington, DC. Published December 2, 2004. Available from:
www.ncd.gov.
National Organization on Disability (2000). N.O.D./Harris Community
Participation Study. Available from: http://nod.org/research_publications/nod_harris_survey/2000_survey_of_community_participation/.
PHI (formerly the Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute) (2008).
Occupational Projections for Direct-Care Workers 2006-2016, Facts 1.
Bronx, NY: PHI. Available from: www.directcareclearinghouse.org/download/BLSfactSheet4-10-08.pdf.
PHI (formerly the Paraprofessional Healthcare Institute) (2009). The
2007 National Survey of State Initiatives on the Direct-Care
Workforce: Key Findings. Prepared by PHI and the Direct Care Workers
Association of North Carolina (DCWA-NC). Available from:
www.directcareclearinghouse.org/download/PHI-StateSweepReport%20final%2012%209%2009.pdf.
Price, P., Stephenson, S., Krantz, L., Ward, K. (2011) Beyond my
Front Door: The Occupational and Social Participation of Adults with
Spinal Cord Injury. OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health.
31(2): 81-88.
Reinhart, SC, Kassner, E, Houser, A. and Mollica, R. (September
2011) Raising Expectations: A State Scorecard on Long-Term Services
and Supports for Older Adults, People with Physical Disabilities,
and Family Caregivers. The AARP Foundation: Washington, DC.
Available from: http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/ppi/ltc/ltss_scorecard.pdf.
Rimmer J, Riley B, Wang E, Rauworth A., Jurkowski J. (2004) Physical
Activity Participation Among Persons with Disabilities: Barriers and
Facilitators. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 26(5): 419-
425.
Salomon, E. (2010) AARP Public Policy Institute: Housing Policy
Solutions to Support Aging in Place. Fact Sheet 172. ARRP Center for
Housing Policy: Washington, DC. Available from: http://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/ppi/liv-com/fs172-aging-in-place.pdf.
Sheppard-Jones, K, Prout, T, Kleinert, H. Quality of Life Dimensions
for Adults with Developmental Disabilities: A
[[Page 5333]]
Comparative Study. Mental Retardation. 43(4): 281-291.
Spivock M., Gauvin L., Riva M, Brodeur JM. (2008). Promoting Active
Living Among People with Physical Disabilities: Evidence for
Neighborhood-Level Buoys. American Journal of Preventive Medicine;
34(4): 291-298.
U.S. Census Bureau (2009) American Community Survey 2005-2009. Based
on tabulations prepared by the Center for Personal Assistance
Services of public use data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American
Community Survey (ACS) for 2009. Available from: www.pascenter.org/state_based_stats/disability_stats/adl_projections.php?state=us.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2003), Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. The Future Supply
of Long-Term Care Workers in Relation to the Aging Baby Boom
Generation: Report To Congress. May 14, 2003. Available from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/ltcwork.pdf.
U.S. Department of Labor (2012a). Economic News Release: Table A-6.
Employment Status of the Civilian Population by Sex, Age, and
Disability Status, not Seasonally Adjusted. Available from:
www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm.
Proposed Priority 1
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for a Disability Rehabilitation Research
Project (DRRP) on Community Living and Participation of Individuals
with Disabilities. The DRRPs must contribute to the outcome of
maximizing the community living and participation outcomes of
individuals with disabilities.
(1) To contribute to this outcome, the DRRP must--
(a) Conduct either research activities or development activities,
in one or more of the following priority areas:
(i) Technology to improve community living and participation
outcomes for individuals with disabilities, generally or within
specific disability or demographic groups.
(ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved
community living and participation outcomes for individuals with
disabilities generally or within specific disability or demographic
groups.
(iii) Interventions that contribute to improved community living
and participation outcomes for individuals with disabilities generally
or within specific disability or demographic groups. Interventions
include any strategy, practice, program, policy, or tool that, when
implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in outcomes for
individuals with disabilities.
(iv) Effects of government policies and programs on community
living and participation outcomes for individuals with disabilities
generally or in specific disability or demographic groups.
(v) Research, knowledge translation, and capacity building for
improved community living and participation outcomes for individuals
with disabilities generally or within specific disability or
demographic groups.
(vi) Practices and policies that contribute to improved community
living and participation outcomes for transition-aged youth with
disabilities;
(b) If conducting research under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority,
focus its research on a specific stage of research. If the DRRP is to
conduct research that can be categorized under more than one stage,
including research that progresses from one stage to another, those
stages must be clearly specified. These stages, exploration and
discovery, intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-
up evaluation, are defined in this document;
(c) Conduct knowledge translation activities (i.e., training,
technical assistance, utilization, dissemination) in order to
facilitate stakeholder (e.g., individuals with disabilities, employers,
policymakers, practitioners) use of the interventions, programs,
technologies, or products that resulted from the research or
development activities conducted under paragraph (1)(a) of this
priority; and
(d) Involve key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted
under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority in order to maximize the
relevance and usability of the research or development products to be
developed under this priority.
Proposed Priority 2--Disability Rehabilitation Research Project on
Health and Function of Individuals With Disabilities
Background
In the United States, approximately 56.7 million individuals have a
disability, including 38.3 million who have a severe disability
(Brault, 2012). Research has contributed to a wide variety of policies,
programs, services, interventions, and products to enhance the health
and function of individuals with disabilities. Despite this work, a
large number of individuals with disabilities with significant health
conditions and functional limitations lack adequate access to health
care, personal assistance services, and rehabilitation services
(National Council on Disability, 2009). Maximizing the health and
function of individuals with disabilities is critical to their general
well-being and their fulfillment of personal aspirations in areas such
as employment and community participation (Henry et al., 2007; Waghorn
et al., 2008).
Adults with disabilities are substantially more likely than adults
without disabilities to be in fair or poor health (as opposed to
excellent, very good, or good health), and to experience a wide variety
of diseases and chronic conditions (Bureau for Health Information,
Statistics, Research, and Evaluation, 2011). Health risks often vary by
condition. For example, individuals with significant vision loss or
with an intellectual disability have a greater prevalence of obesity,
hypertension, and heart disease than individuals without disabilities
(Capella-McDonnall, 2007; Stancliffe et al., 2011). Such risks often
have major adverse health outcomes, including reduced longevity. For
example, 60 percent of individuals with serious mental illness die 25
or more years earlier than the general population due to preventable or
treatable chronic diseases (Colton, Manderschied, 2006). Despite their
substantial health needs and elevated risk of adverse health outcomes,
individuals with disabilities are at a substantial disadvantage in
obtaining access to needed health care services compared to those
without disabilities (National Council on Disability, 2009; Yee, 2011).
In addition to health impairments, individuals with disabilities
experience a wide range of functional limitations that jeopardize their
access to employment and other forms of community participation.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau 5 million adults need assistance
from another person to perform one or more activities of daily living,
such as getting around inside the home, getting into or out of bed,
bathing, dressing, eating, and toileting. Approximately 15 million
individuals have difficulty with one or more instrumental activities of
daily living such as going outside the home, managing money, preparing
meals, doing housework, taking prescription medication, and using the
phone (Brault, 2012). As the number of individuals with disabilities in
the United States continues to grow (Institute on Medicine, 2007), it
will be necessary to improve the Nation's capacity to meet their needs
and access their talents. This will require the development and
refinement of policies, programs, practices, and technologies that
reduce functional limitations and improve health outcomes for these
individuals.
[[Page 5334]]
NIDRR has funded a wide range of disability research and
development projects related to the health and functional outcomes of
individuals with disabilities. In accordance with NIDRR's Plan, NIDRR
seeks to build on these investments by supporting innovative and well-
designed research and development projects that fall under one or more
of NIDRR's general ``health and function'' priority areas, as described
in the following proposed priority. NIDRR hopes to increase competition
and innovation by allowing applicants to specify the research topics
under the broad priority areas within the health and function domain.
If an applicant proposes to conduct research activities, the applicant
must identify the relevant priority area or areas, indicate the stage
or stages of the proposed research in its application (i.e.,
exploration and discovery, intervention development, intervention
efficacy, and scale-up evaluation), justify the need and rationale for
research at the proposed stage or stages, and describe fully an
appropriate methodology or methodologies for the proposed research.
References
Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with Disabilities: 2010. U.S. Census
Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. (available at: www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-131.pdf.
Bureau for Health Information, Statistics, Research, and Evaluation
(2011). A Profile of Health Among Massachusetts Adults, 2010:
Results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health. (available at:
www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/data.html).
Capella-McDonnall, M. (2007). The Need for Health Promotion for
Adults Who Are Visually Impaired, Journal of Visual Impairment and
Blindness, 101(3): 133-145. (available at: http://lvib.org/2010/09/02/september-awareness/).
Colton CW, Manderscheid RW (2006). Congruencies In Increased
Mortality Rates, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Causes of Death
Among Public Mental Health Clients in Eight States. Preventing
Chronic Disease, 3(2): 1-10. (available at: www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2006/apr/05_0180.htm).
Henry, A., Banks, S., Clark, R., & Himmelstein, J. (2007). Mobility
Limitations Negatively Impact Work Outcomes Among Medicaid Enrollees
with Disabilities. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 17(3),
355-369.
Institute on Medicine (2007). The Future of Disability in America.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Council on Disability (2009). The Current State of Health
Care for People with Disabilities. National Council on Disability.
Washington, DC. (available at: www.ncd.gov/publications/2009/Sept302009).
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (2006).
Notice of Final Long-Range Plan for Fiscal Years 2005-2009. Federal
Register. Vol 71, No 31. P 8166-8200.
Stancliffe, R., Lakin, K.C., Larson, S., Taub, S., Bershadsky, J., &
Fortune, J. (2011). Overweight and obesity among adults with
intellectual disabilities who use ID/DD services in the U.S.
American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,
116(6), 401-418.
Waghorn, G., Loyd, C., Abraham, B., Silvester, D., & Chant, D.
(2008). Comorbid physical health conditions hinder employment among
people with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Journal, 31(3), 243-247.
Yee, Sylvia (2011). Health and Health Care Disparities Among People
with Disabilities. Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund.
Berkeley, CA. (available at: www.dredf.org/healthcare/Health-and-Health-Care-Disparities-Among-People-with-Disabilities.pdf).
Proposed Priority 2
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for a Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Project (DRRP) on Health and Function of Individuals with
Disabilities. The DRRPs must contribute to the outcome of maximizing
health and function outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(1) To contribute to this outcome, the DRRP must--
(a) Conduct either research activities or development activities in
one or more of the following priority areas:
(i) Technology to improve health and function outcomes for
individuals with disabilities, generally or within specific disability
or demographic groups.
(ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved
access to rehabilitation and healthcare and improved health and
function outcomes for individuals with disabilities generally or within
specific disability or demographic groups.
(iii) Interventions that contribute to improved health and function
outcomes for individuals with disabilities generally or within specific
disability or demographic groups. Interventions include any strategy,
practice, program, policy, or tool that, when implemented as intended,
contributes to improvements in outcomes for individuals with
disabilities.
(iv) Effects of government policies and programs on health care
access and on health and function outcomes for individuals with
disabilities generally or within specific disability or demographic
groups.
(v) Research, knowledge translation, and capacity building for
improved health and function outcomes for individuals with disabilities
generally or within specific disability groups.
(vi) Practices and policies that contribute to improved health and
function outcomes for transition-aged youth with disabilities;
(b) If conducting research under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority,
focus its research on a specific stage of research. If the DRRP is to
conduct research that can be categorized under more than one stage,
including research that progresses from one stage to another, those
stages must be clearly specified. These stages, exploration and
discovery, intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-
up evaluation, are defined in this document;
(c) Conduct knowledge translation activities (i.e., training,
technical assistance, utilization, dissemination) in order to
facilitate stakeholder (e.g., individuals with disabilities, employers,
policymakers, practitioners) use of the interventions, programs,
technologies, or products that resulted from the research or
development activities conducted under paragraph (1)(a) of this
priority; and
(d) Involve key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted
under paragraph (1)(a) of this priority in order to maximize the
relevance and usability of the research or development products to be
developed under this priority.
Proposed Priority 3--Disability Rehabilitation Research Project on
Employment of Individuals With Disabilities
Background
Despite the enactment of legislation and the implementation of a
variety of policy and program efforts at the Federal and State levels
to improve employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities, the
employment rate for individuals with disabilities remains substantially
lower than the rate for those without disabilities.
Approximately 18 percent of individuals with a disability aged 16
years and older are employed, compared to 64 percent of individuals of
the same age without a disability. The unemployment rate for these two
populations is 13.5 percent, and 7.3 percent, respectively (U.S.
Department of Labor, 2012). The economic downturn in recent years has
disproportionately impacted employment outcomes of individuals with
disabilities; among individuals 25 to 54 years of age during the recent
recession, the unemployment rate of
[[Page 5335]]
individuals with a disability ranged from 2.0 to 2.3 times that of
individuals without a disability (Fogg, Harrington, McMahon, 2010). Not
only are individuals with a disability much less likely to be employed,
the median earnings for individuals with a disability who are employed
are $19,735 per year as compared to $30,285 per year earned by persons
without a disability (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011).
NIDRR has funded a wide range of disability research and
development projects related to the employment outcomes of individuals
with disabilities. In accordance with NIDRR's Plan, NIDRR seeks to
build on these investments by supporting innovative and well-designed
research and development projects that fall under one or more of
NIDRR's general employment priority areas as described in the following
proposed priority. NIDRR hopes to increase competition and innovation
by allowing applicants to specify the research topics under the broad
priority areas within the employment domain. If an applicant proposes
to conduct research activities, the applicant must identify the
relevant priority area or areas, indicate the stage or stages of the
proposed research in its application (i.e., exploration and discovery,
intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-up
evaluation), justify the need and rationale for research at the
proposed stage or stages and describe fully an appropriate methodology
or methodologies for the proposed research.
References
Fogg, N.P., Harrington, P.E., & McMahon, B.T. (2011). The
Underemployment of Persons with Disabilities During the Great
Recession. The Rehabilitation Professional, 19(1), 3-10.
U.S. Census Bureau (2011) American Community Survey: Table B18140.
Available from: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml.
U.S. Department of Labor (2012). Economic News Release: Table A-6.
Employment Status of the Civilian Population by Sex, Age, and
Disability Status, Not Seasonally Adjusted. Available from:
www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm.
Proposed Priority 3
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services announces a priority for a Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Project (DRRP) on Employment of Individuals with Disabilities.
The DRRPs must contribute to the outcome of maximizing employment
outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
(1) To contribute to this outcome, the DRRP must--
(a) Conduct either research activities or development activities,
in one or more of the following priority areas:
(i) Technology to improve employment outcomes for individuals with
disabilities, generally or within specific disability or demographic
groups.
(ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved
employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities generally or
within specific disability or demographic groups.
(iii) Interventions that contribute to improved employment outcomes
for individuals with disabilities generally or within specific
disability or demographic groups. Interventions include any strategy,
practice, program, policy, or tool that, when implemented as intended,
contributes to improvements in outcomes for individuals with
disabilities.
(iv) Effects of government policies and programs on employment
outcomes for individuals with disabilities generally or in specific
disability or demographic groups.
(v) Research, knowledge translation, and capacity building for
improved employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities
generally or within specific disability groups.
(vi) Practices and policies that contribute to improved employment
outcomes for transition-aged youth with disabilities.
(vii) Vocational rehabilitation (VR) practices that contribute to
improved employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities;
(b) If conducting research under paragraph(1)(a) of this priority,
focus its research on a specific stage of research. If the DRRP is to
conduct research that can be categorized under more than one stage,
including research that progresses from one stage to another, those
stages must be clearly specified. These stages, exploration and
discovery, intervention development, intervention efficacy, and scale-
up evaluation, are defined in this document;
(c) Conduct knowledge translation activities (i.e., training,
technical assistance, utilization, dissemination) in order to
facilitate stakeholder (e.g., individuals with disabilities, employers,
policymakers, practitioners) use of the interventions, programs,
technologies, or products that resulted from the research activities,
development activities, or both, conducted under paragraph (1)(a) of
this priority; and
(d) Involve key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted
under paragraphs (1)(a) of this priority in order to maximize the
relevance and usability of the research or development products to be
developed under this priority.
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)).
Proposed Definitions
Background
For the purpose of NIDRR's DRRPs and other programs that NIDRR uses
to sponsor research activities, definitions of the four stages of
research (i.e., exploration and discovery, intervention development,
intervention efficacy, and scale-up evaluation) are proposed in this
document.
Proposed Definitions
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes the following definitions for this program. We may
apply one or more of these definition in any year in which this program
is in effect.
Exploration and discovery means the stage of research that
generates hypotheses or theories by conducting new and refined analyses
of data, producing observational findings, and creating other sources
of research-based information. This research stage may include
identifying or describing the barriers to and facilitators of improved
outcomes of individuals with disabilities, as well as identifying or
describing existing practices, programs, or policies that are
associated with important aspects of the lives of
[[Page 5336]]
individuals with disabilities. Results achieved under this stage of
research may inform the development of interventions or lead to
evaluations of interventions or policies. The results of the
exploration and discovery stage of research may also be used to inform
decisions or priorities.
Intervention development means the stage of research that focuses
on generating and testing interventions that have the potential to
improve outcomes for individuals with disabilities. Intervention
development involves determining the active components of possible
interventions, developing measures that would be required to illustrate
outcomes, specifying target populations, conducting field tests, and
assessing the feasibility of conducting a well-designed interventions
study. Results from this stage of research may be used to inform the
design of a study to test the efficacy of an intervention.
Intervention efficacy means the stage of research during which a
project evaluates and tests whether an intervention is feasible,
practical, and has the potential to yield positive outcomes for
individuals with disabilities. Efficacy research may assess the
strength of the relationships between an intervention and outcomes, and
may identify factors or individual characteristics that affect the
relationship between the intervention and outcomes. Efficacy research
can inform decisions about whether there is sufficient evidence to
support ``scaling-up'' an intervention to other sites and contexts.
This stage of research can include assessing the training needed for
wide-scale implementation of the intervention, and approaches to
evaluation of the intervention in real world applications.
Scale-up evaluation means the stage of research during which a
project analyzes whether an intervention is effective in producing
improved outcomes for individuals with disabilities when implemented in
a real-world setting. During this stage of research, a project tests
the outcomes of an evidence-based intervention in different settings.
It examines the challenges to successful replication of the
intervention, and the circumstances and activities that contribute to
successful adoption of the intervention in real-world settings. This
stage of research may also include well-designed studies of an
intervention that has been widely adopted in practice, but that lacks a
sufficient evidence-base to demonstrate its effectiveness.
Final Priorities and Definitions
We will announce the final priorities and definitions in a notice
in the Federal Register. We will determine the final priorities and
definitions after considering responses to this document and other
information available to the Department. This document does not
preclude us from proposing additional priorities, requirements,
definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year
in which we choose to use one or more of these priorities and
definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
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 subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely
to result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $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.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these proposed priorities and definitions only on a
reasoned determination that their benefits would justify their costs.
In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that this regulatory action is
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
and Centers Programs have been well established over the years in that
similar projects have been completed successfully. These proposed
priorities and definitions would generate new
[[Page 5337]]
knowledge through research and development. Another benefit of these
proposed priorities and definitions is that the establishment of new
DRRPs would improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. The new
DRRPs would generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new
information that would improve outcomes for individuals with
disabilities.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
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: 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:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: January 18, 2013.
Michael Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2013-01418 Filed 1-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P