[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 111 (Tuesday, June 10, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33092-33094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13498]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID: ED-2014-OSERS-0013]
Final Priority. National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research--Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
[CFDA Number: 84.133B-4.]
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Final priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority for the Rehabilitation
Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program administered by the
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR).
Specifically, we announce a priority for an RRTC on Health and Function
of Individuals with Physical Disabilities. The Assistant Secretary may
use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later
years. We take this action to focus research attention on an area of
national need. We intend the priority to contribute to improved
outcomes of health and function of individuals with physical
disabilities.
DATES: This priority is effective July 10, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Barrett, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-6211 or by
email: [email protected].
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: 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).
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
The purpose of the RRTCs, which are funded through the Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program, is to achieve
the goals of, and improve the effectiveness of, services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act through well-designed research, training,
technical assistance, and dissemination activities in important topical
areas. These activities are designed to benefit rehabilitation service
providers, individuals with disabilities, family members, policymakers,
and other research stakeholders. Additional information on the RRTC
program can be found at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/index.html.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(2).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
We published a notice of proposed priority (NPP) for this program
in the Federal Register on March 3, 2014 (79 FR 11738). That notice
contained background information and our reasons for proposing the
particular priority.
There are no differences between the proposed priority and this
final priority.
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of
proposed priority, six parties submitted comments on the proposed
priority.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes, or
suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make under the
applicable statutory authority. In addition, we do not address general
comments that raised concerns not directly related to the proposed
priority.
Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and
of any changes in the priority since publication of the NPP follows.
Comment: One commenter questioned the need for this priority.
Discussion: This priority, creating an RRTC on Health and Function
of Individuals with Physical Disabilities, would help achieve the goals
of, and improve the effectiveness of services authorized under, the
Rehabilitation Act. By creating an RRTC on Health and Function for
Individuals with Physical Disabilities, we are fulfilling the purposes
established in NIDRR's Long-Range Plan for Fiscal Years 2013-2017
(Plan), which was published in the Federal Register on April 4, 2013
(78 FR 20299). More specifically, as we discuss in the NPP, there is a
need to better understand how specific health problems are interrelated
with optimal health and function; how they may affect community
participation, work productivity, and quality of life; and how they may
be prevented or mitigated. We believe this priority will focus research
attention on this area of national need.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC should focus on
technology-based interventions to improve health and function outcomes
of individuals with disabilities.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that technology can be used to improve the
health and function outcomes of individuals with physical disabilities.
This is one of five broad areas described in the priority, under which
applicants can propose research and related activities. NIDRR does not
wish to limit applicants' ability to address the other areas in the
priority by requiring a focus
[[Page 33093]]
on technology, as recommended by the commenter. The peer review process
will determine the merits of each proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter noted that several research centers working
in the area of health and function for individuals with physical
disabilities have focused their efforts on analysis of existing data.
The commenter recommended that NIDRR revise the priority to require the
RRTC to collect new data in order to advance the field.
Discussion: Nothing in the priority precludes an applicant from
proposing to engage in the collection and analysis of new data.
However, NIDRR does not wish to revise the research requirements in the
way suggested by the commenter because we believe the revisions would
limit the number and breadth of applications submitted under this
priority. The peer review process will determine the merits of each
proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that NIDRR revise the priority
to require the RRTC to focus on at least two study populations or
diagnostic groups, thereby promoting the generalizability of the RRTC's
findings.
Discussion: Paragraph (a) of the proposed priority states that the
RRTC can focus on individuals with physical disabilities as a group or
on specific disability or demographic subpopulations of individuals
with physical disabilities. NIDRR purposely does not require a minimum
number of target populations because we do not want to limit the
breadth and number of applications that can be submitted under this
priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked NIDRR to further define and specify
the limits of the term ``physical disability.'' The commenter noted
that people with traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke, for example,
have acquired cognitive or intellectual impairments, as well as
physical impairments, and often receive clinical services from
rehabilitation professionals with expertise in physical disabilities.
The commenter requested clarification of the term ``physical
disability'' to help applicants determine whether their proposed target
population(s) are an appropriate fit within the priority.
Discussion: We agree that some individuals with disabling
conditions such as TBI or stroke could be considered in multiple target
populations, including individuals with physical disabilities. NIDRR
purposely outlines broad categories of target populations in its Plan
and its priorities to allow applicants the flexibility to choose the
disability category that is most relevant to their research questions
and purposes. With this priority, we allow applicants to define and
justify their target population within the broad category of
individuals with physical disabilities. The peer review process will
determine the merits of each proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter noted that paragraph (c)(ii) of the priority
requires the RRTC to provide training to rehabilitation providers and
other disability service providers in order to facilitate more
effective delivery of services. The commenter suggested that by
limiting the recipients of the required training to service providers,
NIDRR may be limiting the knowledge that is available to consumers and
reinforcing the knowledge barrier between service providers and
consumers. The commenter suggested that NIDRR modify paragraph (c)(ii)
to require the RRTCs to provide training to consumers and service
providers.
Discussion: The requirements in paragraph (c)(ii) are based
directly on the Federal regulations that govern administration of the
RRTC program. The regulations in 34 CFR 350.22(b)(1) require that
training be provided to rehabilitation personnel or rehabilitation
research personnel. At the same time, nothing in the regulations or in
the priority precludes applicants from proposing to provide training to
individuals with disabilities in addition to rehabilitation or
rehabilitation research providers (who may also have disabilities). It
is up to the applicant to designate and justify training targets. The
peer review process will determine the merits of each proposal.
Changes: None.
Final Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for an RRTC on Health and Function of
Individuals with Physical Disabilities.
The RRTC must contribute to maximizing the health and function
outcomes of individuals with physical disabilities by:
(a) Conducting research activities in one or more of the following
priority areas, focusing on individuals with physical disabilities as a
group or on individuals in specific disability or demographic
subpopulations of individuals with physical disabilities:
(i) Technology to improve health and function outcomes for
individuals with physical disabilities.
(ii) Individual and environmental factors associated with improved
access to rehabilitation and health care and improved health and
function outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.
(iii) Interventions that contribute to improved health and function
outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities. Interventions
include any strategy, practice, program, policy, or tool that, when
implemented as intended, contributes to improvements in outcomes for
the specified population.
(iv) Effects of government practices, policies, and programs on
health care access and on health and function outcomes for individuals
with physical disabilities.
(v) Practices and policies that contribute to improved health and
function outcomes for individuals with physical disabilities.
(b) Focusing its research on one or more specific stages of
research. If the RRTC is to conduct research that can be categorized
under more than one of the research stages, or research that progresses
from one stage to another, those stages must be clearly specified. The
research stages and their definitions are in the final priorities and
definitions published in the Federal Register on May 7, 2013 (78 FR
26513).
(c) Serving as a national resource center related to health and
function for individuals with physical disabilities, their families,
and other stakeholders by conducting knowledge translation activities
that include, but are not limited to:
(i) Providing information and technical assistance to service
providers, individuals with physical disabilities and their
representatives, and other key stakeholders.
(ii) Providing training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to rehabilitation providers and other disability
service providers, to facilitate more effective delivery of services to
individuals with physical disabilities. This training may be provided
through conferences, workshops, public education programs, in-service
training programs, and similar activities.
(iii) Disseminating research-based information and materials
related to health and function for individuals with physical
disabilities.
(iv) Involving key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted
under paragraph (a) in order to maximize the relevance and usability of
the new knowledge generated by the RRTC.
[[Page 33094]]
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)).
This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, 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 final 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 final 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 upon 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 this final priority only on a reasoned determination
that its benefits justify its 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 does 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 Program have been well established over the years, as
projects similar to the one envisioned by the final priority have been
completed successfully. The new RRTC will generate and promote the use
of new knowledge that is intended to the health and function of
individuals with disabilities.
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: June 5, 2013.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-13498 Filed 6-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P