[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 116 (Tuesday, June 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34500-34509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14154]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities--Center for Systemic Improvement
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Overview Information
Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and
Results for Children with Disabilities--Center for Systemic
Improvement.
Notice inviting applications for a new award for fiscal year (FY)
2014.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326R.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 17, 2014.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 18, 2014.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve
results for children with disabilities by providing technical
assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating
useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by
scientifically based research.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority
is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 663
and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2014 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition,
this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we
consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Center for Systemic Improvement
Background
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to
establish and operate a Center for Systemic Improvement (Center). This
will be a national center with a focus on providing TA to State
educational agencies (SEAs) and lead agencies (LAs)
[[Page 34501]]
to help build their capacity \1\ to support local educational agencies
(LEAs) and early intervention services (EIS) programs and providers in
improving educational results and functional outcomes for children with
disabilities.\2\ Specifically, the Center will provide high-quality TA
to States to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purpose of this priority, ``capacity'' broadly
refers to the ability of the education system to help all students
meet more challenging standards (CPRE Policy Brief: Building
Capacity for Education Reform--December 1995) and the ability of the
early intervention system to improve developmental and functional
outcomes for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their
families.
\2\ For the purpose of this priority, ``children with
disabilities'' refers to infants, toddlers, children, and youth with
disabilities served under both Parts B and C of IDEA. For the
purposes of this priority, the term ``educational results'' and
``functional outcomes'' includes ``early intervention'' results and
``developmental outcomes'' for infants and toddlers with
disabilities and their families under IDEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Increase the capacity of SEAs and LAs to develop, implement,
and evaluate their State Systemic Improvement Plans (SSIPs) to achieve
improved outcomes for children with disabilities;
(2) Increase SEAs' and LAs' knowledge, selection, and utilization
of evidence-based practices (EBPs) \3\ to improve results for children
with disabilities;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the purpose of this priority, ``evidence-based
practices'' refers to a process, product, strategy, or practice
being proposed that, at a minimum, meets minimal evidence of
effectiveness according to the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence
Standards (http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/). A rating of minimal
evidence suggests that the panel cannot point to a body of research
that demonstrates the practice's positive effect on student
achievement. In some cases, this simply means that the recommended
practices would be difficult to study in a rigorous, experimental
fashion; in other cases, it means that researchers have not yet
studied this practice, or that there is weak or conflicting evidence
of effectiveness. A minimal evidence rating does not indicate that
the recommendation is any less important than other recommendations
with a strong or moderate evidence rating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Improve SEA and LA infrastructure \4\ and coordination within
SEAs and LAs for delivering effective TA on implementing and scaling-up
effective strategies, stakeholder engagement, resource mapping and
allocation, and instructional collaboration;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ State systems that make up SEA or LA infrastructure include,
at a minimum: governance, fiscal, quality standards, professional
development, data, TA, and accountability/monitoring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Increase the use of effective dissemination strategies by SEAs
and LAs to ensure LEAs and EIS programs and providers have access to
EBPs and select and implement those EBPs in a sustainable manner;
(5) Increase the effectiveness of SEAs and LAs to meaningfully
engage State and local stakeholders in the development and
implementation of the SSIP;
(6) Increase the capacity of SEAs and LAs to effectively utilize TA
resources funded by the Department of Education (Department) (e.g.,
Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network centers, Comprehensive
Centers, Regional Education Laboratories, Equity Assistance Centers)
and other centers (e.g., Head Start TA centers), as appropriate; and
(7) Increase the capacity of SEAs and LAs to implement general
supervision systems that support effective implementation of the IDEA,
including meeting its requirements and improving educational results
and functional outcomes for children with disabilities.
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is committed to
supporting States in their efforts to improve educational results and
functional outcomes for all children with disabilities, and to
incorporate those efforts into broader statewide improvement
initiatives. In 2012, OSEP announced its intention to redesign its
accountability framework and move to Results-Driven Accountability
(RDA). Since then, OSEP has been aligning its activities and resources
to more effectively support States' capacity to improve educational
results and functional outcomes for children with disabilities, while
continuing to assist States in ensuring compliance with IDEA's
requirements.
RDA represents a results-focused approach to both monitoring and
supporting States' implementation of both the results and compliance
mandates of IDEA. The RDA system includes three major components: (1)
The State Performance Plan (SPP)/Annual Performance Report (APR); (2)
OSEP's annual State determinations; and (3) differentiated monitoring
and support. Sections 616(a) and 642 of IDEA require the Department to
monitor States through SPPs/APRs and through oversight of States'
general supervision systems and to make annual determinations of each
State's performance using data from the APR and other publicly
available information. A differentiated system of monitoring and
support will use results data and other information about a State to
determine the appropriate intensity, focus, and nature of the oversight
and support that each State will receive as part of RDA. The SPP/APR
for the period Federal Fiscal Year 2013-2018 includes a new requirement
for an ambitious, yet achievable, comprehensive multi-year SSIP aimed
at improving educational results and functional outcomes for children
with disabilities. The SSIP contains three phases: (1) Analysis of data
and other information to provide a foundation for the SSIP; (2)
development of the SSIP; and (3) implementation and evaluation of the
SSIP. During the first phase, States are required to conduct a thorough
data and infrastructure analysis, identify the State-identified
measurable result or results to be achieved for children with
disabilities, select coherent improvement strategies, and develop a
theory of action. The State may select a single result (e.g.,
increasing early childhood outcomes (for Part C) or graduation rate for
children with disabilities) or a cluster of related results (e.g.,
increasing the graduation rate and decreasing the dropout rates for
children with disabilities).
Phase two builds on this analysis and requires States to develop
the SSIP. The SSIP will address how the State's infrastructure can
better support local-level implementation of EBPs to improve
educational results and functional outcomes for children with
disabilities. In addition, in this phase of the SSIP, the State will
identify its targets for its State-identified measurable result(s) to
evaluate the State's implementation of the SSIP.
The final phase requires the States to evaluate and report its
progress in implementing the SSIP and in achieving the State-identified
measurable result(s) for children with disabilities.
A focus on improved outcomes requires States to design systemic
approaches to successfully engage in the work of improvement throughout
the State. According to Barr (2012), this focus requires States to: (1)
Work across the SEA/LA to better integrate and align its resources,
services, and efforts; and (2) redesign work processes at all levels to
improve capacity at local levels, which are key activities of the SSIP.
In addition, the SSIP requires States to: (1) Identify root causes that
have an impact on outcomes; and (2) select and apply a coherent set of
improvement strategies to address root causes and build local capacity
to implement EBPs in a sustainable manner. As States work to support
local-level improvement by improving and aligning their resources and
redesigning their work, States will need high-quality TA responsive to
their unique needs in each of the areas identified above.
In a recent survey, State TA specialists identified State and local
capacity-building as their greatest TA need (Daley, Fiore, Bollmer,
Nimkoff, & Lysy, 2013). Other research highlights the challenges for
SEAs, LAs, LEAs, and EIS programs in building capacity to
[[Page 34502]]
provide effective TA that assists schools and EIS providers in
implementing effective practices to improve educational results and
functional outcomes for children with disabilities (Daley et al., 2013;
Hanes, Kerins, Perlman, Redding, & Ross, 2012; Reville, 2007). LEAs
report that when they need assistance to address educational issues,
they are most likely to turn to the State for support (U.S. Department
of Education, 2000).
States' capacity to (1) conduct comprehensive data analyses; (2)
assess the effectiveness of their policies, strategies, and programs;
and (3) appropriately select and sustain the implementation of a
coherent set of strategies to improve outcomes may be constrained by
the lack of collaborative or strategic leadership at the State level,
difficulties leveraging expertise, and an insufficient number of
skilled State-level staff to work with local agencies and programs
(LeFloch, Boyle, & Therriault, 2008; Unger et al., 2008).
In addition to these challenges, there is often a lack of
coordination and collaboration between special education and general
education systems in the State (Bonner-Tompkins, 2005), and early care
and education programs and services (National Governors Association,
2010). Even though State organizational structures may be focused on
similar goals, most SEAs and LAs budget by program and the budgets are
rarely coordinated to specific strategic objectives that may be cross-
cutting across different State-level programs. This lack of
coordination in budgeting and programming has resulted in State systems
being ineffective in responding to the emerging needs of local agencies
and programs (e.g., general education department school improvement
teams provide TA to focus and priority schools in need of improvement
that include students with disabilities, but special education
department staff are often not members of the improvement teams and are
not consulted on strategies that work with these students) (Barr,
2012).
A review of the literature on developing effective systems within a
coherent State infrastructure suggests that States also need support in
disseminating information on EBPs to effectively promote their
implementation at local levels. Traditional ways of disseminating this
information (e.g., journals, conferences, and presentations) often do
not lead to meaningful changes in practice and, therefore, are unlikely
to have an impact on educational results and functional outcomes
(Winton, 2006). Effective dissemination of information can play an
important role in the initial formation of attitudes and beliefs about
effective practices (Cook, Cook, & Landrum, 2013).
Meaningful engagement of stakeholders can be an effective method
for improving dissemination and local implementation of EBPs (Cashman
et al., 2014) and is a critical part of each State's development and
implementation of its SSIP. Authentic engagement of stakeholders (e.g.,
parents and families of children with disabilities, LEAs, TA providers,
policy makers, EIS programs and providers, advocates, the State
Advisory Panel, the State Interagency Coordinating Council, general
education, etc.) helps the SEA and LA to obtain input, and coalesce
support around and address, difficult educational and early childhood
issues; this input should be part of the State's SSIP as it identifies
and implements an effective approach to support improved educational
results and functional outcomes for children with disabilities and
their families (Cashman et al., 2014). Therefore, it is essential that
States meaningfully engage stakeholders throughout the development,
implementation, and evaluation of the SSIP.
In prior years, OSEP has supported six regional resource centers
(RRCs) to provide TA that was targeted to address State-specific needs
related to meeting the program requirements of Parts B and C of IDEA.
Under this priority, the proposed Center will have flexibility in the
provision of TA, to enable States to convene around common challenges
and opportunities, rather than on the basis of geographic region. For
instance, there would be the flexibility to convene around issues
ranging from challenges based on demographics (such as those facing
rural or urban States, those with a large enrollment, or States with
high numbers of English Learners (ELs)), around specific topics, or
some other approach that best meets the needs of States as they
implement their SSIPs.
This Center will build upon and advance previous work of the RRCs
by supporting States in the development, implementation, and evaluation
of their SSIPs and improvement of their general supervision systems. In
part, this will require assisting States with data and infrastructure
analyses on which to base the selection of a State-identified
measurable result(s) for children with disabilities, mapping of
existing resources and coordination of those resources, selection of a
set of coherent improvement strategies and activities that will improve
the State-identified measurable result(s) for children with
disabilities, and support for meaningful stakeholder engagement.
In addition, the Center will have an ongoing role in supporting
States with SSIP implementation activities, including: (1) Developing
and strengthening the State infrastructure to support local-level
implementation and scale-up of EBPs; (2) assessing specific strategies
to leverage existing capacity and resources to support SSIP
implementation; (3) drawing on and promoting the use of research on
implementation of EBPs; and (4) assessing the measures needed to
evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of EBPs and the
State's progress toward improving the State-identified measurable
result(s) for children with disabilities.
The Center will need to engage in collaborative TA activities with
other Department-funded TA centers and other TA centers (e.g., Head
Start TA centers), as appropriate, to effectively support the
development and implementation of SSIPs and improve general supervision
systems. This collaborative approach will also help to facilitate the
alignment of States' SSIPs with other key Federal reform efforts.
Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to
establish and operate a Center for Systemic Improvement to achieve, at
a minimum, the following expected outcomes:
(1) Increased capacity of SEAs and LAs to develop, implement, and
evaluate their SSIPs to achieve improved outcomes for children with
disabilities as part of their SPP/APRs under Parts B and C of IDEA;
(2) Increased SEA and LA knowledge, selection and utilization of
EBPs to improve results for children with disabilities;
(3) Improved SEA and LA infrastructure and coordination within SEAs
and LAs for delivering effective TA on implementing and scaling-up
effective strategies, stakeholder engagement, resource mapping and
allocation, and instructional collaboration;
(4) Increased use of effective dissemination strategies by SEAs and
LAs to ensure LEAs and EIS programs/providers have access to EBPs and
implement those EBPs in a sustainable manner;
(5) Increased effectiveness of LEAs and LAs to meaningfully engage
State and local stakeholders in the development and implementation of
the SSIP;
(6) Increased capacity of SEAs and LAs to effectively utilize TA
resources funded by the Department (e.g.,
[[Page 34503]]
Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network centers, Comprehensive
Centers, Regional Education Laboratories, Equity Assistance Centers)
and other TA centers (e.g., Head Start TA centers), as appropriate; and
(7) Increased capacity of SEAs and LAs to implement general
supervision systems that support effective implementation of the IDEA,
including meeting its requirements and improving educational results
and functional outcomes for children with disabilities.
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application
and administrative requirements in this priority. OSEP encourages
innovative approaches to meet these requirements, which are:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance of the Project,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address the current and emerging needs of SEAs and LAs to:
support the development, implementation, and evaluation of an SSIP;
identify existing State resources and align those resources with
strategic objectives; appropriately select a set of coherent
improvement strategies, based on thorough data analyses, that are
aligned to current efforts to improve outcomes for all children;
disseminate information on EBPs; provide effective TA on EBP
implementation; meaningfully engage stakeholders; and ensure the
effective implementation of the IDEA. To meet this requirement the
applicant must--
(i) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational and early
intervention issues and ongoing challenges to implementing the IDEA
consistent with its statutory and regulatory provisions and improving
educational results and functional outcomes for children with
disabilities; and
(ii) Present information and data about the current capacity of
SEAs and LAs to support systemic change, and how the Center will
address the weaknesses and enhance the strengths within SEAs and LAs to
build capacity in local agencies to implement, scale-up, and sustain
State-level initiatives and EBPs that will lead to improved educational
results and functional outcomes for children with disabilities.
(2) Improve SEA and LA infrastructure (e.g., align governance,
fiscal systems and resources, quality standards, professional
development, data, TA, and accountability/monitoring, share data to
inform needed improvement) and increase capacity to ensure
implementation of the IDEA and the SSIP.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the Project Services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Assist SEAs and LAs to ensure equal access to TA products and
services for members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how
it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and
information; and
(ii) Ensure that TA services and products are accessible to the
stakeholders served by the intended recipients (e.g., by creating
materials in formats and languages accessible to the stakeholders
served by the intended recipients and inclusive of culturally
responsive principles).
(2) Achieve the goals, objectives, and intended outcomes in the
application. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) The logic model by which the proposed project will achieve its
intended outcomes.
(3) Use a conceptual framework to develop project plans and
activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical
support for this framework.
(4) Be based on current research and make use of EBPs. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) The current research on the effectiveness of systems change,
capacity-building, and program evaluation that will inform the TA and
related evidence-based improvement strategies;
(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and
implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and
(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research
and EBPs in the development and delivery of its TA products and
services.
(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality
and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes
of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant
must describe--
(i) How it proposes to identify, use, and expand the knowledge base
on--
(A) The coordination and functioning of SEA and LA infrastructure
to drive better outcomes for children with disabilities;
(B) Supporting States in developing, implementing, and evaluating
an SSIP;
(C) Effective State dissemination strategies to ensure access to
and adoption of EBPs by LEAs and EIS programs; and
(D) Meaningful engagement of stakeholders to solve complex
educational and early intervention problems and support implementation
of the IDEA and the use of EBPs at the local level;
(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\5\ which must
identify the intended recipients of the products and services under
this approach, and include the dissemination plan for ensuring that
SEAs, LAs, and other relevant TA centers can access and use products
and services developed by the proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in
minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time,
invited or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This
category of TA also includes information or products, such as
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the
TA center's Web site by independent users. Brief communications by
TA center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are
also considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\6\ which
must, at a minimum, offer targeted TA to States with a ``Needs
Assistance'' determination and identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA service based on needs
common to multiple recipients and not extensively individualized. A
relationship is established between the TA recipient and one or more
TA center staff. This category of TA includes one-time, labor-
intensive events, such as facilitating strategic planning or hosting
regional or national conferences. It can also include episodic, less
labor-intensive events that extend over a period of time, such as
facilitating a series of conference calls on single or multiple
topics that are designed around the needs of the recipients.
Facilitating communities of practice can also be considered
targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this
approach;
(B) The process the proposed project will use to identify common
areas of required TA for a number of SEAs and LAs (e.g., challenges
presented by rural versus urban settings, structure of LA service
delivery, early childhood transition, postsecondary transition, or
disproportionality or other areas) that lend themselves to targeted TA;
and
(C) The process by which the proposed project will collaborate with
other relevant TA centers to develop and implement targeted TA
strategies in order to reduce duplication of efforts
[[Page 34504]]
and extend the reach of current TA providers; and
(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\7\ which
must, at a minimum, offer intensive TA to States with a ``Needs
Intervention'' determination and identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA
center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome.
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program,
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients of the products and services under this
approach, including considerations used to determine which States
without a ``Needs Intervention'' determination, if any, will receive
this level of TA, including how the project will improve States'
readiness for the proposed project, if necessary, in SEAs and LAs that
require intensive TA;
(B) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs and LAs to build or
enhance their TA systems to include evidence-based professional
development practices and coaching;
(C) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the
education and early intervention system (e.g., regional TA providers,
SEAs, LEAs, schools, LAs, EIS programs and providers, and families) to
ensure that there is communication between each level and that there
are systems in place to support the sustained use of EBPs; and
(D) The process by which the proposed project will collaborate with
other relevant TA centers to develop and implement intensive TA
strategies in order to reduce duplication of efforts and extend the
reach of current TA providers.
(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize
efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the
intended project outcomes;
(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the
intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to
achieve the intended project outcomes.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the Evaluation Plan,'' include an evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs. In order to assess the
effectiveness of the project's activities, the evaluation plan must
describe measures of progress in implementation, including the extent
to which the project's products and services have reached its target
population, and measures of intended outcomes or results of the
project's activities.
In designing the evaluation plan, the project must--
(1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officers, a
project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time, experience
in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration
with the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP),\8\ the project
director, and the OSEP project officers on the following tasks:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and
oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large
discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per
year and required to participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP's
Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development;
Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology,
Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to
enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and
unbiased technical assistance in designing the evaluations with due
consideration of the project's budget. CIPP does not function as a
third-party evaluator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the grant
application to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of
implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or
clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;
(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in
the grant application consistent with the logic model (e.g., preparing
evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes,
developing quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit
both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of
implementation, as appropriate, and the assessment of effectiveness,
selecting respondent samples if appropriate, designing instruments or
identifying data sources, and identifying analytic strategies); and
(iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the grant
application such that it clearly--
(A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources
for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic
strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the
evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completion of the plan;
(B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the
second project year for use during the project's intensive review for
continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of
the Project; and
(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project
officers, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the
performance measures to be addressed in the project's APR;
(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks
described in paragraph (1) of this section; and
(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the
costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
this section and implementing the evaluation plan.
(d) In the narrative section of the application under ``Adequacy of
Project Resources,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the Management Plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated to the project and how these allocations are
appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives (taking into consideration race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability, as appropriate), including those of
families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers,
among others, in its development and operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must--
[[Page 34505]]
(1) Include in Appendix A a logic model that depicts, at a minimum,
the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed
project. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its
intended outcomes and provides a framework for both the formative and
summative evaluations of the project.
Note: The following Web sites provide more information on logic
models: www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html
and www.tadnet.org/pages/589;
(2) Include in Appendix A a conceptual framework for the project;
(3) Include in Appendix A person-loading charts and timelines, as
applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative;
(4) Include in the budget attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC,
after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in
Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officers and other relevant staff
during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officers and
the grantee's project director or other authorized representative;
(ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;
(iii) Two, two-day trips annually to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP; and
(iv) A one-day intensive review meeting in Washington, DC, during
the last half of the second year of the project period;
(5) Include in the budget a line item for an annual set-aside of
five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those
needs are identified in consultation with OSEP.
Note: With approval from the OSEP project officers, the project
must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no
later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period; and
(6) Maintain a Web site that meets government or industry-
recognized standards for accessibility.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:
In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a), as well as--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the
second year of the project period;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's
products and services and the extent to which the project's products
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.
References:
Barr, S.L. (2012). State education agencies: The critical role of
SEAs in facilitating school district capacity to improve learning
and achievement for students with disabilities. Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
Bonner-Tompkins, E. (2005). State systems of technical assistance
delivery in special education. August 2005 questionnaire: Summary of
findings. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers and
the Access Center.
Cashman, J., Linehan, P., Purcell, L., Rosser, M., Schultz, S., &
Skalski, S. (2014). Leading by convening: A blueprint for authentic
engagement. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors
of Special Education.
Cook, B.G., Cook, L., & Landrum, T.J. (2013). Moving research into
practice. Exceptional Children, 79, (2).
Daley, T.C., Fiore, T.A., Bollmer, J., Nimkoff, T., & Lysy, C.
(2013). National Evaluation of the IDEA Technical Assistance &
Dissemination Program (NCEE 2014-4000). Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute
of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Hanes, S., Kerins, T., Perlman, C., Redding, S., & Ross, S. (2012).
Evaluating and improving the SEA system of recognition,
accountability, and support with rubrics, explanations, and
exemplars. Lincoln, IL: Academic Development Institute, Center on
Innovation & Improvement.
Le Floch, K.C., Boyle, A., & Therriault, S.B. (2008). Help wanted:
State capacity for school improvement. Washington, DC: American
Institutes for Research.
National Governors Association, Center for Best Practices. (2010).
Building ready states: A governors guide to supporting a
comprehensive, high-quality early childhood State system.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/1010GOVSGUIDEEARLYCHILD.PDF.
Reville, P. (2007). A mountain beyond mountains. In Redding, S. &
Walberg, H.J. (Eds.), Handbook on statewide systems of support.
Lincoln, IL: Center on Innovation & Improvement.
Unger, C., Lane, B., Cutler, E., Lee, S., Whitney, J., Arruda, E., &
Silva, M. (2008). How can State education agencies support district
improvement: A conversation amongst educational leaders,
researchers, and policy actors. Providence, RI: The Education
Alliance at Brown University.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Under Secretary,
Planning and Evaluation Service, Elementary and Secondary Education
Division. (2000). Comprehensive Regional Assistance Centers Program:
Final report on the evaluation: Volume I. Washington, DC: Author.
Winton, P. (2006). The evidence-based practice movement and its
effect on knowledge utilization. In V. Buysse & P. Wesley (Eds.).
Evidence-based practice in the early childhood field (pp. 71-115).
Washington, DC: Zero to Three.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and
requirements. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Education Department debarment
and suspension regulations in 2 CFR part 3485.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $8,771,748.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2015 from the list of
unfunded applicants from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $8,771,748 for a single budget period of 12 months.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in
the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
[[Page 34506]]
Project Period: Up to 36 months with an optional additional 24
months based on performance. Applications must include plans for both
the 36-month award and the 24-month extension.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LAs; LEAs, including public charter
schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public
agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and
outlying areas; Indian tribes or tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Other General Requirements:
(a) Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding under this
program must involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application Package: You can obtain an
application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following
address: www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. To obtain a
copy from ED Pubs, write, fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S.
Department of Education, P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304.
Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (703) 605-6794. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY),
call, toll free: 1-877-576-7734.
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at
its email address: [email protected].
If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify
this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.326R.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or compact disc) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition. Page
Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where
you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use
to evaluate your application. You must limit Part III to no more than
70 pages, using the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial. An application submitted in any other font
(including Times Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be accepted.
The page limit and double-spacing requirement does not apply to
Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the
narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and
certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the
application package for completing the abstract), the table of
contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference
list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the page
limit and double-spacing requirement does apply to all of Part III, the
application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures,
graphs, and screen shots.
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit in the
application narrative section; or if you apply standards other than
those specified in this notice and the application package.
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: June 17, 2014.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 18, 2014.
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your
application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, please refer to section IV. 7. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However,
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive the intergovernmental review in order to
make an award by the end of FY 2014.
5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Data Universal Numbering System Number, Taxpayer Identification
Number, and System for Award Management: To do business with the
Department of Education, you must--
a. Have a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and a
Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);
b. Register both your DUNS number and TIN with the System for Award
Management (SAM) (formerly the Central Contractor Registry (CCR)), the
Government's primary registrant database;
c. Provide your DUNS number and TIN on your application; and
d. Maintain an active SAM registration with current information
while your application is under review by the Department and, if you
are awarded a grant, during the project period.
You can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number
can be created within one-to-two business days.
If you are a corporate entity, agency, institution, or
organization, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue Service.
If you are an individual, you can obtain a TIN from the Internal
Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration. If you need a
new TIN, please allow 2-5 weeks for your TIN to become active.
The SAM registration process can take approximately seven business
days, but may take upwards of several weeks, depending on the
completeness and accuracy of the data entered into the SAM database by
an entity. Thus, if you think you might want to apply for Federal
financial assistance under a program administered by the Department,
please allow sufficient time to obtain and register your DUNS
[[Page 34507]]
number and TIN. We strongly recommend that you register early.
Note: Once your SAM registration is active, you will need to
allow 24 to 48 hours for the information to be available in
Grants.gov and before you can submit an application through
Grants.gov.
If you are currently registered with SAM, you may not need to make
any changes. However, please make certain that the TIN associated with
your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to update
your registration annually. This may take three or more business days.
Information about SAM is available at www.SAM.gov. To further
assist you with obtaining and registering your DUNS number and TIN in
SAM or updating your existing SAM account, we have prepared a SAM.gov
Tip Sheet, which you can find at: http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html.
In addition, if you are submitting your application via Grants.gov,
you must (1) be designated by your organization as an Authorized
Organization Representative (AOR); and (2) register yourself with
Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these steps are outlined at the
following Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html.
7. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under
this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify
for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the
instructions in this section.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
Applications for grants under the Center for Systemic Improvement
competition, CFDA number 84.326R, must be submitted electronically
using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at www.Grants.gov.
Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the
application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit
your application. You may not email an electronic copy of a grant
application to us.
We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
You may access the electronic grant application for the Center for
Systemic Improvement competition at www.Grants.gov. You must search for
the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA
number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search
(e.g., search for 84.326, not 84.326R).
Please note the following:
When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find
information about submitting an application electronically through the
site, as well as the hours of operation.
Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must
be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30:00
p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as
otherwise noted in this section, we will not accept your application if
it is received--that is, date and time stamped by the Grants.gov
system--after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. We do not consider an application that does not comply
with the deadline requirements. When we retrieve your application from
Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application
because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after
4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.
The amount of time it can take to upload an application
will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
You should review and follow the Education Submission
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures
pertaining to Grants.gov under News and Events on the Department's G5
system home page at www.G5.gov.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your
application in paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
all information you typically provide on the following forms: The
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications.
You must upload any narrative sections and all other
attachments to your application as files in a PDF (Portable Document)
read-only, non-modifiable format. Do not upload an interactive or
fillable PDF file. If you upload a file type other than a read-only,
non-modifiable PDF or submit a password-protected file, we will not
review that material. Additional, detailed information on how to attach
files is in the application instructions.
Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send
a second notification to you by email. This second notification
indicates that the Department has received your application and has
assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified
identifying number unique to your application).
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues
with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov
Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a
Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
If you are prevented from electronically submitting your
application on the application deadline date because of technical
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension
until 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing
instructions described elsewhere in this notice.
If you submit an application after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC
time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person
listed under FOR
[[Page 34508]]
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice and provide
an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with
Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will
accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem
occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your
ability to submit your application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC
time, on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you
after a determination is made on whether your application will be
accepted.
Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply
only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the
Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed
to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before
the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem
you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.
Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an
exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your
application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application
through the Grants.gov system because--
You do not have access to the Internet; or
You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to
the Grants.gov system; and
No later than two weeks before the application deadline
date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the
application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business
day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement
to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception
prevents you from using the Internet to submit your application.
If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be
postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline
date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must
receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the
application deadline date.
Address and mail or fax your statement to: Perry Williams, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4147, Potomac
Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2600. FAX: (202) 245-7617.
Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the
mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a
commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail
the original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.326R), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with
your local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper
application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original
and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.326R), 550 12th Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays.
Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by
the Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including
suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are
submitting your application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a
notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not
receive this notification within 15 business days from the
application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of
Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
also requires various assurances including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications. However, if the Department decides to
select an equal number of applications in each group
[[Page 34509]]
for funding, this may result in different cut-off points for fundable
applications in each group.
4. Special Conditions: Under 34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12, the Secretary
may impose special conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is
not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance;
has a financial or other management system that does not meet the
standards in 34 CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable; has not fulfilled
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve
Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. For
purposes of this priority, the Center will use these measures, which
focus on the extent to which projects provide high-quality products and
services, the relevance of project products and services to educational
and early intervention policy and practice, and the use of products and
services to improve educational and early intervention policy and
practice.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department
(34 CFR 75.590).
5. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.253, the extent to which a
grantee has made ``substantial progress toward meeting the objectives
in its approved application.'' This consideration includes the review
of a grantee's progress in meeting the targets and projected outcomes
in its approved application, and whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and
budget. In making a continuation grant, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Perry Williams, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 4147, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2600. Telephone: (202) 245-7575.
If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS),
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting
the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 5037, PCP, Washington, DC 20202-2550.
Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS,
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System
at: 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 12, 2014.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-14154 Filed 6-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P