[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 30 (Wednesday, February 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7288-7297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2349]
[[Page 7287]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Notices Inviting
Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007; Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 14, 2007 /
Notices
[[Page 7288]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--
Disability Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRPs) and Rehabilitation
Engineering Research Centers (RERCs)
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priorities for DRRPs and RERCs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces certain funding priorities for the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program
administered by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this notice announces four final
priorities for DRRPs and seven priorities for RERCs. The Assistant
Secretary may use these priorities for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2007 and later years. We take this action to focus research attention
on areas of national need. We intend these priorities to improve
rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
Effective Date: These priorities are effective March 16, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 6030, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-7462 or via Internet:
[email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
We published a notice of proposed priorities (NPP) for NIDRR's
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program in
the Federal Register on September 19, 2006 (71 FR 54870). The NPP
included a background statement that described our rationale for each
priority proposed in that notice.
In this notice, we are announcing the following priorities for
DRRPs and RERCs.
For DRRPs, the priorities are:
Priority 1--National Data and Statistical Center for the
Burn Model Systems.
Priority 2--Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers.
Priority 3--Emergency Evacuation and Individuals with
Disabilities.
Priority 4--Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS)
Centers.
For RERCs, the priorities are:
Priority 5--RERC for Spinal Cord Injury.
Priority 6--RERC for Recreational Technologies and
Exercise Physiology Benefiting Individuals with Disabilities.
Priority 7--RERC for Relating Physiological Data and
Functional Performance.
Priority 8--RERC for Accessible Medical Instrumentation.
Priority 9--RERC for Workplace Accommodations.
Priority 10--RERC for Rehabilitation Robotics and
Telemanipulation Systems.
Priority 11--RERC for Emergency Management Technologies.
There are differences between the NPP and this notice of final
priorities (NFP). Specifically, we have made changes to Priority 3--
Inclusive Emergency Evacuation of Individuals with Disabilities,
including changing the title to ``Emergency Evacuation and Individuals
with Disabilities,'' and Priority 4--Traumatic Brain Injury Model
Systems (TBIMS) Centers. We also have changed the title of Priority 7
from ``RERC for Translating Physiological Data into Predictions for
Functional Performance'' to ``RERC for Relating Physiological Data and
Functional Performance.''
Analysis of Comments and Changes
In response to our invitation in the NPP, 22 parties submitted
comments on the proposed priorities addressed in this NFP. An analysis
of the comments and the changes in the priorities since the publication
of the NPP follows. We discuss major issues according to general topic
questions and priorities.
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
priorities.
General
Collaborative Research Module Projects (Priority 2--Burn Model Systems
(BMS) Centers and Priority 4--Traumatic Brain Injury Systems (TBIMS)
Centers)
Comment: Several commenters requested clarification on the
collaborative research module requirements reflected in paragraph (b)
of the Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers priority (Priority 2) and
paragraph (b) of the Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS)
Centers priority (Priority 4). In particular, commenters requested more
information on the process by which module research projects will be
selected for implementation.
Discussion: The priorities for the BMS Centers and the TBIMS
Centers require applicants to propose one collaborative research module
project and to participate in at least one collaborative research
module project. These priorities state that, in conjunction with NIDRR,
at the beginning of the funding cycle project directors will select
specific modules for implementation from approved applications. The
details of this selection process will be based, in part, on input from
project directors of funded centers, and, therefore, will not be
finalized until after grant awards have been made. As stated in both
priorities, decisions regarding selection of module projects for
implementation will be made by the project directors of the newly
awarded centers in conjunction with NIDRR staff. NIDRR is not requiring
applicants to identify collaborators or to have established
relationships with such collaborators prior to submitting applications.
Under both priorities, multiple applicants may propose the same, or
substantially similar, module projects. In the case of the TBIMS
Centers priority, applicants may also propose to continue, refine, or
extend an existing collaborative module project. Under both priorities,
participation in the module projects will be limited to the funded
centers. Because these are peer-reviewed projects, in accordance with
NIDRR policies, any substantial changes to project scope (e.g.,
addition of outside collaborative sites) must be approved by the
assigned NIDRR project officer.
Moreover, under both priorities, funded centers may participate in
more than one module project. The number and subject of the modules
selected for implementation will not be known, however, until after the
first Project Directors' meeting. Each successful applicant will work
with NIDRR staff to determine if allocations of staffing and budget
allow participation in more than
[[Page 7289]]
one module project. NIDRR recommends that each center set aside up to
15 percent of its budget for participating in module projects.
NIDRR requires that applicants fully develop and present their
module research project, identifying research question(s) to be
addressed by their projects, along with a description of the importance
of the research they intend to conduct and the specific outcomes they
hope to achieve through the projects, so that reviewers may determine
whether the scope and format of the projects are appropriate.
Changes: None.
Priority 2--Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers
Comment: Two commenters suggested that NIDRR should require BMS
Centers grantees to conduct research on rural areas.
Discussion: While NIDRR agrees that focus on the treatment needs of
individuals in rural areas might be an excellent subject for burn
research, we do not believe that all applicants should be required to
focus on rural areas in their proposals. Nothing in the priority
precludes an applicant from suggesting such a research focus. The peer
review process will evaluate the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that NIDRR should require BMS
Centers grantees to conduct research focused on the measurement of burn
outcome.
Discussion: While NIDRR agrees that outcome measures might be an
excellent subject for burn research, we do not believe that all
applicants should be required to propose projects that focus only on
outcomes measurement. Nothing in the priority precludes an applicant
from suggesting such a research focus, however. The peer review process
will evaluate the merits of the individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Priority 3--Emergency Evacuation and Individuals with Disabilities
Comment: One commenter inquired about the expected level of funding
and duration of projects to be supported under this priority.
Discussion: Because funding level and project duration are not
subject to public comment, this information was not included in the
NPP. We will include information about the expected level of funding
and project duration in the notice inviting applications for any
competition using this priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the use of the term
``inclusive'' in this priority means that applicants must include
people with all forms of disabilities in their target population.
Another commenter suggested that NIDRR change the title of this
priority from ``Inclusive Emergency Evacuation of Individuals with
Disabilities'' to ``Including Individuals with Disabilities in
Emergency Evacuation.''
Discussion: The term ``inclusive'' is not intended to require
applicants to include individuals with all forms of disabilities in
their target population(s). Rather, the priority is intended to direct
applicants to define the parameters and units of analysis for their
proposed activities, including the target population of their project.
Applicants may choose to focus on individuals with one or more types of
disabilities. It is up to the applicant to explain and justify their
proposed target population in their applications. The peer review
process will assess the merits of individual applications.
Changes: To clarify that projects funded under this priority are
not required to include all forms of disabilities in their target
population(s), we have changed the title of this priority from
``Inclusive Emergency Evacuation of Individuals with Disabilities'' to
``Emergency Evacuation and Individuals with Disabilities'' and removed
other references to the term ``inclusive'' throughout the priority.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification on whether
applicants are required to focus on buildings, transportation systems,
and geographic locations, or whether they can select one or more of
these areas. The commenter also requested clarification on whether
applicants are required to focus on disability-related evacuation
devices, plans, exercises, protocols, models, systems, networks, and
standards, or whether applicants can focus on one or more of these. The
commenter stated that the language in paragraph (a) of the proposed
priority is unclear.
Discussion: In each case, applicants may choose one or more of the
areas listed. Regardless of the area(s) selected, applicants must
clearly define and justify their chosen area(s) of focus in their
applications.
Changes: We have revised paragraph (a) of the priority by deleting
the term ``and,'' and inserting the term ``or'' in both lists of areas
of focus. We also have made other editorial, non-substantive revisions
to this paragraph in order to clarify it further.
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon internal review of this priority, NIDRR determined
that the phrase ``disability-related'' in the priority could lead
applicants to focus narrowly on disability issues instead of more
broadly on emergency management initiatives and evacuation solutions
(i.e., evacuation devices, plans, exercises, protocols, models,
systems, networks, standards and interventions) that incorporate
disability issues.
Changes: We have deleted the phrase ``disability-related'' from
paragraphs (a) and (b) of the priority. We have added the phrase ``for
individuals with disabilities'' to paragraph (b).
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon internal review of this priority, NIDRR determined
that it may not be clear that the phrase ``evacuation solutions'' as
stated in paragraph (b) of the priority refers to the focus areas
identified in paragraph (a) (i.e., evacuation devices, plans,
exercises, protocols, models, systems, networks, standards, and
interventions).
Changes: We have added the phrase ``evacuation solutions'' to
paragraph (a) of the priority to clarify that evacuation devices,
plans, exercises, protocols, models, systems, networks, standards, and
interventions are all evacuation solutions.
Comment: Two commenters asked NIDRR to clarify the requirement that
the DRRP synthesize the current evidence base in the area(s) selected
by the grantee. Specifically, the commenters asked: (a) Whether the
proposed priority is asking for an assessment of the current evidence
base and (b) whether the required synthesis is to be a one-time or
ongoing activity.
Discussion: The priority requires a synthesis and assessment of the
current evidence base in the area(s) selected by the grantee (e.g.,
evacuation devices, plans, exercises, protocols, models, systems,
networks, standards, or interventions). We expect that this synthesis
will develop over the course of the project period. The synthesis
should inform implementation of the proposed project and should
culminate in a final document that provides a comprehensive assessment
of what we know and what research needs remain.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the requirement that the DRRP
synthesize the current evidence base in the area(s) selected by the
grantee requires that knowledge translation strategies be addressed.
Discussion: NIDRR is integrating knowledge translation requirements
across its research portfolio and does want applicants to address
knowledge translation strategies when responding to this priority. For
this reason, we think it is important to clarify the role of
[[Page 7290]]
knowledge translation in the work to be performed under this priority.
Changes: For clarification, we have added an additional requirement
in paragraph (b) of the priority. This new requirement directs the DRRP
to share findings with the emergency management community and other
stakeholders. It will be up to the applicant to propose a specific
strategy or method for sharing information with stakeholders. The peer
review process will determine the merits of individual proposals.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority include the
establishment of an electronic clearinghouse of information in order to
facilitate dissemination to stakeholders and assist the translation of
research into practice.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that an electronic clearinghouse could be
a useful dissemination tool. Applicants may propose to establish an
electronic clearinghouse to facilitate the dissemination of research
and assist in the translation of research into practice. However, NIDRR
does not believe that it would be appropriate to require that every
applicant include such a clearinghouse in their proposed project. The
peer review process will assess the merits of individual applications.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the priority mostly focuses on
establishing the current state of the science, or solicits ideas for
new interventions or enhancement of existing interventions.
Discussion: The priority requires the DRRP to synthesize and assess
the evidence base in one or more of the following areas: buildings,
transportation systems, or geographic locations. It also requires the
DRRP to advance the evidence base in one or more of these areas. We
intend for the priority to allow for the generation of ideas for new
interventions or enhancements of existing interventions. Applicants may
choose their area(s) of focus.
Changes: In order to clarify our intent, we have reworded paragraph
(a) of the priority to incorporate a requirement related to advancing
the current evidence base. We also have added the word
``interventions'' to this paragraph to clarify that applicants may
suggest new interventions or enhancements of existing interventions.
Comment: One commenter asked whether the requirement to examine
barriers and facilitators to effective implementation of disability-
related evacuation solutions within existing emergency management
initiatives suggests a research and evaluation component to this
priority.
Discussion: The intended outcome of requirement (b)(1) of this
priority is that the DRRP will add to the evidence base about factors
that help or hinder the inclusion of individuals with disabilities in
existing emergency evacuation plans. We anticipate that, in order to
add to the current evidence base about these factors, grantees will
need to conduct research. Evaluation activities also may be required,
depending on the area of focus chosen by the applicant. It is up to the
applicant to define and justify area(s) of focus. The peer review
process will determine the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that in order to develop inclusive
evacuation plans, people with disabilities should be included in the
planning process. The commenter stated that the DRRP should include
research on ways in which people with disabilities can participate in
the planning processes at a macro and micro level.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that including individuals with
disabilities in the planning process is a sound approach. As noted in
the NPP and elsewhere in this notice, NIDRR intends to require all DRRP
applicants under this priority to meet the requirements of the General
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRP) Requirements
priority that it published in a notice of final priorities in the
Federal Register on April 28, 2006 (71 FR 25472). Under the General
DRRP Requirements priority, each applicant must involve individuals
with disabilities in planning and implementing the DRRP's research,
training, and dissemination activities, and evaluating its work. It is
up to the applicant to propose how it will meet this requirement and
the peer reviewers will assess the merits of each individual proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that State and local safety codes may
present barriers to inclusive, effective evacuation of people with
disabilities. The commenter recommended that the priority require
grantees to investigate the impact of these codes and how they interact
with applicable nondiscrimination requirements of legislation such as
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that State and local safety codes may
present barriers to inclusive, effective evacuation of individuals with
disabilities. This may be an appropriate focus of research; nothing in
the priority precludes an applicant from proposing to examine these
variables. However, NIDRR does not believe that it would be appropriate
to require every applicant to examine these codes and their effect on
including individuals with disabilities in effective evacuation plans.
The peer review process will assess the merits of each individual
proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that an important outcome of the
proposed DRRP would be engagement and collaboration with the emergency
management community, emergency technology providers, and end users to
develop inclusive communication plans in their respective emergency
management protocols.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees with this comment, and believes that the
priority includes this focus. The priority states that the DRRP must be
designed to contribute to the outcome of increased implementation of
evacuation solutions for individuals with disabilities within existing
emergency management initiatives, and requires meaningful and sustained
collaboration with a variety of stakeholders, including mainstream
emergency management professionals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the proposed priority be
changed to use a functional definition of disability. The commenter
stated that condition-specific definitions of disability may not be
appropriate in the disaster management context and that it is important
to think broadly about disability in terms of function, and not
impairment or diagnosis.
Discussion: Consistent with the definition of ``disability'' that
applies to title II of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
NIDRR agrees that a broad view of disability is appropriate. However,
we wish to retain the requirement that applicants specify the target
populations (e.g., individuals with physical, sensory or mental
impairments) of their proposed project in order to emphasize the
breadth of populations that could be included in the target
population(s) of the work to be performed under this priority. However,
this does not mean that applicants may not choose to use a functional
definition of disability in their application. Applicants are free to
define the target population(s) of their proposed project and to
justify the population(s) as they deem appropriate. The peer review
process will determine the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority specifically
include
[[Page 7291]]
research to support evacuation planning, preparation, and strategies
that fully account for the broad population of individuals who are
blind or visually impaired (including seniors with vision loss, people
with multiple disabilities, and individuals who are ethnically or
linguistically diverse).
Discussion: This priority is intentionally stated as broadly as
possible in order to enable applicants with varying focus areas to
apply. Nothing in the priority would preclude an applicant from
including individuals with vision loss as their target population; the
priority states that applicants must define their target population
(e.g., individuals with physical, sensory, or mental impairments).
NIDRR does not believe that it would be appropriate to require that all
applicants include individuals with vision loss in their target
populations.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that, as currently written, the
Inclusive Emergency Evacuation of Individuals with Disabilities
priority could be interpreted as requiring the synthesis and assessment
of technological evidence (i.e., highway width, design capacity
specifications, building standards, etc.) or systemic evidence (i.e.,
improved communication plans, guidelines or annexes among best
practices of disaster management, training modules, etc.). The
commenter asked which of these two types of evidence the priority seeks
to address.
Discussion: The priority is broadly stated, permitting applicants
to choose their area(s) of focus, and, hence, the types of evidence
they synthesize and assess. Applicants may propose to focus their
research on any one or more of the following: evacuation solutions--
evacuation devices, plans, exercises, protocols, models, systems,
networks, standards and interventions. It is up to the applicant to
define and justify their chosen area(s). The peer review process will
evaluate the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that it would be better for the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to fund the research described in
the Inclusive Emergency Evacuation of Individuals with Disabilities
priority. The commenter stated that DHS has specific responsibility in
this area, has research programs and portfolios that are appropriate to
this topic, and has funding capability via the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. The commenter added that emergency management
targeted to people with disabilities should be a mainstream activity of
DHS and that funding through DHS would facilitate the rapid adoption of
findings and products.
Discussion: This DRRP fits within NIDRR's research agenda, which
includes a growing portfolio of research to improve outcomes for
individuals with disabilities in emergency and disaster situations. In
addition, NIDRR chairs the Research Subcommittee of the DHS Interagency
Coordinating Council on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with
Disabilities. As such, in developing this priority, NIDRR worked
collaboratively with representatives of DHS as well as seven other
Federal agencies. The priority requires applicants to demonstrate how
they plan to implement a sustained, meaningful and integrated
collaboration with a variety of stakeholders, including relevant
Federal agencies and members of DHS's Interagency Coordinating Council
on Emergency Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities.
Changes: None.
Priority 4--Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS) Centers
Comment: Two commenters expressed concern that the proposed TBIMS
Centers priority would be understood by applicants to favor local
projects that conduct intervention trials over projects that conduct
diagnostic and prognostic studies. These commenters expressed concern
that local projects that conduct intervention trials are likely to lack
the sample sizes necessary to ensure adequate statistical power and
generalizability of the research findings.
Discussion: Under this priority applicants may propose to test
innovative approaches to treatment and evaluation of traumatic brain
injury (TBI) outcomes; however, NIDRR suggests that applicants also may
consider the ways in which prognostic or diagnostic research can
support the development of interventions that improve outcomes for
persons with TBI. Nothing in the priority prohibits an applicant from
proposing such prognostic or diagnostic research projects. The peer
review process will evaluate the merits of each individual proposal.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested that the TBIMS Centers priority be
modified to include an indication of how the 35-case-minimum (for
enrollment in the TBIMS database) will be enforced. The commenter
explained that the inclusion of this information in the priority would
serve to discourage applicants from artificially inflating their
estimate of TBIMS database enrollment in the application.
Discussion: NIDRR expects that all applicants will make a good
faith estimate of the number of people to be enrolled in the TBIMS
database based on clinical enrollment rates at their respective
institutions, accounting for expected refusals and attrition.
Monitoring and enforcement of funded activities, including the number
of persons enrolled in the TBIMS database, is the post-award
responsibility of NIDRR staff.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter noted that the TBIMS Centers priority does
not address whether collaborative research module projects developed
under the last funding cycle of this program would be eligible for
funding under this priority.
Discussion: Grants under this priority will provide funds for
collaborative research module projects that meet the requirements of
the priority and are selected for implementation. Nothing in the TBIMS
Centers priority prohibits an applicant from proposing a continuation
or extension of a collaborative research module project that was funded
in the last funding cycle of the TBIMS program. The peer review process
will evaluate the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested that the TBIMS Centers priority
explicate the process by which module research projects will be
selected for implementation.
Discussion: We discuss the process by which module research
projects proposed under this priority will be selected for
implementation under the heading Collaborative Research Module Projects
(Priority 2--Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers and Priority 4--Traumatic
Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS) Centers) elsewhere in this notice.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter inquired about the components of the
required multidisciplinary system of care designed to meet the needs of
individuals with TBI, stating that emergency medical services or Level
1 trauma centers were not explicitly mentioned in the TBIMS Centers
priority.
Discussion: As explained in the background statement for the TBIMS
Centers priority in the NPP, each TBIMS center funded under this
program should be designed to offer a multidisciplinary system for
providing rehabilitation services specifically designed to meet the
special needs of
[[Page 7292]]
individuals with TBI. These services span the continuum of treatment
from acute care through community re-entry. Paragraph (1) of the
priority also makes clear that a TBIMS Center must ``provide a
multidisciplinary system of rehabilitation care specifically designed
to meet the needs of individuals with TBI. The system must encompass a
continuum of care, including emergency medical services, acute care
services, acute medical rehabilitation services, and post-acute
services.'' While NIDRR agrees that Level 1 trauma centers can play a
key role in this system, NIDRR has no basis for requiring that
applicants provide Level 1 trauma center care. The peer review process
will evaluate the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern about the under-
representation of persons from minority and lower socioeconomic
backgrounds in some TBIMS research. The commenter recommended that
NIDRR more strongly encourage the inclusion of underserved populations
in research conducted by the TBIMS Centers.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that members of underserved populations
with TBI experience greater challenges in receiving health care
services and are generally in poorer health. NIDRR does encourage the
inclusion of underserved populations in the research funded through the
TBIMS program. Nothing in the TBIMS Centers priority prohibits an
applicant from proposing to include members of underserved populations
in the proposed research. The peer review process will evaluate the
merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: None.
Discussion: Paragraph (2) of the TBIMS Centers priority requires
that all TBIMS Centers coordinate with the NIDRR-funded Model Systems
Knowledge Translation Center to provide scientific results and
information for dissemination to clinical and consumer audiences. Since
the publication of the NPP, the NIDRR-funded Model Systems Knowledge
Translation Center has been established. Information about the newly
funded Model Systems Knowledge Translation Center can be found at the
following Web site: http://uwctds.washington.edu/projects/msktc.asp.
Changes: We have revised paragraph (2) of the priority by adding
the following Web site address for the NIDRR-funded Model Systems
Knowledge Translation Center: http://uwctds.washington.edu/projects/msktc.asp.
Comment: None.
Discussion: In the NPP, the background statement for the proposed
TBIMS Centers priority stated that additional information regarding the
TBIMS database, which is maintained by the NIDRR-funded National Data
and Statistical Center for the TBIMS can be found at http://tbindc.org.
Please note that, since the publication of the NPP, the NIDRR-funded
TBIMS National Data and Statistical Center has been awarded to a
different institution, and the associated Web site address has changed
to http://www.tbindsc.org.
Changes: None.
Priorities 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11--Rehabilitation Engineering
Research Centers (RERCs)
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Recreational
Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting Individuals with
Disabilities priority should specifically address the needs of people
with sensory disabilities.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that the recreational and fitness needs of
individuals with sensory disabilities are important. Nothing in this
priority prohibits an applicant from proposing to address the needs of
individuals with sensory disabilities through its proposed project; the
peer review process will evaluate the merits of the proposal. However,
NIDRR does not believe that it would be appropriate to require that all
applicants address sensory disabilities through their proposed
projects.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Recreational
Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting Individuals with
Disabilities priority should specifically address exercise programs for
people with disabilities.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that the development of exercise programs
for individuals with disabilities may lead to better health outcomes
and increased access to and participation in physical fitness
activities. An applicant could propose to address exercise programs for
individuals with disabilities; the peer review process will evaluate
the merits of individual proposals. However, NIDRR does not believe
that it would be appropriate to require all applicants under this
priority to propose to address exercise programs for individuals with
disabilities.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Translating
Physiological Data into Predictions for Functional Performance priority
should address mobility aids (e.g., canes and guide dogs) used by
adults with low vision and blindness.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that research and demonstration activities
on mobility aids may help to improve ambulation and access by people
with low vision and blindness. An applicant could propose to address
mobility aids used by adults with low vision and blindness through its
proposed project and the peer review process will evaluate the merits
of the proposal. However, NIDRR does not believe that it would be
appropriate to require that all applicants address mobility aids used
by adults with low vision and blindness in their proposed projects.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Translating
Physiological Data into Predictions for Functional Performance priority
is too restrictive because it limits the relationship between
physiological measures and functional performance to prediction only.
This commenter expressed concern that the title of the proposed
priority contributes to this narrow focus.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees with the commenter. Models and methods for
understanding the various relationships between physiological data and
functional performance are in need of development. An applicant could
propose to address other components of the relationship between
physiological measures and functional performance; the peer review
process will evaluate the merits of the individual proposals. For the
sake of clarity, NIDRR will change the title of this priority.
Changes: The title of this priority area has been changed from
``RERC for Translating Physiological Data into Predictions for
Functional Performance'' to ``RERC for Relating Physiological Data and
Functional Performance.''
Comment: One commenter believes that the RERC for Accessible
Medical Instrumentation priority should focus on monitoring devices
used for self-care by people with disabilities and that the RERC should
be responsible for standards development for monitoring devices used
for self-care by people with disabilities.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that research and development in the area
of monitoring devices used for self-care by individuals with
disabilities is needed. An applicant could propose to address
monitoring devices used for self-care by individuals with disabilities;
the peer review process will evaluate the merits of the proposal.
However, NIDRR does not believe that it would be appropriate to require
that all applicants address monitoring devices used for self-care by
individuals with disabilities through
[[Page 7293]]
their proposed projects. If an applicant proposes to address monitoring
devices used for self-care by individuals with disabilities, it must
remember that it will be required to provide technical assistance to
public and private organizations responsible for developing policies,
guidelines, and standards that affect this area of research.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Workplace
Accommodations priority should specifically recognize that the
workplace is a dynamic, ever-changing environment where effective
accommodations may change over time.
Discussion: NIDRR agrees that the workplace is a dynamic
environment where accommodations at the individual level may not be
sufficient for the human-work environment system. As employee job
functions and responsibilities change, the employee and accommodations
must be able to adapt effectively. An applicant under this priority
could propose to address this aspect of workplace accommodations
through its proposed project; the peer review process will evaluate the
merits of individual proposals. However, NIDRR does not believe that it
would be appropriate to require all applicants to address this aspect
of workplace accommodations in their proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Workplace
Accommodations priority should specifically address individuals with
environmental illness and that it should require the study of the
impact of personal assistance services on employment barriers.
Discussion: Nothing in the RERC for Workplace Accommodations
priority prohibits an applicant from proposing to address environmental
illness in the workplace or to study the impact of personal assistance
services on employment barriers; the peer review process will evaluate
the merits of individual proposals received under this priority. NIDRR
does not believe that it would be appropriate to require that all
applicants propose to address environmental illness or to study the
impact of personal assistance services on employment barriers.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Rehabilitation
Robotics and Telemanipulation Systems priority should be expanded to
include robotic aids for mobility, education, and manipulation.
Discussion: Nothing in this priority prohibits an applicant from
proposing to investigate intelligent mobility aids. NIDRR does not
believe, however, that it would be appropriate to require all
applicants to investigate intelligent mobility aids under this
priority. The peer review process will evaluate the merits of
individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the RERC for Emergency
Management Technologies priority should address specifically the inter-
operability of communications platforms, and digital emergency alert
systems, and that it should involve the Federal, State, and local
emergency management communities.
Discussion: NIDRR recognizes that compatible communications,
digital emergency alert systems, and the involvement of the Federal,
State, and local emergency management communities are critical to
effective emergency management communications. That said, NIDRR does
not believe that it would be appropriate to require all applicants
under this priority to address inter-operability issues or digital
alert systems, or to involve Federal, State, and local emergency
management communities through their proposed projects. Nothing
prohibits an applicant from proposing to address compatible
communications, or digital emergency alert systems, or to involve the
Federal, State, and local emergency management communities; the peer
review process will evaluate the merits of individual proposals.
Changes: None.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting
applications we designate each priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational. 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 either
(1) awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent
to which the application meets the competitive preference priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets
the competitive preference 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 invitational
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over
other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Note: This NFP is in concert with President George W. Bush's New
Freedom Initiative (NFI) and NIDRR's Final Long-Range Plan for FY
2005-2009 (Plan). The NFI can be accessed on the Internet at the
following site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom.
The 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://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
Through the implementation of the NFI and the 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.
Priorities
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRP) Program
The purpose of the DRRP program is to plan and conduct research,
demonstration projects, training, and related 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. 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,
development, demonstration, training, dissemination, utilization, and
technical assistance.
An applicant for assistance 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). In addition, NIDRR intends
to require all DRRP applicants to meet the requirements of the General
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects (DRRP) Requirements
priority that it published in a notice of final priorities in the
Federal Register on April 28, 2006 (71 FR 25472).
Additional information on the DRRP program can be found at: http://
[[Page 7294]]
www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/res-program.htmlDRRP.
National Data and Statistical Center for the Burn Model Systems
Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for the establishment of a National
Data and Statistical Center for the Burn Model Systems (National BMS
Data Center). The National BMS Data Center must advance medical
rehabilitation by increasing the rigor and efficiency of scientific
efforts to assess the experience of individuals with burn injury. To
meet this priority, the National BMS Data Center's research and
technical assistance must be designed to contribute to the following
outcomes:
(a) Maintenance of a national longitudinal database (BMS Database)
for data submitted by each of the Burn Model Systems centers (BMS
Centers). This database must provide for confidentiality, quality
control, and data-retrieval capabilities, using cost-effective and
user-friendly technology.
(b) High-quality, reliable data in the BMS Database. The National
BMS Data Center must contribute to this outcome by providing training
and technical assistance to BMS Centers on subject retention and data
collection procedures, data entry methods, and appropriate use of study
instruments, and by monitoring the quality of the data submitted by the
BMS Centers.
(c) Rigorous research conducted by BMS Centers. To help in the
achievement of this outcome, the National BMS Data Center must make
statistical and other methodological consultation available for
research projects that use the BMS Database, as well as center-specific
and collaborative projects of the BMS program.
(d) Improved efficiency of the BMS Database operations. The
National BMS Data Center must pursue strategies to achieve this
outcome, such as collaborating with the National Data and Statistical
Center for Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems, the National Data and
Statistical Center for Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems, and the Model
Systems Knowledge Translation Center.
Burn Model Systems (BMS) Centers
Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for the funding of Burn Model Systems
(BMS) centers (BMS Center) under the Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Projects (DRRP) Program to conduct research that contributes
to evidence-based rehabilitation interventions and clinical as well as
practice guidelines that improve the lives of individuals with burn
injury. Each BMS Center must--
(a) Contribute to continued assessment of long-term outcomes of
burn injury by enrolling at least 30 subjects per year into the
national longitudinal database for BMS data maintained by the National
Data and Statistical Center for the BMS, following established
protocols for the collection of enrollment and follow-up data on
subjects;
(b) Contribute to improved outcomes for individuals with burn
injury by proposing one collaborative research module project and
participating in at least one collaborative research module project,
which may range from pilot research to more extensive studies; and
(c) Contribute to improved long-term outcomes of individuals with
burn injury by conducting no more than two site-specific research
projects to test innovative approaches that contribute to
rehabilitation interventions and evaluating burn injury outcomes in
accordance with the focus areas identified in NIDRR's Final Long-Range
Plan for FY 2005-2009 (Plan). Applicants who propose more than two
site-specific projects will be disqualified.
In carrying out these activities, each BMS Center may select from
the following research domains related to specific areas of the Plan:
Health and function, employment, participation and community living,
and technology for access and function.
In addition, each BMS Center must--
(1) Provide a multidisciplinary system of rehabilitation care
specifically designed to meet the needs of individuals with burn
injury. The system must encompass a continuum of care, including
emergency medical services, acute care services, acute medical
rehabilitation services, and post-acute services; and
(2) Coordinate with the NIDRR-funded Model Systems Knowledge
Translation Center to provide scientific results and information for
dissemination to clinical and consumer audiences.
Emergency Evacuation and Individuals with Disabilities
Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services announces a priority for a Disability Rehabilitation Research
Project (DRRP) on Emergency Evacuation and Individuals with
Disabilities. This DRRP must conduct research that contributes to
improved outcomes for individuals with disabilities in emergencies and
disasters. Under this priority, the DRRP must be designed to contribute
to the following outcomes:
(a) Increased evidence-based knowledge about the emergency
evacuation of individuals with disabilities from one or more of the
following areas: buildings; transportation systems; or geographic
locations (e.g., cities and States). The DRRP must contribute to this
outcome by synthesizing, assessing, and advancing the current state of
evidence-based knowledge within the area(s) chosen above. This must
include a focus on one or more of the following evacuation solutions--
evacuation devices, plans, exercises, protocols, models, systems,
networks, standards, or interventions. Research activities must be
designed with the goal of achieving reliable, usable, accessible, safe,
effective, and emergency evacuation for individuals with disabilities.
(b) Increased implementation of evacuation solutions for
individuals with disabilities within existing emergency management
initiatives. The DRRP must contribute to this outcome by-- (1)
examining barriers and facilitators to incorporating disability-related
evacuation solutions within existing emergency management initiatives;
(2) sharing findings from this DRRP with the emergency management
community and other key stakeholders; and (3) collaborating with the
emergency management community and other key stakeholders to propose
solutions to identified barriers.
In addition to the above outcomes, applicants must:
Define, in their applications, the parameters and units of
analysis for their proposed activities. Applications must include a
description of each of the following: (1) Type(s) of evacuation (i.e.,
evacuation from buildings, transportation systems, geographic locations
such as cities or States); (2) target population(s) (e.g., individuals
with physical, sensory, mental impairments); and (3) type(s) of
evacuation solutions (e.g., evacuation devices, plans, exercises,
protocols, models, systems, networks, standards, interventions).
Demonstrate in their applications how they plan to
implement a sustained, meaningful, and integrated collaboration
throughout the project with key stakeholders. These may include but are
not limited to: (1) disability and aging advocates and organizations,
disability subject matter
[[Page 7295]]
experts, and qualified individuals with disabilities; (2) fire
engineers, homeland security and preparedness personnel, and other
mainstream emergency management professionals and associations; (3)
industry, standard-setting organizations, and other relevant
stakeholders involved in standards development; (4) researchers
(including researchers working on projects funded by NIDRR, other
government agencies, and researchers in the private sector); and (5)
relevant Federal agencies, including but not limited to those
participating in the Interagency Coordinating Council on Emergency
Preparedness and Individuals with Disabilities.
Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems (TBIMS) Centers
Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for Traumatic Brain Injury Model
Systems (TBIMS) centers under the Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Projects (DRRP) program to conduct research that contributes
to evidence-based rehabilitation interventions which improve the lives
of individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Each TBIMS center
must contribute to the following outcomes:
(a) Continued assessment of long-term outcomes of TBI by enrolling
at least 35 subjects per year into the longitudinal portion of the
TBIMS database maintained by the National Data and Statistical Center
for the TBIMS, following established protocols for the collection of
enrollment and follow-up data on subjects.
(b) Improved outcomes for individuals with TBI by proposing one
collaborative research module project and participating in at least one
collaborative research module project, which may range from pilot
research to more extensive studies (at the beginning of the funding
cycle, the TBIMS directors, in conjunction with NIDRR, will select
specific modules for implementation from the approved applications).
(c) Improved long-term outcomes of individuals with TBI by
conducting no more than two site-specific research projects to test
innovative approaches that contribute to rehabilitation interventions
and evaluating TBI outcomes in accordance with the focus areas
identified in NIDRR's Long-Range Plan for FY 2005-2009 (Plan).
Applicants who propose more than two site-specific projects will be
disqualified.
In carrying out each of these research activities, each TBIMS
Center may select from the following research domains related to
specific areas of the Plan: Health and Function, Employment,
Participation and Community Living, and Technology for Access and
Function.
In addition, each TBIMS Center must--
(1) Provide a multidisciplinary system of rehabilitation care
specifically designed to meet the needs of individuals with TBI. The
system must encompass a continuum of care, including emergency medical
services, acute care services, acute medical rehabilitation services,
and post-acute services; and
(2) Coordinate with the NIDRR-funded Model Systems Knowledge
Translation Center to provide scientific results and information for
dissemination to clinical and consumer audiences. (Additional
information on this center can be found at http://uwctds.washington.edu/projects/msktc.asp). Rehabilitation Engineering
Research Centers Program
General Requirements of Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers
(RERCs)
RERCs carry out research or demonstration activities in support of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, by--
Developing and disseminating innovative methods of
applying advanced technology, scientific achievement, and psychological
and social knowledge to: (a) Solve rehabilitation problems and remove
environmental barriers; and (b) study and evaluate new or emerging
technologies, products, or environments and their effectiveness and
benefits; or
Demonstrating and disseminating: (a) Innovative models for
the delivery of cost-effective rehabilitation technology services to
rural and urban areas; and (b) other scientific research to assist in
meeting the employment and independent living needs of individuals with
severe disabilities; and
Facilitating service delivery systems change through: (a)
The development, evaluation, and dissemination of consumer-responsive
and individual and family-centered innovative models for the delivery
to both rural and urban areas of innovative cost-effective
rehabilitation technology services; and (b) other scientific research
to assist in meeting the employment and independence needs of
individuals with severe disabilities.
Each RERC must be operated by or in collaboration with one or more
institutions of higher education or one or more nonprofit
organizations.
Each RERC must provide training opportunities, in conjunction with
institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations, to assist
individuals, including individuals with disabilities, to become
rehabilitation technology researchers and practitioners.
Additional information on the RERC program can be found at: http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/index.html.
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) for Spinal Cord
Injury, Recreational Technologies and Exercise Physiology Benefiting
Individuals with Disabilities, Relating Physiological Data and
Functional Performance, Accessible Medical Instrumentation, Workplace
Accommodations, Rehabilitation Robotics and Telemanipulation Systems,
and Emergency Management Technologies
Priorities
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes seven priorities for the establishment of (a) an
RERC for Spinal Cord Injury, (b) an RERC for Recreational Technologies
and Exercise Physiology Benefiting Individuals with Disabilities, (c)
an RERC for Relating Physiological Data and Functional Performance, (d)
an RERC for Accessible Medical Instrumentation, (e) an RERC for
Workplace Accommodations, (f) an RERC for Rehabilitation Robotics and
Telemanipulation Systems, and (g) an RERC for Emergency Management
Technologies. Within its designated priority research area, each RERC
will focus on innovative technological solutions, new knowledge, and
concepts that will improve the lives of persons with disabilities.
(a) RERC for Spinal Cord Injury.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop and evaluate
innovative technologies and approaches that will improve the treatment,
rehabilitation, employment, and reintegration into society of persons
with spinal cord injury. This RERC must work collaboratively with the
NIDRR-funded Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems Centers program;
(b) RERC for Recreational Technologies and Exercise Physiology
Benefiting Individuals with Disabilities.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
innovative technologies and strategies that will enhance recreational
opportunities for individuals with disabilities and develop methods to
[[Page 7296]]
enhance the physical performance of individuals with disabilities.
(c) RERC for Relating Physiological Data and Functional
Performance.
Under this priority, the RERC must determine the physiological
measurement tools that are available in a specific sub-specialty of
rehabilitation. A sub-specialty may be based on underlying disabling
condition (e.g., spinal cord injury, and Parkinson's disease), or on
specific sequelae that may be common to a wide variety of disabling
conditions (e.g., pain, spasticity). The RERC must then develop and
evaluate models and methods for determining the relationships between
basic physiological measurements and functional performance. These
models and methods must take the characteristics of individuals and
their environments into consideration when attempting to delineate
these relationships, so that the results of this research are relevant
to clinical practice and the real-world experiences of individuals with
disabilities.
(d) RERC for Accessible Medical Instrumentation.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
innovative methods and technologies to increase the usability and
accessibility of diagnostic, therapeutic, and procedural healthcare
equipment (e.g., equipment used during medical examinations, and
treatment) for individuals with disabilities. This includes developing
methods and technologies that are useable and accessible for patients
and health care providers with disabilities.
(e) RERC for Workplace Accommodations.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
innovative technologies and implementation plans, devices, and systems
to enhance the productivity of individuals with disabilities in the
workplace. This RERC must emphasize the application of universal design
concepts to improve the accessibility of the workplace and workplace
tools for all workers.
(f) RERC for Rehabilitation Robotics and Telemanipulation Systems.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
human-scale robots and telemanipulation systems that will provide or
perform rehabilitation therapies and address the unique needs of
individuals with disabilities.
(g) RERC for Emergency Management Technologies.
Under this priority, the RERC must research, develop, and evaluate
existing and innovative emergency management technologies to enhance
emergency outcomes for individuals with disabilities. Areas of focus
within this priority research area may include but are not limited to
communications, transportation, evacuation, and other areas related to
emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. In addition, this RERC
must provide input and expertise into the development of standards to
improve emergency management for individuals with disabilities. This
RERC must work collaboratively with the NIDRR-funded Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Project: Emergency Evacuation and Individuals
with Disabilities.
Under each priority, the RERC must be designed to contribute to the
following programmatic outcomes:
(1) Increased technical and scientific knowledge-base relevant to
its designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to this
outcome by conducting high-quality, rigorous research and development
projects.
(2) Innovative technologies, products, environments, performance
guidelines, and monitoring and assessment tools as applicable to its
designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute to this
outcome by developing and testing these innovations.
(3) Improved research capacity in its designated priority research
area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by collaborating with
the relevant industry, professional associations, and institutions of
higher education.
(4) Improved focus on cutting edge developments in technologies
within its designated priority research area. The RERC must contribute
to this outcome by identifying and communicating with NIDRR and the
field regarding trends and evolving product concepts related to its
designated priority research area.
(5) Increased impact of research in the designated priority
research area. The RERC must contribute to this outcome by providing
technical assistance to public and private organizations, individuals
with disabilities, and employers on policies, guidelines, and standards
related to its designated priority research area.
In addition, under each priority, the RERC must--
Have the capability to design, build, and test prototype
devices and assist in the transfer of successful solutions to relevant
production and service delivery settings;
Evaluate the efficacy and safety of its new products,
instrumentation, or assistive devices;
Provide as part of its proposal and then implement a plan
that describes how it will include, as appropriate, individuals with
disabilities or their representatives in all phases of its activities,
including research, development, training, dissemination, and
evaluation;
Provide as part of its proposal and then implement, in
consultation with the NIDRR-funded National Center for the
Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR), a plan to disseminate its
research results to individuals with disabilities, their
representatives, disability organizations, service providers,
professional journals, manufacturers, and other interested parties;
Develop and implement in the first year of the project
period, in consultation with the NIDRR-funded RERC on Technology
Transfer, a plan for ensuring that all new and improved technologies
developed by the RERC are successfully transferred to the marketplace;
Conduct a state-of-the-science conference on its
designated priority research area in the fourth year of the project
period and publish a comprehensive report on the final outcomes of the
conference in the fifth year of the project period; and
Coordinate research projects of mutual interest with
relevant NIDRR-funded projects, as identified through consultation with
the NIDRR project officer.
Executive Order 12866
This NFP has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order
12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed the potential
costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with this NFP are those resulting
from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary
for administering this program effectively and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this NFP, we have determined that the benefits of
the final priorities justify the costs.
Summary of Potential Costs and Benefits
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 final
priorities will generate new knowledge and technologies through
research,
[[Page 7297]]
development, dissemination, utilization, and technical assistance
projects.
Another benefit of these final priorities is that the establishment
of new DRRPs and new RERCs will support the President's NFI and will
improve the lives of persons with disabilities. The new DRRPs and RERCs
will generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new information that
will improve the options for individuals with disabilities to perform
regular activities in the community.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: 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 on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 84.133A Disability
Rehabilitation Research Projects and 84.133E Rehabilitation
Engineering Research Centers Program)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g), 764(a), 764(b)(2), and
764(b)(3).
Dated: February 5, 2007.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. E7-2349 Filed 2-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P