2014-27516.pdf

69442 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices

1 For the purposes of this priority, the definition of ‘‘evidence-based’’ consists of the following definitions in 34 CFR 77.1: Large sample means an analytic sample of 350 or more students (or other single analysis units) who were randomly assigned to a treatment or control group or 50 or more groups (such as classrooms or schools) that contain 10 or more students (or other single analysis units) and that were randomly assigned to a treatment or control group. Moderate evidence of effectiveness means one of the following conditions is met:

(i) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations [What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which can currently be found at the following link: http:// ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a statistically significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), and includes a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice.

(ii) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations [What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which can currently be found at the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/ ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a statistically significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a large sample and a multi-site sample (Note:

Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large and multi-site sample requirements as long as each study meets the other requirements in this paragraph).

Multi-site sample means more than one site, where site can be defined as an LEA, locality, or State.

Relevant outcome means the student outcome or outcomes (or the ultimate outcome if not related to students) that the proposed process, product, strategy, or practice is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of a program.

Strong evidence of effectiveness means that one of the following conditions is met:

(i) There is at least one study of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards without reservations [What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which can currently be found at the following link: http:// ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a statistically significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the study or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a large sample and a multi-site sample (Note:

Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large and multi-site sample requirements as long as each study meets the other requirements in this paragraph).

(ii) There are at least two studies of the effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or practice being proposed, each of which: Meets the What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards with reservations [What Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which can currently be found at the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a statistically significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant and overriding unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant populations in the studies or in other studies of the intervention reviewed by and reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes a large sample and a multi-site sample.

2 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘technology tools’’ may include, but are not limited to, digital math text readers for students with visual authorized for release and export to the Government of Australia.

[FR Doc. 2014–27605 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Termination of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees

AGENCY: DoD.

ACTION: Termination of Federal Advisory Committee.

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce that it is terminating the Department of Defense Task Force on the Care, Management, and Transition of Recovering Wounded, Ill, and Injured Members of the Armed Forces (‘‘the Task Force’’).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Freeman, Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, 703–692–5952.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This committee is being terminated in accordance with section 724 of Public Law 111–84(f) and under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix), 41 CFR 102–3.55, and the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b), effective October 27, 2014.

Dated: November 18, 2014.

Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 2014–27593 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards;

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals With Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology Implementation

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice.

Overview Information

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology Implementation.

Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2015.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.327S.

DATES: Applications Available:

November 21, 2014.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: January 20, 2015.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: March 23, 2015.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to: (1) Improve results for students with disabilities by promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology;

(2) support educational activities designed to be of educational value in the classroom for students with disabilities; (3) provide support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the classroom;

and (4) provide accessible educational materials to students with disabilities in a timely manner.

Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 674 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.)).

Absolute Priority: For FY 2015 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:

Educational Technology, Media, and

Materials for Individuals with Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology Implementation.

Background: The purpose of this priority is to fund cooperative agreements to: (a) Identify strategies needed to effectively implement evidence-based 1 technology tools 2 that benefit students with disabilities; and (b) develop and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19 http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19

69443 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices impairment, reading software to improve literacy and communication development, and text-to-speech software to improve reading performance.

These tools must assist or otherwise benefit students with disabilities.

3 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘products’’ may include, but are not limited to, instruction manuals, lesson plans, demonstration videos, ancillary instructional materials, and professional development modules such as collaborative groups, coaching, mentoring, or online supports.

4 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘resources’’ include, but are not limited to, school leadership support, professional development support to school staff, and a plan for integrating technology into the classroom curriculum.

5 In this context, ‘‘effective implementation’’ means ‘‘making better use of research findings in typical service settings through the use of processes and activities (such as accountable implementation teams) that are purposeful and described in sufficient detail such that independent observers can detect the presence and strength of these processes and activities’’ (Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005).

6 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘settings’’ include general education classrooms, special education classrooms or any place where school-based instruction occurs.

disseminate products 3 that will help a broad range of schools to effectively implement these technology tools. As Congress recognized in IDEA, ‘‘almost 30 years of research and experience has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by . . . supporting the development and use of technology, including assistive technology devices and assistive technology services, to maximize accessibility for children with disabilities’’ (section 601(c)(5)(H) of

IDEA).

The use of technology, including assistive technology devices and assistive technology services, enhances instruction and access to the general education curriculum. Technology can be the great equalizer in a classroom for students with disabilities. Whereas teachers can find it difficult to differentiate instruction for a large number of students in one class, all with different needs and abilities, technology tools that benefit students with disabilities can often help teachers personalize lessons and skill building for each child. ‘‘Most students with disabilities can and do benefit from technology in the classroom.

Incorporating technology increases students’ motivation to learn and personalizes lessons to a student’s individual needs’’ (Zorigian & Job, 2008). Furthermore, technologies offer opportunities to support State educational agency (SEA) and local educational agency (LEA) Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) flexibility plans by: (a) Improving student learning and engagement; (b) accommodating the special needs of students; (c) facilitating student and teacher access to digital content and resources; 4 and (d) improving the quality of instruction through personalized learning and data (Duffey & Fox, 2012; Fletcher, Schaffhauser, & Levi, 2012; U.S. Department of Education, 2010).

Employing products and resources designed to assist with the implementation of evidence-based technology tools is critical to ensuring that these tools will be effectively used to improve early childhood outcomes, academic achievement, and college- and career-readiness of children with disabilities. Data from a survey of more than 1,000 kindergarten through grade 12 (K–12) teachers, principals, and assistant principals indicated that simply providing teachers with technology does not ensure that it will be used. The survey also indicated that while newer teachers may use technology in their personal lives more often than veteran teachers, they do not use it more frequently in their classrooms than veteran teachers do.

The survey also revealed that the more often teachers use technology to improve students’ daily classroom engagement, the more likely teachers are to recognize the benefits to understanding different student learning styles (Grunwald Associates, 2010).

Additionally, Perlman and Redding (2011) found that in order to be used most effectively, technology must be implemented in ways that align with curricular and teacher goals and must offer students opportunities to use these tools in their learning. While for years there has been a vast improvement in the infrastructure to support the implementation of technology in educational institutions, the integration of technology at all levels still remains surprisingly low (Lu & Overbaugh, 2009). For example, even as many systems have recently been deployed to deliver coursework online and the number of students involved in online learning has grown precipitously, many of these online learning technologies have not been designed to be accessible to students with disabilities (Center on Online Learning and Students with Disabilities, 2012). These findings demonstrate a need for products and resources that can ensure technology tools for students with disabilities are implemented effectively.

Since 1998, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has supported technology and media service projects through the Steppingstones of Technology Innovation for Children with Disabilities (Steppingstones) program. The projects funded under the Steppingstones program developed and evaluated numerous innovative technology tools designed to improve results for children with disabilities.

Examples of such tools include: Web-based learning and assessment materials, instructional software, assistive technology devices, methods for using off-the-shelf hardware and software to improve learning, and methods for integrating technology into instruction. In addition, the Department’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) now supports projects to develop and evaluate innovative technology tools. The Stepping-up Technology Implementation program is building on these technology development efforts by identifying, developing, and disseminating products and resources that promote the effective implementation 5 of evidence-based instructional and assistive technology tools in early childhood or K–12 settings.6

Priority: The purpose of this priority is to fund cooperative agreements to: (a) Identify strategies needed to effectively implement evidence-based technology tools that benefit students with disabilities; and (b) develop and disseminate products (e.g., instruction manuals, lesson plans, demonstration videos, ancillary instructional materials) that will help early childhood or K–12 settings to effectively implement these technology tools.

To be considered for funding under this absolute priority, applicants must meet the application requirements. Any project funded under this absolute priority must also meet the programmatic and administrative requirements specified in the priority.

Application Requirements: An applicant must include in its application—

(a) A logic model or conceptual framework that depicts at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project. A logic model communicates how a project will achieve its outcomes and provides a framework for both 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.

(b) A plan to implement the activities described in the Project Activities section of this priority;

(c) A plan, linked to the proposed project’s logic model, for a formative evaluation of the proposed project’s activities. The plan must describe how

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html http://www.researchutilization.org/matrix/logicmodel_resource3c.html http://www.tadnet.org/pages/589

69444 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices

7 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘iterative development’’ refers to a process of testing, systematically securing feedback, and then revising the educational intervention that leads to revisions in the intervention to increase the likelihood that it will be implemented with fidelity (Diamond & Powell, 2011).

8 The term ‘‘persistently lowest-achieving schools’’ means, as determined by the State—

(a)(1) Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that—

(i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring or the lowest-achieving five Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the State, whichever number of schools is greater; or

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; and

(2) Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I funds that—

(i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of secondary schools or the lowest-achieving five secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, whichever number of schools is greater; or

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years.

(b) To identify the persistently lowest-achieving schools, a State must take into account both—

(i) The academic achievement of the ‘‘all students’’ group in a school in terms of proficiency on the State’s assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

(ii) The school’s lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the ‘‘all students’’ group.

For the purposes of this priority, the Department considers schools that are identified as Tier I or Tier II schools under the School Improvement Grants Program (see 75 FR 66363) as part of a State’s approved FY 2009, FY 2010, FY 2011, or FY 2012 application to be persistently lowest-achieving schools. A list of these Tier I and Tier II schools can be found on the Department’s Web site at www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html.

9 The term ‘‘priority school’’ means a school that has been identified by the State as a priority school pursuant to the State’s approved request for ESEA flexibility.

the formative evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring the quality of products and services;

(d) A plan for recruiting and selecting the following:

(1) Three development schools.

Development schools are the sites in which iterative development 7 of the implementation of technology tools and products will occur. The project must start implementing the technology tool with one development school in year one of the project period and two additional development schools in year two.

(2) Four pilot schools. Pilot schools are the sites in which try-out, formative evaluation, and refinement of technology tools and products will occur. The project must work with the four pilot schools during years three and four of the project period.

(3) Ten dissemination schools.

Dissemination schools will be selected if the project is extended for a fifth year.

Dissemination schools will be used to conduct the final test of the effectiveness of the products and the final opportunity for the project to refine the products for use by teachers, but will receive less technical assistance (TA) from the project than the development or pilot schools. Also, at this stage, dissemination schools will extend the benefits of the technology tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination school, eligible schools and LEAs must commit to working with the project to implement the evidence-based technology tool. A school may not serve in more than one category (i.e., development, pilot, dissemination).

(e) Information (e.g., early childhood setting; elementary, middle, or high school; persistently lowest-achieving school; 8 priority school 9) about the diversity of the development, pilot, and dissemination schools; their demographics (e.g., student race or ethnicity, percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch); and other pertinent data.

(f) Documentation that the technology tool is evidence-based (as defined in this notice) and that it can be implemented to improve early childhood outcomes, academic achievement, and college- and career-readiness.

(g) A budget for attendance at the following:

(1) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting to be held in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting held in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer 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 officer and the grantee’s project director or other authorized representative.

(2) A three-day project directors’ conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period.

(3) Two two-day trips annually to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP.

Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this priority, the project, at a minimum, must conduct the following activities:

(a) Recruit a minimum of three development schools in one LEA and four pilot schools across at least two LEAs in accordance with the plan proposed under paragraph (d) of the Application Requirements section of this notice.

Note: Final site selection will be determined in consultation with the OSEP project officer following the kick-off meeting.

(b) Identify resources and develop products to support sustained implementation of the selected technology tool. Development of the products must be an interactive process beginning in a single development school and continuing through iterative cycles of development and refinement in the other development schools, followed by a formative evaluation and refinement in the pilot schools. The products must include, at a minimum, the following components to support implementation of the technology tool:

(1) An instrument or method for assessing (i) the need for the technology tool, and (ii) readiness to implement it.

Instruments and methods may include resource inventory checklists, school self-study guides, surveys of teacher interest, detailed descriptions of the technology tool for review by school staff, and similar approaches used singly or in combination.

(2) Methods and manuals to support the implementation of the technology tool.

(3) Professional development activities necessary for teachers to implement the technology tool with fidelity and integrate it into the curriculum.

(c) Collect and analyze data on the effect of the technology tool on academic achievement and college- and career-readiness.

(d) Collect formative and summative evaluation data from the development schools and pilot schools to refine and evaluate the products.

(e) If the project is extended to a fifth year, provide the products and the technology tool to no fewer than 10 dissemination schools that are not the same schools used as development and pilot schools.

(f) Collect summative data about the success of the products in supporting

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html

69445 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices

10 ‘‘Privacy requirements’’ means the requirements of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232g, and its implementing regulations in 34 CFR part 99, the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as well as all applicable Federal, State and local requirements regarding privacy.

implementation of the technology tool in the dissemination schools; and

(g) By the end of the project period, projects must provide information on:

(1) The products and resources that will enable other schools to implement and sustain implementation of the technology tool.

(2) How the technology tool has improved early childhood, academic achievement, or college- and career-readiness for children with disabilities.

(3) A strategy for disseminating the technology tool and accompanying products beyond the schools directly involved in the project.

Cohort Collaboration and Support.

OSEP Project Officer(s) will provide coordination support among the projects. Each project funded under this priority must—

(a) Participate in bi-monthly conference call discussions to share and collaborate around implementation and specific project issues,

(b) Provide information bi-annually using a template that captures descriptive data on project site selection, processes for installation of technology, and the use of technology and sustainability (i.e., the process of technology implementation).

Note: The following Web site provides more information about implementation research: http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/learn-implementation.

Fifth Year of the Project: The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond 48 months to work with dissemination schools if the grantee is achieving the intended outcomes and making a positive contribution to the implementation of an evidence-based technology tool in the development and pilot schools. Each applicant must include in its application a plan for the full 60-month award. In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and in addition—

(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be held during the last half of the third 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) Evidence of the degree to which the project’s activities have contributed to changed practices and improved early childhood outcomes, academic achievement, or college- and career-readiness for students with disabilities.

Competitive Preference Priority:

Within this absolute priority, we give competitive preference to applications that meet the following priority. For FY 2015 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, this priority is a competitive preference priority.

This priority is from the notice of final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs, published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78486), and corrected on May 12, 2011

(76 FR 27637).

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional five points to an application that meets this priority.

This priority is:

Enabling More Data-Based Decision-

Making.

Projects that are designed to collect

(or obtain), analyze, and use high-quality and timely data, including data on program participant outcomes, in accordance with privacy requirements,10 in one or more of the following priority areas:

(a) Improving instructional practices, policies, and child outcomes in early learning settings.

(b) Improving instructional practices, policies, and student outcomes in elementary or secondary schools.

(c) Improving postsecondary student outcomes relating to enrollment, persistence, and completion and leading to career success.

(d) Providing reliable and comprehensive information on the implementation of Department of Education programs, and participant outcomes in these programs by using data from State longitudinal data systems or by obtaining data from reliable third-party sources.

References

Center for Online Learning and Students with Disabilities (COLSD). (2012). The foundation of online learning for students with disabilities (COLSD White Paper). Lawrence, KS: Author. Retrieved from http://centerononlinelearning.org/ wp-content/uploads/Foundation_7_ 2012.pdf.

Diamond, K.E., & Powell, D.R. (2011). An iterative approach to the development of a professional development intervention for head start teachers. Journal of Early Intervention, 33(1), 75–93.

Duffey, D., & Fox, C. (2012). National Educational Technology Trends 2012:

State Leadership Empower Educators, Transforming Teaching and Learning.

Washington, DC: State Educational Technology Directors Association (SEDTA). Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED536746.pdf.

Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005).

Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.

Fletcher, G., Schaffhauser, D. & Levi, D.

(2012). Out of print: Reimaging the K–12 textbook in a digital age. Washington, DC: State Educational Technology Directors Association (SEDTA).

Retrieved from www.setda.org/c/ document_library/get_ file?folderId=321&name=DLFE-1587.pdf.

Grunwald Associates. (2010). Educators, technology, and 21st century skills:

Dispelling five myths. Minneapolis, MN:

Walden University, Richard W. Riley College of Education. Retrieved from www.WaldenU.edu/fivemyths.

Lu, R., & Overbaugh, R.C. (2009). School environment and technology implementation in K–12 classrooms.

Computers in the Schools, 26(2), 89–106.

Perlman, C.L., & Redding, S. (Eds.). (2011).

Choosing and implementing technology wisely. Handbook on Effective Implementation of School Improvement Grants. Lincoln, IL: Academic Development Institute. Retrieved from www.centerii.org/handbook.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2010).

Transforming American Education:

Learning Powered by Technology.

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ netp2010.pdf.

Zorigian, K., & Job, J. (2008). How do special education students benefit from technology? Retrieved from www.learnnc.org.

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 priorities in this notice.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.

Applicable Regulations: This application notice (also referred to as a notice inviting applications (NIA)) is being published before the Department adopts the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements in 2 CFR part 200.

We expect to publish interim final regulations that would adopt those requirements before December 26, 2014, and make those regulations effective on that date. Because grants awarded under this NIA will likely be made after the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://centerononlinelearning.org/wp-content/uploads/Foundation_7_2012.pdf http://centerononlinelearning.org/wp-content/uploads/Foundation_7_2012.pdf http://centerononlinelearning.org/wp-content/uploads/Foundation_7_2012.pdf http://www.setda.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=321&name=DLFE-1587.pdf http://www.setda.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=321&name=DLFE-1587.pdf http://www.setda.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=321&name=DLFE-1587.pdf http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED536746.pdf http://www.WaldenU.edu/fivemyths http://www.centerii.org/handbook http://www.learnnc.org

69446 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices

Department adopts the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, we list as applicable regulations both those that are currently effective and those that will be effective at the time the Department makes grants.

The current regulations follow: (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 OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485.

At the time we award grants under this NIA, the following regulations will apply: (a) EDGAR in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement)in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485, and the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended in 2 CFR part 3474.

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 institutions of higher education (IHEs) only.

II. Award Information Type of Award: Cooperative

Agreements.

Estimated Available Funds: The

Administration has requested $28,047,000 for the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities program for FY 2015, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,000,000 for this competition. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2016 from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards: $475,000 to $500,000 per year.

Estimated Average Size of Awards:

$500,000 per year.

Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $500,000 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: 2.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 48 months with an optional additional 12 months based on performance. Applications must include plans for both the 48 month award and the 12 month extension.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs;

other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated States; 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 program 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 competition 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: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.

If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.327S.

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 50 pages, using the following standards:

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ × 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 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 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 the application package.

3. Submission Dates and Times:

Applications Available: November 21, 2014.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: January 20, 2015.

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

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html mailto:edpubs@inet.ed.gov http://www.EDPubs.gov

69447 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 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.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: March 23, 2015.

4. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition.

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 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 Stepping-up Technology Implementation competition, CFDA number 84.327S, 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 Stepping-up Technology Implementation 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 84.327, not 84.327S).

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

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Nov 20, 2014 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21NON1.SGM 21NON1m st oc ks til l o n D

S K

4V P

T V

N 1P

R O

D w ith N

O T

IC

E

S http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/register.html http://www.Grants.gov http://www.Grants.gov http://www.SAM.gov

69448 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 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…