2022-01353.pdf

3788 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices helps the public understand the Department’s information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;

(4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Grantee Reporting Form—Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) Annual Payback Report.

OMB Control Number: 1820–0617.

Type of Review: An extension without change of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: State, Local, and Tribal Governments;

Individuals and Households; Private Sector.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 11,790.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 4,858.

Abstract: Public Law 114–95, section 302(b) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) provides Long- Term Training grants to academic institutions to support scholarship assistance to students. Students who receive scholarships under this program are required to work within the public rehabilitation program, such as with a state vocational rehabilitation agency, or an agency or organization that has a service arrangement with a state vocational rehabilitation agency. The student is expected to work two years in such settings for every year of full-time scholarship support. The program regulations at 34 CFR 386.33–386.35 and 386.40–386.43 detail the payback provisions and the RSA scholars’ requirements to comply with them.

Section 302 (b)(2)(C) of the Act requires tracking of scholars’ employment status and location of former scholars supported under the grants in order to ensure that students are meeting the payback requirement.

Scholars must provide requested information necessary to meet the exit certification requirements.

In addition to meeting the requirement that all scholars be tracked, the information collected will provide performance data relevant to the rehabilitation fields and degrees pursued by RSA scholars, as well as the funds owed and the rehabilitation work completed by them. These data are used to assess program effectiveness and efficiency, and to meet the reporting requirements of Public Law 103–62 section 4 of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).

RSA is requesting an extension of the currently approved collection for grantees (Institutions of Higher Education), scholars, and employers to submit data electronically through the online RSA Payback Information Management System (PIMS). There is no substantial change in the proposed data collected, nor estimated burden required to report data using the PIMS system.

Dated: January 20, 2022.

Juliana Pearson, PRA Coordinator, Strategic Collections and Clearance, Governance and Strategy Division, Office of Chief Data Officer, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.

[FR Doc. 2022–01385 Filed 1–24–22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards;

Technical Assistance and Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities—National Technical Assistance Center for Inclusive Practices and Policies

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

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2022 for a National Technical Assistance Center for Inclusive Practices and Policies, Assistance Listing Number 84.326Y. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1820–0028.

DATES:

Applications Available: January 25, 2022.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: March 28, 2022.

Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: May 25, 2022.

Pre-Application Webinar Information:

No later than January 31, 2022, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide technical assistance (TA) to interested applicants. The webinars may be found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/ apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979.

Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in SAM.gov a Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number to the implementation of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI).

More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at https:// www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/ docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan Weigert, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5177, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–5076.

Telephone: (202) 245–6522. Email:

Susan.Weigert@ed.gov.

If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and improve results for children with disabilities by providing TA, supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research.

Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in sections 663 and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481(d)).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html http://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html http://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979 mailto:Susan.Weigert@ed.gov

3789 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices

1 Cognitive disabilities include intellectual disabilities, autism, multiple disabilities, deaf-blindness, and traumatic brain injury.

2 For the purposes of this priority, inclusive policies refer to State and local education policies that support the implementation of inclusive practices.

3 For the purposes of this priority, inclusive practices refer to a range of individualized supplementary aids and services that facilitate the participation of students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Examples include adapted curricula aligned to grade-level or alternate academic achievement standards, specific instructional strategies, classroom instructional configurations, and personnel in general education settings.

4 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘evidence-based’’ means, at a minimum, evidence that demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1), where a key project component included in the project’s logic model is informed by research or evaluation findings that suggest the project component is likely to improve relevant outcomes.

Absolute Priority: For FY 2022 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications 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:

National Technical Assistance Center for Inclusive Practices and Policies.

Background:

All children with disabilities benefit when educators have high expectations of them and take steps to ensure that they participate and make progress in the general education curriculum to the maximum extent possible (e.g., Agran et al., 2020; Allor et al., 2014; Dessemontet et al., 2012; Gee et al., 2020; McDonnell & Hunt, 2014; Ryndak et al., 2013).

Furthermore, IDEA requires that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. (IDEA section 612(a)(5)(A)). This requirement to educate children in the least restrictive environment (LRE) is a cornerstone of IDEA and applies to all children with disabilities, including students with significant cognitive disabilities, who often need high levels of support.1

Despite the progress State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) have made in including students with disabilities in the LRE, many students with significant cognitive disabilities continue to be educated in separate settings (e.g., classrooms, schools, and out-of-district placements) where exposure to the general education classroom, nondisabled peers, and the core curriculum is limited. The wide variation in educational placements across the country suggests, at a minimum, that placement of students with significant cognitive disabilities may not always be determined based on their individual educational needs.

Further, despite advances in identifying effective and inclusive policies 2 and practices 3 for serving children with disabilities, implementation of the LRE requirements for children with significant cognitive disabilities, including those who are also English learners, remains a challenge for SEAs and LEAs. This TA Center will help address these challenges.

Priority:

The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center for Inclusive Practices and Policies (TA Center). The TA Center will assist SEAs and LEAs to successfully implement and sustain evidence-based 4 inclusive practices and policies based on individualized determinations, for students with significant cognitive disabilities, including those who are also English learners, in elementary, middle, and high school (K–12) programs. The TA Center will select, in collaboration with OSEP, SEAs with a demonstrated commitment to developing and implementing inclusive practices and policies in schools. The TA Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Increase the capacity of SEA, LEA, and school personnel to support and implement inclusive practices and policies in grade-level academic and extracurricular settings for students with significant cognitive disabilities.

(b) Increase the quantity of time that students with significant cognitive disabilities are served in more inclusive environments, where appropriate, based on their individual needs;

(c) Increase educational engagement for students with significant cognitive disabilities across multiple settings and activities (e.g., classroom, academic instruction, extracurricular activities) throughout the school day;

(d) Improve the quality of instruction, including the use of interventions and accommodations supported by evidence, for students with significant cognitive disabilities in more inclusive environments based on their individual needs and aligned to the general education curriculum; and

(e) Develop and disseminate an implementation package of products and resources that will assist SEAs, LEAs, and schools to implement inclusive practices and policies and increase the amount of time that students with significant cognitive disabilities are served in the LRE, based on their individual needs.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Improve SEAs’ and LEAs’ implementation and sustainability of evidence-based inclusive practices and policies that are designed to improve access to more inclusive environments and increase the amount of educational engagement for students with significant cognitive disabilities. To meet this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Present applicable State, regional, or local data demonstrating SEAs’ and LEAs’ needs for high-quality implementation of evidence-based inclusive practices and policies, as well as students’ access to more inclusive environments, particularly for students with significant cognitive disabilities;

(ii) Present information about the current levels of inclusion of students with significant cognitive disabilities in systems of tiered support, including the availability of universal, general;

targeted, specific; and intensive, sustained interventions designed to support retention of such students in inclusive classrooms;

(iii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy initiatives relating to inclusive practices and policies for students with significant cognitive disabilities, including those who are also English learners;

(iv) Present information about increasing implementation of inclusive vocational technology instruction to support transition and career-readiness for middle and high school students with significant cognitive disabilities, including preparation for competitive integrated or supported employment;

(v) Present information about increasing teachers’ capacity to implement instruction aligned with appropriate standards, and formative and interim assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities in inclusive classrooms; and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S

3790 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices

5 Logic model (34 CFR 77.1) (also referred to as a theory of action) means a framework that identifies key project components of the proposed project (i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical and operational relationships among the key project components and relevant outcomes.

6 ‘‘Universal, general TA’’ means TA and information provided to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in minimal interaction with TA center staff and including one-time, invited, or offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This category of TA also includes information or products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the TA center’s website by independent users.

Brief communications by TA center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also considered universal, general TA.

7 ‘‘Targeted, specialized TA’’ means TA services based on needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively individualized. A relationship is established between the TA recipient and one or more TA center staff. This category of TA includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating strategic planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around the needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can also be considered targeted, specialized TA.

8 ‘‘Intensive, sustained TA’’ means TA services often provided on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA center staff and the TA recipient. ‘‘TA services’’ are defined as a negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.

(vi) Present information about increasing parents’ capacity to become effective partners in implementing inclusive practices for students with significant cognitive disabilities; and

(2) Address the likely magnitude or importance of improving the quantity of time students with significant cognitive disabilities spend in general educational environments, where appropriate, based on their individual needs, and increasing the amount of their educational engagement.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

(ii) Ensure that products and services meet the needs of the intended recipients of the grant;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 5 by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;

(3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks:

www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework; https://osepideas thatwork.org/evaluation?tab=eval-logic;

and https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/ regions/central/pdf/REL_2021112.pdf.

(4) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based practices

(EBPs). To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project proposes to identify, develop, and expand the knowledge base about instruction and assessment of students with significant cognitive disabilities;

(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and implementation science that will inform the proposed

TA;

(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and EBPs in the development and delivery of its products and services; and

(iv) How the proposed project will collaborate with the OSEP-funded National Assessment Center to incorporate information on including students with significant cognitive disabilities in State and district-wide assessment systems;

(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How it proposes to identify or develop and expand the knowledge base about instruction and assessment of students with significant cognitive disabilities;

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,6 which must identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach;

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,7 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach; and

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level;

(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,8 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of TA recipients to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local district and program levels;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs, LEAs, and school personnel to build or enhance training systems that include professional development based on adult learning principles and coaching; and

(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, districts, schools, families) to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support implementation of evidence-based inclusive practices and policies;

(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes; and

(7) Develop a dissemination plan that describes how the applicant will systematically distribute information, products, and services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies, to promote awareness and use of the TA Center’s products and services.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the project evaluation,’’ include an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/central/pdf/REL_2021112.pdf https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/central/pdf/REL_2021112.pdf https://osepideasthatwork.org/evaluation?tab=eval-logic https://osepideasthatwork.org/evaluation?tab=eval-logic https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework

3791 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices

9 A ‘‘third-party’’ evaluator is an independent and impartial program evaluator who is contracted by the grantee to conduct an objective evaluation of the project. This evaluator must not have participated in the development or implementation of any project activities, except for the evaluation activities, nor have any financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.

evaluation plan for the project developed in consultation with and implemented by a ‘‘third-party’’ evaluator.9 The evaluation plan must—

(1) Articulate formative and summative evaluation questions, including important process and outcome evaluation questions. These questions must be related to the project’s proposed logic model required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this notice;

(2) Describe how progress in and fidelity of implementation, as well as project outcomes, will be measured to answer the evaluation questions.

Specify the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions.

Include information regarding reliability and validity of measures where appropriate;

(3) Describe strategies for analyzing data and how data collected as part of this plan will be used to inform and improve service delivery over the course of the project and to refine the proposed logic model and evaluation plan, including subsequent data collection;

(4) Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation and include staff assignments for completing the plan.

The timeline must indicate that the data will be available annually for the annual performance report (APR) and at the end of Year 2 for the review process described under the heading, Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of developing or refining the evaluation plan in consultation with a third-party evaluator, as well as the costs associated with the implementation of the evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,’’ how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project’s intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under ‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’ how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project’s intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project’s intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one- and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, 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;

(ii) A two- and one-half-day project directors’ conference in Washington, DC, or virtually, during each year of the project period;

(iii) Up to two annual two-day trips, or virtually, to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five (5) percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project’s intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;

(4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility;

(5) Ensure that annual project progress toward meeting project goals is posted on the project website; and

(6) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the continuity of services to States during the transition to this new award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:

In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), including—

(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts with experience and knowledge in providing TA to address the needs of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities and inclusive practices. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project’s products and services and the extent to which the project’s products and services are aligned with the project’s objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue funding accordingly.

References

Agran, M., Jackson, L., Kurth, J., Ryndak, D., Burnette, K., Jameson, M., Zagona, A., VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

3792 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices

Fitzpatrick, H., & Wehmeyer, M. (2020).

Why aren’t students with severe disabilities being placed in general education classrooms: Examining the relations among classroom placement, learner outcomes, and other factors.

Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45(1), 4–13. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134.

Allor, J. H., Mathes, P. G., Roberts, J. K., Cheatham, J. P., & Al Otaiba, S. (2014).

Is scientifically based reading instruction effective for students with below-average IQs? Exceptional Children, 80, 287–306.

https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0014402914522208.

Dessemontet, R. S., Bless, G., & Morin, D.

(2012). Effects of inclusion on the academic achievement and adaptive behavior of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56(6), 579–587.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 2788.2011.01497.x.

Gee, K., Gonzalez, M., & Cooper, C. (2020).

Outcomes of inclusive versus separate placements: A matched pairs comparison study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45, 223–240.

https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1540796920943469.

McDonnell, J., & Hunt, P. (2014). Inclusive education and meaningful school outcomes. In Agran, M., Brown, F., Hughes, C., Quirk, C., Ryndak, D. (Eds.), Equity and full participation for individuals with severe disabilities: A vision for the future (pp. 155–176). Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., Inc.

Ryndak, D. L., Jackson, L., & White, J. M.

(2013). Involvement and progress in the general curriculum for students with extensive support needs: K–12 inclusive-education research and implications for the future. Inclusion, 1(1), 28–49. https:// doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-1.1.028.

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. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 and 1481.

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (No procurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform

Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department 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 agreement.

Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested $49,345,000 for the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities program for FY 2022, of which we intend to use an estimated $2,000,000 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 2023 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,000,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.

Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

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

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

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; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost sharing or matching.

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/ intro.html.

c. Administrative Cost Limitation:

This program does not include any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to the Cost Principles described in 2

CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform Guidance.

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities described in its application.

Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart D.

4. Other General Requirements:

a. Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).

b. Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute priority, 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. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and available at www.federalregister.gov/d/ 2021-27979February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768) and available at www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019- 02206.pdf, which contain requirements and information on how to submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on February 13, 2019, and, in part, describe the transition from the requirement to register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to the implementation of the UEI. More information on the phase-out of DUNS numbers is available at https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/ list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf.

2. 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.

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ofo/docs/unique-entity-identifier-transition-fact-sheet.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf http://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01497.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01497.x http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html http://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979February http://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979February https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-1.1.028 https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-1.1.028 https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134 https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134 https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914522208 https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914522208 https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796920943469 https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796920943469

3793 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices application. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 70 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

• Use one of the following fonts:

Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.

The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; 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 recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed below:

(a) Significance (10 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses.

(ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project.

(b) Quality of project design and services (35 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed project and the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.

(ii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of that framework.

(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.

(iv) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

(v) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources.

(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.

(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.

(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and qualitative data to the extent possible.

(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director or principal investigator.

(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

(iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, and independence, of the evaluator.

(v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.

(vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.

(vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project.

(viii) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

(e) Quality of the management plan (20 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products and services from the proposed project.

(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives is brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:19 Jan 24, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM 25JAN1kh am m on d on

D S

K

JM

1Z 7X

2P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

3794 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 25, 2022 / Notices

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant’s use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past, the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process, while permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.

4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance;

has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant;

or is otherwise not responsible.

5. Integrity and Performance System:

If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold…