2023-15159.pdf

45399 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices

Navy Science and Technology Board (DoN S&T Board) as a discretionary Federal advisory committee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Freeman, DoD Advisory Committee Management Officer, 703–692–5952, james.d.freeman4.civ@mail.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This committee is being established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and 41 CFR 102–3.50(a). The charter and contact information for the DoN S&T Board’s Designated Federal Officer (DFO) are found at: https://www.facadatabase.gov/ FACA/apex/FACAPublic AgencyNavigation.

The DoN S&T Board is a discretionary Federal advisory committee established to provide independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the Department of the Navy’s (DoN) scientific, technical, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, medicine, and business management functions. These matters include, but are not limited to, the pressing and complex scientific and technological problems facing the DoD in such areas as research, engineering, organizational structure and process, business and functional concepts, and manufacturing, and will ensure the identification of new technologies and new applications of technology in those areas to strengthen national security.

The DoN S&T Board shall be composed of no more than 20 members who are prominent authorities in one or more of the following disciplines and fields: science, technology, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, medicine, climate, and business management functions, as well as other matters of special interest to the DoN.

Membership will consist of private and public leaders, fairly balanced to provide a diversity of background, experience, and thought in support of the DoN S&T Board mission.

Individual members are appointed according to DoD policy and procedures and serve a term of service of one-to-four years with annual renewals. One member will be appointed as Chair of the DoN S&T Board. No member, unless approved according to DoD policy and procedures, may serve more than two consecutive terms of service on the DoN S&T Board, or serve on more than two DoD Federal advisory committees at one time.

DoN S&T Board members who are not full-time or permanent part-time Federal civilian officers or employees are appointed as experts or consultants, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, to serve as special government employee members.

DoN S&T Board members who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal civilian officers or employees are appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102– 3.130(a), to serve as regular government employee members.

All DoN S&T Board members are appointed to provide advice based on their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official DoN S&T Board-related travel and per diem, members serve without compensation.

The public or interested organizations may submit written statements about the DoN S&T Board mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meetings of the DoN S&T Board. All written statements shall be submitted to the DoN S&T Board’s DFO, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

Dated: July 12, 2023.

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

[FR Doc. 2023–15089 Filed 7–14–23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards;

Technical Assistance and Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities and School Safety National Activities Programs—National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

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

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for a National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, Assistance Listing Number 84.326S.

This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1820–0028.

DATES:

Applications Available: July 17, 2023.

Deadline for Transmittal of

Applications: August 31, 2023.

Pre-Application Webinar Information:

No later than July 24, 2023, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will post pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide technical assistance (TA) to interested applicants. The webinars may be found at https://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 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mohamed Soliman, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5054B, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–5067.

Telephone: (202) 245–6335. Email:

Mohamed.Soliman@ed.gov.

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7–1–1.

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 to 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.

The School Safety National Activities Program provides support to State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs) for activities to improve student safety and well-being.

Priorities: This competition includes two absolute priorities. Applicants must address both priorities, and we will make one award as a comprehensive investment designed to enhance local and State efforts to improve school climate, conditions for learning, and access to and engagement in the instructional environment, with a focus on students with behavioral challenges, by implementing comprehensive positive behavioral interventions and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Jul 14, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1dd ru m he lle r on D

S K

0R

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicAgencyNavigation https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicAgencyNavigation https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicAgencyNavigation https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html mailto:james.d.freeman4.civ@mail.mil http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs mailto:Mohamed.Soliman@ed.gov http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs

45400 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices

1 The term ‘‘positive behavioral interventions and supports’’ was first used in a priority published by the Department in 1997, and it is currently used in the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F), 611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and

665) and the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We do not use PBIS to mean any specific program or curriculum. Rather, we use the term generically to reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve the integration and implementation of social, emotional, behavioral and mental health practices, data-driven decision-making systems, professional development opportunities, school leadership, supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidence-based instructional strategies. A PBIS framework helps to organize practices to improve social, emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic outcomes by improving school climate, promoting positive social skills, promoting effective strategies to support and respond to student needs, and increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based, tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary Prevention; Tier 2: Targeted, Secondary Prevention;

and Tier 3: Intensive and Individualized, Tertiary Prevention) for supporting students’ behavioral, academic, social, emotional, and mental health.

2 The term ‘‘positive behavioral interventions and supports’’ was first used in a priority published by the Department in 1997, and it is currently used in the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F), 611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and

665) and the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We do not use PBIS to mean any specific program or curriculum. Rather, we use the term generically to reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve the integration and implementation of social, emotional, behavioral and mental health practices, data-driven decision-making systems, professional development opportunities, school leadership, supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidence-based instructional strategies. A PBIS framework helps to organize practices to improve social, emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic outcomes by improving school climate, promoting positive social skills, promoting effective strategies to support and respond to student needs, and increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based, tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary Prevention; Tier 2: Targeted, Secondary Prevention;

and Tier 3: Intensive and Individualized, Tertiary Prevention) for supporting students’ behavioral, academic, social, emotional, and mental health.

3 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘evidence-based practices’’ (EBPs) means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.

supports (PBIS) frameworks.1 Absolute Priority 1 is established in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) (20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1)). Absolute Priority 2 is from the Notice of Final priority and requirements—Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities and the School Safety National Activities—National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (NFP), published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

Background:

Many students need additional supports to address social, emotional, and behavioral challenges that impact their full access to and participation in learning (Chafouleas, 2020). These challenges, if not properly addressed, can lead to student responses that are inconsistent with school or program expectations. The COVID–19 global pandemic exacerbated these challenges, accelerating the need to provide school-based social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health supports and leverage the existing evidence base to provide nurturing educational environments to meet the needs of our nation’s youth.

MTSS frameworks such as PBIS 2 have been validated by numerous randomized control trials (Bradshaw et al., 2012; Freeman et al., 2017). When implemented with fidelity, PBIS outcomes include reductions in removals of students from instruction;

improved student exposure to and success in academics (grades and completion); improved educator satisfaction and retention; and improved overall ratings of school safety, belonging, and climate.

Despite improved outcomes and knowledge from PBIS implementation efforts over the last two decades, data from the Office for Civil Rights’ Civil Rights Data Collection suggests students from underserved groups are more likely to experience exclusionary discipline (e.g., suspensions, expulsions) (U.S. Department of Education, Civil Rights Data Collection SY17–18, Office for Civil Rights, 2021).

Disaggregated data shows that disproportionate use of discipline grows when considering race, sex, and disability. Id. Research consistently shows that students of color, particularly Black students, Native students, and Black students with disabilities are significantly more likely than their non-disabled or White peers to be subjected to exclusionary discipline practices, including office discipline referrals and suspensions (e.g., Gage et al., 2019; McIntosh et al., 2018; McIntosh et al., 2021; Civil Rights Data Collection SY17–18, Office for Civil Rights, 2021). While disproportionality with respect to Black boys has long been acknowledged, more recent data analysis indicates the disproportionality also exists for Black girls as compared to White girls (Hassan & Carter, 2021). Other studies show disproportionality based on gender, historically demonstrating boys receive suspensions and expulsions at higher rates than girls (Bradshaw et al., 2010).

Higher rates of punitive discipline practices also exist for students who identify as LGBTQ and those with disabilities (Himmelstein & Brückner, 2011; Brobbey, 2018). When students are denied access to instruction and participation in school opportunities, they are more likely to experience negative outcomes in school and later in life, including poor academic outcomes, lower graduation rates, incarceration, and employment and relationship challenges (Hemez et al., 2020; Lansford et al., 2016).

One of the most significant barriers to reducing exclusionary and aversive discipline practices for students, including students of color and students with disabilities, is the lack of culturally and linguistically inclusive pre-service and in-service training for teachers and leaders on effective practices for creating positive, safe learning environments to teach and support desired school behaviors and for responding to and mitigating behaviors that are inconsistent with school expectations and interfere with learning.

The PBIS framework has provided an effective multi-tiered structure through the implementation and examination of systems, practices, and data to assist LEAs and schools in addressing inequities. When there is fidelity in implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) 3 to prevent, reduce, and mitigate interfering behaviors within a PBIS framework, studies have found the following statistically significant results:

improved perception of school safety;

reductions in overall behaviors that are inconsistent with classroom or school expectations and that interfere with learning; and reduction of bullying behaviors, office discipline referrals, chronic absenteeism, and suspensions (Waasdorp et al., 2012). The PBIS framework has solidified the importance of core strategies, including implementing EBPs, and providing the systems needed to support those practices and data-based decision-making, to create and sustain positive, safe, and predictable learning environments. Fidelity in the implementation of the core strategies has also demonstrated the importance of adult responses, including effectively supporting and responding to student behavior (Horner et al., 2020).

Although prior Department investments have led to successful implementation of the PBIS framework and positive outcome data in over 27,000 schools, based on persistent needs in the field, the Department has determined that additional and continued TA is needed to focus on: (1) students with more intensive social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs and those most likely to be excluded from the learning environment due to behavior that interferes with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Jul 14, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1dd ru m he lle r on D

S K

0R

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S

45401 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices learning; (2) pre-service and in-service training on culturally and linguistically inclusive practices that support students from underserved groups; (3) improving implementation fidelity; and (4) addressing other systemic inequities such as access to school funding, experienced educators, and advanced coursework opportunities. In addition, the Department has determined that SEAs and LEAs could benefit from further TA to develop, expand, and sustain school-wide frameworks and to build personnel capacity and expertise to promote safe, positive, predictable, and culturally and linguistically inclusive learning environments where students feel a sense of belonging. Such additional TA would be focused on increasing the use of EBPs to more effectively support and respond to student needs, such as teaching school and classroom expectations, building classroom cultures of respect and belonging, and implementing trauma-informed practices. Such additional TA also would be focused on using EBPs to reduce the use of restraints, seclusion, and corporal punishment; chronic absenteeism; incidents of bullying; the disproportionate application of disciplinary procedures, such as suspension and expulsion, for students, including students of color and those with disabilities; unnecessary referrals of students to law enforcement; and violent and traumatic school incidents.

The Center will support States and LEAs in implementing EBPs within a MTSS/PBIS framework that improves results for children, including those underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-economic status. While PBIS is one evidence-based MTSS framework for addressing social, emotional, behavioral and mental health needs, the Department expects that the Center will stay abreast of developing frameworks and identify and incorporate a broad array of EBPs to support and respond to student needs, and tailor technical assistance in the settings established in the priority. This investment is aligned to the Secretary’s Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR 70612), in the areas of meeting student social, emotional, and academic needs, and promoting equity in student access to educational resources and opportunities.

References:

Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., & Leaf, P.

(2012). Effects of school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems. Pediatrics, 130(5),1136–1145. https:// pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/ 130/5/e1136.

Bradshaw, C.P., Mitchell, M.M., O’Brennan, L.M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Multilevel exploration of factors contributing to the overrepresentation of Black students in office disciplinary referrals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 508–520.

Brobbey, G. (2018). Punishing the vulnerable:

Exploring suspension rates for students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53, 216–219.

Chafouleas, S. (2020, August). Four questions to ask now in preparing your child for school. Psychology Today.

www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school.

Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., Goodman, S., Mitchell, B., George, H.P., Swain- Bradway, J., Lane, K., Sprague, J., & Putnam, B. (2017). PBIS technical brief on systems to support teachers’ implementation of positive classroom behavior support. PBIS Center.

www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support.

Gage, N.A., Grasley-Boy, N., George, H.P., Childs, K., & Kincaid, D. (2019). A quasi-experimental design analysis of the effects of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on discipline in Florida. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 21(1), 50–61. https:// doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300718768208.

Hassan, H.H., & Carter, V.B. (2021). Black and White Female Disproportional Discipline K–12. Education and Urban Society, 53(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0013124520915571.

Hemez P., Brent J.J., & Mowen T.J. (2020).

Exploring the school-to-prison pipeline:

How school suspensions influence incarceration during young adulthood.

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 18(3), 235–255. doi: 10.1177/ 1541204019880945.

Himmelstein, K.E., & Brückner, H. (2011).

Criminal-justice and school sanctions against nonheterosexual youth: A national longitudinal study. Pediatrics, 127(1), 49–57.

Horner, R.H., Sugai, G., & Lewis, T.J. (2020).

Is school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) an evidence-based practice? Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. www.pbis.org/ resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice.

Lansford, J.E., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., Bates, J.E. (2016). A Public Health Perspective on School Dropout and Adult Outcomes:

A Prospective Study of Risk and Protective Factors From Age 5 to 27 Years. Journal of Adolescent Health, 58(6), 652–658.

McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., McDaniel, S.C., Santiago-Rosario, M.R., St. Joseph, S., Fairbanks Falcon, S., Izzard, S., Bastable, E. (2021). Effects of an equity-focused PBIS approach to school improvement on exclusionary discipline and school climate. Preventing School Failure:

Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 65(4), 354–361.

McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Fairbanks Falcon, S., McDaniel, S.C., Smolkowski, K., Bastable, E., Santiago-Rosario, M.R., Izzard, S., Austin, S.C., Nese, R.N.T., & Baldy, T.S. (2021). An equity-focused PBIS approach reduces racial inequities in school discipline: A randomized controlled trial. School Psychology, 36(6), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1037/ spq0000466.

McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Horner, R.H., Smolkowski, K., & Sugai, G. (2018). A 5-point intervention approach for enhancing equity in school discipline.

OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. www.pbis.org/resource/a-5-point-intervention-approach-for-enhancing-equity-in-school-discipline.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2021). 2017–2018 Civil Rights Data Collection. https:// ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018.

Waasdorp, T.E., Bradshaw, C.P., & Leaf, P.J.

(2012). The impact of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on bullying and peer rejection:

A randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 166(2), 149–56.

doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.755.

Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, these priorities are absolute priorities.

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet these priorities.

These priorities are:

Absolute Priority 1—Technical

Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities Program— National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.

The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) (Center). This Center will assist SEAs and LEAs to enhance their capacity to develop, implement, scale-up, and sustain school-wide frameworks for MTSS/PBIS to improve behavior and climate and to enable all students, especially those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and those with disabilities, to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment.

The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Improved infrastructure at the national, regional, State, and district

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Jul 14, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1dd ru m he lle r on D

S K

0R

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school http://www.pbis.org/resource/a-5-point-intervention-approach-for-enhancing-equity-in-school-discipline http://www.pbis.org/resource/a-5-point-intervention-approach-for-enhancing-equity-in-school-discipline http://www.pbis.org/resource/a-5-point-intervention-approach-for-enhancing-equity-in-school-discipline https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/5/e1136 https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/5/e1136 https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/5/e1136 https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018 https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300718768208 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300718768208 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124520915571 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124520915571 https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000466 https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000466 http://www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support http://www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support http://www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support http://www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support http://www.pbis.org/resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice http://www.pbis.org/resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice http://www.pbis.org/resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice http://www.pbis.org/resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice

45402 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices

4 ‘‘Evidence-based practices’’ (EBPs) means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.

levels to support, develop, sustain, and expand local implementation efforts (e.g., an increase in the number of schools) of MTSS/PBIS with fidelity to demonstrate improved student outcomes: academic performance, social-emotional competence, mental health and well-being, academic outcomes, reduced bullying behaviors, reduced student reports of alcohol and drug use for students with or at risk of disabilities and those with the most intensive needs.

(b) Improved capacity for systems implementation at the SEA and LEA levels, including new and existing LEAs and schools, to implement the components of a MTSS/PBIS framework (i.e., policies, funding, professional development, coaching, data collection, analysis, and use) and develop and utilize new and existing tools for selecting and aligning multiple initiatives within the SEA or LEA with a special focus on PBIS tiers beyond universal and the inclusion of EBPs to address mental health and well-being for children and youth with or at risk of disabilities, especially those with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds and those with the most intensive needs;

(c) Improved capacity of existing and new SEA and LEA personnel to enhance the knowledge and skills of members of school leadership teams and individualized education program (IEP) Teams to implement MTSS/PBIS policies and practices for students with or at risk of disabilities and those with the most intensive needs, including the development and implementation of IEPs and behavior intervention plans that are culturally responsive, particularly for students with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, to support positive school behavior and respond to behaviors that interfere with a student’s ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment;

(d) Increased use by SEAs and LEAs of new and updated reliable and valid tools and processes for evaluating the fidelity of the implementation of a MTSS/PBIS framework and for measuring its outcomes, including reductions in violence and the illegal use of drugs, discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, and the use of restraints and seclusion; and improvements in school climate, time spent in instruction, mental health and well-being, and overall academic achievement, particularly for students with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and those with or at risk of disabilities, and those with the most intensive needs; and

(e) Increased body of knowledge to enhance implementation of MTSS/PBIS, particularly for students with culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, those with or at risk of disabilities, and for those with the most intensive needs, in high-poverty schools, low-performing schools, rural schools, high schools, alternative public schools, charter schools, mental health settings, private schools, and juvenile correction settings.

Absolute Priority 2: Technical Assistance—School Safety National Activities Program—National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.

The purpose of this priority is to enhance the capacity of SEAs and LEAs to implement positive and safe school environments, and effectively support and respond to students’ social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs to improve their learning, by implementing EBPs 4 within an MTSS/PBIS framework in the following settings:

(i) Programs or schools serving high percentages of students from low-income families in the following settings:

(1) Early learning programs.

(2) Elementary schools.

(3) Middle schools.

(4) High schools.

(5) Career and technical education programs.

(6) Rural schools.

(ii) Alternative schools and programs.

(iii) Juvenile justice system or correctional facilities.

(iv) Low-performing schools.

(v) Schools with a high student-to-mental health provider ratio.

(vi) Schools with high rates of chronic absenteeism, exclusionary discipline, referrals to the juvenile justice system, bullying/harassment, community and school violence, or substance abuse.

(vii) Schools in which students recently experienced a natural disaster, incident of violence, or traumatic event.

(viii) Schools with high percentages of students with disabilities or English Learners.

(ix) Federally supported elementary schools or secondary schools for Indian students.

To meet this priority, the applicant must propose to achieve, at a minimum, one or more of the following expected outcomes:

(a) Improved systems and resources at the national, regional, State, and district levels to support, develop, align, and sustain local implementation of MTSS/ PBIS efforts to organize EBPs to support positive school climates and respond to student social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs to improve access to and engagement in learning.

(b) Improved capacity of SEA and LEA personnel to support the knowledge and skills development of school personnel, including administrators and practitioners, through efforts such as pre-service and in-service training and coaching, to implement MTSS/PBIS as a framework to organize EBPs to support and respond to student needs, particularly those from underserved and, culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and students whose behaviors may interfere with a their ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment.

(c) Increased use by SEAs, LEAs, and school-based personnel of reliable and valid tools and processes for enhancing and assessing the fidelity of implementation of an MTSS/PBIS Framework and for measuring intended outcomes, including improvements in school climate; time spent on instruction; well-being and belonging;

overall academic achievement; and reductions in absenteeism, discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, the use of restraints or seclusion, illegal use of drugs, and referrals to law enforcement.

(d) Improved implementation of a MTSS/PBIS framework and EBPs, and assessment of SEA or LEA recipients of grant programs that focus on improving positive school climates and implementing EBPs to support and respond to students’ social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs.

(e) Enhanced response and recovery assistance, as requested by and in collaboration with the Department, for violent or traumatic incidents that impact school communities, including intensive individualized support to facilitate recovery of the learning environment.

(f) Increased body of knowledge and evidence to enhance implementation of PBIS and other emerging MTSS frameworks and EBPs to address the social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs of underserved students in the settings established in the priority.

Common Application Requirements:

To be considered for funding under these priorities, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in these priorities, which are:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Jul 14, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1dd ru m he lle r on D

S K

0R

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E

45403 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices

5 As defined in 34 CFR 77.1, ‘‘logic model’’ (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 Center staff and including one-time, invited or offered conference presentations by Center staff. This category of TA also includes information or products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the Center’s website by independent users.

Brief communications by 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 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 Center staff and the TA recipient. ‘‘TA services’’ are defined as negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program, practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.

(a) Demonstrate how the proposed project will—

(1) Improve SEAs’ and LEAs’ implementation, scaling, and sustaining of EBPs within a MTSS/PBIS framework and policies that are designed to improve school climate and, as needed, to provide additional behavioral supports for students whose behavior impacts their ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment, including students with disabilities and other underserved students in the settings established in the priority. To meet this requirement, the applicant must—

(i) Present applicable State, regional, or local data demonstrating SEAs’ and LEAs’ needs related to (A) implementation of EBPs and policies to improve school climate, student well-being, and belonging; and (B) increasing students’ ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment;

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current education issues and policy initiatives relating to MTSS/PBIS and school climate practices and policies and EBPs to effectively support and respond to student behavior that impacts learning;

and

(iii) Present information about the current level of implementation of MTSS/PBIS, EBPs, policies, best practices, and benefits for all students, especially underserved students and those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds;

(2) [See the Unique Application Requirements section below for the separate requirements applicable to Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2 in paragraph (a)(2).]

(b) Demonstrate 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, disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-economic status. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

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

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

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

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) 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 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: https:// osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/ files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_ Updated.pdf and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research and make use of EBPs. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research on the assessment of the implementation of MTSS/PBIS frameworks and related EBPs;

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

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

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

(i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base of MTSS/

PBIS:

(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, a description of the products and services that the Center proposes to make available, and the expected impact of those 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, a description of the products and services that the Center proposes to make available, and the expected impact of those 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 systems, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level; and

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

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients from a variety of settings and geographic distribution, that will receive the products and services designed to improve school climate and;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of the State- and local-level personnel to work with the project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current systems, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local level;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs, LEAs, local Part C agencies, charter management organizations, and private school organizations 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

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:10 Jul 14, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1dd ru m he lle r on D

S K

0R

N

P R

O D w ith

N O

T

IC

E S https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework http://www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework

45404 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices

9 The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per year and required to participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP’s Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development; Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology, Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and unbiased TA in designing the evaluations with due consideration of the project’s budget. CIPP does not function as a third-party evaluator.

system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, schools, families, community providers) to ensure that there is communication between each level and that there are systems in place to support the use of MTSS/PBIS;

(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, including families, community providers, other federal investments as appropriate, 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 Center’s products and services.

(c) Include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria for determining the extent to which the project’s products and services have met the goals for reaching its target population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project’s activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model, have been met.

The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the evaluation plan, it will—

(1) Designate, with the approval of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer in consultation with Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) staff, a project liaison with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Program and Project Performance (CIPP),9 the project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:

(i) Revise the logic model submitted in the application, as appropriate, to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;

(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in the application, as appropriate, to be consistent with the revised logic model and using the most rigorous design suitable (e.g., prepare evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes; develop quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate, and the assessment of project outcomes; and identify analytic strategies); and

(iii) Revise the evaluation plan submitted in the application such that it clearly—

(A) Specifies the evaluation questions, measures, and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to answer these questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completing the evaluation activities;

(B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the second project year for use during the project’s evaluation (3+2 review) by OSEP for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project officer in consultation with OESE staff, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the project performance measures to be addressed in the project’s annual performance report;

(2) Dedicate sufficient staff time and other resources during the first 6 months of the project to collaborate with CIPP staff, including regular meetings (e.g., weekly, biweekly, or monthly) with CIPP and the OSEP project officer, in order to accomplish the tasks described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section; and

(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (C)(1) and (2) of this section and revising and implementing the evaluation plan. Please note in your budget narrative the funds dedicated for this activity.

(d) Demonstrate 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, disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-economic status, 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 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 policymakers, among others, in its development and operation.

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

(1) Include personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the…