oppED-GRANTS-071018-001-cfda84.327-cid84-327T2018-1-instructions.pdf

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION & REHABILITATIVE SERVICES

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202

FISCAL YEAR 2018

APPLICATION FOR NEW GRANTS UNDER THE

INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT (IDEA)

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, MEDIA, AND MATERIALS FOR

INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM

(CFDA 84.327)

APPLICATIONS FOR NEW AWARDS;

CENTER ON TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS IN LOCAL

EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES

(CFDA 84.327T)

DATED MATERIAL: OPEN IMMEDIATELY

CLOSING DATE: AUGUST 09, 2018

FORM APPROVED —OMB NO. 1820-0028, EXP. DATE: 09/30/2019

http://www.ed.gov/

GRANT APPLICATION PACKAGE CFDA 84.327T

CONTENTS

Applicant Letter ...................................................................................................................... A1

Notice Inviting Applications .................................................................................................. B1

Federal Register Notice ...................................................................................................... B2

Grants.gov Submission Procedures and Tips for Applicants ............................................ B33

Priority Description and Selection Criteria........................................................................... C1

Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies, (CFDA 84.327T).............. C2

Selection Criteria and Format for the Applications for New Awards— Center on

Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies, (CFDA 84.327T) Competition ....... C211

General Information on Completing an Application ........................................................... D1

Application Transmittal Instructions and Requirements for Intergovernmental Review ..................................................................................................... E1

Appendix ................................................................................................................................ F1

Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs ................................................................. F2

State Single Points of Contact (SPOCs) ............................................................................. F3

Notice to All Applicants Ensuring Equitable Access and Application Forms and Instructions ......................................................................................................... G1

Part I: Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)

Part II: Budget Information (Form 524)

Part III: Application Narrative

Part IV: Assurances and Certifications

Assurances—Non-Construction Programs

Certification Regarding Lobbying

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

Part V: Additional Information

DUNS Number Instructions

Grant Application Receipt Acknowledgement

Grant and Contract Funding Information

PAPERWORK BURDEN STATEMENT

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid

OMB control number for this information collection is 1820-0028. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 45 hours and 40 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to:

U.S. Department of Education

Washington, DC 20202-4651

If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to:

Office of Special Education Programs

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Ave. SW, PCP 5159

Washington, DC 20202-2600

APPLICANT LETTER

Dear Applicant:

This application packet contains information and the required forms for you to use in submitting a new application for funding under one program authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA). This packet covers one competition under the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities (CFDA 84.327) program—Applications for

New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities—

Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies, (CFDA No. 84.327T).

Please take the time to review all of the applicable requirements, definitions, selection criteria, and application instructions thoroughly. An application will not be evaluated for funding if the applicant does not comply with all of the procedural rules that govern the submission of the application or if the application does not contain the information required. (EDGAR §75.216 (b) and (c)).

Please note the following:

• GRANTS.GOV APPLICATION SUBMISSION AND SAM REGISTRATION.

Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the

Grants.gov Apply site (www.Grants.gov). Please read carefully the Grants.gov Submission

Procedures and Tips for Applicants document included on page B-33, which includes helpful tips about submitting electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site. Grants.gov registration involves many steps including registration on SAM (www.sam.gov) which may take approximately one week to complete, but could take as many as several weeks to complete. You may begin working on your application while completing the registration process, but you cannot submit an application until all of the Registration steps are complete. Please note that once your SAM registration is active, it will take 24-48 hours for the information to be available in Grants.gov. You cannot submit an application through

Grants.gov until Grants.gov has received your SAM registration information. We strongly encourage you to familiarize yourself with SAM and Grants.gov and strongly recommend that you register and submit early.

Applicants are required to upload .PDF files only in a read only, flattened format.

Please be aware that applications submitted to Grants.gov for the Department of Education will now be posted using Adobe forms. Information on computer and operating system compatibility with Adobe and links to download the latest version of Adobe are available on

Grants.gov. Please note that you must follow the Application Procedures as described in the

Federal Register notice announcing this grant competition. Information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically can also be found in section D-1 of this application package, Application Transmittal Instructions and Requirements for

Intergovernmental Review. Additional instructions for sending applications electronically are provided on page G-4, Application Forms and Instructions for Grants.gov Applications.

file:///C:/Users/Debra.Sturdivant/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/8WBIWOAI/www.Grants.gov http://www.sam.gov/

• MAXIMUM AWARD AMOUNT.

The competitions included in this package have maximum award amounts. Please refer to the specific information for the priority/competition to which you are submitting an application (i.e., Section B of this package) for detailed budget information for the total grant period requested.

Please be advised that for the priority in this package, the maximum award amount covers all project costs including indirect costs.

• RECOMMENDED PAGE LIMITS AND LINE SPACING OF APPLICATION NARRATIVE.

The competitions included in this package limit the Part III Application Narrative to a recommended number of double-spaced pages. This recommended page limitation and double-line spacing applies to all material presented in the application narrative. This recommended double-line spacing applies to all titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots, and logic models included in the application narrative. (Please refer to the specific recommendations on page limits for the priority/competition to which you are submitting an application, Section B of this package).

• FORMAT FOR OTHER SECTIONS OF THE APPLICATION.

Additional information regarding formatting applications has been included on Pages D-3 and D-4 of the “General Information on Completing an Application” section of this package.

Appendix A: Reviewers will be instructed to review the content of Appendix A as they do the application narrative. Reviewers will not be required to review any other appendices.

Charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots and logic models that provide information directly relating to the application requirements for the narrative should be the only items included in Appendix A. Appendix A should not be used for supplementary information. Please note that charts, tables, figures, graphs, screen shots, and logic models can be single-spaced when placed in an Appendix A.

Abstract: For the application Abstract, applicants should use the template located at:

https://www2.ed.gov/programs/oseptms/applicant.html

• ABSOLUTE PRIORITIES AND COMPETITIVE PREFERENCE PRIORITY.

This competition includes one absolute priority. The Department will use peer reviewers to review and score applications on the selection criteria.

Prior to the peer review, Department staff will determine if an application has met the absolute priority and is eligible for peer review. PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS IN

RESEARCH.

The discretionary grant Application Form SF-424 requires applicants to indicate whether they plan to conduct research involving human subjects at any time during the proposed https://www2.ed.gov/programs/oseptms/applicant.html project period. The Protection of Human Subjects in Research Attachment is an integral part of the SF-424 form. It includes information that applicants need to complete the protection of human subjects item and, as appropriate, to provide additional information to the

Department regarding human subjects research projects. Additional information on completing the protection of human subjects item is also available and can be accessed on the internet at:

www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/gcsindex.html www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/humansub.html

• RESPONSE TO GPRA.

As required by the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act (GPRA) of 2010 the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has developed a strategic plan for measuring GPRA performance. The program included in this announcement is authorized under Part D - National Activities to Improve Education of Children with Disabilities of the

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Projects funded under this competition are required to submit data on GPRA performance measures as directed by OSEP. See Performance

Measures included in the Priority Description section of this application package. Applicants are encouraged to consider this information when preparing their applications.

• COPIES OF THE APPLICATION.

Unless you qualify for an exception in accordance with the instructions found in the Notice inviting applications, you must submit your application electronically. Therefore, you do not need to submit paper copies of the application. If you are granted an exception, current

Government-wide policy requires that an original and two paper copies need to be submitted. Please note: If an application is recommended for funding and a grant award is issued, we will contact the applicant to request an electronic copy of the application in MS

Word or a PDF file. The Department is moving toward an electronic grant filing system and an electronic copy of all applications that are being funded will facilitate this effort.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

OSEP also provides information on developing performance measures and logic models at https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel to assist you in preparing a quality application.

For information about other U.S. Department of Education grant and contract opportunities, we encourage you to use the Department's grant information web page which can be accessed on the internet at:

http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/grants/grants.html http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/gcsindex.html http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/humansub.html https://www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/grants/grants.html

We appreciate your efforts to improve the provision of services for individuals with disabilities.

Sincerely, /s/

Lawrence J. Wexler, Ed.D.

Directory

Research to Practice Division

Office of Special Education Programs

B-1

NOTICE INVITING APPLICATIONS

B-2

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE

4000-01-U

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for

Individuals with Disabilities Program—Center on Technology Systems in Local

Educational Agencies, AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of

Education.

ACTION: Notice.

Overview Information:

Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program—Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies, Notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2018.

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

Dates:

Applications Available: July 10, 2018.

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 09, 2018.

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 February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf

B-3

For Further Information Contact:

Carmen Sánchez

U.S. Department of Education

400 Maryland Avenue, SW

Room 5175, Potomac Center Plaza

Washington, DC 20202-5076.

Telephone: (202) 245-6595.

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 purposes of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with

Disabilities are to:

(1) improve results for students with disabilities by promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology;

(2) support educational activities designed to be of educational value in the classroom for students with disabilities;

(3) provide support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the classroom; and

(4) provide accessible educational materials to students with disabilities in a timely manner.1

Applicants should note that other laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C.

12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State educational agencies and local educational agencies provide captioning, video description, and other accessible educational materials to students with disabilities when such materials are necessary to provide students with disabilities with equally integrated and equally effective access to the benefits of the educational program or activity, or as part of a “free appropriate public education” as defined in the Department of Education’s Section 504 regulation.

B-4

Priority:

In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 674(b)(2) and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

(IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1474(b) and 1481(d)).

Absolute Priority:

For FY 2018 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:

Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies.

Background:

The mission of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) is to improve early childhood, educational, and employment outcomes and raise expectations for all people with disabilities, their families, their communities, and the Nation.

Over 40 years of research and experience have demonstrated the benefits of assistive technology (AT)2 and instructional technology (IT)3 for the education and development of children with disabilities (see section 601(c)(5)(H) of IDEA). With the increased use of appropriate AT and IT, more children with disabilities will have access to the general education curriculum and be prepared to meet standards for academic success (Ahmad, 2015).

Despite these known benefits, teachers, related services personnel, and other professionals

(collectively, “providers”) vary greatly in their knowledge of evidence-based (as defined in this

Section 602 of IDEA defines an “assistive technology device” as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability.”

IDEA does not provide a definition for IT, but for the purposes of this priority, “IT” is defined as technology processes and resources that facilitate learning and improve student performance for all students.

B-5 notice) practices (EBPs) for effective use4 of AT and IT (Bausch, Ault, Evmenova, & Behrmann, 2008; Lee & Vega, 2005; Smith & Robinson, 2003; U.S. Department of Education, 2010; Zhou, Parker, Smith, & Griffin-Shirley, 2011). At the same time, local educational agencies (LEAs) vary greatly in their ability to implement systems5 that support the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families. Some LEAs have robust systems in place that ensure the acquisition and effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities while others struggle to meet the AT and IT needs of children with disabilities. Moreover, the rapid evolution of technology often outstrips providers’ efforts to effectively support the use of technology

(Bausch, Ault, & Hasselbring, 2015).

Technology planning to develop comprehensive and sustainable systems for effective use of AT and IT should focus on sound frameworks6 that provide a process for providers to understand and meet the AT and IT needs of children with disabilities and their families (Hartmann &

Weismer, 2016). Comprehensive and sustainable systems in LEAs for the effective use of AT and IT must include: (1) a vision of how AT and IT can increase access to educational opportunities, improve outcomes, and lead to greater equity for children with disabilities; (2) practices rooted in strong knowledge of how children with disabilities can effectively use AT and

IT even as the technology itself changes; (3) ongoing opportunities for professional development for providers, educators, administrators, and families in children’s use of AT and IT;

(4) funding sources for appropriate low- and high-tech AT and IT devices and services; and (5) coordinated programs to acquire, maintain, and reuse AT and IT devices (U.S. Department of

Education, 2017).

This priority will fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a Center on Technology

Systems in Local Educational Agencies (Center). The Center will increase the effective use of

AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families by building the capacity of LEAs to

For purposes of this priority, “effective use” refers to active use of technology to enable learning through creation, production, and problem-solving (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).

For purposes of this priority, “systems” refers to interrelated components (e.g., funding, professional development, data collection, accountability, and quality improvement) that need to be in place to support the identification, procurement, deployment, and effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families.

For purposes of this priority, “frameworks” refers to the theories, knowledge base, policies, and practices that form the basic conceptual structure of effective systems. A framework is a guide to increase the capacity of LEAs to understand, improve, and implement effective systems.

B-6 implement comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT. This priority is consistent with the following Secretary’s Supplemental Priorities: Priority 2--Promoting

Innovation and Efficiency, Streamlining Education with an Increased Focus on Improving

Student Outcomes, and Providing Increased Value to Students and Taxpayers; Priority 5--

Meeting the Unique Needs of Students and Children With Disabilities and/or Those With Unique

Gifts and Talents; Priority 7--Promoting Literacy; and Priority 8--Promoting Effective Instruction in Classrooms and Schools, published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096).

Priority:

The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a

Center on Technology Systems in Local Educational Agencies to achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Development and refinement of a framework that incorporates theories, knowledge base, and effective practices, policies, and tools that LEAs can use to develop or enhance comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT;

(b) Increased knowledge of providers about evidence-based AT and IT practices for children with disabilities and their families;

(c) Increased capacity of LEAs to develop comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT; and

(d) Increased effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families in the

LEAs that have comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT.

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 project will--

(1) Address LEAs’ needs regarding useful, relevant, and current information and training to build their capacity to develop and sustain systems for the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families. To meet this requirement the applicant must--

B-7

(i) Present applicable national data demonstrating the extent to which LEAs have comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families, including gaps in the resources available to support LEAs in the development of these systems;

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy initiatives relating to the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families;

(iii) Present information about the current capacity of--

(A) Providers to implement EBPs to improve the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families; and

(B) LEAs to implement components of comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families; and

(2) Improve the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families, and indicate the likely magnitude or importance of the improvements.

(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 technical assistance (TA) and information;

and

(ii) Ensure that services and products 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

B-8

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in this notice) 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/logicModel 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 practices to support the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities;

(ii) The current research on components of LEA systems, including policies and practices, necessary to increase the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families;

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

(iv) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and EBPs in the development and dissemination of a framework of LEA policies and practices that are necessary for creating comprehensive and sustainable systems for the effective use of AT and IT by children with disabilities and their families; and

(v) How the proposed project will identify LEAs that have promising systems or policies and practices for supporting children’s and families’ effective use of AT and IT and incorporate that information into the development of the framework;

B-9

(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 related to children’s and families’ effective use of AT and IT and the development of comprehensive and sustainable systems in LEAs to support that use;

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,7 which must identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach and should include, at minimum--

(A) A plan to disseminate the framework and develop professional learning activities for LEAs to enhance their understanding and implementation of the framework; and

(B) A plan to identify and disseminate other relevant resources, including those currently housed by the Center on Technology and Disability, on evidence-based AT and IT practices for children with disabilities and their families; and

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA8 to support LEAs in implementing the framework, 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

“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.

“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.

B-10

(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; and

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

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

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

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

(c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the project evaluation,” include an 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 should 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;

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.

B-11

(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,” 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;

B-12

(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, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the Office of Special Education

Programs (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, during each year of the project period;

(iii) One annual two-day trip 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, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

B-13

(5) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project’s intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with, 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;

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

(7) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the transfer of pertinent resources and products from the current Center for Technology and Disability and to maintain the continuity of services during the transition to this new Center and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fifth Year of Project

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

(a) The recommendation of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary.

This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness 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.

References:

Ahmad, F. K. (2015). Use of assistive technology in inclusive education: Making room for diverse learning needs. Transcience, 6(2), 62-77.

B-14

Bausch, M. E., Ault, M. J., Evmenova, A. S., & Behrmann, M. M. (2008). Going beyond AT devices: Are AT services being considered? Journal of Special Education Technology, 23(2), 1-16.

Bausch, M. E., Ault, M. J., & Hasselbring, T. S. (2015). Assistive technology in schools:

Lessons learned from the National Assistive Technology Research Institute. Efficacy of

Assistive Technology Interventions Advances in Special Education Technology, 1, 13-15.

Hartmann, E., & Weismer, P. (2016). Technology and curriculum engagement for children and youth who are deafblind. American Annals of the Deaf, 161(4), 462-473.

Lee, Y., & Vega, L. A. (2005). Perceived knowledge, attitudes, and challenges of AT use in special education. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20(2), 60–62.

Smith, S. J., & Robinson, S. (2003). Technology integration through collaborative cohorts.

Remedial & Special Education, 24(3), 154-159.

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

American education: Learning powered by technology. Retrieved from www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/netp2010.pdf.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan update.

Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf.

Zhou, L., Parker, A. T., Smith, D. W., & Griffin-Shirley, N. (2011). Assistive technology for students with visual impairments: Challenges and needs in teachers' preparation programs and practice. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 105(4), 197-210.

Definitions:

The following definitions are from 34 CFR 77.1:

Demonstrates a rationale means 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.

B-15

Evidence-based means the proposed project component is supported by one or more of strong evidence, moderate evidence, promising evidence, or evidence that demonstrates a rationale.

Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment group receiving a project component or a control group that does not.

Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies, and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g., sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbook:

(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to receive the project component (the control group).

(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of outcomes.

(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case (e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the treatment.

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.

Moderate evidence means that there is evidence of effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations or settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

B-16

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a “positive effect” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a

“medium to large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single experimental study or quasi-experimental design study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, or otherwise assessed by the

Department using version 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, as appropriate, and that--

(A) Meets WWC standards with or without reservations;

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version

2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook; and

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites.

Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs

(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy this requirement.

Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention, process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers).

Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a “strong evidence base” or “moderate evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

B-17

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a “positive effect” or “potentially positive effect” on a relevant outcome with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that--

(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group); and

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome.

Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation (e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbook.

Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s) the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the specific goals of the program.

Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:

(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a “strong evidence base” for the corresponding practice guide recommendation;

(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a “positive effect” on a relevant outcome based on a “medium to large” extent of evidence, with no reporting of a “negative effect” or “potentially negative effect” on a relevant outcome; or

B-18

(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, or otherwise assessed by the Department using version 3.0 of the

WWC Handbook, as appropriate, and that--

(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;

(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;

(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version

2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook; and

(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State, county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at least 350 students or other individuals across sites.

Multiple studies of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs

(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy this requirement.

What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook) means the standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1

(incorporated by reference, see 34 CFR 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of evidence as described in the Handbook documentation.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking:

Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and requirements.

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

Program Authority:

20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.

B-19

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 (Nonprocurement) 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 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.

B-20

II. AWARD INFORMATION

Type of Award:

Cooperative agreements.

Estimated Available Funds:

$700,000.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2019 from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Maximum Award:

We will not make an award exceeding $700,000 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.

B-21

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

1. Eligible Applicants:

State educational agencies; LEAs, including public charter schools that operate as LEAs under

State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching:

This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

3. Eligible Subgrantees:

(a) Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee may award subgrants--to directly carry out project activities described in its application--to the following types of entities: IHEs and private nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the activities proposed in the application.

(b) The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application.

4. Other: General Requirements:

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

(b) The applicant and grant recipient funded under this competition must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26 in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

B-22

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

1. Application Submission Instructions:

For information on how to submit an application please refer to our Common Instructions for

Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal

Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

2. Intergovernmental Review:

This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.

However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to make awards by the end of FY 2018.

3. Funding Restrictions:

We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

4. Recommended Page Limit:

The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. 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…