National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program-Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers; Grants and Cooperative Agreements; Availability, 35363-35365 [05-11924]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 116 / Friday, June 17, 2005 / Notices
Grantees should consult these sites,
on a regular basis, to obtain details and
explanations on how NIDRR programs
contribute to the advancement of the
Department’s long-term and annual
performance goals.
VII. Agency Contact
For Further Information Contact:
Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 6030, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202. Telephone:
(202) 245–7462 or by e-mail:
donna.nangle@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
the TDD number at (202) 245–7317 or
the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at
1–800–877–8339.
Individuals with disabilities may
obtain this document in an alternative
format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the program contact person
listed in this section.
VIII. Other Information
Electronic Access to This Document:
You may view this document, as well as
all other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) on the Internet at the
following site: https://www.ed.gov/news/
fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site. If you have questions about
using PDF, call the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at
1–888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
Note: The official version of this document
is the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the official
edition of the Federal Register and the Code
of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
index.html.
Dated: June 13, 2005.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education
and, Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 05–11923 Filed 6–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:49 Jun 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research—Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Projects
and Centers Program—Rehabilitation
Research and Training Centers; Grants
and Cooperative Agreements;
Availability
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priority (NFP) on
promoting access to effective consumercentered and community-based
practices and supports for adults with
serious mental illness.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services announces a funding priority
for the National Institute on Disability
and Rehabilitation Research’s (NIDRR)
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program,
Rehabilitation Research and Training
Centers (RRTC) program. This priority
may be used for competitions in fiscal
year (FY) 2005 and later years. We take
this action to focus research attention on
areas of national need. We intend this
priority to improve rehabilitation
services and outcomes for individuals
with disabilities.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is
effective July 18, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 6030, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202. Telephone:
(202) 245–7462 or by e-mail:
donna.nangle@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call
the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–
800–877–8339.
Individuals with disabilities may
obtain this document in an alternative
format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Rehabilitation Research and Training
Centers
RRTCs conduct coordinated and
integrated advanced programs of
research targeted toward the production
of new knowledge to improve
rehabilitation methodology and service
delivery systems, alleviate or stabilize
disability conditions, or promote
maximum social and economic
independence for persons with
disabilities. Additional information on
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
35363
the RRTC program can be found at:
https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/
pubs/res-program.html#RRTC.
General Requirements of Rehabilitation
Research and Training Centers
RRTCs must—
• Carry out coordinated advanced
programs of rehabilitation research;
• Provide training, including
graduate, pre-service, and in-service
training, to help rehabilitation
personnel more effectively provide
rehabilitation services to individuals
with disabilities;
• Provide technical assistance to
individuals with disabilities, their
representatives, providers, and other
interested parties;
• Demonstrate in its application how
it will address, in whole or in part, the
needs of individuals with disabilities
from minority backgrounds;
• Disseminate informational materials
to individuals with disabilities, their
representatives, providers, and other
interested parties; and
• Serve as centers for national
excellence in rehabilitation research for
individuals with disabilities, their
representatives, providers, and other
interested parties.
The Department is particularly
interested in ensuring that the
expenditure of public funds is justified
by the execution of intended activities
and the advancement of knowledge and,
thus, has built this accountability into
the selection criteria. Not later than
three years after the establishment of
any RRTC, NIDRR will conduct one or
more reviews of the activities and
achievements of the RRTC. In
accordance with the provisions of 34
CFR 75.253(a), continued funding
depends at all times on satisfactory
performance and accomplishment of
approved grant objectives.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
We published a notice of proposed
priority (NPP) for this program in the
Federal Register on March 3, 2005 (70
FR 10378). The NPP included a
background statement that described
our rationale for proposing this priority.
In response to our invitation in the
NPP, 17 parties submitted comments on
the proposed priority. An analysis of the
comments and of any changes in the
priority since publication of the NPP is
discussed in the Analysis of Comments
and Changes section published as an
appendix to this notice.
Generally, we do not address
technical and other minor changes and
suggested changes we are not authorized
to make under the applicable statutory
authority.
E:\FR\FM\17JNN2.SGM
17JNN2
35364
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 116 / Friday, June 17, 2005 / Notices
Note: This notice does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we choose
to use this final priority, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal
Register. When inviting applications we
designate the priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational. The
effect of the priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications that
meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a
competitive preference priority, we give
competitive preference to an application by
either (1) awarding additional points,
depending on how well or the extent to
which the application meets the competitive
priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the
competitive priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the
priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational
priority, we are particularly interested in
applications that meet the invitational
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
competitive or absolute preference over other
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Note: NIDRR supports the goals of
President Bush’s New Freedom Initiative
(NFI). The NFI can be accessed on the
Internet at the following site: https://
www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom.
The final priority is in concert with
NIDRR’s 1999–2003 Long-Range Plan
(Plan). The Plan is comprehensive and
integrates many issues relating to
disability and rehabilitation research
topics. Applicants will find many
sections throughout the Plan that
support potential research to be
conducted under the final priority. The
references to the topic of this priority
may be found in the Plan, Chapter 4,
Health and Function and Chapter 6,
Independent Living And Community
Integration. The Plan can be accessed on
the Internet at the following site:
https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/
pubs/.
Through the implementation of the
NFI and the Plan, NIDRR seeks to: (1)
Improve the quality and utility of
disability and rehabilitation research;
(2) foster an exchange of expertise,
information, and training to facilitate
the advancement of knowledge and
understanding of the unique needs of
traditionally underserved populations;
(3) determine best strategies and
programs to improve rehabilitation
outcomes for underserved populations;
(4) identify research gaps; (5) identify
mechanisms of integrating research and
practice; and (6) disseminate findings.
Priority
The Assistant Secretary intends to
fund a priority for one RRTC that must
focus on promoting access to effective
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:49 Jun 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
consumer-centered and communitybased practices and supports for adults
with serious mental illness.
The RRTC must—
(1) Identify or develop and evaluate
models, methods, and measures for
improving the quality of mental health
outcomes through transformation of the
service delivery system in a manner that
reflects and embodies consumer choice.
These models, methods, and measures
may focus on, but are not limited to,
self-determination, consumer-centered
services, consumer choice, and
coordination across service systems. All
of these efforts must be culturally
competent and appropriate for targeted
populations;
(2) Identify or develop and then
evaluate strategies for translating
evidence-based mental health research
findings and best practices into effective
interventions, including the
development of tools and supports for
providers of mental health or other
adjunctive services that reflect
consumer choice; and
(3) Identify or develop and evaluate
interventions, such as peer support
services, that help to improve workforce
capacity, choice, participation, and job
longevity for adults with serious mental
illness.
In addition to these requirements, the
RRTC must—
• Conduct a state-of-the-science
conference on its respective area of
research in the third year of the grant
cycle and publish a comprehensive
report on the final outcomes of the
conference in the fourth year of the
grant cycle. This conference must
include materials from experts internal
and external to the RRTC;
• Coordinate on research projects of
mutual interest with relevant NIDRRfunded projects as identified through
consultation with the NIDRR project
officer;
• Involve individuals with
disabilities in planning and
implementing its research, training, and
dissemination activities, and in
evaluating the RRTC; and
• Identify anticipated outcomes (i.e.,
advances in knowledge and/or changes
and improvements in policy, practice,
behavior, and system capacity) that are
linked to the applicant’s stated grant
objectives.
Executive Order 12866
This NFP has been reviewed in
accordance with Executive Order 12866.
Under the terms of the order, we have
assessed the potential costs and benefits
of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with
the NFP are those resulting from
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
statutory requirements and those we
have determined as necessary for
administering this program effectively
and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and
benefits—both quantitative and
qualitative—of this NFP, we have
determined that the benefits of the final
priority justify the costs.
Summary of potential costs and
benefits:
The potential costs associated with
this final priority are minimal while the
benefits are significant. Grantees may
incur some costs associated with
completing the application process in
terms of staff time, copying, and mailing
or delivery. The use of Grants.gov
technology reduces mailing and copying
costs significantly.
The benefits of the RRTC program
have been well established over the
years in that similar projects have been
completed successfully. This final
priority will generate new knowledge
and technologies through research,
development, dissemination, utilization,
and technical assistance projects.
Another benefit of this final priority is
that the establishment of a new RRTC
will support the President’s NFI and
will improve the lives of persons with
disabilities, in particular promoting
access to effective consumer-centered
and community-based practices and
supports for adults with serious mental
illness. The new RRTC will generate,
disseminate, and promote the use of
new information that will improve
options for individuals with disabilities
and allow them to perform regular
activities in the community.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 350.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well
as all other Department of Education
documents published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable
Document Format (PDF) on the Internet
at the following site: https://www.ed.gov/
news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site. If you have questions about
using PDF, call the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
Note: The official version of this document
is the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the official
edition of the Federal Register and the Code
of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
index.html.
E:\FR\FM\17JNN2.SGM
17JNN2
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 116 / Friday, June 17, 2005 / Notices
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number 84.133B Rehabilitation Research and
Training Centers Program)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and
764(b)(2).
Dated: June 13, 2005.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
Appendix
Analysis of Comments and Changes
An analysis of the comments and the
changes in the priority since publication of
the NPP follows.
Comment: None.
Discussion: After further review of the
general requirements of an RRTC and the
priority requirements, we have changed the
location of two of the requirements, ‘‘Identify
anticipated outcomes (i.e., advances in
knowledge and/or changes and
improvements in policy, practice, behavior,
and system capacity) that are linked to the
applicant’s stated grant objectives’’ has been
moved from the general requirements of an
RRTC to the priority section of the NPP.
‘‘Demonstrate in its application how it will
address, in whole or in part, the needs of
individuals with disabilities from minority
backgrounds’’ has been moved from the
priority section of the NPP to the general
requirements of an RRTC.
Change: The location of two of the
requirements has been changed to better
reflect the requirements of an RRTC. This
change in the structure of the requirements
does not change the requirements in the NPP.
Comment: One commenter suggested that
the first required activity was ambiguous.
The commenter indicated that the priority
could be read to require ‘‘improving the
quality of practices and supports (which
should then lead to improved outcomes) or
improving outcomes per se’.
Discussion: The goal of this priority is to
achieve improved outcomes in a variety of
domains for individuals with serious mental
illness. To reach that goal, the applicant may
propose a variety of means that could
improve the quality of practices and supports
that would facilitate those outcomes. The
peer review panel will evaluate the models,
methods, and measures an applicant
proposes.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter raised concerns
about the phrase ‘‘strategies for translating
evidence-based mental health research
findings and best practices into effective
interventions’’ that is in the second required
activity. The commenter stated that
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:49 Jun 16, 2005
Jkt 205001
‘‘interventions cannot be considered to be
effective if they are not already evidencebased, thus evidence-based practices should
by definition be effective and not require
translation—unless the priority is addressing
specific translational research or the
adaptation of evidence-based practices for
real world naturalistic settings (e.g., for
communities of color, which might be
considered to be more dissemination
research)’’. The commenter further asked
whether applicants were being encouraged to
develop ‘‘toolkits’’ for practices that do not
already have them or to disseminate existing
evidence-based practices to populations
other than those on whom the evidence was
based.
Discussion: Evidence-based practices must
be used in order to benefit the people they
are intended to serve; research alone is
insufficient for improving outcomes. This
requirement focuses on strategies for
translating evidence-based research findings
into interventions. This can include
dissemination and utilization activities.
Additionally, an applicant may propose a
variety of methods to achieve the goal of
bridging gaps between research and
implementation. The peer review panel will
evaluate the methodologies applicants
propose.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter expressed
confusion about the phrase ‘‘workforce
capacity and choice’’ in the third required
activity. The commenter stated that
‘‘increasing capacity can be done purely by
hiring additional staff made possible by an
infusion of new resources, but this may have
no impact whatsoever in terms of choice.
Alternatively, training staff in culturally
responsive and consumer-centered
approaches can increase consumer choice
and the quality of services, without having
any impact on capacity. By putting the two
terms together are we to understand that they
are somehow related, for example, increasing
specifically the capacity of the system for
enhancing choice.’’
Discussion: This comment suggests a
misunderstanding of the target population for
the third required activity. This activity
focuses on interventions that enhance
employment opportunities for individuals
with serious mental illness—not methods of
increasing provider workforce capacity. The
RRTC must identify or develop and evaluate
interventions that improve job readiness,
skills, and overall capacity for people with
serious mental illness. Interventions that
strengthen the workforce capacity of workers
with serious mental illness lead to increased
choice. Workers with more skills and
capacity have more options and choices in
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
35365
the job market because they can offer more
to employers.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter wrote that
persons with psychiatric disabilities are a key
emerging disability group in the United
States. The commenter noted that although
this population now represents one quarter of
new state based vocational rehabilitation
cases, the total number of interventions and
effective approaches for addressing these
needs is quite small. The commenter
suggested that the third required activity be
modified to emphasize the need for
interventions that help to improve workforce
participation and job longevity, as well as
choice.
Discussion: We agree that adding the terms
participation and job longevity would be
helpful. As noted in the NPP background
statement, a number of data sources indicate
the need for effective programs, services, and
supports to improve workforce participation
for individuals with psychiatric disabilities.
Changes: The third required activity now
includes the phrase ‘‘participation and job
longevity’’ and reads, ‘‘Identify or develop
and evaluate interventions, such as peer
support services, that help to improve
workforce capacity, choice, participation,
and job longevity for adults with serious
mental illness.
Comment: One commenter suggested that
the priority be expanded to require greater
efforts on the part of the mental health and
disabilities systems in helping clients to
access mainstream resources such as—
housing programs that promote home
ownership opportunities, vocational
opportunities that support consumers who
want to enter mainstream academic or skill
training programs outside the mental health
system, and social supports that work with
community groups rather than solely support
segregated social programs.
Discussion: NIDRR has long encouraged
disability-focused providers to draw upon
the wide range of generic community
supports and services. Those resources might
expand the range of opportunities available
to individuals with disabilities. They are
potential tools and supports for both
providers and consumers. Within the
framework of this RRTC, an applicant could
propose methodologies to enhance use of
such generic programs. The peer review
panel will evaluate the merits of any
activities of this nature that the applicant
proposes.
Changes: None.
[FR Doc. 05–11924 Filed 6–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
E:\FR\FM\17JNN2.SGM
17JNN2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 116 (Friday, June 17, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35363-35365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11924]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers; Grants and Cooperative
Agreements; Availability
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priority (NFP) on promoting access to effective
consumer-centered and community-based practices and supports for adults
with serious mental illness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces a funding priority for the National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research's (NIDRR)
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program,
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTC) program. This
priority may be used for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2005 and
later years. We take this action to focus research attention on areas
of national need. We intend this priority to improve rehabilitation
services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective July 18, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 6030, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 245-7462 or by e-mail:
donna.nangle@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
RRTCs conduct coordinated and integrated advanced programs of
research targeted toward the production of new knowledge to improve
rehabilitation methodology and service delivery systems, alleviate or
stabilize disability conditions, or promote maximum social and economic
independence for persons with disabilities. Additional information on
the RRTC program can be found at: https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/
pubs/res-program.html#RRTC.
General Requirements of Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
RRTCs must--
Carry out coordinated advanced programs of rehabilitation
research;
Provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to help rehabilitation personnel more effectively
provide rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities;
Provide technical assistance to individuals with
disabilities, their representatives, providers, and other interested
parties;
Demonstrate in its application how it will address, in
whole or in part, the needs of individuals with disabilities from
minority backgrounds;
Disseminate informational materials to individuals with
disabilities, their representatives, providers, and other interested
parties; and
Serve as centers for national excellence in rehabilitation
research for individuals with disabilities, their representatives,
providers, and other interested parties.
The Department is particularly interested in ensuring that the
expenditure of public funds is justified by the execution of intended
activities and the advancement of knowledge and, thus, has built this
accountability into the selection criteria. Not later than three years
after the establishment of any RRTC, NIDRR will conduct one or more
reviews of the activities and achievements of the RRTC. In accordance
with the provisions of 34 CFR 75.253(a), continued funding depends at
all times on satisfactory performance and accomplishment of approved
grant objectives.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
We published a notice of proposed priority (NPP) for this program
in the Federal Register on March 3, 2005 (70 FR 10378). The NPP
included a background statement that described our rationale for
proposing this priority.
In response to our invitation in the NPP, 17 parties submitted
comments on the proposed priority. An analysis of the comments and of
any changes in the priority since publication of the NPP is discussed
in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section published as an
appendix to this notice.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes and
suggested changes we are not authorized to make under the applicable
statutory authority.
[[Page 35364]]
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this final priority, we invite applications
through a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting applications
we designate the priority as absolute, competitive preference, or
invitational. The effect of the priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by either
(1) awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent
to which the application meets the competitive priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the
competitive priority over an application of comparable merit that
does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the invitational
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the
priority a competitive or absolute preference over other
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Note: NIDRR supports the goals of President Bush's New Freedom
Initiative (NFI). The NFI can be accessed on the Internet at the
following site: https://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom.
The final priority is in concert with NIDRR's 1999-2003 Long-Range
Plan (Plan). The Plan is comprehensive and integrates many issues
relating to disability and rehabilitation research topics. Applicants
will find many sections throughout the Plan that support potential
research to be conducted under the final priority. The references to
the topic of this priority may be found in the Plan, Chapter 4, Health
and Function and Chapter 6, Independent Living And Community
Integration. The Plan can be accessed on the Internet at the following
site: https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/.
Through the implementation of the NFI and the Plan, NIDRR seeks to:
(1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and rehabilitation
research; (2) foster an exchange of expertise, information, and
training to facilitate the advancement of knowledge and understanding
of the unique needs of traditionally underserved populations; (3)
determine best strategies and programs to improve rehabilitation
outcomes for underserved populations; (4) identify research gaps; (5)
identify mechanisms of integrating research and practice; and (6)
disseminate findings.
Priority
The Assistant Secretary intends to fund a priority for one RRTC
that must focus on promoting access to effective consumer-centered and
community-based practices and supports for adults with serious mental
illness.
The RRTC must--
(1) Identify or develop and evaluate models, methods, and measures
for improving the quality of mental health outcomes through
transformation of the service delivery system in a manner that reflects
and embodies consumer choice. These models, methods, and measures may
focus on, but are not limited to, self-determination, consumer-centered
services, consumer choice, and coordination across service systems. All
of these efforts must be culturally competent and appropriate for
targeted populations;
(2) Identify or develop and then evaluate strategies for
translating evidence-based mental health research findings and best
practices into effective interventions, including the development of
tools and supports for providers of mental health or other adjunctive
services that reflect consumer choice; and
(3) Identify or develop and evaluate interventions, such as peer
support services, that help to improve workforce capacity, choice,
participation, and job longevity for adults with serious mental
illness.
In addition to these requirements, the RRTC must--
Conduct a state-of-the-science conference on its
respective area of research in the third year of the grant cycle and
publish a comprehensive report on the final outcomes of the conference
in the fourth year of the grant cycle. This conference must include
materials from experts internal and external to the RRTC;
Coordinate on research projects of mutual interest with
relevant NIDRR-funded projects as identified through consultation with
the NIDRR project officer;
Involve individuals with disabilities in planning and
implementing its research, training, and dissemination activities, and
in evaluating the RRTC; and
Identify anticipated outcomes (i.e., advances in knowledge
and/or changes and improvements in policy, practice, behavior, and
system capacity) that are linked to the applicant's stated grant
objectives.
Executive Order 12866
This NFP has been reviewed in accordance with Executive Order
12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed the potential
costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with the NFP are those resulting
from statutory requirements and those we have determined as necessary
for administering this program effectively and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this NFP, we have determined that the benefits of
the final priority justify the costs.
Summary of potential costs and benefits:
The potential costs associated with this final priority are minimal
while the benefits are significant. Grantees may incur some costs
associated with completing the application process in terms of staff
time, copying, and mailing or delivery. The use of Grants.gov
technology reduces mailing and copying costs significantly.
The benefits of the RRTC program have been well established over
the years in that similar projects have been completed successfully.
This final priority will generate new knowledge and technologies
through research, development, dissemination, utilization, and
technical assistance projects.
Another benefit of this final priority is that the establishment of
a new RRTC will support the President's NFI and will improve the lives
of persons with disabilities, in particular promoting access to
effective consumer-centered and community-based practices and supports
for adults with serious mental illness. The new RRTC will generate,
disseminate, and promote the use of new information that will improve
options for individuals with disabilities and allow them to perform
regular activities in the community.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
https://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: https://www.gpoaccess.gov/
nara/.
[[Page 35365]]
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.133B
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers Program)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(2).
Dated: June 13, 2005.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
Appendix
Analysis of Comments and Changes
An analysis of the comments and the changes in the priority
since publication of the NPP follows.
Comment: None.
Discussion: After further review of the general requirements of
an RRTC and the priority requirements, we have changed the location
of two of the requirements, ``Identify anticipated outcomes (i.e.,
advances in knowledge and/or changes and improvements in policy,
practice, behavior, and system capacity) that are linked to the
applicant's stated grant objectives'' has been moved from the
general requirements of an RRTC to the priority section of the NPP.
``Demonstrate in its application how it will address, in whole or in
part, the needs of individuals with disabilities from minority
backgrounds'' has been moved from the priority section of the NPP to
the general requirements of an RRTC.
Change: The location of two of the requirements has been changed
to better reflect the requirements of an RRTC. This change in the
structure of the requirements does not change the requirements in
the NPP.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the first required
activity was ambiguous. The commenter indicated that the priority
could be read to require ``improving the quality of practices and
supports (which should then lead to improved outcomes) or improving
outcomes per se'.
Discussion: The goal of this priority is to achieve improved
outcomes in a variety of domains for individuals with serious mental
illness. To reach that goal, the applicant may propose a variety of
means that could improve the quality of practices and supports that
would facilitate those outcomes. The peer review panel will evaluate
the models, methods, and measures an applicant proposes.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter raised concerns about the phrase
``strategies for translating evidence-based mental health research
findings and best practices into effective interventions'' that is
in the second required activity. The commenter stated that
``interventions cannot be considered to be effective if they are not
already evidence-based, thus evidence-based practices should by
definition be effective and not require translation--unless the
priority is addressing specific translational research or the
adaptation of evidence-based practices for real world naturalistic
settings (e.g., for communities of color, which might be considered
to be more dissemination research)''. The commenter further asked
whether applicants were being encouraged to develop ``toolkits'' for
practices that do not already have them or to disseminate existing
evidence-based practices to populations other than those on whom the
evidence was based.
Discussion: Evidence-based practices must be used in order to
benefit the people they are intended to serve; research alone is
insufficient for improving outcomes. This requirement focuses on
strategies for translating evidence-based research findings into
interventions. This can include dissemination and utilization
activities. Additionally, an applicant may propose a variety of
methods to achieve the goal of bridging gaps between research and
implementation. The peer review panel will evaluate the
methodologies applicants propose.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter expressed confusion about the phrase
``workforce capacity and choice'' in the third required activity.
The commenter stated that ``increasing capacity can be done purely
by hiring additional staff made possible by an infusion of new
resources, but this may have no impact whatsoever in terms of
choice. Alternatively, training staff in culturally responsive and
consumer-centered approaches can increase consumer choice and the
quality of services, without having any impact on capacity. By
putting the two terms together are we to understand that they are
somehow related, for example, increasing specifically the capacity
of the system for enhancing choice.''
Discussion: This comment suggests a misunderstanding of the
target population for the third required activity. This activity
focuses on interventions that enhance employment opportunities for
individuals with serious mental illness--not methods of increasing
provider workforce capacity. The RRTC must identify or develop and
evaluate interventions that improve job readiness, skills, and
overall capacity for people with serious mental illness.
Interventions that strengthen the workforce capacity of workers with
serious mental illness lead to increased choice. Workers with more
skills and capacity have more options and choices in the job market
because they can offer more to employers.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter wrote that persons with psychiatric
disabilities are a key emerging disability group in the United
States. The commenter noted that although this population now
represents one quarter of new state based vocational rehabilitation
cases, the total number of interventions and effective approaches
for addressing these needs is quite small. The commenter suggested
that the third required activity be modified to emphasize the need
for interventions that help to improve workforce participation and
job longevity, as well as choice.
Discussion: We agree that adding the terms participation and job
longevity would be helpful. As noted in the NPP background
statement, a number of data sources indicate the need for effective
programs, services, and supports to improve workforce participation
for individuals with psychiatric disabilities.
Changes: The third required activity now includes the phrase
``participation and job longevity'' and reads, ``Identify or develop
and evaluate interventions, such as peer support services, that help
to improve workforce capacity, choice, participation, and job
longevity for adults with serious mental illness.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority be expanded
to require greater efforts on the part of the mental health and
disabilities systems in helping clients to access mainstream
resources such as--housing programs that promote home ownership
opportunities, vocational opportunities that support consumers who
want to enter mainstream academic or skill training programs outside
the mental health system, and social supports that work with
community groups rather than solely support segregated social
programs.
Discussion: NIDRR has long encouraged disability-focused
providers to draw upon the wide range of generic community supports
and services. Those resources might expand the range of
opportunities available to individuals with disabilities. They are
potential tools and supports for both providers and consumers.
Within the framework of this RRTC, an applicant could propose
methodologies to enhance use of such generic programs. The peer
review panel will evaluate the merits of any activities of this
nature that the applicant proposes.
Changes: None.
[FR Doc. 05-11924 Filed 6-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P