Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Overview Information; Technology and Media Services for Individuals With Disabilities-Center on Technology Implementation; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009, 33219-33226 [E9-16380]
Download as PDF
33219
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Records Notice will be deleted from the
Air Force’s inventory.
Department of the Air Force
Department of the Air Force
[FR Doc. E9–16375 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am]
[Docket ID USAF–2009–0043]
[Docket ID USAF–2009–0044]
Privacy Act of 1974; System of
Records
Privacy Act of 1974; System of
Records
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
AGENCY:
Department of the Air Force,
AGENCY:
Department of the Air Force,
DoD.
DoD.
ACTION: Notice to delete a system of
records.
ACTION: Notice to delete a system of
records.
SUMMARY: The Department of the Air
Force proposes to delete a system of
records to its inventory of record
systems subject to the Privacy Act of
1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.
SUMMARY: The Department of the Air
Force proposes to delete a system of
records to its inventory of record
systems subject to the Privacy Act of
1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.
DATES: This proposed action will be
effective without further notice on
August 10, 2009 unless comments are
received which result in a contrary
determination.
DATES: This proposed action will be
effective without further notice on
August 10, 2009 unless comments are
received which result in a contrary
determination.
Send comments to the Air
Force Privacy Act Officer, Office of
Warfighting Integration and Chief
Information Officer, SAF/XCPPI, 1800
Air Force Pentagon, Suite 220,
Washington, DC 20330–1800.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr.
Ben Swilley at (703) 696–6648.
The
Department of the Air Force systems of
records notices subject to the Privacy
Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended, have been published in the
Federal Register and are available from
the address above.
The Department of the Air Force
proposes to delete one system of records
notice from its inventory of record
systems subject to the Privacy Act of
1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The
proposed deletion is not within the
purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy
Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended, which requires the
submission of a new or altered system
report.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: July 7, 2009.
Morgan E. Frazier,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
Send comments to the Air
Force Privacy Act Officer, Office of
Warfighting Integration and Chief
Information Officer, SAF/XCPPI, 1800
Air Force Pentagon, Suite 220,
Washington, DC 20330–1800.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Ben Swilley at (703) 696–6648.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of the Air Force systems of
records notices subject to the Privacy
Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended,
have been published in the Federal
Register and are available from the
address above.
The Department of the Air Force
proposes to delete one system of records
notice from its inventory of record
systems subject to the Privacy Act of
1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The
proposed deletion is not within the
purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy
Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended,
which requires the submission of a new
or altered system report.
ADDRESSES:
Dated: July 7, 2009.
Morgan E. Frazier,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
F031 AFMC A
SYSTEM NAME:
SYSTEM NAME:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
F036 AFMC B
AFMC Badge and Vehicle Control
Records (January 12, 2009, 74 FR 1184).
Systems Acquisition Schools Student
Records (June 11, 1997, 62 FR 31793)
REASON:
REASON:
The system is no longer in use.
[FR Doc. E9–16374 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
This records collection for this system
is already covered by F031 AF SF B,
Security Forces Management
Information System (SFMIS) published
on October 14, 2003, 68 FR 59168.
Accordingly, this Privacy Act System of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Publication of Revision and
Consolidation of Military Freight Traffic
Rules Publications (MFTRP) 1C–R
(Motor), 10 (Rail), 30 (Barge), 6A
(Pipeline), 4A (Tank Truck), Military
Standard Tender Instruction
Publication (MSTIP) 364D, SpotBid
Business Rules, and SDDC Military
Class Rate Publication No. 100A to a
Consolidation of Procurement
Requirements for the Purchase of
Commercial Transportation Services
Into the Military Freight Traffic Unified
Rules Publication (MFTURP) No. 1
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice; correction.
SUMMARY: The notice published in the
Federal Register on June 9, 2009 (74 FR
27294), indicated a July 9, 2009 effective
date. The effective date for this
publication will not be July 9, 2009. The
effective date will be determined and
published at a later date. All
publications listed above will remain in
effect until further notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms.
Dora J. Elias, (757) 878–5379.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
None.
Brenda S. Bowen,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–16345 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710–08–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services; Overview
Information; Technology and Media
Services for Individuals With
Disabilities—Center on Technology
Implementation; Notice Inviting
Applications for New Awards for Fiscal
Year (FY) 2009
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) Number: 84.327G.
Dates:
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: August 10, 2009.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: August 19, 2009.
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
33220
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of
the Technology and Media Services for
Individuals with Disabilities program
are to: (1) Improve results for children
with disabilities by promoting the
development, demonstration, and use of
technology, (2) support educational
media services activities designed to be
of educational value in the classroom
setting to children with disabilities, and
(3) provide support for captioning and
video description of educational
materials that are appropriate for use in
the classroom setting.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from
allowable activities specified in the
statute or otherwise authorized in the
statute (see sections 674 and 681(d) of
the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1474
and 1481(d)).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2009 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applicants from this competition, this
priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only
applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Technology and Media Services for
Individuals with Disabilities—Center on
Technology Implementation.
Background: Students with
disabilities can benefit from the use of
instructional and assistive technology
(D.P. Bryant, Goodwin, & B.R. Bryant,
2003; L.S. Fuchs, D. Fuchs, Hamlet,
Powell, Capizzi, & Seethaler, 2006;
Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, C., 2008;
Slavin & Lake, 2007). However, research
suggests that the benefits of using
technology depend on the quality of the
implementation of the technology
(Fitzer, et al., 2007; Zorfass & Rivero,
2005; Slavin, et al., 2008; Morrison,
2007; Todis, 2001).
Implementation of any practice or
program is a topic of general concern in
education and, fortunately, there is a
growing body of knowledge on
implementing educational innovations
that can help ensure that innovations
(including technology innovations) are
implemented and sustained with
fidelity and effectiveness (Bond, Drake,
McHugo, Rapp, Whitley, & National
Evidence-Based Practices Project
Research Group, in press; Fixsen &
Blase, 2009; Fixsen, Naoom, Blase,
Friedman, & Wallace, 2005; Mueser,
Torrey, Lynde, Singer, & Drake, 2003;
Torrey, Lynde, & Gorman, 2005). After
an extensive review of available
research on implementation Fixsen, et
al. (2005) identified the following core
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
components (‘‘implementation drivers’’)
as critical to the successful
implementation of any program or
practice: (i) Staff recruitment and
selection, (ii) preservice and inservice
training, (iii) ongoing consultation and
coaching, (iv) staff and program
evaluation, (v) facilitative
administrative supports, and (vi)
systems interventions. Furthermore,
Fixsen, et al. also found that successful
implementation of a new practice or
program involves a multiyear process
that progresses through stages,
including exploration and adoption,
program installation, initial
implementation, full operation,
innovation, and sustainability.
There is a growing body of knowledge
focusing specifically on the
implementation of technology. For
example, the following factors have
been shown to affect the
implementation of technology programs
or practices in education: Teacher
motivation to use the technology being
implemented; compatibility between the
technology being implemented and the
teacher’s pedagogical orientation; the
availability of ongoing technology
planning and administrative support;
professional development relevant to
the technology being implemented; and
school readiness and infrastructure to
support the technology being
implemented (Blumenfeld, Fishman,
Krajcik, & Marx, 2000; Cradler, 1995;
Ertmer, 2005; Glazer, Hannafin, & Song,
2005). To achieve the full benefits of
technology for children with
disabilities, schools must effectively
implement the technology practices or
programs. Schools, therefore, can
benefit tremendously from having
access to better information on effective
technology implementation strategies
and TA to aid them in successfully
implementing technology practices and
programs on their own.
Priority: The purpose of this priority
is to fund a cooperative agreement to
support the establishment and operation
of a Center on Technology
Implementation (Center) that will
develop, test, and disseminate the
following two types of products to
support effective and sustainable local
implementation of evidence-based
technology practices and programs to
improve educational outcomes for
students with disabilities:
(1) Implementation Resource Kits. The
Center’s Implementation Resource Kits
must be designed to guide and support
the implementation of specific
evidence-based technology practices or
programs for local educational agencies
(LEAs).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(2) Implementation Practice Guide.
The Center’s Implementation Practice
Guide must summarize available
evidence and provide general guidance
(not limited to a specific practice or
program) on implementing technology
programs and practices to benefit
students with disabilities.
To be considered for funding under
this absolute priority, applicants must
meet the application requirements
contained in this priority. Any project
funded under this absolute priority also
must meet the programmatic and
administrative requirements specified in
the priority.
Application Requirements. An
applicant must include in its
application—
(a) A detailed plan for implementing
the activities described in the Project
Activities section of this priority,
including:
(1) A dissemination plan that
describes the Center’s strategy for
communicating findings (upon review
and approval from OSEP) to key
stakeholders, including:
(i) Professional organizations,
including but not limited to, the Council
of Administrators of Special Education,
the National Association of State
Directors of Special Education, the
Council of the Great City Schools, the
Council for Exceptional Children, the
National Education Association, The
Rehabilitation Engineering and
Assistive Technology Society of North
America (RESNA) and the American
Federation of Teachers.
(ii) Federal technical assistance and
dissemination projects, including (but
not limited to) the Regional Resource
Centers funded under the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act, the
Comprehensive Centers and State
Educational Technology projects funded
under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as amended,
statewide assistive technology programs
as funded under the Assistive
Technology Act of 1998 (as amended),
and other relevant Federal projects as
determined by OSEP; and
(iii) Technology developers, vendors
and researchers.
(2) The dissemination plan must
include provisions for preparing
national and State TA providers to
disseminate and use the Implementation
Resource Kits and Implementation
Practice Guide without the need for
ongoing TA from the Center and after
the end of the project period.
(c) A budget for attendance at the
following:
(1) A one and one half day kick-off
meeting to be held in Washington, DC,
within four weeks after receipt of the
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
award, and an annual planning meeting
held in Washington, DC, with the OSEP
Project Officer during each subsequent
year of the project period.
(2) A three-day Project Directors’
Conference in Washington, DC, during
each year of the project period; and
(3) A two-day technology project
director’s meeting in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period.
Project Activities. To meet the
requirements of this priority, the Center
must conduct the following activities:
(a) Conduct an ongoing review of
research and scholarly literature on the
implementation of practices and
programs in education, with an
emphasis on implementing instructional
and assistive technology practices and
programs with students with
disabilities.
(b) Select at least three evidencebased technology practices and
programs (which must include at least
one technology program, as defined in
this notice) upon which to base the
development of Implementation
Resource Kits. The evidence base for
each selected technology practice or
program must meet a standard of rigor
similar to those applied by one of the
following: the What Works
Clearinghouse (https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
wwc/references), the Best Evidence
Encyclopedia (https://
www.bestevidence.org/methods/
methods.htm), or the Campbell
Collaboration (https://
www.campbellcollaboration.org).
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Note: The technology practices and
programs selected pursuant to paragraph (b)
of this section of the priority must make
integral use of technology, but may involve
other materials and activities as well (e.g.,
computers used in combination with other
hard copy textual materials or World Wide
Web activities incorporated into inquirybased classroom activities).
For purposes of this priority, the
following definitions apply 1:
(1) Technology practices are skills,
techniques, and strategies involving the
use of technology that can be used by
practitioners to achieve educational
outcomes for students with disabilities.
Examples of technology practices
include using word processors in
writing instruction and making
classroom accommodations to integrate
AT devices into instruction.
(2) Technology programs are
integrated collections of technology
1 These definitions of ‘‘technology practice’’ and
‘‘technology program’’ are adapted from Fixsen, et
al. (2005 p. 26). The examples provided with these
definitions are provided for illustrative purposes
only and are not intended to guide the Center’s
selections nor to imply endorsement of them as
evidence based practices.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
practices that are performed within a set
of defined parameters (e.g., a defined
philosophy, a defined service delivery
structure, or a defined set of treatment
components). Examples of technology
programs include schoolwide progress
monitoring programs that uses a Webbased system for interpreting data and
selecting educational interventions, and
programs for systematically assessing
individual student needs for assistive
technology and supporting the use of
the technology in educational settings.
(c) Develop a detailed conceptual
framework for implementing each
technology practice or program selected
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section
of the priority. The Center’s detailed
conceptual frameworks must—
(1) Describe the core intervention
components of the selected technology
practices or programs (i.e., key elements
such as materials, procedures, teacher
resources, and environmental features
that must be maintained for the practice
or program to be effective);
(2) Describe the core implementation
components (as well as their sources)
needed for successful implementation of
the selected technology practices and
programs through all phases of
implementation (i.e., initial exploration
and adoption through initial
implementation, full operation,
innovation, and sustainability). (For
more information about ‘‘core
intervention components’’ and ‘‘core
implementation components,’’ see
Fixsen et al., 2005, pp. 24–26, and 28–
34, respectively);
(3) Describe the anticipated impact on
the target group or groups of students,
including changes in their learning
outcomes and how mediating and
moderating variables (e.g., instructional
methodology, time-on-task, learning
supports, class structure) may affect
how well the technology practice or
program supports student learning
outcomes;
(4) Serve as a basis for designing the
Implementation Resource Kits and the
formative and summative evaluations of
the project.
(d) Develop an Implementation
Resource Kit based on the detailed
conceptual framework for each selected
technology practice and program. (For
more information on Implementation
Resource Kits, also referred to as
implementation packages and toolkits,
see Mueser, et al., 2003; Torrey, et al.,
2005; and McHugo, et al., 2007). The
Center must design its Implementation
Resource Kits to be usable by TA
providers and core implementation
components that are typically available
to LEAs, so that the Implementation
Resource Kits will continue to be used
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33221
after the completion of the Center’s
project period. In developing the
Implementation Resource Kits, the
Center must perform field-based tryouts
and formative evaluations of the
Implementation Resource Kits, in order
to refine and revise the kits, as needed.
Each Implementation Resource Kit must
include at least the following:
(1) Procedures and instruments to
assess the implementation readiness
and the implementation needs of the
LEA (at the teacher, school, and LEA
levels). These procedures and
instruments may include surveys,
resource inventories, school or LEA selfstudy guides, observational instruments,
and other suitable procedures and
instruments and must be drawn to the
greatest extent possible from existing
procedures and instruments that have
been studied and validated in previous
research.
(2) Methods and resources to support
the implementation process at its
various levels (teacher, school, LEA)
and through its various phases from
initial exploration and adoption through
sustainability. These methods and
resources may include: Interactive
professional development activities and
media, community-of-practice
guidelines and resources, online
awareness and skill development
resources, video and multi-media
products, sample language for inclusion
in technology policies and plans, and
public awareness materials to generate
broad-based support for sustained
implementation, and other suitable
methods and resources. The Center
should, to the maximum extent
possible, include methods and resources
that have previously been developed
and evaluated.
(3) Procedures and instruments to
evaluate implementation as it progresses
through the various phases, including
measures of the fidelity of
implementation, the sustainability, and
the impact on students with disabilities.
The procedures and instruments must
be designed to suggest corrective actions
in cases where the implementation is
not progressing as desired. The Center
should, to the maximum extent
possible, include procedures and
instruments that have been studied and
validated in previous research.
(e) In consultation with participating
State educational agencies, field-test
each Implementation Resource Kit in 8
to 10 LEAs, including urban, suburban
and rural school LEAs, and LEAs with
high enrollments of English language
learners and low-income students. In
these field tests, the Center must study
implementation of the selected
technology practice or program over a
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
33222
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
course of at least three calendar years
and the processes of implementation
from adoption through full operation
and sustainability. The field tests must
be designed to evaluate implementation,
sustainability, and impact on outcomes
for students with disabilities and how
the differences in variables such as type
of LEA affect implementation. The field
test must, to the greatest possible extent,
use typically-available TA providers to
utilize the Implementation Resource
Kits. This will allow the field test to
represent typical circumstances and will
also foster the capability of the
typically-available TA providers to use
the Implementation Resource Kits after
the end of the project period.
(f) Develop one Implementation
Practice Guide on technology
implementation for students with
disabilities. In contrast to the
Implementation Resource Kits, which
apply to specific technology practices
and programs, the Implementation
Practice Guide must apply generally to
the implementation of technology
(assistive and instructional) to benefit
students with disabilities. The
Implementation Practice Guide must be
developed by a panel of experts through
a systematic process of reviewing
evidence that supports specific
recommendations and documenting the
level of support for each
recommendation. The following Web
site provides examples of practice
guides and the procedures for
developing them: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
wwc/publications/practiceguides.
(g) Establish and maintain an advisory
committee to review the activities and
outcomes of the Center and to provide
programmatic support and advice
throughout the project period. At a
minimum, the advisory committee must
meet on an annual basis in Washington,
DC, and consist of individuals with
knowledge and expertise in: Effective
instructional technology and assistive
technology, effective schoolwide and
LEA-wide technology implementation
practices, and rigorous evaluation
methods. The committee membership
must also include individuals with
disabilities, parents of individuals with
disabilities, and individuals from
communities representing rural, lowincome, urban and limited English
proficiency populations. The Center
must submit the names of proposed
members of the advisory committee to
the Office of Special Education
Programs (OSEP) for approval within
eight weeks after receipt of the award.
(h) Prior to developing any new paper
or electronic product, submit a proposal
describing the content and purpose of
the product to the OSEP Project Officer
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
and the Proposed Product Advisory
Board at OSEP’s Technical Assistance
Coordination Center for approval.
(i) Conduct a summative evaluation of
both the Implementation Resource Kits
and Implementation Practice Guide in
collaboration with the Center to
Improve Project Performance (CIPP) as
described in the following paragraphs.
Note: The major tasks of CIPP are to guide,
coordinate, and oversee the summative
evaluations conducted by selected Technical
Assistance, Personnel Development, Parent
Training and Information Centers, and
Technology projects that individually receive
$500,000 or more funding from OSEP
annually. The efforts of CIPP are expected to
enhance individual project evaluations by
providing expert and unbiased assistance in
designing evaluations, conducting analyses,
and interpreting data.
To fulfill the requirements of the
summative evaluation to be conducted
under the guidance of CIPP, the Center
must—
(1) Hire or designate, with the
approval of the OSEP Project Officer, a
project liaison staff person with
sufficient dedicated time, experience in
evaluation, and knowledge of the Center
to work with CIPP on the following
tasks:
(i) Planning for the Center’s
summative evaluation (e.g., selecting
evaluation questions, developing a
timeline for the evaluation, locating
sources of relevant data, and refining
the conceptual frameworks used for the
evaluation).
(ii) Developing the summative
evaluation design and instrumentation
(e.g., determining quantitative or
qualitative data collection strategies,
selecting respondent samples, and pilot
testing instruments).
(iii) Coordinating the evaluation
timeline with the implementation of the
Center’s activities.
(iv) Collecting summative data.
(v) Writing reports of summative
evaluation findings.
(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order
to accomplish the tasks described in
paragraph (1) of this section; and
(3) Dedicate a minimum of $65,000 of
the annual budget request for this
project to cover the costs of carrying out
the tasks described in paragraphs (1)
and (2) of this section, implementing the
Center’s formative evaluation and
traveling to Washington, DC, in the
second year of the project period for the
Center’s review for continued funding.
(j) Maintain ongoing communication
with the OSEP Project Officer through
regular teleconferences and e-mail
communication.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:
In deciding whether to continue funding
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Center for the fourth and fifth years,
the Secretary will consider the
requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and
in addition—
(a) The recommendation of a review
team consisting of experts selected by
the Secretary. This review will be
conducted during a one-day intensive
meeting in Washington, DC, that will be
held during the last half of the second
year of the project period. The Center
must budget for travel expenses
associated with this one-day intensive
review;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness
with which all requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have
been or are being met by the Center; and
(c) The degree to which the Center’s
activities have the potential to
contribute to changed practice and
improved implementation of
technologies and access and progress in
the general education curriculum for
students with disabilities.
References: Bond, G.R., Drake, R.E.,
McHugo, G.J., Rapp, C.A., Whitley, R., &
National Evidence-Based Practices
Project Research Group. Strategies for
improving fidelity in the National
Evidence-Based Practices Project.
Research on Social Work Practice, in
press.
Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B.J., Krajcik, J., &
Marx, R.W. (2000). Creating usable
innovations in systemic reform: Scaling
up technology-embedded project-based
science in urban schools. Educational
Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164.
Bryant, D.P., Goodwin, M., & Bryant, B.R.
(2003). Vocabulary Instruction for
Students with Learning Disabilities: A
Review of the Research. Learning
Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 117–28.
Cradler, J. (1995). Implementing technology
in education: Recent findings from
research and evaluation studies. Far
West Laboratory. Retrieved on February
1, 2008 from, https://www.wested.org/
techpolicy/;recapproach.html.
Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical
beliefs: the final frontier in our quest for
technology integration? Educational
Technology Research and Development,
53(4), 25–39.
Fitzer, K.M., Freidhoff, J.R., Fritzen, A.,
Heintz, A., Koehler, J., Mishra, P.,
Ratcliffe, J., Zhang, T., Zheng, J., & Zhou,
W. (2007). Guest editorial: More
questions than answers: Responding to
the reading and mathematics software
effectiveness study. Contemporary Issues
in Technology and Teacher Education,
7(2), 1–6.
Fixsen, D.L., & Blase, K.A. (2009, January).
Implementation: The missing link
between research and practice. NIRN
Implementation Brief #1. Chapel Hill:
The University of North Carolina, FPG,
NIRN.
Fixsen, D.L., Blase, K.A., Horner, R., & Sugai,
G. (2009, February). Scaling-up
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
evidence-based practices in education.
Scaling-up Brief #1. Chapel Hill: The
University of North Carolina, FPG,
SISEP.
Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A.,
Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005).
Implementation research: A synthesis of
the literature. Tampa, FL: University of
South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida
Mental Health Institute, The National
Implementation Research; available at
https://www.fpg.unc.edu/∼nirn/resources/
publications/Monograph/.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C.L., Powell,
S.R., Capizzi, A.M., & Seethaler, P.M.
(2006). The Effects of Computer-Assisted
Instruction on Number Combination
Skill in At-Risk First Graders. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 467–75.
Glazer, E., Hannafin, M.J., & Song, L. (2005).
Promoting technology integration
through collaborative apprenticeship.
Educational Technology Research and
Development, 53(4), 57–67.
McHugo, G.M., Drake, R.E., Whitley, R.,
Bond, G.R., Campbell, K., Rapp, C.A.,
Goldman, H.H., Lutz, W., & Finnerty, M.
(2007). Fidelity outcomes in the National
Implementing Evidence-Based Practices
Project. Psychiatric Services, 58, 1279–
1284.
Morrison, K. (2007). Implementation of
Assistive Computer Technology: A
Model for School Systems. International
Journal of Special Education, 22(1), 83–
95.
Mueser, K.T., Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D.,
Singer, P., & Drake, R.E. (2003).
Implementing evidence-based practices
for people with severe mental illness.
Behavior Modification, 27(3), 387–411.
Slavin, R.E. & Lake, C. (2007, February).
Effective programs in elementary
mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University, Center for Data-Driven
Reform in Education.
Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., and Lake,
C. (2008). Effective reading programs for
middle and high schools: A best
evidence synthesis. Reading Research
Quarterly, 43, 3, 290–322.
Todis, B. (2001). It can’t hurt: Implementing
AAC technology in the classroom for
students with severe and multiple
disabilities. In Woodward, J., & Cuban, L.
(Eds.) Technology, curriculum, and
professional development: Adapting
schools to meet the needs of students
with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, Calif:
Corwin Press.
Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D.W., & Gorman, P.
(2005). Promoting the implementation of
practices that are supported by research:
The National Implementing EvidenceBased Practice Project. Child and
Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North
America, 14 (2), 297–306.
Zorfass, J., & Rivero, H.K. (2005).
Collaboration is Key: How a Community
of Practice Promotes Technology
Integration. Journal of Special Education
Technology, 20 (3), 51–60.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking:
Under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
generally offers interested parties the
opportunity to comment on proposed
priorities and requirements. Section
681(d) of the 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.
Applicable Regulations: The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in
34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82,
84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79
apply to all applicants except Federally
recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86
apply to institutions of higher education
(IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative
Agreement.
Estimated Available Funds:
$1,375,000.
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in FY
2010 from the list of unfunded
applicants from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will reject any
application that proposes a budget
exceeding $1,375,000 for a single budget
period of 12 months. The Assistant
Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services may change the
maximum amount through a notice
published in the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any
estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: State
educational agencies; local educational
agencies (LEAs), including public
charter schools that are considered
LEAs under State law; IHEs; other
public agencies; private nonprofit
organizations; outlying areas; freely
associated States; Indian Tribes or
Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
competition does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. 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 the IDEA).
(b) Applicants and grant recipients
funded under this competition must
involve individuals with disabilities or
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33223
parents of individuals with disabilities
ages birth through 26 in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the
projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of the
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Address To Request Application
Package
Education Publications Center (ED
Pubs), P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD
20794–1398. Telephone, toll free: 1–
877–433–7827. FAX: (301) 470–1244. If
you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call, toll free: 1–877–
576–7734.
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web
site, also: https://www.ed.gov/pubs/
edpubs.html or at its e-mail address:
edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
If you request an application package
from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this
competition as follows: CFDA number
84.327G.
Individuals with disabilities can
obtain a copy of the application package
in an accessible format (e.g., braille,
large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) by contacting the person or
team listed under Accessible Format in
section VIII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application
Submission
Requirements concerning the content
of an application, together with the
forms you must submit, are in the
application package for this
competition.
Page Limit: The application narrative
(Part III of the application) is where you,
the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate
your application. You must limit the
application narrative to the equivalent
of no more than 50 pages, using the
following standards:
• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side
only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom,
and both sides.
• Double space (no more than three
lines per vertical inch) all text in the
application narrative, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations,
references, and captions, as well as all
text in charts, tables, figures, and
graphs.
• Use a font that is either 12 point or
larger or no smaller than 10 pitch
(characters per inch).
The page limit does not apply to Part
I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget
section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and
certifications; or the one-page abstract,
the resumes, the bibliography, the
references, or the letters of support.
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
33224
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
However, the page limit does apply to
all of the application narrative section
(Part III).
We will reject your application if you
exceed the page limit or if you apply
other standards and exceed the
equivalent of the page limit.
3. Submission Dates and Times
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: August 10, 2009.
Applications for grants under this
competition may be submitted
electronically using the Electronic Grant
Application System (e-Application)
accessible through the Department’s eGrants site, or in paper format by mail
or hand delivery. For information
(including dates and times) about how
to submit your application
electronically, or in paper format by
mail or hand delivery, please refer to
section IV.6. Other Submission
Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application
that does not comply with the deadline
requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who
need an accommodation or auxiliary aid
in connection with the application
process should contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If
the Department provides an
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an
individual with a disability in
connection with the application
process, the individual’s application
remains subject to all other
requirements and limitations in this
notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: August 19, 2009.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Information about Intergovernmental
Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the
application package for this
competition.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
5. Funding Restrictions
We reference regulations outlining
funding restrictions in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Applications for grants under this
competition may be submitted
electronically or in paper format by mail
or hand delivery.
a. Electronic Submission of
Applications
If you choose to submit your
application to us electronically, you
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
must use e-Application, accessible
through the Department’s e-Grants Web
site at: https://e-grants.ed.gov.
While completing your electronic
application, you will be entering data
online that will be saved into a
database. You may not e-mail an
electronic copy of a grant application to
us.
Please note the following:
• Your participation in e-Application
is voluntary.
• You must complete the electronic
submission of your grant application by
4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on
the application deadline date. EApplication will not accept an
application for this competition after
4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on
the application deadline date.
Therefore, we strongly recommend that
you do not wait until the application
deadline date to begin the application
process.
• The hours of operation of the eGrants Web site are 6:00 a.m. Monday
until 7:00 p.m. Wednesday; and 6:00
a.m. Thursday until 8:00 p.m. Sunday,
Washington, DC time. Please note that,
because of maintenance, the system is
unavailable between 8:00 p.m. on
Sundays and 6:00 a.m. on Mondays, and
between 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and
6:00 a.m. on Thursdays, Washington,
DC time. Any modifications to these
hours are posted on the e-Grants Web
site.
• You will not receive additional
point value because you submit your
application in electronic format, nor
will we penalize you if you submit your
application in paper format.
• You must submit all documents
electronically, including all information
you typically provide on the following
forms: the Application for Federal
Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for
SF 424, Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED 524), and all
necessary assurances and certifications.
You must attach any narrative sections
of your application as files in a .DOC
(document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF
(Portable Document) format. If you
upload a file type other than the three
file types specified in this paragraph or
submit a password protected file, we
will not review that material.
• Your electronic application must
comply with any page limit
requirements described in this notice.
• Prior to submitting your electronic
application, you may wish to print a
copy of it for your records.
• After you electronically submit
your application, you will receive an
automatic acknowledgment that will
include a PR/Award number (an
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
identifying number unique to your
application).
• Within three working days after
submitting your electronic application,
fax a signed copy of the SF 424 to the
Application Control Center after
following these steps:
(1) Print SF 424 from E-Application.
(2) The applicant’s Authorizing
Representative must sign this form.
(3) Place the PR/Award number in the
upper right hand corner of the hardcopy signature page of the SF 424.
(4) Fax the signed SF 424 to the
Application Control Center at (202)
245–6272.
• We may request that you provide us
original signatures on other forms at a
later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension
in Case of System Unavailability: If you
are prevented from electronically
submitting your application on the
application deadline date because EApplication is unavailable, we will
grant you an extension of one business
day to enable you to transmit your
application electronically, by mail, or by
hand delivery. We will grant this
extension if—
(1) You are a registered user of eApplication and you have initiated an
electronic application for this
competition; and
(2)(a) E-Application is unavailable for
60 minutes or more between the hours
of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington,
DC time, on the application deadline
date; or
(b) E-Application is unavailable for
any period of time between 3:30 p.m.
and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date.
We must acknowledge and confirm
these periods of unavailability before
granting you an extension. To request
this extension or to confirm our
acknowledgment of any system
unavailability, you may contact either
(1) the person listed elsewhere in this
notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT (see VII. Agency Contact) or (2)
the e-Grants help desk at 1–888–336–
8930. If E-Application is unavailable
due to technical problems with the
system and, therefore, the application
deadline is extended, an e-mail will be
sent to all registered users who have
initiated an e-Application.
Extensions referred to in this section
apply only to the unavailability of eApplication. If e-Application is
available, and, for any reason, you are
unable to submit your application
electronically or you do not receive an
automatic acknowledgment of your
submission, you may submit your
application in paper format by mail or
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
hand delivery in accordance with the
instructions in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by
Mail
If you submit your application in
paper format by mail (through the U.S.
Postal Service or a commercial carrier),
you must mail the original and two
copies of your application, on or before
the application deadline date, to the
Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education,
Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.327G), LBJ Basement
Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202–4260.
You must show proof of mailing
consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service
postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the
date of mailing stamped by the U.S.
Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or
receipt from a commercial carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing
acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Education.
If you mail your application through
the U.S. Postal Service, we do not
accept either of the following as proof
of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by
the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after
the application deadline date, we will
not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not
uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before
relying on this method, you should check
with your local post office.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
c. Submission of Paper Applications by
Hand Delivery
If you submit your application in
paper format by hand delivery, you (or
a courier service) must deliver the
original and two copies of your
application by hand, on or before the
application deadline date, to the
Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education,
Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.327G), 550 12th
Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center
Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260.
The Application Control Center
accepts hand deliveries daily between
8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington,
DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays,
and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or
Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If
you mail or hand deliver your
application to the Department—
(1) You must indicate on the envelope
and—if not provided by the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424
the CFDA number, including suffix
letter, if any, of the competition under
which you are submitting your
application; and
(2) The Application Control Center
will mail to you a notification of receipt
of your grant application. If you do not
receive this grant notification within 15
business days from the application
deadline date, you should call the U.S.
Department of Education Application
Control Center at (202) 245–6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection
criteria for this competition are from 34
CFR 75.210 and are listed in the
application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: In
the past, the Department has had
difficulty finding peer reviewers for
certain competitions because so many
individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest.
The Standing Panel requirements under
the IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of
reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that, for some
discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two
or more groups and ranked and selected
for funding within the specific groups.
This procedure will make it easier for
the Department to find peer reviewers
by ensuring that greater numbers of
individuals who are eligible to serve as
reviewers for any particular group of
applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality,
independence, and fairness of the
review process while permitting panel
members to review applications under
discretionary grant competitions for
which they also have submitted
applications. However, if the
Department decides to select an equal
number of applications in each group
for funding, this may result in different
cut-off points for fundable applications
in each group.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application
is successful, we notify your U.S.
Representative and U.S. Senators and
send you a Grant Award Notification
(GAN). We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or
not selected for funding, we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy
requirements in the application package
and reference these and other
requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33225
We reference the regulations outlining
the terms and conditions of an award in
the Applicable Regulations section of
this notice and include these and other
specific conditions in the GAN. The
GAN also incorporates your approved
application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your
project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial
information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year
award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the
most current performance and financial
expenditure information as directed by
the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The
Secretary may also require more
frequent performance reports under 34
CFR 75.720(c). For specific
requirements on reporting, please go to
https://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/
appforms/appforms.html.
4. Performance Measures: Under the
Government Performance and Results
Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has
established a set of performance
measures, including long-term
measures, that are designed to yield
information on various aspects of the
effectiveness and quality of the
Technology and Media Services for
Individuals with Disabilities program.
These measures focus on the extent to
which projects are high-quality, are
relevant to improving outcomes of
children with disabilities, and
contribute to improving outcomes for
children with disabilities. We will
collect data on these measures from the
project funded under this competition.
The grantee will be required to report
information on its project’s performance
in annual reports to the Department (34
CFR 75.590).
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Malouf, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Room 4119, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–2550.
Telephone: (202) 245–6253.
If you use a TDD, call the Federal
Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–
877–8339.
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document
and a copy of the application package in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or computer diskette)
by contacting the Grants and Contracts
Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245–
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
33226
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices
7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll
free, at 1–800–877–8339.
Electronic Access to This Document:
You can 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.
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary
of Education has delegated authority to
Andrew J. Pepin, Executive
Administrator for the Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services,
to perform the functions of the Assistant
Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
Dated: July 6, 2009.
Andrew J. Pepin,
Executive Administrator for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. E9–16380 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services; Overview
Information; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services
and Results for Children With
Disabilities—Regional Resource
Centers; Notice Inviting Applications
for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY)
2009
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.326R.
DATES:
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: August 10, 2009.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: August 19, 2009.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:16 Jul 09, 2009
Jkt 217001
achievement and to improve results for
children with disabilities by providing
technical assistance (TA), supporting
model demonstration projects,
disseminating useful information, and
implementing activities that are
supported by scientifically based
research.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from
allowable activities specified in the
statute or otherwise authorized in the
statute (see sections 663 and 681(d) of
the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1400, et
seq.).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2009 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards based on the list of unfunded
applicants from this competition, this
priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only
applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and
Results for Children With Disabilities—
Regional Resource Centers.
Background
Over the last four decades, the Office
of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
has supported Regional Resource
Centers to provide TA that is targeted to
meet State-specific needs related to
meeting the program requirements
under Parts B and C of IDEA.
Historically, each RRC functioned
independently, serving primarily as a
TA provider to State educational
agencies (SEAs) in the RRC’s region
helping the SEAs address self-identified
needs related to providing services to
children with disabilities. In 1998,
RRCs’ traditional role as TA providers
expanded when they also began serving
as brokers of TA, linking SEAs and local
educational agencies (LEAs) to relevant
OSEP-funded TA centers. Over time,
and as OSEP developed its monitoring
of Part C programs and issued
monitoring reports from 1998 through
2003, RRCs began providing TA in their
respective regions to the State Part C
lead agencies (LAs).
When IDEA was last reauthorized in
2004, the increased general supervision
responsibilities of SEAs and LAs under
Parts B and C, respectively, also
increased the need for general
supervision support and collaboration
among RRCs and other OSEP-funded TA
Centers (i.e., the National Dropout
Prevention Center for Students with
Disabilities and the Data Accountability
Center) to provide coordinated and
meaningfully informed TA. Specifically,
sections 616(b) and 642 of IDEA require
each State to have in place a State
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Performance Plan (SPP) that evaluates
the State’s efforts to implement
requirements under Parts B and C of
IDEA and that describes how the State
will improve its implementation of
these requirements. The SPP must
include measurable and rigorous targets
for quantifiable indicators in the priority
areas described in section 616(a)(3) of
IDEA. These priority areas for Part B
are—providing a free appropriate public
education (FAPE) in the least restrictive
environment (LRE); reducing
disproportionate representation of racial
and ethnic groups in special education
and related services, to the extent the
representation is the result of
inappropriate identification; and
ensuring effective general supervision,
including child find, transition, and
dispute resolution. These priority areas
for Part C are—providing early
intervention services in natural
environments and ensuring effective
general supervision, including child
find, transition, and dispute resolution.
Additionally, sections 616 and 642 of
IDEA require each SEA and LA to
conduct many activities annually. Each
SEA and LA must submit an Annual
Performance Report (APR) to the
Secretary on the State’s progress in
meeting its targets in each of the priority
areas under Parts B and C of IDEA.
There are 20 priority indicators under
Part B (including early childhood
transition, postsecondary transition,
graduation, and dropout prevention)
and 14 priority indicators under Part C
(including provision of early
intervention services in the natural
environment, timely provision of
services, timely evaluation, and early
childhood transition). OSEP issues
annual letters of determination and
response tables for each State under
Parts B and C of IDEA based in large
part on the State’s APR data in each of
these priority indicator areas.
In turn, SEAs must monitor and
evaluate LEAs’ implementation of Part
B, and State LAs must monitor and
evaluate the implementation of Part C
by early intervention service (EIS)
programs. Each year, the SEA and LA
must publicly report on the performance
of each LEA or EIS program in each of
the priority areas and issue a local
‘‘determination.’’ Through such
reporting, SEAs and LAs are responsible
for ensuring both the continuous
improvement of results and functional
outcomes for children with disabilities
and the timely correction of
noncompliance with IDEA
requirements.
The Department first issued its annual
determinations under sections 616 and
642 of IDEA in 2007 and made one of
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 131 (Friday, July 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33219-33226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16380]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Overview
Information; Technology and Media Services for Individuals With
Disabilities--Center on Technology Implementation; Notice Inviting
Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.327G.
Dates:
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 10, 2009.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 19, 2009.
[[Page 33220]]
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Technology and Media
Services for Individuals with Disabilities program are to: (1) Improve
results for children with disabilities by promoting the development,
demonstration, and use of technology, (2) support educational media
services activities designed to be of educational value in the
classroom setting to children with disabilities, and (3) provide
support for captioning and video description of educational materials
that are appropriate for use in the classroom setting.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority
is from allowable activities specified in the statute or otherwise
authorized in the statute (see sections 674 and 681(d) of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1474 and
1481(d)).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2009 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition,
this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we
consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Technology and Media Services for Individuals with Disabilities--
Center on Technology Implementation.
Background: Students with disabilities can benefit from the use of
instructional and assistive technology (D.P. Bryant, Goodwin, & B.R.
Bryant, 2003; L.S. Fuchs, D. Fuchs, Hamlet, Powell, Capizzi, &
Seethaler, 2006; Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, C., 2008; Slavin &
Lake, 2007). However, research suggests that the benefits of using
technology depend on the quality of the implementation of the
technology (Fitzer, et al., 2007; Zorfass & Rivero, 2005; Slavin, et
al., 2008; Morrison, 2007; Todis, 2001).
Implementation of any practice or program is a topic of general
concern in education and, fortunately, there is a growing body of
knowledge on implementing educational innovations that can help ensure
that innovations (including technology innovations) are implemented and
sustained with fidelity and effectiveness (Bond, Drake, McHugo, Rapp,
Whitley, & National Evidence-Based Practices Project Research Group, in
press; Fixsen & Blase, 2009; Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace,
2005; Mueser, Torrey, Lynde, Singer, & Drake, 2003; Torrey, Lynde, &
Gorman, 2005). After an extensive review of available research on
implementation Fixsen, et al. (2005) identified the following core
components (``implementation drivers'') as critical to the successful
implementation of any program or practice: (i) Staff recruitment and
selection, (ii) preservice and inservice training, (iii) ongoing
consultation and coaching, (iv) staff and program evaluation, (v)
facilitative administrative supports, and (vi) systems interventions.
Furthermore, Fixsen, et al. also found that successful implementation
of a new practice or program involves a multiyear process that
progresses through stages, including exploration and adoption, program
installation, initial implementation, full operation, innovation, and
sustainability.
There is a growing body of knowledge focusing specifically on the
implementation of technology. For example, the following factors have
been shown to affect the implementation of technology programs or
practices in education: Teacher motivation to use the technology being
implemented; compatibility between the technology being implemented and
the teacher's pedagogical orientation; the availability of ongoing
technology planning and administrative support; professional
development relevant to the technology being implemented; and school
readiness and infrastructure to support the technology being
implemented (Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, & Marx, 2000; Cradler, 1995;
Ertmer, 2005; Glazer, Hannafin, & Song, 2005). To achieve the full
benefits of technology for children with disabilities, schools must
effectively implement the technology practices or programs. Schools,
therefore, can benefit tremendously from having access to better
information on effective technology implementation strategies and TA to
aid them in successfully implementing technology practices and programs
on their own.
Priority: The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative
agreement to support the establishment and operation of a Center on
Technology Implementation (Center) that will develop, test, and
disseminate the following two types of products to support effective
and sustainable local implementation of evidence-based technology
practices and programs to improve educational outcomes for students
with disabilities:
(1) Implementation Resource Kits. The Center's Implementation
Resource Kits must be designed to guide and support the implementation
of specific evidence-based technology practices or programs for local
educational agencies (LEAs).
(2) Implementation Practice Guide. The Center's Implementation
Practice Guide must summarize available evidence and provide general
guidance (not limited to a specific practice or program) on
implementing technology programs and practices to benefit students with
disabilities.
To be considered for funding under this absolute priority,
applicants must meet the application requirements contained in this
priority. Any project funded under this absolute priority also must
meet the programmatic and administrative requirements specified in the
priority.
Application Requirements. An applicant must include in its
application--
(a) A detailed plan for implementing the activities described in
the Project Activities section of this priority, including:
(1) A dissemination plan that describes the Center's strategy for
communicating findings (upon review and approval from OSEP) to key
stakeholders, including:
(i) Professional organizations, including but not limited to, the
Council of Administrators of Special Education, the National
Association of State Directors of Special Education, the Council of the
Great City Schools, the Council for Exceptional Children, the National
Education Association, The Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive
Technology Society of North America (RESNA) and the American Federation
of Teachers.
(ii) Federal technical assistance and dissemination projects,
including (but not limited to) the Regional Resource Centers funded
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the
Comprehensive Centers and State Educational Technology projects funded
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended,
statewide assistive technology programs as funded under the Assistive
Technology Act of 1998 (as amended), and other relevant Federal
projects as determined by OSEP; and
(iii) Technology developers, vendors and researchers.
(2) The dissemination plan must include provisions for preparing
national and State TA providers to disseminate and use the
Implementation Resource Kits and Implementation Practice Guide without
the need for ongoing TA from the Center and after the end of the
project period.
(c) A budget for attendance at the following:
(1) A one and one half day kick-off meeting to be held in
Washington, DC, within four weeks after receipt of the
[[Page 33221]]
award, and an annual planning meeting held in Washington, DC, with the
OSEP Project Officer during each subsequent year of the project period.
(2) A three-day Project Directors' Conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period; and
(3) A two-day technology project director's meeting in Washington,
DC, during each year of the project period.
Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this priority, the
Center must conduct the following activities:
(a) Conduct an ongoing review of research and scholarly literature
on the implementation of practices and programs in education, with an
emphasis on implementing instructional and assistive technology
practices and programs with students with disabilities.
(b) Select at least three evidence-based technology practices and
programs (which must include at least one technology program, as
defined in this notice) upon which to base the development of
Implementation Resource Kits. The evidence base for each selected
technology practice or program must meet a standard of rigor similar to
those applied by one of the following: the What Works Clearinghouse
(https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references), the Best Evidence Encyclopedia
(https://www.bestevidence.org/methods/methods.htm), or the Campbell
Collaboration (https://www.campbellcollaboration.org).
Note: The technology practices and programs selected pursuant to
paragraph (b) of this section of the priority must make integral use
of technology, but may involve other materials and activities as
well (e.g., computers used in combination with other hard copy
textual materials or World Wide Web activities incorporated into
inquiry-based classroom activities).
For purposes of this priority, the following definitions apply \1\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These definitions of ``technology practice'' and
``technology program'' are adapted from Fixsen, et al. (2005 p. 26).
The examples provided with these definitions are provided for
illustrative purposes only and are not intended to guide the
Center's selections nor to imply endorsement of them as evidence
based practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Technology practices are skills, techniques, and strategies
involving the use of technology that can be used by practitioners to
achieve educational outcomes for students with disabilities. Examples
of technology practices include using word processors in writing
instruction and making classroom accommodations to integrate AT devices
into instruction.
(2) Technology programs are integrated collections of technology
practices that are performed within a set of defined parameters (e.g.,
a defined philosophy, a defined service delivery structure, or a
defined set of treatment components). Examples of technology programs
include schoolwide progress monitoring programs that uses a Web-based
system for interpreting data and selecting educational interventions,
and programs for systematically assessing individual student needs for
assistive technology and supporting the use of the technology in
educational settings.
(c) Develop a detailed conceptual framework for implementing each
technology practice or program selected pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this section of the priority. The Center's detailed conceptual
frameworks must--
(1) Describe the core intervention components of the selected
technology practices or programs (i.e., key elements such as materials,
procedures, teacher resources, and environmental features that must be
maintained for the practice or program to be effective);
(2) Describe the core implementation components (as well as their
sources) needed for successful implementation of the selected
technology practices and programs through all phases of implementation
(i.e., initial exploration and adoption through initial implementation,
full operation, innovation, and sustainability). (For more information
about ``core intervention components'' and ``core implementation
components,'' see Fixsen et al., 2005, pp. 24-26, and 28-34,
respectively);
(3) Describe the anticipated impact on the target group or groups
of students, including changes in their learning outcomes and how
mediating and moderating variables (e.g., instructional methodology,
time-on-task, learning supports, class structure) may affect how well
the technology practice or program supports student learning outcomes;
(4) Serve as a basis for designing the Implementation Resource Kits
and the formative and summative evaluations of the project.
(d) Develop an Implementation Resource Kit based on the detailed
conceptual framework for each selected technology practice and program.
(For more information on Implementation Resource Kits, also referred to
as implementation packages and toolkits, see Mueser, et al., 2003;
Torrey, et al., 2005; and McHugo, et al., 2007). The Center must design
its Implementation Resource Kits to be usable by TA providers and core
implementation components that are typically available to LEAs, so that
the Implementation Resource Kits will continue to be used after the
completion of the Center's project period. In developing the
Implementation Resource Kits, the Center must perform field-based
tryouts and formative evaluations of the Implementation Resource Kits,
in order to refine and revise the kits, as needed. Each Implementation
Resource Kit must include at least the following:
(1) Procedures and instruments to assess the implementation
readiness and the implementation needs of the LEA (at the teacher,
school, and LEA levels). These procedures and instruments may include
surveys, resource inventories, school or LEA self-study guides,
observational instruments, and other suitable procedures and
instruments and must be drawn to the greatest extent possible from
existing procedures and instruments that have been studied and
validated in previous research.
(2) Methods and resources to support the implementation process at
its various levels (teacher, school, LEA) and through its various
phases from initial exploration and adoption through sustainability.
These methods and resources may include: Interactive professional
development activities and media, community-of-practice guidelines and
resources, online awareness and skill development resources, video and
multi-media products, sample language for inclusion in technology
policies and plans, and public awareness materials to generate broad-
based support for sustained implementation, and other suitable methods
and resources. The Center should, to the maximum extent possible,
include methods and resources that have previously been developed and
evaluated.
(3) Procedures and instruments to evaluate implementation as it
progresses through the various phases, including measures of the
fidelity of implementation, the sustainability, and the impact on
students with disabilities. The procedures and instruments must be
designed to suggest corrective actions in cases where the
implementation is not progressing as desired. The Center should, to the
maximum extent possible, include procedures and instruments that have
been studied and validated in previous research.
(e) In consultation with participating State educational agencies,
field-test each Implementation Resource Kit in 8 to 10 LEAs, including
urban, suburban and rural school LEAs, and LEAs with high enrollments
of English language learners and low-income students. In these field
tests, the Center must study implementation of the selected technology
practice or program over a
[[Page 33222]]
course of at least three calendar years and the processes of
implementation from adoption through full operation and sustainability.
The field tests must be designed to evaluate implementation,
sustainability, and impact on outcomes for students with disabilities
and how the differences in variables such as type of LEA affect
implementation. The field test must, to the greatest possible extent,
use typically-available TA providers to utilize the Implementation
Resource Kits. This will allow the field test to represent typical
circumstances and will also foster the capability of the typically-
available TA providers to use the Implementation Resource Kits after
the end of the project period.
(f) Develop one Implementation Practice Guide on technology
implementation for students with disabilities. In contrast to the
Implementation Resource Kits, which apply to specific technology
practices and programs, the Implementation Practice Guide must apply
generally to the implementation of technology (assistive and
instructional) to benefit students with disabilities. The
Implementation Practice Guide must be developed by a panel of experts
through a systematic process of reviewing evidence that supports
specific recommendations and documenting the level of support for each
recommendation. The following Web site provides examples of practice
guides and the procedures for developing them: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides.
(g) Establish and maintain an advisory committee to review the
activities and outcomes of the Center and to provide programmatic
support and advice throughout the project period. At a minimum, the
advisory committee must meet on an annual basis in Washington, DC, and
consist of individuals with knowledge and expertise in: Effective
instructional technology and assistive technology, effective schoolwide
and LEA-wide technology implementation practices, and rigorous
evaluation methods. The committee membership must also include
individuals with disabilities, parents of individuals with
disabilities, and individuals from communities representing rural, low-
income, urban and limited English proficiency populations. The Center
must submit the names of proposed members of the advisory committee to
the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) for approval within
eight weeks after receipt of the award.
(h) Prior to developing any new paper or electronic product, submit
a proposal describing the content and purpose of the product to the
OSEP Project Officer and the Proposed Product Advisory Board at OSEP's
Technical Assistance Coordination Center for approval.
(i) Conduct a summative evaluation of both the Implementation
Resource Kits and Implementation Practice Guide in collaboration with
the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP) as described in the
following paragraphs.
Note: The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and
oversee the summative evaluations conducted by selected Technical
Assistance, Personnel Development, Parent Training and Information
Centers, and Technology projects that individually receive $500,000
or more funding from OSEP annually. The efforts of CIPP are expected
to enhance individual project evaluations by providing expert and
unbiased assistance in designing evaluations, conducting analyses,
and interpreting data.
To fulfill the requirements of the summative evaluation to be
conducted under the guidance of CIPP, the Center must--
(1) Hire or designate, with the approval of the OSEP Project
Officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time,
experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the Center to work with CIPP
on the following tasks:
(i) Planning for the Center's summative evaluation (e.g., selecting
evaluation questions, developing a timeline for the evaluation,
locating sources of relevant data, and refining the conceptual
frameworks used for the evaluation).
(ii) Developing the summative evaluation design and instrumentation
(e.g., determining quantitative or qualitative data collection
strategies, selecting respondent samples, and pilot testing
instruments).
(iii) Coordinating the evaluation timeline with the implementation
of the Center's activities.
(iv) Collecting summative data.
(v) Writing reports of summative evaluation findings.
(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks
described in paragraph (1) of this section; and
(3) Dedicate a minimum of $65,000 of the annual budget request for
this project to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section, implementing the Center's
formative evaluation and traveling to Washington, DC, in the second
year of the project period for the Center's review for continued
funding.
(j) Maintain ongoing communication with the OSEP Project Officer
through regular teleconferences and e-mail communication.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project: In deciding whether to
continue funding the Center for the fourth and fifth years, the
Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and in
addition--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting in Washington, DC, that will be held during the
last half of the second year of the project period. The Center must
budget for travel expenses associated with this one-day intensive
review;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
Center; and
(c) The degree to which the Center's activities have the potential
to contribute to changed practice and improved implementation of
technologies and access and progress in the general education
curriculum for students with disabilities.
References: Bond, G.R., Drake, R.E., McHugo, G.J., Rapp, C.A.,
Whitley, R., & National Evidence-Based Practices Project Research
Group. Strategies for improving fidelity in the National Evidence-Based
Practices Project. Research on Social Work Practice, in press.
Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B.J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R.W. (2000).
Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up
technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools.
Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149-164.
Bryant, D.P., Goodwin, M., & Bryant, B.R. (2003). Vocabulary
Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Review of the
Research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 117-28.
Cradler, J. (1995). Implementing technology in education: Recent
findings from research and evaluation studies. Far West Laboratory.
Retrieved on February 1, 2008 from, https://www.wested.org/techpolicy/;recapproach.html.
Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier
in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology
Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
Fitzer, K.M., Freidhoff, J.R., Fritzen, A., Heintz, A., Koehler, J.,
Mishra, P., Ratcliffe, J., Zhang, T., Zheng, J., & Zhou, W. (2007).
Guest editorial: More questions than answers: Responding to the
reading and mathematics software effectiveness study. Contemporary
Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(2), 1-6.
Fixsen, D.L., & Blase, K.A. (2009, January). Implementation: The
missing link between research and practice. NIRN Implementation
Brief 1. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina,
FPG, NIRN.
Fixsen, D.L., Blase, K.A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009, February).
Scaling-up
[[Page 33223]]
evidence-based practices in education. Scaling-up Brief 1.
Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG, SISEP.
Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace,
F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature.
Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida
Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research;
available at https://www.fpg.unc.edu/~nirn/resources/publications/
Monograph/.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C.L., Powell, S.R., Capizzi, A.M., &
Seethaler, P.M. (2006). The Effects of Computer-Assisted Instruction
on Number Combination Skill in At-Risk First Graders. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 467-75.
Glazer, E., Hannafin, M.J., & Song, L. (2005). Promoting technology
integration through collaborative apprenticeship. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 57-67.
McHugo, G.M., Drake, R.E., Whitley, R., Bond, G.R., Campbell, K.,
Rapp, C.A., Goldman, H.H., Lutz, W., & Finnerty, M. (2007). Fidelity
outcomes in the National Implementing Evidence-Based Practices
Project. Psychiatric Services, 58, 1279-1284.
Morrison, K. (2007). Implementation of Assistive Computer
Technology: A Model for School Systems. International Journal of
Special Education, 22(1), 83-95.
Mueser, K.T., Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D., Singer, P., & Drake, R.E.
(2003). Implementing evidence-based practices for people with severe
mental illness. Behavior Modification, 27(3), 387-411.
Slavin, R.E. & Lake, C. (2007, February). Effective programs in
elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University, Center for Data-Driven Reform in
Education.
Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., and Lake, C. (2008). Effective
reading programs for middle and high schools: A best evidence
synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 3, 290-322.
Todis, B. (2001). It can't hurt: Implementing AAC technology in the
classroom for students with severe and multiple disabilities. In
Woodward, J., & Cuban, L. (Eds.) Technology, curriculum, and
professional development: Adapting schools to meet the needs of
students with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D.W., & Gorman, P. (2005). Promoting the
implementation of practices that are supported by research: The
National Implementing Evidence-Based Practice Project. Child and
Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14 (2), 297-306.
Zorfass, J., & Rivero, H.K. (2005). Collaboration is Key: How a
Community of Practice Promotes Technology Integration. Journal of
Special Education Technology, 20 (3), 51-60.
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 the 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.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except Federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $1,375,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2010 from the list of
unfunded applicants from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $1,375,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in
the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies; local
educational agencies (LEAs), including public charter schools that are
considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private
nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated States;
Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. 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
the IDEA).
(b) Applicants and grant recipients 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 projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of the IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address To Request Application Package
Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD
20794-1398. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call, toll
free: 1-877-576-7734.
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also: https://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html or at its e-mail address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to
identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.327G.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Requirements concerning the content of an application, together
with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this
competition.
Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit the
application narrative to the equivalent of no more than 50 pages, using
the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5 x 11, on one side
only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography, the references, or the letters of support.
[[Page 33224]]
However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative
section (Part III).
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit or if
you apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the page limit.
3. Submission Dates and Times
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 10, 2009.
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted
electronically using the Electronic Grant Application System (e-
Application) accessible through the Department's e-Grants site, or in
paper format by mail or hand delivery. For information (including dates
and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in
paper format by mail or hand delivery, please refer to section IV.6.
Other Submission Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 19, 2009.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental
Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the
application package for this competition.
5. Funding Restrictions
We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the
Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted
electronically or in paper format by mail or hand delivery.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications
If you choose to submit your application to us electronically, you
must use e-Application, accessible through the Department's e-Grants
Web site at: https://e-grants.ed.gov.
While completing your electronic application, you will be entering
data online that will be saved into a database. You may not e-mail an
electronic copy of a grant application to us.
Please note the following:
Your participation in e-Application is voluntary.
You must complete the electronic submission of your grant
application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. E-Application will not accept an application for this
competition after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait
until the application deadline date to begin the application process.
The hours of operation of the e-Grants Web site are 6:00
a.m. Monday until 7:00 p.m. Wednesday; and 6:00 a.m. Thursday until
8:00 p.m. Sunday, Washington, DC time. Please note that, because of
maintenance, the system is unavailable between 8:00 p.m. on Sundays and
6:00 a.m. on Mondays, and between 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and 6:00 a.m.
on Thursdays, Washington, DC time. Any modifications to these hours are
posted on the e-Grants Web site.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you submit your application in paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
all information you typically provide on the following forms: the
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications. You must attach any narrative sections of your
application as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF
(Portable Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the
three file types specified in this paragraph or submit a password
protected file, we will not review that material.
Your electronic application must comply with any page
limit requirements described in this notice.
Prior to submitting your electronic application, you may
wish to print a copy of it for your records.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive an automatic acknowledgment that will include a PR/Award number
(an identifying number unique to your application).
Within three working days after submitting your electronic
application, fax a signed copy of the SF 424 to the Application Control
Center after following these steps:
(1) Print SF 424 from E-Application.
(2) The applicant's Authorizing Representative must sign this form.
(3) Place the PR/Award number in the upper right hand corner of the
hard-copy signature page of the SF 424.
(4) Fax the signed SF 424 to the Application Control Center at
(202) 245-6272.
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
other forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of System
Unavailability: If you are prevented from electronically submitting
your application on the application deadline date because E-Application
is unavailable, we will grant you an extension of one business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically, by mail, or by
hand delivery. We will grant this extension if--
(1) You are a registered user of e-Application and you have
initiated an electronic application for this competition; and
(2)(a) E-Application is unavailable for 60 minutes or more between
the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the
application deadline date; or
(b) E-Application is unavailable for any period of time between
3:30 p.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date.
We must acknowledge and confirm these periods of unavailability
before granting you an extension. To request this extension or to
confirm our acknowledgment of any system unavailability, you may
contact either (1) the person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (see VII. Agency Contact) or (2) the e-
Grants help desk at 1-888-336-8930. If E-Application is unavailable due
to technical problems with the system and, therefore, the application
deadline is extended, an e-mail will be sent to all registered users
who have initiated an e-Application.
Extensions referred to in this section apply only to the
unavailability of e-Application. If e-Application is available, and,
for any reason, you are unable to submit your application
electronically or you do not receive an automatic acknowledgment of
your submission, you may submit your application in paper format by
mail or
[[Page 33225]]
hand delivery in accordance with the instructions in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail
If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the
U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must mail the
original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.327G), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with
your local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery
If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery,
you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of
your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date,
to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number
84.327G), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand
Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your
application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by the
Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix
letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your
application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification
of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this grant
notification within 15 business days from the application deadline
date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application
Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: In the past, the Department has
had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because
so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have
conflicts of interest. The Standing Panel requirements under the IDEA
also have placed additional constraints on the availability of
reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that, for some
discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into
two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within the
specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department
to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals
who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of
applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase
the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process while
permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary
grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.
However, if the Department decides to select an equal number of
applications in each group for funding, this may result in different
cut-off points for fundable applications in each group.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN). We may notify you informally, also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a
final performance report, including financial information, as directed
by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an
annual performance report that provides the most current performance
and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary
under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent
performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements
on reporting, please go to https://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Technology and Media Services for Individuals with
Disabilities program. These measures focus on the extent to which
projects are high-quality, are relevant to improving outcomes of
children with disabilities, and contribute to improving outcomes for
children with disabilities. We will collect data on these measures from
the project funded under this competition.
The grantee will be required to report information on its project's
performance in annual reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Malouf, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 4119, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-6253.
If you use a TDD, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free,
at 1-800-877-8339.
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by
contacting the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-
[[Page 33226]]
7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: You can 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/.
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary of Education has delegated
authority to Andrew J. Pepin, Executive Administrator for the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, to perform the functions
of the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
Dated: July 6, 2009.
Andrew J. Pepin,
Executive Administrator for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. E9-16380 Filed 7-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P