Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services-Special Demonstration Programs-Model Demonstration Project To Improve Outcomes for Individuals Receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) Served by State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies, 47798-47801 [2010-19609]
Download as PDF
47798
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 152 / Monday, August 9, 2010 / Notices
The Defense Logistics Agency
proposes to delete a system of records
notice in its existing inventory of
records systems subject to the Privacy
Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended.
REASON:
This proposed action will be
effective without further notice on
September 8, 2010, unless comments are
received which result in a contrary
determination.
[FR Doc. 2010–19543 Filed 8–6–10; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
DATES:
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and title,
by any of the following methods:
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, Room 3C843 Pentagon,
1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301–1160.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this Federal Register
document. The general policy for
comments and other submissions from
members of the public is to make these
submissions available for public
viewing on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jody
Sinkler at (703) 767–5045.
The
Defense Logistics Agency 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 Chief Privacy and FOIA Officer,
Headquarters Defense Logistics Agency,
ATTN: DGA, 8725 John J. Kingman
Road, Suite 1644, Fort Belvoir, VA
22060–6221.
The Agency proposes to delete a
system of records notice in 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.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: August 4, 2010.
Mitchell S. Bryman,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
Deletion: S330.40 CAHS
SYSTEM NAME:
Employee Assistance Program
Records (August 27, 1999; 64 FR 46889).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Aug 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
This collection is covered under the
existing DHHS/FOH EAP Privacy notice
09–90–0010, entitled ‘‘Employee
Assistance Program (EAP) Records,
HHS/OS/ASAM/OHR.’’
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services—Special
Demonstration Programs—Model
Demonstration Project To Improve
Outcomes for Individuals Receiving
Social Security Disability Insurance
(SSDI) Served by State Vocational
Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priority.
AGENCY:
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.235L.
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority under the
Special Demonstration Programs to fund
a project to identify, develop, and
implement a model demonstration
project to improve outcomes for
individuals receiving Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) served by
State vocational rehabilitation (VR)
agencies. The Assistant Secretary may
use this priority for competitions in
fiscal year (FY) 2010 and later years. We
take this action to improve employment
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries
receiving services from State VR
agencies.
Effective Date: This priority is
effective September 8, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Finch, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 5147, Potomac Center Plaza (PCP),
Washington, DC 20202–2800.
Telephone: (202) 245–7343 or by e-mail:
tom.finch@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at
1–800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
this program is to expand and improve
the provision of rehabilitation and other
services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(the Rehabilitation Act), or to support
activities that increase the provision,
extent, availability, scope, and quality of
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
rehabilitation services provided under
the Rehabilitation Act.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 373.
We published a notice of proposed
priority for this program in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2010 (75 FR
14582). That notice contained
background information and our reasons
for proposing the particular priority.
Except for minor editorial revisions,
there are no differences between the
proposed priority and this final priority.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the notice of proposed
priority, four parties submitted
comments on the proposed priority. An
analysis of the comments and of any
changes in the priority since publication
of the proposed priority follows.
Generally, we do not address
technical and other minor editorial
changes and suggested changes the law
does not authorize us to make under the
applicable statutory authority.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon further internal
review of the text of the proposed
priority, we identified a number of
small editorial changes that we believe
make the priority clearer.
Changes: In addition to making a
number of small clarifying changes, we
have revised the bulleted paragraphs of
the priority to identify them as
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) so that we
can more easily cross-reference the
requirements contained in those
paragraphs.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the priority should permit the
grantee to identify effective VR practices
by conducting in-depth case studies of
State VR agencies, including State VR
agencies with poor and satisfactory
outcomes, through analysis of RSA–911
data.
Discussion: The purpose of this
priority is to conduct an in-depth
analysis of factors that contribute to
high performance in State VR agencies.
While there may be worthwhile
information to be gained by examining
agencies with poor and satisfactory
outcomes, the Department seeks to use
this priority to target high-performing
States, if after preliminary analyses it is
determined that there are a number of
high-performing States to investigate.
Applicants are free to propose the
process that will be used to identify
States that are high-performing. Nothing
in this priority precludes an applicant
from proposing a project that includes
comparing high-performing States with
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 152 / Monday, August 9, 2010 / Notices
States that have a history of poor and
satisfactory outcomes in this area.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that the grantee examine
the characteristics of the SSDI cases to
determine if State VR agencies are
serving similar or different segments of
the SSDI population.
Discussion: We recognize that there
may be differences in the characteristics
of SSDI beneficiaries served by State VR
agencies and that the services provided
to different segments of the SSDI
population may vary. Nothing in this
priority would prohibit an applicant
from proposing and justifying an
analysis that examined such differences.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that
the priority should require the grantee
to examine the employment outcomes
associated with individuals receiving
both SSDI and Supplemental Security
Income (SSI).
Discussion: This priority does not
focus on individuals receiving both
SSDI and SSI benefits at the time they
are served by State VR agencies. While
the background section of the notice of
proposed priority included individuals
receiving both SSI and SSDI as a focus
of the proposed priority, this was an
administrative error and was not
reflected in the priority itself. We
believe that the approach of focusing the
priority on individuals receiving only
SSDI at the time they are served by State
VR agencies is appropriate because the
differences between the SSI and SSDI
programs (e.g., eligibility) and SSI and
SSDI recipients (e.g., work history,
amount of disability payment, workrelated incentives/disincentives) would
make it difficult to analyze, interpret,
and generalize the results of an
examination that focused on individuals
receiving both SSI and SSDI.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that the Department
require more preliminary research from
the grantee. The commenter suggested
that such research would help ensure
that the grantee designs an effective
demonstration project.
Discussion: We agree with the
commenter that preliminary research is
needed. We recognize that a
demonstration project of considerable
scope requires significant time and
effort to identify effective practices and
to translate these practices into a
demonstration that is replicable. For
this reason, paragraph (a) of this priority
requires the project to begin with an
analysis of extant data and in-depth case
studies in order to identify key factors
related to outcomes and to facilitate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Aug 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
design of a demonstration project based
on research findings.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters suggested
that it will take 24 to 36 months to
collect sufficient data to demonstrate
effective practices and measure
employment outcomes.
Discussion: We recognize that in order
to meet the requirements of this priority
the grantee will need an intervention
period of at least 24 months (beginning
from the time of enrollment of SSDI
beneficiaries in the VR program to the
time they achieve employment
outcomes) to implement its
demonstration project in the selected
sites. In addition, time will be required
to track records, analyze data, measure
employment outcomes, and disseminate
the findings of the demonstration
project to State VR agencies. We agree
that it will likely require 24 to 36
months for the grantee to conduct
adequate follow-up for analyses of
outcomes. However, we believe it is best
to allow applicants to determine and
justify in their applications the exact
timeline they will need to implement
the requirements of this priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked if
proposed projects must focus on the
development of effective practices to
assist SSDI beneficiaries or if proposed
projects can examine practices that
increase employment outcomes for State
VR clients, which can then be
demonstrated to also work with SSDI
beneficiaries.
Discussion: The focus of this priority
is on factors that improve outcomes for
SSDI beneficiaries. Therefore, while the
Department recognizes that effective
practices in State VR agencies may have
general applicability and not be specific
to any one target population (e.g.,
individuals receiving SSDI), the focus of
this priority is on effective practices that
improve outcomes for the specific
population of SSDI beneficiaries,
whether or not such practices benefit
other populations.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Department use this priority to
examine the employment outcomes
associated with SSDI beneficiaries
served by State VR agencies and
compare them to the employment
outcomes associated with all SSDI
beneficiaries in the State.
Discussion: The purpose of this
priority is to examine factors that
increase employment outcomes and to
develop effective practices to assist
State VR agencies to increase
employment outcomes for SSDI
beneficiaries. The focus of the priority is
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
47799
on SSDI beneficiaries who receive
services from State VR agencies.
Nothing in this priority would preclude
an applicant from proposing an analysis
of characteristics of SSDI beneficiaries
served by State VR agencies in
comparison with the characteristics of
all SSDI beneficiaries in a State during
the case study phase of the project.
However, we do not have a sufficient
basis for requiring that all applicants
conduct such an analysis.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter expressed
concern about the requirement in the
priority that the intervention be based
on factors within the control of the State
VR agency. If no such factors are
identified through the case studies, this
commenter asked whether the grantee
may develop and implement ‘‘novel’’
approaches to developing evidencebased return-to-work strategies and
interventions for SSDI beneficiaries.
Discussion: The Department
anticipates funding this priority as a
cooperative agreement and will work
closely with the grantee at every stage
of the project. We will work with the
grantee to determine next steps in the
event that the case study analysis of
SSDI beneficiary outcomes does not
provide evidence of a sufficient number
of factors related to better employment
outcomes that are within the control of
the State VR agency or in the event that
the Department determines that it is not
feasible to implement, demonstrate, and
evaluate the intervention model
proposed by the grantee. Next steps may
include working with the grantee on
how it would otherwise accomplish the
goals of the project or ending the project
following the Department’s review.
Changes: Paragraph (b) of the priority
has been revised to make it clear that
the grantee will consult with the
Rehabilitation Services Administration
to determine next steps in the event that
the case study analysis of SSDI
beneficiary outcomes does not provide
evidence of a sufficient number of
factors related to better employment
outcomes that are within the control of
the State VR agency or in the event that
the Department determines that it is not
feasible to implement, demonstrate, and
evaluate the intervention model
proposed by the grantee.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Department sponsor a related
project that emphasizes the involvement
of State VR agencies in early
intervention and job retention.
Discussion: The Department
recognizes the importance of providing
VR services that focus on early
intervention and of providing those
services to currently or recently
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
47800
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 152 / Monday, August 9, 2010 / Notices
employed individuals to help them
retain their jobs. However, early
intervention is not the focus of this
priority, and the Department cannot
comment on the content of future
priorities.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters
recommended that the priority be
revised to require the grantee to conduct
rigorous and analytical research on
effective practices, such as evidencebased interventions for supported
employment, benefits counseling, and
behavioral/attitudinal changes.
Discussion: The Department agrees
that additional research on effective
practices is important. For this reason,
we are funding research on effective VR
practices through the National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). NIDRR published a
notice of final priority on this topic on
July 8, 2010 (75 FR 39220) and
anticipates making an award for this
project prior to September 30, 2010.
Applicants for that priority can suggest
additional effective practices for study.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the priority require site selection to
be methodical and include an analysis
of organizational capacity and existing
services that impact employment
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries.
Discussion: As indicated in paragraph
(c) of the priority, sites must be selected
based on an analysis of existing and
available data that indicate relatively
better qualitative and quantitative
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries,
compared to the results achieved by
other State VR agencies. Applicants are
free to propose additional criteria for
selecting sites.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that the priority require
the use of analytical techniques,
including random assignment, to study
the development and implementation of
evidence-based practices.
Discussion: We have designed this
priority to build on information
available in extant data systems and are
requiring the grantee to (a) conduct indepth case studies to determine factors
that both impede and support strategies
that result in better employment
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries and (b)
design, implement, and evaluate a
demonstration project based on the
results of those case studies. The next
step for a demonstration project funded
under this priority may be taking the
grantee’s intervention to scale and could
involve random assignment and other
research designs that would further
demonstrate the efficacy of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Aug 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
interventions. The Department will
closely monitor the grantee’s
demonstration to determine if it would
be worthwhile to fund projects in the
future that focus on scaling up effective
practices.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter
recommended that the Department
examine State unemployment insurance
(UI) wage records in order to track
employment earnings for this priority.
Discussion: The Department
recognizes the usefulness of these data
for the purpose of evaluation. State VR
agency access to UI wage records data
varies from State to State. While
applicants are free to propose the use of
these data for case study analyses, we
have no basis for requiring that all
applicants adopt this approach. That
said, the Department and the Social
Security Administration (SSA) have had
a data sharing Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) in place since 2003.
Data files merged pursuant to this MOA
include earnings records for SSDI
beneficiaries, and we will continue to
examine these data in order to assess the
impact of State VR policies, practices,
and services on beneficiaries.
Changes: None.
Final Priority
Model Demonstration Project to
Improve Outcomes for Individuals
Receiving Social Security Disability
Insurance (SSDI) served by State
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
Agencies.
The Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services
establishes a priority under the Special
Demonstration Programs to fund a
project to identify, develop, and
implement a model demonstration
project to improve outcomes for
individuals receiving Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) who are
served by State vocational rehabilitation
(VR) agencies. Under this priority, the
project must be designed to—
(a) Identify, through in-depth case
studies of selected State VR agencies,
the factors that account for these
agencies achieving employment
outcomes that are at or above substantial
gainful activity (SGA) for the SSDI
beneficiaries they serve;
(b) After consultation with the
Rehabilitation Services Administration
(RSA), determine whether, of the
identified factors, there are a sufficient
number of factors related to the better
employment outcome results that are
within the control of the State VR
agency, and if so, develop an
intervention model incorporating those
factors that can be replicated in other
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
State VR agencies and that can be
evaluated in terms of the model’s
impact after implementation;
(c) Implement and evaluate an
intervention model based on replicable
factors identified in case studies in at
least three State VR agencies, selected
by RSA based on information provided
by the grantee, that are willing to
implement the model. One criterion for
selecting these State VR agencies to
participate in the model demonstration
project is that the SSDI beneficiaries
whom these agencies serve have an
employment outcome rate at or below
the rate for other State VR agencies; and
(d) If the intervention model
implemented under paragraph (c) of this
priority shows an improved
employment rate for SSDI beneficiaries,
revise the intervention model based on
information learned from the model
demonstration project, recommend any
strategies needed for implementation of
the model by other State VR agencies,
and disseminate the findings of this
demonstration project to State VR
agencies.
Types of Priorities: When inviting
applications for a competition using one
or more priorities, we designate the type
of each priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority, we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
This notice does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities,
requirements, definitions, or selection
criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we choose
to use this priority, we invite applications
through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866: This notice
has been reviewed in accordance with
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
47801
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 152 / Monday, August 9, 2010 / Notices
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms
of the order, we have assessed the
potential costs and benefits of this
regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with
this final regulatory action are those
resulting from statutory requirements
and those we have determined as
necessary for administering this
program effectively and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and
benefits—both quantitative and
qualitative—of this final regulatory
action, we have determined that the
benefits of the final priority justify the
costs.
We have determined, also, that this
final regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
We summarized the costs and benefits
of this regulatory action in the notice of
proposed priority.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document 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–
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 the
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
the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at this site.
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:01 Aug 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
Dated: August 4, 2010.
Alexa Posny,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2010–19609 Filed 8–6–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services; Overview
Information; Special Demonstration
Programs—Model Demonstration
Projects To Improve Outcomes for
Individuals Receiving Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) Served by
State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
Agencies; Notice Inviting Applications
for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY)
2010
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.235L.
DATES: Applications Available: August
9, 2010.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: September 8, 2010.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: October 8, 2010.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
this program is to expand and improve
the provision of rehabilitation and other
services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
(the Rehabilitation Act), or to support
activities that increase the provision,
extent, availability, scope, and quality of
rehabilitation services provided under
the Rehabilitation Act.
Priority: This priority is from the
notice of final priority for this program,
published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register.
Absolute Priority: For FY 2010 this
priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only
applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Model Demonstration Projects To
Improve Outcomes for Individuals
Receiving Social Security Disability
Insurance (SSDI) Served by State
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
Agencies.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b).
Applicable Regulations: (a) The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in
34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82,
84, 85, 86, 97, and 99. (b) The
regulations for this program in 34 CFR
parts 373. (c) The notice of final
priority, published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86
apply to institutions of higher education
only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Discretionary grant.
Estimated Available Funds:
$16,871,400.
Maximum Award: We will reject any
application that proposes a budget
exceeding the funding available for any
single budget period of 12 months. The
proposed funding levels for this
demonstration project are:
Fiscal year
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
Maximum
funds available
$1,530,700
1,530,700
4,892,500
4,892,500
4,025,000
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: States and
public or nonprofit agencies and
organizations, including institutions of
higher education.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
program does not require cost sharing or
matching.
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Address to Request Application
Package: You can obtain an application
package via the Internet or from the
Education Publications Center (ED
Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet,
use the following address: https://www.
ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/
index.html. To obtain a copy from ED
Pubs, write, fax, or call the following:
ED Pubs, U.S. Department of Education,
P.O. Box 22207, Alexandria, VA 22304.
Telephone, toll free: 1–877–433–7827.
FAX: (703) 605–6794. 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.EDPubs.gov or at
its e-mail address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
If you request an application package
from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this
program or competition as follows:
CFDA number 84.235L.
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.
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 152 (Monday, August 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47798-47801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19609]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services--Special
Demonstration Programs--Model Demonstration Project To Improve Outcomes
for Individuals Receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
Served by State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priority.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.235L.
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services establishes a priority under the Special
Demonstration Programs to fund a project to identify, develop, and
implement a model demonstration project to improve outcomes for
individuals receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
served by State vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies. The Assistant
Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2010 and later years. We take this action to improve employment
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries receiving services from State VR
agencies.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective September 8, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Finch, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 5147, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-7343 or by e-
mail: tom.finch@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to expand and
improve the provision of rehabilitation and other services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (the Rehabilitation
Act), or to support activities that increase the provision, extent,
availability, scope, and quality of rehabilitation services provided
under the Rehabilitation Act.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 373.
We published a notice of proposed priority for this program in the
Federal Register on March 26, 2010 (75 FR 14582). That notice contained
background information and our reasons for proposing the particular
priority.
Except for minor editorial revisions, there are no differences
between the proposed priority and this final priority.
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the notice of
proposed priority, four parties submitted comments on the proposed
priority. An analysis of the comments and of any changes in the
priority since publication of the proposed priority follows.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor editorial
changes and suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make
under the applicable statutory authority.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
Comment: None.
Discussion: Upon further internal review of the text of the
proposed priority, we identified a number of small editorial changes
that we believe make the priority clearer.
Changes: In addition to making a number of small clarifying
changes, we have revised the bulleted paragraphs of the priority to
identify them as paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) so that we can more
easily cross-reference the requirements contained in those paragraphs.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority should permit
the grantee to identify effective VR practices by conducting in-depth
case studies of State VR agencies, including State VR agencies with
poor and satisfactory outcomes, through analysis of RSA-911 data.
Discussion: The purpose of this priority is to conduct an in-depth
analysis of factors that contribute to high performance in State VR
agencies. While there may be worthwhile information to be gained by
examining agencies with poor and satisfactory outcomes, the Department
seeks to use this priority to target high-performing States, if after
preliminary analyses it is determined that there are a number of high-
performing States to investigate. Applicants are free to propose the
process that will be used to identify States that are high-performing.
Nothing in this priority precludes an applicant from proposing a
project that includes comparing high-performing States with
[[Page 47799]]
States that have a history of poor and satisfactory outcomes in this
area.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the grantee examine the
characteristics of the SSDI cases to determine if State VR agencies are
serving similar or different segments of the SSDI population.
Discussion: We recognize that there may be differences in the
characteristics of SSDI beneficiaries served by State VR agencies and
that the services provided to different segments of the SSDI population
may vary. Nothing in this priority would prohibit an applicant from
proposing and justifying an analysis that examined such differences.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the priority should require the
grantee to examine the employment outcomes associated with individuals
receiving both SSDI and Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
Discussion: This priority does not focus on individuals receiving
both SSDI and SSI benefits at the time they are served by State VR
agencies. While the background section of the notice of proposed
priority included individuals receiving both SSI and SSDI as a focus of
the proposed priority, this was an administrative error and was not
reflected in the priority itself. We believe that the approach of
focusing the priority on individuals receiving only SSDI at the time
they are served by State VR agencies is appropriate because the
differences between the SSI and SSDI programs (e.g., eligibility) and
SSI and SSDI recipients (e.g., work history, amount of disability
payment, work-related incentives/disincentives) would make it difficult
to analyze, interpret, and generalize the results of an examination
that focused on individuals receiving both SSI and SSDI.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the Department require more
preliminary research from the grantee. The commenter suggested that
such research would help ensure that the grantee designs an effective
demonstration project.
Discussion: We agree with the commenter that preliminary research
is needed. We recognize that a demonstration project of considerable
scope requires significant time and effort to identify effective
practices and to translate these practices into a demonstration that is
replicable. For this reason, paragraph (a) of this priority requires
the project to begin with an analysis of extant data and in-depth case
studies in order to identify key factors related to outcomes and to
facilitate design of a demonstration project based on research
findings.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters suggested that it will take 24 to 36 months
to collect sufficient data to demonstrate effective practices and
measure employment outcomes.
Discussion: We recognize that in order to meet the requirements of
this priority the grantee will need an intervention period of at least
24 months (beginning from the time of enrollment of SSDI beneficiaries
in the VR program to the time they achieve employment outcomes) to
implement its demonstration project in the selected sites. In addition,
time will be required to track records, analyze data, measure
employment outcomes, and disseminate the findings of the demonstration
project to State VR agencies. We agree that it will likely require 24
to 36 months for the grantee to conduct adequate follow-up for analyses
of outcomes. However, we believe it is best to allow applicants to
determine and justify in their applications the exact timeline they
will need to implement the requirements of this priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked if proposed projects must focus on the
development of effective practices to assist SSDI beneficiaries or if
proposed projects can examine practices that increase employment
outcomes for State VR clients, which can then be demonstrated to also
work with SSDI beneficiaries.
Discussion: The focus of this priority is on factors that improve
outcomes for SSDI beneficiaries. Therefore, while the Department
recognizes that effective practices in State VR agencies may have
general applicability and not be specific to any one target population
(e.g., individuals receiving SSDI), the focus of this priority is on
effective practices that improve outcomes for the specific population
of SSDI beneficiaries, whether or not such practices benefit other
populations.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department use this
priority to examine the employment outcomes associated with SSDI
beneficiaries served by State VR agencies and compare them to the
employment outcomes associated with all SSDI beneficiaries in the
State.
Discussion: The purpose of this priority is to examine factors that
increase employment outcomes and to develop effective practices to
assist State VR agencies to increase employment outcomes for SSDI
beneficiaries. The focus of the priority is on SSDI beneficiaries who
receive services from State VR agencies. Nothing in this priority would
preclude an applicant from proposing an analysis of characteristics of
SSDI beneficiaries served by State VR agencies in comparison with the
characteristics of all SSDI beneficiaries in a State during the case
study phase of the project. However, we do not have a sufficient basis
for requiring that all applicants conduct such an analysis.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern about the requirement in
the priority that the intervention be based on factors within the
control of the State VR agency. If no such factors are identified
through the case studies, this commenter asked whether the grantee may
develop and implement ``novel'' approaches to developing evidence-based
return-to-work strategies and interventions for SSDI beneficiaries.
Discussion: The Department anticipates funding this priority as a
cooperative agreement and will work closely with the grantee at every
stage of the project. We will work with the grantee to determine next
steps in the event that the case study analysis of SSDI beneficiary
outcomes does not provide evidence of a sufficient number of factors
related to better employment outcomes that are within the control of
the State VR agency or in the event that the Department determines that
it is not feasible to implement, demonstrate, and evaluate the
intervention model proposed by the grantee. Next steps may include
working with the grantee on how it would otherwise accomplish the goals
of the project or ending the project following the Department's review.
Changes: Paragraph (b) of the priority has been revised to make it
clear that the grantee will consult with the Rehabilitation Services
Administration to determine next steps in the event that the case study
analysis of SSDI beneficiary outcomes does not provide evidence of a
sufficient number of factors related to better employment outcomes that
are within the control of the State VR agency or in the event that the
Department determines that it is not feasible to implement,
demonstrate, and evaluate the intervention model proposed by the
grantee.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department sponsor a
related project that emphasizes the involvement of State VR agencies in
early intervention and job retention.
Discussion: The Department recognizes the importance of providing
VR services that focus on early intervention and of providing those
services to currently or recently
[[Page 47800]]
employed individuals to help them retain their jobs. However, early
intervention is not the focus of this priority, and the Department
cannot comment on the content of future priorities.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the priority be revised to
require the grantee to conduct rigorous and analytical research on
effective practices, such as evidence-based interventions for supported
employment, benefits counseling, and behavioral/attitudinal changes.
Discussion: The Department agrees that additional research on
effective practices is important. For this reason, we are funding
research on effective VR practices through the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). NIDRR published a
notice of final priority on this topic on July 8, 2010 (75 FR 39220)
and anticipates making an award for this project prior to September 30,
2010. Applicants for that priority can suggest additional effective
practices for study.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority require site
selection to be methodical and include an analysis of organizational
capacity and existing services that impact employment outcomes for SSDI
beneficiaries.
Discussion: As indicated in paragraph (c) of the priority, sites
must be selected based on an analysis of existing and available data
that indicate relatively better qualitative and quantitative outcomes
for SSDI beneficiaries, compared to the results achieved by other State
VR agencies. Applicants are free to propose additional criteria for
selecting sites.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the priority require the
use of analytical techniques, including random assignment, to study the
development and implementation of evidence-based practices.
Discussion: We have designed this priority to build on information
available in extant data systems and are requiring the grantee to (a)
conduct in-depth case studies to determine factors that both impede and
support strategies that result in better employment outcomes for SSDI
beneficiaries and (b) design, implement, and evaluate a demonstration
project based on the results of those case studies. The next step for a
demonstration project funded under this priority may be taking the
grantee's intervention to scale and could involve random assignment and
other research designs that would further demonstrate the efficacy of
the interventions. The Department will closely monitor the grantee's
demonstration to determine if it would be worthwhile to fund projects
in the future that focus on scaling up effective practices.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the Department examine
State unemployment insurance (UI) wage records in order to track
employment earnings for this priority.
Discussion: The Department recognizes the usefulness of these data
for the purpose of evaluation. State VR agency access to UI wage
records data varies from State to State. While applicants are free to
propose the use of these data for case study analyses, we have no basis
for requiring that all applicants adopt this approach. That said, the
Department and the Social Security Administration (SSA) have had a data
sharing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in place since 2003. Data files
merged pursuant to this MOA include earnings records for SSDI
beneficiaries, and we will continue to examine these data in order to
assess the impact of State VR policies, practices, and services on
beneficiaries.
Changes: None.
Final Priority
Model Demonstration Project to Improve Outcomes for Individuals
Receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) served by State
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agencies.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority under the Special Demonstration
Programs to fund a project to identify, develop, and implement a model
demonstration project to improve outcomes for individuals receiving
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) who are served by State
vocational rehabilitation (VR) agencies. Under this priority, the
project must be designed to--
(a) Identify, through in-depth case studies of selected State VR
agencies, the factors that account for these agencies achieving
employment outcomes that are at or above substantial gainful activity
(SGA) for the SSDI beneficiaries they serve;
(b) After consultation with the Rehabilitation Services
Administration (RSA), determine whether, of the identified factors,
there are a sufficient number of factors related to the better
employment outcome results that are within the control of the State VR
agency, and if so, develop an intervention model incorporating those
factors that can be replicated in other State VR agencies and that can
be evaluated in terms of the model's impact after implementation;
(c) Implement and evaluate an intervention model based on
replicable factors identified in case studies in at least three State
VR agencies, selected by RSA based on information provided by the
grantee, that are willing to implement the model. One criterion for
selecting these State VR agencies to participate in the model
demonstration project is that the SSDI beneficiaries whom these
agencies serve have an employment outcome rate at or below the rate for
other State VR agencies; and
(d) If the intervention model implemented under paragraph (c) of
this priority shows an improved employment rate for SSDI beneficiaries,
revise the intervention model based on information learned from the
model demonstration project, recommend any strategies needed for
implementation of the model by other State VR agencies, and disseminate
the findings of this demonstration project to State VR agencies.
Types of Priorities: When inviting applications for a competition
using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as
absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in
the Federal Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Order 12866: This notice has been reviewed in accordance
with
[[Page 47801]]
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed
the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with this final regulatory action
are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for administering this program effectively and
efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this final regulatory action, we have determined
that the benefits of the final priority justify the costs.
We have determined, also, that this final regulatory action does
not unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
We summarized the costs and benefits of this regulatory action in
the notice of proposed priority.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document 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) 245-7363.
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 the 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 the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site.
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/.
Dated: August 4, 2010.
Alexa Posny,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2010-19609 Filed 8-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P