Proposed Priority-National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research-Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program-Disability and Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP)-Employment of Individuals With Disabilities, 24934-24938 [2012-10010]
Download as PDF
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24934
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2012 / Notices
performance targets included in
grantees’ approved Race to the Top
plans. Grantees will be required to
report on their progress in the four core
education reform areas and in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics. This reporting includes
narrative sections on progress and key
performance indicators. As was the case
in the completion of the Race to the Top
applications, grantees will coordinate
with LEAs to collect and report on
school and district-level data elements.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before June 25,
2012.
ADDRESSES: Written comments
regarding burden and/or the collection
activity requirements should be
electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or mailed to U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., LBJ, Washington, DC
20202–4537. Copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on
link number 04845. When you access
the information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed
to 202–401–0920. Please specify the
complete title of the information
collection and OMB Control Number
when making your request.
Individuals who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that
Federal agencies provide interested
parties an early opportunity to comment
on information collection requests. The
Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Privacy, Information
and Records Management Services,
Office of Management, publishes this
notice containing proposed information
collection requests at the beginning of
the Departmental review of the
information collection. The Department
of Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Apr 25, 2012
Jkt 226001
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
Title of Collection: Race to the Top
Annual Performance Report.
OMB Control Number: 1894–0012.
Type of Review: Reinstatement,
without change of a previously
approved collection.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 19.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 1,845.
Abstract: The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act provides $4.3 billion
for the Race to the Top Fund (referred
to in the statute as the State Incentive
Grant Fund). This is a competitive grant
program. The purpose of the program is
to encourage and reward States that are
creating the conditions for education
innovation and reform; achieving
significant improvement in student
outcomes, including making substantial
gains in student achievement, closing
achievement gaps, improving high
school graduation rates, and ensuring
student preparation for success in
college and careers; and implementing
ambitious plans in four core education
reform areas: (a) Adopting
internationally-benchmarked standards
and assessments that prepare students
for success in college and and the
workplace; (b) building data systems
that measure student success and
inform teachers and principals in how
they can improve their practices; (c)
increasing teacher effectiveness and
achieving equity in teacher distribution;
and (d) turning around our lowestachieving schools.
In order to fulfill our responsibilities
for programmatic oversight and public
reporting, the Department has
developed a Race to the Top Annual
Performance Report that is tied directly
to the Race to the Top selection criteria
and priorities previously established
and published in the Federal Register.
The report is grounded in the key
performance targets included in
grantees’ approved Race to the Top
plans. Grantees will be required to
report on their progress in the four core
education reform areas and in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics. This reporting includes
narrative sections on progress and key
performance indicators. As was the case
in the completion of the Race to the Top
applications, grantees will coordinate
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with LEAs to collect and report on
school and district-level data elements.
In order to robustly fulfill our
programmatic and fiscal oversight
responsibilities, it is essential that we
gather this data from Race to the Top
grantees and subgrantees. In the first
year of the grant, the APR was collected
through an emergency clearance
approval. In order to allow for a
comprehensive assessment of progress
for the remaining grant period to both
update the public and Congress about
Race to the Top and pinpoint areas
requiring technical assistance, we are
requesting a three-year clearance with
this form.
Additionally, through the Department
of Defense and Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2011 (FY 2011
Appropriations Act), the Department
made a total of $200 million in grants
to seven additional States in Phase 3 to
invest in a portion of their plans from
the Phase 2 competition. The
Department is requesting these States,
who will complete a sub-set of the APR
based on their approved plans, be
included in the three-year clearance
with this form.
Dated: April 23, 2012.
Darrin A. King,
Director, Information Collection Clearance
Division, Privacy, Information and Records
Management Services, Office of Management.
[FR Doc. 2012–10090 Filed 4–25–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA Number 84.133A–01]
Proposed Priority—National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research—Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Program—Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Project
(DRRP)—Employment of Individuals
With Disabilities
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority under the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program
administered by the National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research (NIDRR). Specifically, this
notice proposes a priority for a
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Project (DRRP) on Employment of
Individuals with Disabilities. The
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2012 / Notices
Assistant Secretary may use this priority
for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2012
and later years. We take this action to
focus research attention on areas of
national need. We intend this priority to
contribute to improved employment
outcomes for individuals with
disability.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before May 29, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about
this notice to Marlene Spencer, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., room 5133, Potomac
Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC
20202–2700.
If you prefer to send your comments
by email, use the following address:
Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov. You must
include the phrase ‘‘Proposed Priority
for Employment of Individuals with
Disabilities’’ in the subject line of your
electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245–
7532 or by email:
Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice of proposed priority is in concert
with NIDRR’s currently approved LongRange Plan (Plan). The currently
approved Plan, which was published in
the Federal Register on February 15,
2006 (71 FR 8165), can be accessed on
the Internet at the following site: https://
www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/
other/2006-1/021506d.pdf.
Through the implementation of the
currently approved Plan, NIDRR seeks
to: (1) Improve the quality and utility of
disability and rehabilitation research;
(2) foster an exchange of expertise,
information, and training to facilitate
the advancement of knowledge and
understanding of the unique needs of
traditionally underserved populations;
(3) determine best strategies and
programs to improve rehabilitation
outcomes for underserved populations;
(4) identify research gaps; (5) identify
mechanisms of integrating research and
practice; and (6) disseminate findings.
This notice proposes a priority that
NIDRR intends to use for a DRRP
competition in FY 2012 and possibly
later years. However, nothing precludes
NIDRR from publishing additional
priorities, if needed. Furthermore,
NIDRR is under no obligation to make
an award using this priority. The
decision to make an award will be based
on the quality of applications received
and available funding.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Apr 25, 2012
Jkt 226001
Invitation to Comment: We invite you
to submit comments regarding this
notice. To ensure that your comments
have maximum effect in developing the
notice of final priority, we urge you to
identify clearly the specific topic that
each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 and their overall requirement
of reducing regulatory burden that
might result from this proposed priority.
Please let us know of any further ways
we could reduce potential costs or
increase potential benefits while
preserving the effective and efficient
administration of the program.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about this notice in Room 5133, 550
12th Street SW., PCP, Washington, DC,
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4
p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday
through Friday of each week except
Federal holidays. Assistance to
Individuals with Disabilities in
Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On
request we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an
individual with a disability who needs
assistance to review the comments or
other documents in the public
rulemaking record for this notice. If you
want to schedule an appointment for
this type of accommodation or auxiliary
aid, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Projects and Centers Program
is to plan and conduct research,
demonstration projects, training, and
related activities, including
international activities, to develop
methods, procedures, and rehabilitation
technology, that maximize the full
inclusion and integration into society,
employment, independent living, family
support, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with
disabilities, especially individuals with
the most severe disabilities, and to
improve the effectiveness of services
authorized under the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation
Act).
Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects
The purpose of NIDRR’s DRRPs,
which are funded through the Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Projects
and Centers Program, are to improve the
effectiveness of services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, by developing methods,
procedures, and rehabilitation
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24935
technologies that advance a wide range
of independent living and employment
outcomes for individuals with
disabilities, especially individuals with
the most severe disabilities. DRRPs
carry out one or more of the following
types of activities, as specified and
defined in 34 CFR 350.13 through
350.19: research, training,
demonstration, development,
dissemination, utilization, and technical
assistance.
An applicant for assistance under this
program must demonstrate in its
application how it will address, in
whole or in part, the needs of
individuals with disabilities from
minority backgrounds (34 CFR
350.40(a)). The approaches an applicant
may take to meet this requirement are
found in 34 CFR 350.40(b). Additional
information on the DRRP program can
be found at: https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/
research/pubs/res-program.html#DRRP.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and
764(a).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 350.
Proposed Priority: This notice
contains one proposed priority.
DRRP on Employment of Individuals
With Disabilities
Background
Despite the enactment of legislation
and the implementation of a variety of
policy and program efforts at the
Federal and State levels to improve
employment outcomes for individuals
with disabilities, the employment rate
for individuals with disabilities remains
substantially lower than the rate for
those without disabilities. The
economic downturn in recent years has
resulted in still greater workforce
disparities. In December 2011, 17.9
percent of persons with a disability age
16 years and older were employed,
compared to 63.7 percent of persons
without a disability (U.S. Department of
Labor, 2012). Among persons 25 to 54
years of age during the recent recession,
the unemployment rate of persons with
a disability ranged from 2.0 to 2.3 times
that of persons without a disability
(Fogg, Harrington, McMahon, 2010).
These differences in employment and
unemployment rates exist across all
socio-demographic groups.
Additionally, the median earnings for
persons with a disability who are
employed are $19,500 per year as
compared to $29,997 per year earned by
persons without a disability (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2011).
NIDRR has funded a wide range of
disability research and development
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
24936
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2012 / Notices
projects on employment topics,
including on the impact of government
policies and programs on employment
outcomes for individuals with
disabilities; employer practices and
workplace environments; individual
characteristics that affect employment
outcomes of individuals with
disabilities; technology to support
employment outcomes of individuals
with disabilities; and vocational
rehabilitation (VR) practice. NIDRR
seeks to build on this research by
supporting innovative and welldesigned research and development
projects that fall under one or more
general employment topic areas and that
focus on a specific stage of research (i.e.,
exploration, intervention development,
intervention efficacy, and scale-up
evaluation). This priority would require
a project to focus its research or
development activities on a general
employment area or areas and, to the
extent an applicant proposes to conduct
research activities under the priority,
require that the applicant identify the
stage of the proposed research in its
application. NIDRR hopes to increase
competition and innovation by allowing
applicants to specify the research topics
under the broader areas of research.
NIDRR also hopes to improve the rigor
of the research it funds by asking
applicants to identify and justify the
stage of research being proposed and the
methods appropriate to that stage.
Through this priority, we would fund
projects that are designed to identify,
develop, test, and evaluate
interventions, programs, technologies,
and products that increase employment
rates, hours of paid work, earnings and
other compensation of individuals with
disabilities; and improve job and career
satisfaction, or other job-related
outcomes of individuals with
disabilities.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
References
Fogg, N. P., Harrington, P. E., & McMahon,
B. T. (2011). The underemployment of
persons with disabilities during the
Great Recession. The Rehabilitation
Professional, 19(1), 3–10.
U.S. Census Bureau (2010) American
Community Survey: Table B18140.
Available from: https://
factfinder.census.gov
U.S. Department of Labor (2012a). Economic
News Release: Table A–6. Employment
status of the civilian population by sex,
age, and disability status, not seasonally
adjusted. Retrieved from: https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/
empsit.t06.htm
U.S. Department of Labor (2012b). Economic
News Release: Table 1. Employment
status of the civilian noninstitutionalized
population by disability and selected
characteristics. Retrieved from: https://
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Apr 25, 2012
Jkt 226001
www.bls.gov/news.release/
disabl.t01.htm.
Proposed Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services
proposes a priority for a Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP)
on Employment of Individuals with
Disabilities. The DRRP must contribute
to the outcomes of increased
employment rates, hours of paid work,
earnings and other compensation for
individuals with disabilities as well as
improved job and career satisfaction and
other work-related outcomes for
individuals with disabilities.
(a) To contribute to these outcomes,
the DRRP must—
(1) Conduct research activities,
development activities, or both, in one
or more of the following priority areas:
(i) The impact of government policies
and programs on employment outcomes
for individuals with disabilities.
(ii) Employer practices and workplace
environments that contribute to
improved employment outcomes for
individuals with disabilities.
(iii) Preparedness of individuals with
disabilities to participate in the current
and future workforce.
(iv) Technology (including the
systems that develop, evaluate, and
deliver the technology) that support
improved employment outcomes of
individuals with disabilities.
(v) Practices and policies that
contribute to improved employment
outcomes for transition-aged youth.
(vi) Vocational rehabilitation (VR)
practices that result in improved
employment outcomes for individuals
with disabilities.
(2) If conducting research under
paragraph (a)(1) of this priority, focus its
research on a specific stage of research.
For purposes of this priority, the stages
of research are as follows:
(i) Exploration. Exploration means the
stage of research that generates
hypotheses or theories by conducting
new and refined analyses of data,
producing observational findings, and
creating other sources of research-based
information. This research stage may
include identifying or describing the
barriers to and facilitators of improved
outcomes of individuals with
disabilities, as well as identifying or
describing existing practices, programs,
or policies that are associated with
important aspects of the lives of
individuals with disabilities. Results
achieved under this stage of research
may inform the development of
interventions or lead to evaluations of
interventions or policies. The results of
the exploration stage of research may
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
also be used to inform decisions or
priorities.
(ii) Intervention Development.
Intervention Development means the
stage of research that focuses on
generating and testing interventions that
have the potential to improve
employment outcomes for individuals
with disabilities. Intervention
development involves determining the
active components of possible
interventions, developing measures that
would be required to illustrate
outcomes, specifying target populations,
conducting field tests, and assessing the
feasibility of conducting a well-designed
interventions study. Results from this
stage of research may be used to inform
the design of a study to test the efficacy
of an intervention.
(iii) Intervention Efficacy.
Intervention efficacy means the stage of
research during which a project
evaluates and tests whether an
intervention is feasible, practical, and
has the potential to yield positive
outcomes for individuals with
disabilities. Efficacy research may assess
the strength of the relationships
between an intervention and outcomes,
and may identify factors or individual
characteristics that affect the
relationship between the intervention
and outcomes. Efficacy research can
inform decisions about whether there is
sufficient evidence to support ‘‘scalingup’’ an intervention to other sites and
contexts. This stage of research can
include assessing the training needed
for wide-scale implementation of the
intervention, and approaches to
evaluation of the intervention in real
world applications.
(iv) Scale-Up Evaluation. Scale-up
evaluation means the stage of research
during which a project analyzes
whether an intervention is effective in
producing improved outcomes for
individuals with disabilities when
implemented in a real-world setting.
During this stage of research, a project
tests the outcomes of an evidence-based
intervention in different settings. It
examines the challenges to successful
replication of the intervention, and the
circumstances and activities that
contribute to successful adoption of the
intervention in real-world settings. This
stage of research may also include welldesigned studies of an intervention that
has been widely adopted in practice, but
that lacks a sufficient evidence-base to
demonstrate its effectiveness.
(3) Conduct knowledge translation
activities (i.e., training, technical
assistance, utilization, dissemination) in
order to facilitate stakeholder (e.g.,
individuals with disabilities, employers,
policymakers, practitioners) use of the
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2012 / Notices
interventions, programs, technologies,
or products that resulted from the
research activities, development
activities, or both, conducted under
paragraph (a)(1) of this priority;
(4) Involve key stakeholder groups in
the activities conducted under
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this
priority in order to maximize the
relevance and usability of the
interventions, programs, technologies,
or products to be developed or studied
under this priority.
(b) In its application, an applicant
must describe how its proposed project
will meet this priority. In particular, the
applicant must—
(1) Identify, in its application, the
priority area or areas on which its
proposed research or development
activities will focus; and
(2) If conducting research under
paragraph (a)(1) of this priority, identify
and provide a rationale for the stage of
research being proposed and the
research methods associated with the
stage.
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)).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Final Priority
We will announce the final priority in
a notice in the Federal Register. We will
determine the final priority after
considering responses to this notice and
other information available to the
Department. This notice does not
preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Apr 25, 2012
Jkt 226001
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 Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Secretary must determine whether this
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of
the Executive order and subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as an action likely to
result in a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local or Tribal governments or
communities in a material way (also
referred to as an ‘‘economically
significant’’ rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
stated in the Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not
a significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866.
We have also reviewed this regulatory
action under Executive Order 13563,
which supplements and explicitly
reaffirms the principles, structures, and
definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866.
To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an
agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
on a reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs (recognizing
that some benefits and costs are difficult
to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24937
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are taking this regulatory action
only on a reasoned determination that
its benefits justify its costs. In choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits.
Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this proposed
priority is consistent with the principles
in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action would not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
associated with this regulatory action
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
The benefits of the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Programs have been well
established over the years in that similar
projects have been completed
successfully. This proposed priority
would generate new knowledge through
research and development. Another
benefit of this proposed priority is that
the establishment of new DRRPs would
improve the lives of individuals with
disabilities. The new DRRP would
generate, disseminate, and promote the
use of new information that would
improve employment opportunities for
individuals with disabilities.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is not subject to Executive
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
24938
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2012 / Notices
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
CFR part 79.
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 or a TTY, call
the FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339.
Electronic Access to This Document:
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 via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site 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). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site. You may also
access documents of the Department
published in the Federal Register by
using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically,
through the advanced search feature at
this site, you can limit your search to
documents published by the
Department.
Dated: April 20, 2012.
Sue Swenson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Delegated the Authority to Perform the
Functions and Duties of Assistant Secretary
for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2012–10010 Filed 4–25–12; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Assessment Governing
Board; Meeting
National Assessment
Governing Board, U.S. Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice of open and closed
meeting sessions.
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
schedule and proposed agenda for the
upcoming meeting of the National
Assessment Governing Board (Board)
and also describes the specific functions
of the Board. Notice of this meeting is
required under Section 10(a)(2) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act. This
notice is issued to provide members of
the general public with an opportunity
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Apr 25, 2012
Jkt 226001
DATES:
May 17–19, 2012.
Times
May 17
Committee Meetings
Assessment Development Committee
(ADC): Closed Session: 12 p.m.–4:15
p.m.
Executive Committee: Open Session:
4:30 p.m.–5:30 p.m.; Closed Session:
5:30 p.m.–6 p.m.
May 18
Full Board: Open Session: 8:30 a.m.–
9:45 a.m.; Closed Session: 12:30 p.m.–2
p.m.; Open Session: 2:15 p.m.–4:45 p.m.
Committee Meetings
Assessment Development Committee
(ADC): Closed Session: 10 a.m.–12 p.m.;
Open Session: 12 p.m.–12:30 p.m.
Reporting and Dissemination
Committee (R&D): Open Session: 10
a.m.–12:30 p.m.
Committee on Standards, Design and
Methodology (COSDAM): Open Session:
10 a.m.–11:20 a.m.; Closed Session:
11:25 a.m.–12:25 p.m.; Open Session:
12:25 p.m.–12:30 p.m.
May 19
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
SUMMARY:
to attend and/or provide comments.
Individuals who will need special
accommodations in order to attend the
meeting (e.g. interpreting services,
assistive listening devices, materials in
alternative format) should notify Munira
Mwalimu at 202–357–6938 or at
Munira.Mwalimu@ed.gov no later than
April 27, 2012. We will attempt to meet
requests after this date but cannot
guarantee availability of the requested
accommodation. The meeting site is
accessible to individuals with
disabilities.
Nominations Committee: Closed
Session: 7:30 a.m.–8:15 a.m.
Full Board: Open Session: 8:30 a.m.–
11:30 a.m.
Location: Marriott Plaza San Antonio,
555 South Alamo Street, San Antonio,
TX 78205
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Munira Mwalimu, Executive Officer,
National Assessment Governing Board,
800 North Capitol Street NW., Suite 825,
Washington, DC, 20002–4233,
Telephone: (202) 357–6938.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
National Assessment Governing Board
(Board) is established under section 412
of the National Education Statistics Act
of 1994, as amended.
The Board is established to formulate
policy guidelines for the National
Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP). The Board’s responsibilities
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
include the following: Selecting subject
areas to be assessed, developing
assessment frameworks and
specifications, developing appropriate
student achievement levels for each
grade and subject tested, developing
standards and procedures for interstate
and national comparisons, developing
guidelines for reporting and
disseminating results, and releasing
initial NAEP results to the public.
On May 17, 2012, two committee
meetings are scheduled. The
Assessment Development Committee
(ADC) will meet in closed session from
12 p.m. to 4:15 p.m. to review secure
computer-based tasks for the NAEP
2014 Technology and Engineering
Literacy Assessment. During the closed
session, ADC members will be provided
specific test materials for review which
are not yet available for release to the
general public. Premature disclosure of
these secure test items and materials
would compromise the integrity and
substantially impede implementation of
the NAEP assessments and is therefore
protected by exemption 9(B) of section
552b(c) of Title 5 of the United States
Code.
On May 17, 2012, the Executive
Committee will meet in open session
from 4:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., and
thereafter in closed session from 5:30
p.m. to 6 p.m. During the closed session,
the Executive Committee will discuss a
personnel matter. This portion of the
meeting will be conducted in closed
session because public discussion of
this information would disclose
information of a personal nature where
disclosure would constitute an
unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy. As such, the discussions are
protected by exemptions 2 and 6 of
section 552b(c) of Title 5 of the United
States Code.
On May 18, 2012, the full Board will
meet in open session from 8:30 a.m. to
9:45 a.m., followed by a closed session
from 12:30 p.m. to 2 p.m. and thereafter
in open session from 2:15 p.m. to 4:45
p.m.
From 8:30 a.m. to 9:15 a.m. on May
18, the Board will review and approve
the May 2012 meeting agenda and
meeting minutes from the March 2012
Board meeting, followed by the
Chairman’s remarks and a welcome
from San Antonio Board member Leticia
van de Putte and a San Antonio policy
maker. From 9:15 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. the
Executive Director of the Governing
Board will provide a report to the Board,
followed by updates from the
Commissioner of the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES) and the
Director of the Institute of Education
Sciences (IES). Following these
E:\FR\FM\26APN1.SGM
26APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24934-24938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10010]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA Number 84.133A-01]
Proposed Priority--National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research--Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program--Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Project (DRRP)--Employment of Individuals With Disabilities
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services proposes a priority under the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program administered by
the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
(NIDRR). Specifically, this notice proposes a priority for a Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Project (DRRP) on Employment of Individuals
with Disabilities. The
[[Page 24935]]
Assistant Secretary may use this priority for competitions in fiscal
year (FY) 2012 and later years. We take this action to focus research
attention on areas of national need. We intend this priority to
contribute to improved employment outcomes for individuals with
disability.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 29, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this notice to Marlene Spencer,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5133,
Potomac Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2700.
If you prefer to send your comments by email, use the following
address: Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov. You must include the phrase ``Proposed
Priority for Employment of Individuals with Disabilities'' in the
subject line of your electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245-
7532 or by email: Marlene.Spencer@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice of proposed priority is in
concert with NIDRR's currently approved Long-Range Plan (Plan). The
currently approved Plan, which was published in the Federal Register on
February 15, 2006 (71 FR 8165), can be accessed on the Internet at the
following site: https://www2.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2006-1/021506d.pdf.
Through the implementation of the currently approved Plan, NIDRR
seeks to: (1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and
rehabilitation research; (2) foster an exchange of expertise,
information, and training to facilitate the advancement of knowledge
and understanding of the unique needs of traditionally underserved
populations; (3) determine best strategies and programs to improve
rehabilitation outcomes for underserved populations; (4) identify
research gaps; (5) identify mechanisms of integrating research and
practice; and (6) disseminate findings.
This notice proposes a priority that NIDRR intends to use for a
DRRP competition in FY 2012 and possibly later years. However, nothing
precludes NIDRR from publishing additional priorities, if needed.
Furthermore, NIDRR is under no obligation to make an award using this
priority. The decision to make an award will be based on the quality of
applications received and available funding.
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priority, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific topic that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall
requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from this
proposed priority. Please let us know of any further ways we could
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving
the effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about this notice in Room 5133, 550 12th Street SW., PCP,
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Washington,
DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking
Record: On request we will provide an appropriate accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance
to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking
record for this notice. If you want to schedule an appointment for this
type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is to plan and
conduct research, demonstration projects, training, and related
activities, including international activities, to develop methods,
procedures, and rehabilitation technology, that maximize the full
inclusion and integration into society, employment, independent living,
family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency of individuals
with disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe
disabilities, and to improve the effectiveness of services authorized
under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation Act).
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
The purpose of NIDRR's DRRPs, which are funded through the
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program,
are to improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, by developing methods,
procedures, and rehabilitation technologies that advance a wide range
of independent living and employment outcomes for individuals with
disabilities, especially individuals with the most severe disabilities.
DRRPs carry out one or more of the following types of activities, as
specified and defined in 34 CFR 350.13 through 350.19: research,
training, demonstration, development, dissemination, utilization, and
technical assistance.
An applicant for assistance under this program must demonstrate in
its application how it will address, in whole or in part, the needs of
individuals with disabilities from minority backgrounds (34 CFR
350.40(a)). The approaches an applicant may take to meet this
requirement are found in 34 CFR 350.40(b). Additional information on
the DRRP program can be found at: https://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/res-program.html#DRRP.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(a).
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR part 350.
Proposed Priority: This notice contains one proposed priority.
DRRP on Employment of Individuals With Disabilities
Background
Despite the enactment of legislation and the implementation of a
variety of policy and program efforts at the Federal and State levels
to improve employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities, the
employment rate for individuals with disabilities remains substantially
lower than the rate for those without disabilities. The economic
downturn in recent years has resulted in still greater workforce
disparities. In December 2011, 17.9 percent of persons with a
disability age 16 years and older were employed, compared to 63.7
percent of persons without a disability (U.S. Department of Labor,
2012). Among persons 25 to 54 years of age during the recent recession,
the unemployment rate of persons with a disability ranged from 2.0 to
2.3 times that of persons without a disability (Fogg, Harrington,
McMahon, 2010). These differences in employment and unemployment rates
exist across all socio-demographic groups. Additionally, the median
earnings for persons with a disability who are employed are $19,500 per
year as compared to $29,997 per year earned by persons without a
disability (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011).
NIDRR has funded a wide range of disability research and
development
[[Page 24936]]
projects on employment topics, including on the impact of government
policies and programs on employment outcomes for individuals with
disabilities; employer practices and workplace environments; individual
characteristics that affect employment outcomes of individuals with
disabilities; technology to support employment outcomes of individuals
with disabilities; and vocational rehabilitation (VR) practice. NIDRR
seeks to build on this research by supporting innovative and well-
designed research and development projects that fall under one or more
general employment topic areas and that focus on a specific stage of
research (i.e., exploration, intervention development, intervention
efficacy, and scale-up evaluation). This priority would require a
project to focus its research or development activities on a general
employment area or areas and, to the extent an applicant proposes to
conduct research activities under the priority, require that the
applicant identify the stage of the proposed research in its
application. NIDRR hopes to increase competition and innovation by
allowing applicants to specify the research topics under the broader
areas of research. NIDRR also hopes to improve the rigor of the
research it funds by asking applicants to identify and justify the
stage of research being proposed and the methods appropriate to that
stage. Through this priority, we would fund projects that are designed
to identify, develop, test, and evaluate interventions, programs,
technologies, and products that increase employment rates, hours of
paid work, earnings and other compensation of individuals with
disabilities; and improve job and career satisfaction, or other job-
related outcomes of individuals with disabilities.
References
Fogg, N. P., Harrington, P. E., & McMahon, B. T. (2011). The
underemployment of persons with disabilities during the Great
Recession. The Rehabilitation Professional, 19(1), 3-10.
U.S. Census Bureau (2010) American Community Survey: Table B18140.
Available from: https://factfinder.census.gov
U.S. Department of Labor (2012a). Economic News Release: Table A-6.
Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, and
disability status, not seasonally adjusted. Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t06.htm
U.S. Department of Labor (2012b). Economic News Release: Table 1.
Employment status of the civilian noninstitutionalized population by
disability and selected characteristics. Retrieved from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/disabl.t01.htm.
Proposed Priority
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for a Disability and Rehabilitation
Research Project (DRRP) on Employment of Individuals with Disabilities.
The DRRP must contribute to the outcomes of increased employment rates,
hours of paid work, earnings and other compensation for individuals
with disabilities as well as improved job and career satisfaction and
other work-related outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
(a) To contribute to these outcomes, the DRRP must--
(1) Conduct research activities, development activities, or both,
in one or more of the following priority areas:
(i) The impact of government policies and programs on employment
outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
(ii) Employer practices and workplace environments that contribute
to improved employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
(iii) Preparedness of individuals with disabilities to participate
in the current and future workforce.
(iv) Technology (including the systems that develop, evaluate, and
deliver the technology) that support improved employment outcomes of
individuals with disabilities.
(v) Practices and policies that contribute to improved employment
outcomes for transition-aged youth.
(vi) Vocational rehabilitation (VR) practices that result in
improved employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
(2) If conducting research under paragraph (a)(1) of this priority,
focus its research on a specific stage of research. For purposes of
this priority, the stages of research are as follows:
(i) Exploration. Exploration means the stage of research that
generates hypotheses or theories by conducting new and refined analyses
of data, producing observational findings, and creating other sources
of research-based information. This research stage may include
identifying or describing the barriers to and facilitators of improved
outcomes of individuals with disabilities, as well as identifying or
describing existing practices, programs, or policies that are
associated with important aspects of the lives of individuals with
disabilities. Results achieved under this stage of research may inform
the development of interventions or lead to evaluations of
interventions or policies. The results of the exploration stage of
research may also be used to inform decisions or priorities.
(ii) Intervention Development. Intervention Development means the
stage of research that focuses on generating and testing interventions
that have the potential to improve employment outcomes for individuals
with disabilities. Intervention development involves determining the
active components of possible interventions, developing measures that
would be required to illustrate outcomes, specifying target
populations, conducting field tests, and assessing the feasibility of
conducting a well-designed interventions study. Results from this stage
of research may be used to inform the design of a study to test the
efficacy of an intervention.
(iii) Intervention Efficacy. Intervention efficacy means the stage
of research during which a project evaluates and tests whether an
intervention is feasible, practical, and has the potential to yield
positive outcomes for individuals with disabilities. Efficacy research
may assess the strength of the relationships between an intervention
and outcomes, and may identify factors or individual characteristics
that affect the relationship between the intervention and outcomes.
Efficacy research can inform decisions about whether there is
sufficient evidence to support ``scaling-up'' an intervention to other
sites and contexts. This stage of research can include assessing the
training needed for wide-scale implementation of the intervention, and
approaches to evaluation of the intervention in real world
applications.
(iv) Scale-Up Evaluation. Scale-up evaluation means the stage of
research during which a project analyzes whether an intervention is
effective in producing improved outcomes for individuals with
disabilities when implemented in a real-world setting. During this
stage of research, a project tests the outcomes of an evidence-based
intervention in different settings. It examines the challenges to
successful replication of the intervention, and the circumstances and
activities that contribute to successful adoption of the intervention
in real-world settings. This stage of research may also include well-
designed studies of an intervention that has been widely adopted in
practice, but that lacks a sufficient evidence-base to demonstrate its
effectiveness.
(3) Conduct knowledge translation activities (i.e., training,
technical assistance, utilization, dissemination) in order to
facilitate stakeholder (e.g., individuals with disabilities, employers,
policymakers, practitioners) use of the
[[Page 24937]]
interventions, programs, technologies, or products that resulted from
the research activities, development activities, or both, conducted
under paragraph (a)(1) of this priority;
(4) Involve key stakeholder groups in the activities conducted
under paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this priority in order to
maximize the relevance and usability of the interventions, programs,
technologies, or products to be developed or studied under this
priority.
(b) In its application, an applicant must describe how its proposed
project will meet this priority. In particular, the applicant must--
(1) Identify, in its application, the priority area or areas on
which its proposed research or development activities will focus; and
(2) If conducting research under paragraph (a)(1) of this priority,
identify and provide a rationale for the stage of research being
proposed and the research methods associated with the stage.
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)).
Final Priority
We will announce the final priority in a notice in the Federal
Register. We will determine the final priority after considering
responses to this notice and other information available to the
Department. 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 Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to
the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely
to result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
We have also reviewed this regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are taking this regulatory action only on a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that
maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the
Department believes that this proposed priority is consistent with the
principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with this regulatory action are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
The benefits of the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
and Centers Programs have been well established over the years in that
similar projects have been completed successfully. This proposed
priority would generate new knowledge through research and development.
Another benefit of this proposed priority is that the establishment of
new DRRPs would improve the lives of individuals with disabilities. The
new DRRP would generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new
information that would improve employment opportunities for individuals
with disabilities.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to Executive
[[Page 24938]]
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
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 or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: 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 via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site 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). To use PDF
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the
site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at:
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Dated: April 20, 2012.
Sue Swenson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services, Delegated the Authority to Perform the Functions and Duties
of Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2012-10010 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P