Proposed Priorities, Requirement, and Definitions-Innovative Approaches to Literacy (IAL) Program, 11363-11366 [2014-04490]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2013–OESE–0159; CFDA
Number: 84.215G]
Proposed Priorities, Requirement, and
Definitions—Innovative Approaches to
Literacy (IAL) Program
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education (Department).
ACTION: Proposed priorities,
requirement, and definitions.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, a requirement, and
definitions under the IAL program. The
Assistant Secretary may use the
priorities, requirement, and definitions
for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014
and later years. We take this action to
ensure IAL projects will be supported,
at a minimum, by evidence of strong
theory, and to focus Federal financial
assistance on projects that serve rural
local educational agencies (LEAs).
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before March 31, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments submitted by fax or by email
or those submitted after the comment
period. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your
comments only once. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket, is available on the
site under ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’
• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery,
or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments about these proposed
regulations, address them to David
Moore Miller, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
room 3E241, Washington, DC 20202–
6200.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
Privacy Note: The Department’s policy is
to make all comments received from
members of the public available for public
viewing in their entirety on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.
Therefore, commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only information
that they wish to make publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melvin Graham, U.S. Department of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:27 Feb 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
room 3E334, Washington, DC 20202–
6200. Telephone: (202) 260–8268 or by
email: melvin.graham@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:
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 priorities, requirement,
and definitions, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific proposed priority,
requirement, or definition that each
comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866
and its overall requirement of reducing
regulatory burden that might result from
these proposed priorities, requirement,
and definitions. 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 these proposed regulations by
accessing Regulations.gov. You may also
inspect the comments in person in room
3E241 400 Maryland Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m., Washington, DC time,
Monday through Friday of each week
except Federal holidays. Please contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 IAL program is to support highquality projects designed to develop and
improve literacy skills for children and
students from birth through 12th grade
within the attendance boundaries of
high-need LEAs and schools.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7243–
7243b.
Proposed Priorities:
This notice contains two proposed
priorities.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11363
Proposed Priority 1—High-quality
plan for innovative approaches to
literacy that include book distribution,
childhood literacy activities, or both,
and that is supported, at a minimum, by
evidence of strong theory (as defined in
34 CFR 77.1(c)).
Background:
We have developed a priority that
describes the components of a highquality plan and the level of evidence of
effectiveness most appropriate for the
IAL program.
The components of a high-quality
plan include a description of how the
activity improves literacy in early
childhood, improves students’ reading
ability, motivates older children to read,
or teaches children and students to read.
The plan must also include a
description of the populations to be
served, key goals and activities, the
rationale for the activities chosen,
timeline for the project, parties
responsible for implementing the
project, and the credibility of the plan.
The Secretary published final
regulations in the Federal Register on
August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49338), that
include a description of four levels of
evidence for the Department to use in
determining the potential effectiveness
of proposed projects.
Considering that the new regulations
were established, in part, to provide
incentives and opportunities to build
the body of evidence of effectiveness in
education, and considering the wide
range of new and innovative approaches
possible under the IAL program, we
have determined that the most
appropriate level of evidence for the IAL
program is strong theory.
While there exists evidence in the
field to support a higher level of
evidence for the IAL program, we
selected strong theory in order to
broaden the evidence base by
supporting innovative and new ideas, as
well as to empower applicants to
propose activities and approaches that
have shown evidence of promise or
effectiveness anecdotally or in theory,
but that have not yet been included in
a published research study or not met
the requirements of a higher level of
evidence.
The final regulations also note the
importance of applicants proposing
project evaluations that increase the
level of evidence of the proposed
project’s effectiveness. In order to
provide opportunities for applicants to
build the body of evidence of
effectiveness in education, we will
include a related selection criterion that
encourages applicants to incorporate
evaluation designs that will, if wellimplemented, produce evidence of
E:\FR\FM\28FEP1.SGM
28FEP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11364
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules
promise for future projects. Evidence of
promise is a more rigorous level of
evidence than strong theory.
Proposed Priority:
To meet this priority, applicants must
submit a plan that is supported by
evidence of strong theory, including a
rationale for the proposed process,
product, strategy, or practice and a
corresponding logic model (as defined
in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
The applicant must submit a plan
with the following information:
(a) a description of the proposed book
distribution, childhood literacy
activities, or both, that are designed to
improve the literacy skills of children
and students by one or more of the
following—
(1) promoting early literacy and
preparing young children to read;
(2) developing and improving
students’ reading ability;
(3) motivating older children to read;
and
(4) teaching children and students to
read.
(b) the age or grade spans of children
and students from birth through 12th
grade to be served within the attendance
boundaries of high-need LEAs (as
defined in this notice);
(c) a detailed description of the key
goals, the activities to be undertaken,
the rationale for those activities, the
timeline, the parties responsible for
implementing the activities, and the
credibility of the plan (as judged, in
part, by the information submitted as
evidence of strong theory); and
(d)(i) a description of how the
proposed project is supported by strong
theory; and (ii) the corresponding logic
model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
Proposed Priority 2—Serving Rural
LEAs
Background:
Rural school districts often lack the
personnel and resources needed to
compete effectively for Federal
competitive grants. Therefore, we wish
to establish a priority to better enable
eligible rural applicants to compete
effectively for IAL funds.
Proposed Priority:
To meet this priority, an applicant
must propose a project designed to
provide high-quality literacy
programming, or distribute books, or
both, to students served by a rural LEA
(as defined in this notice).
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:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:27 Feb 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
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)).
Proposed Requirement:
Background:
The IAL program is guided by the
Senate report that accompanied the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014
(S. Rep. no. 113–71, at 173 (2013)).
According to that report, funds made
available under the IAL program are for
competitive awards to national not-forprofit organizations (NNPs) or school
libraries.
School libraries generally do not have
the capacity to manage Federal grants
independently of the schools and
districts they serve. We believe LEAs are
better equipped to compete for, and
meet the requirements of, Federal grants
than are school libraries. Therefore,
school libraries should coordinate with
their LEAs in competing for IAL funds.
Proposed Requirement:
The Assistant Secretary proposes the
following requirement for this program.
We may apply this requirement in any
year in which this program is in effect.
Eligibility: To be considered for an
award under this competition, an
applicant must be one of the following:
(1) A high-need LEA (as defined in this
notice); (2) an NNP (as defined in this
notice) that serves children and students
within the attendance boundaries of one
or more high-need LEAs; (3) a
consortium of NNPs that serve children
and students within the attendance
boundaries of one or more high-need
LEAs; (4) a consortium of high-need
LEAs; or (5) a consortium of one or more
high-need LEAs and one or more NNPs
that serve children and students within
the attendance boundaries of one or
more high-need LEAs.
Proposed Definitions:
Background:
Six important terms associated with
this program are not defined in the
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
authorizing statute, applicable
regulations, or EDGAR.
Proposed Definitions:
The Assistant Secretary proposes the
following definitions for this program.
We may apply one or more of these
definitions in any year in which this
program is in effect.
College- and career-ready standards
means content standards for
kindergarten through 12th grade that
build towards college and career
readiness by the time of high school
graduation. A State’s college- and
career-ready standards must be either
(1) standards that are common to a
significant number of States; or (2)
standards that are approved by a State
network of institutions of higher
education, which must certify that
students who meet the standards will
not need remedial course work at the
postsecondary level.
Comprehensive statewide literacy
plan means a plan (which may be a
component or modification of the plan
submitted under the Striving Readers
Comprehensive Literacy formula grant
program, CFDA 84.371B) that addresses
the literacy and language needs of
children from birth through 12th grade,
including English Learners and students
with disabilities; aligns literacy policies,
resources, and practices; contains clear
instructional goals; and sets high
expectations for all students and student
subgroups.
High-need local educational agency
(High-need LEA) means an LEA,
including a charter school or Stateadministered school that is considered
an LEA under State law, in which at
least 25 percent of the students aged 0–
17 in the geographic area served by the
LEA (or, in the case of a charter school
that is an LEA, at least 25 percent of the
students enrolled in the school) are from
families with incomes below the
poverty line based on the most recent
satisfactory data available from the U.S.
Census Bureau at the time a notice
inviting applications is published.
National not-for-profit (NNP)
organization means an agency,
organization, or institution owned and
operated by one or more corporations or
associations whose net earnings do not
benefit, and cannot lawfully benefit, any
private shareholder or entity. In
addition, it means, for the purposes of
this program, an organization of
national scope that is supported by staff
or affiliates at the State and local levels,
who may include volunteers, and that
has a demonstrated history of effectively
developing and implementing literacy
activities. Note: A local affiliate of an
NNP does not meet the definition of
NNP. Only a national agency,
E:\FR\FM\28FEP1.SGM
28FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules
organization, or institution is eligible to
apply as an NNP.
Rural local educational agency (Rural
LEA) means an LEA that is eligible
under the Small Rural School
Achievement program (SRSA) or the
Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS)
program authorized under Title VI, Part
B of the ESEA at the time of application.
Universal design for learning (UDL)
means a scientifically valid framework
for guiding educational practice that (i)
provides flexibility in the ways
information is presented, in the ways
students respond or demonstrate
knowledge and skills, and in the ways
students are engaged; and (ii) reduces
barriers in instruction, provides
appropriate accommodations, supports,
and challenges, and maintains high
achievement expectations for all
students, including students with
disabilities and students who are
English Learners.
Final Priorities, Requirement, and
Definitions:
We will announce the final priorities,
requirement, and definitions in a notice
in the Federal Register. We will
determine the final priorities,
requirement, and definitions 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 one or more of these priorities,
requirement, and definitions we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the
Secretary must determine whether this
proposed 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);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:27 Feb 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
(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 proposed
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
upon 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 issuing these proposed
priorities, requirement, and definitions
only on a reasoned determination that
their benefits would justify their costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11365
In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, we selected
those approaches that would maximize
net benefits. Based on the analysis that
follows, the Department believes that
this regulatory action 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, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities.
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 compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
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.
E:\FR\FM\28FEP1.SGM
28FEP1
11366
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Dated: February 24, 2014.
Deborah Delisle,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2014–04490 Filed 2–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[GN Docket No. 13–5; WC Docket Nos. 10–
90, 13–97, FCC 14–5]
Technology Transitions; Connect
America Fund; Numbering Policies for
Modern Communications
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) seeks comment on a
number of discrete issues relating to the
rural broadband experiments and on the
appropriate budget and funding to
support initiatives for the ongoing need
for research into the future of telephone
numbering. The purpose of these
experiments is to speed market-driven
technological transitions and
innovations by preserving the core
statutory vales that exist today.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
March 31, 2014 and reply comments are
due on or before April 14, 2014. If you
anticipate that you will be submitting
comments, but find it difficult to do so
within the period of time allowed by
this document, you should advise the
contact listed below as soon as possible.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by either WC Docket No. 10–
90 or WC Docket No. 13–97, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/;. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202)
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alexander Minard, Wireline
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:27 Feb 27, 2014
Jkt 232001
Competition Bureau, (202) 418–0428 or
TTY: (202) 418–0484 for WC Docket No.
10–90, Robert Cannon, Office of
Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis,
(202) 418–2421 for WC Docket No. 13–
97.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemakings
(FNPRM’s) in WC Docket Nos. 10–90;
13–97 FCC 14–5, adopted on January 30,
2014 and released on January 31, 2014.
The full text of this document is
available for public inspection during
regular business hours in the FCC
Reference Center, Room CY–A257, 445
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC
20554. Or at the following Internet
address: https://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_
public/attachmatch/FCC-14-5A1.pdf.
Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415,
1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments on or
before the dates indicated on the first
page of this document. Comments may
be filed using the Commission’s
Electronic Comment Filing System
(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,
63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998.
D Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the Internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in
the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for
each additional docket or rulemaking
number. Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
D All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary must be
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445
12th St. SW., Room TW–A325,
Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand
deliveries must be held together with
rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes and boxes must be disposed
of before entering the building.
D Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights,
MD 20743.
D U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
addressed to 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington DC 20554.
People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
418–0432 (tty).
I. Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (WC Docket No. 10–90)
1. In the Technology Transitions
Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (Order), adopted
concurrently with these FNPRM’s, the
Commission kick started the process for
a diverse set of experiments and data
collection initiatives that will allow the
Commission and the public to evaluate
how customers are affected by the
historic technology transitions that are
transforming our nation’s voice
communications services—from a
network based on time-division
multiplexed (TDM) circuit-switched
voice services running on copper loops
to an all-Internet Protocol (IP) network
using copper, co-axial cable, wireless,
and fiber as physical infrastructure. In
this FNPRM, the Commission seeks
comment on a number of discrete issues
relating to rural broadband experiments.
The final rules that were adopted
concurrently with these FNPRM’s are
published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register.
A. Budget for Rural Broadband
Experiments
2. The Commission intends to provide
funding for experiments to extend
modern networks in rural, high-cost
areas without increasing the overall size
of the universal service fund. The USF/
ICC Transformation Order, 76 FR 73830,
November 29, 2011, directed Universal
Service Administrative Company
(USAC) to collect $4.5 billion annually
for the Connect America Fund, and, to
the extent disbursements in a given year
are less than collections, deposit the
excess in a broadband reserve account.
Because annual disbursements have
been less than $4.5 billion to date, and
funds have accumulated in the reserve
account, a limited amount of funding
could be awarded for experiments in
2014 from the reserve account without
exceeding the overall $4.5 billion
annual budget for the Connect America
Fund. The Commission proposes that a
limited amount of these unallocated
funds be made available for experiments
in any part of the country, whether
served by an incumbent price cap
carrier or rate-of-return carrier. Utilizing
these unallocated funds for rural
E:\FR\FM\28FEP1.SGM
28FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11363-11366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04490]
[[Page 11363]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2013-OESE-0159; CFDA Number: 84.215G]
Proposed Priorities, Requirement, and Definitions--Innovative
Approaches to Literacy (IAL) Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education (Department).
ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirement, and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, a requirement, and definitions under the IAL
program. The Assistant Secretary may use the priorities, requirement,
and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later
years. We take this action to ensure IAL projects will be supported, at
a minimum, by evidence of strong theory, and to focus Federal financial
assistance on projects that serve rural local educational agencies
(LEAs).
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 31, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under ``Are you new to the site?''
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed regulations, address
them to David Moore Miller, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., room 3E241, Washington, DC 20202-6200.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only information that they wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melvin Graham, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 3E334, Washington, DC 20202-
6200. Telephone: (202) 260-8268 or by email: melvin.graham@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:
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 priorities, requirement, and
definitions, we urge you to identify clearly the specific proposed
priority, requirement, or definition that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed
priorities, requirement, and definitions. 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 these proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov.
You may also inspect the comments in person in room 3E241 400 Maryland
Avenue SW., Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington,
DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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 IAL program is to support
high-quality projects designed to develop and improve literacy skills
for children and students from birth through 12th grade within the
attendance boundaries of high-need LEAs and schools.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7243-7243b.
Proposed Priorities:
This notice contains two proposed priorities.
Proposed Priority 1--High-quality plan for innovative approaches to
literacy that include book distribution, childhood literacy activities,
or both, and that is supported, at a minimum, by evidence of strong
theory (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
Background:
We have developed a priority that describes the components of a
high-quality plan and the level of evidence of effectiveness most
appropriate for the IAL program.
The components of a high-quality plan include a description of how
the activity improves literacy in early childhood, improves students'
reading ability, motivates older children to read, or teaches children
and students to read. The plan must also include a description of the
populations to be served, key goals and activities, the rationale for
the activities chosen, timeline for the project, parties responsible
for implementing the project, and the credibility of the plan.
The Secretary published final regulations in the Federal Register
on August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49338), that include a description of four
levels of evidence for the Department to use in determining the
potential effectiveness of proposed projects.
Considering that the new regulations were established, in part, to
provide incentives and opportunities to build the body of evidence of
effectiveness in education, and considering the wide range of new and
innovative approaches possible under the IAL program, we have
determined that the most appropriate level of evidence for the IAL
program is strong theory.
While there exists evidence in the field to support a higher level
of evidence for the IAL program, we selected strong theory in order to
broaden the evidence base by supporting innovative and new ideas, as
well as to empower applicants to propose activities and approaches that
have shown evidence of promise or effectiveness anecdotally or in
theory, but that have not yet been included in a published research
study or not met the requirements of a higher level of evidence.
The final regulations also note the importance of applicants
proposing project evaluations that increase the level of evidence of
the proposed project's effectiveness. In order to provide opportunities
for applicants to build the body of evidence of effectiveness in
education, we will include a related selection criterion that
encourages applicants to incorporate evaluation designs that will, if
well-implemented, produce evidence of
[[Page 11364]]
promise for future projects. Evidence of promise is a more rigorous
level of evidence than strong theory.
Proposed Priority:
To meet this priority, applicants must submit a plan that is
supported by evidence of strong theory, including a rationale for the
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice and a corresponding
logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
The applicant must submit a plan with the following information:
(a) a description of the proposed book distribution, childhood
literacy activities, or both, that are designed to improve the literacy
skills of children and students by one or more of the following--
(1) promoting early literacy and preparing young children to read;
(2) developing and improving students' reading ability;
(3) motivating older children to read; and
(4) teaching children and students to read.
(b) the age or grade spans of children and students from birth
through 12th grade to be served within the attendance boundaries of
high-need LEAs (as defined in this notice);
(c) a detailed description of the key goals, the activities to be
undertaken, the rationale for those activities, the timeline, the
parties responsible for implementing the activities, and the
credibility of the plan (as judged, in part, by the information
submitted as evidence of strong theory); and
(d)(i) a description of how the proposed project is supported by
strong theory; and (ii) the corresponding logic model (as defined in 34
CFR 77.1(c)).
Proposed Priority 2--Serving Rural LEAs
Background:
Rural school districts often lack the personnel and resources
needed to compete effectively for Federal competitive grants.
Therefore, we wish to establish a priority to better enable eligible
rural applicants to compete effectively for IAL funds.
Proposed Priority:
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose a project designed
to provide high-quality literacy programming, or distribute books, or
both, to students served by a rural LEA (as defined in this notice).
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)).
Proposed Requirement:
Background:
The IAL program is guided by the Senate report that accompanied the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (S. Rep. no. 113-71, at 173
(2013)). According to that report, funds made available under the IAL
program are for competitive awards to national not-for-profit
organizations (NNPs) or school libraries.
School libraries generally do not have the capacity to manage
Federal grants independently of the schools and districts they serve.
We believe LEAs are better equipped to compete for, and meet the
requirements of, Federal grants than are school libraries. Therefore,
school libraries should coordinate with their LEAs in competing for IAL
funds.
Proposed Requirement:
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following requirement for this
program. We may apply this requirement in any year in which this
program is in effect.
Eligibility: To be considered for an award under this competition,
an applicant must be one of the following: (1) A high-need LEA (as
defined in this notice); (2) an NNP (as defined in this notice) that
serves children and students within the attendance boundaries of one or
more high-need LEAs; (3) a consortium of NNPs that serve children and
students within the attendance boundaries of one or more high-need
LEAs; (4) a consortium of high-need LEAs; or (5) a consortium of one or
more high-need LEAs and one or more NNPs that serve children and
students within the attendance boundaries of one or more high-need
LEAs.
Proposed Definitions:
Background:
Six important terms associated with this program are not defined in
the authorizing statute, applicable regulations, or EDGAR.
Proposed Definitions:
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following definitions for this
program. We may apply one or more of these definitions in any year in
which this program is in effect.
College- and career-ready standards means content standards for
kindergarten through 12th grade that build towards college and career
readiness by the time of high school graduation. A State's college- and
career-ready standards must be either (1) standards that are common to
a significant number of States; or (2) standards that are approved by a
State network of institutions of higher education, which must certify
that students who meet the standards will not need remedial course work
at the postsecondary level.
Comprehensive statewide literacy plan means a plan (which may be a
component or modification of the plan submitted under the Striving
Readers Comprehensive Literacy formula grant program, CFDA 84.371B)
that addresses the literacy and language needs of children from birth
through 12th grade, including English Learners and students with
disabilities; aligns literacy policies, resources, and practices;
contains clear instructional goals; and sets high expectations for all
students and student subgroups.
High-need local educational agency (High-need LEA) means an LEA,
including a charter school or State-administered school that is
considered an LEA under State law, in which at least 25 percent of the
students aged 0-17 in the geographic area served by the LEA (or, in the
case of a charter school that is an LEA, at least 25 percent of the
students enrolled in the school) are from families with incomes below
the poverty line based on the most recent satisfactory data available
from the U.S. Census Bureau at the time a notice inviting applications
is published.
National not-for-profit (NNP) organization means an agency,
organization, or institution owned and operated by one or more
corporations or associations whose net earnings do not benefit, and
cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity. In
addition, it means, for the purposes of this program, an organization
of national scope that is supported by staff or affiliates at the State
and local levels, who may include volunteers, and that has a
demonstrated history of effectively developing and implementing
literacy activities. Note: A local affiliate of an NNP does not meet
the definition of NNP. Only a national agency,
[[Page 11365]]
organization, or institution is eligible to apply as an NNP.
Rural local educational agency (Rural LEA) means an LEA that is
eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement program (SRSA) or the
Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI,
Part B of the ESEA at the time of application.
Universal design for learning (UDL) means a scientifically valid
framework for guiding educational practice that (i) provides
flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students
respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students
are engaged; and (ii) reduces barriers in instruction, provides
appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains
high achievement expectations for all students, including students with
disabilities and students who are English Learners.
Final Priorities, Requirement, and Definitions:
We will announce the final priorities, requirement, and definitions
in a notice in the Federal Register. We will determine the final
priorities, requirement, and definitions 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 one or more of these priorities, requirement,
and definitions 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 upon 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 issuing these proposed priorities, requirement, and
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes
that this regulatory action 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, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
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 compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
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.
[[Page 11366]]
Dated: February 24, 2014.
Deborah Delisle,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2014-04490 Filed 2-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P