Equity Assistance Centers (Formerly Desegregation Assistance Centers (DAC)), 46807-46817 [2016-16811]
Download as PDF
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 137
July 18, 2016
Part III
Department of Education
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
34 CFR Chapter II, Parts 270, 271, and 272
Equity Assistance Centers (Formerly Desegregation Assistance Centers
(DAC)); Final Priority and Requirement—Equity Assistance Centers; Final
Rules; Applications for New Awards; Equity Assistance Centers; Notice
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
46808
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 270, 271, and 272
RIN 1810–AB26
[Docket ID ED–2016–OESE–0006]
Equity Assistance Centers (Formerly
Desegregation Assistance Centers
(DAC))
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
AGENCY:
The Secretary amends the
regulations that govern the Equity
Assistance Centers (EAC) program,
authorized under Title IV of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (Title IV), and
removes the regulations that govern the
State Educational Agency Desegregation
(SEA Desegregation) program,
authorized under Title IV. These
regulations govern the application
process for new EAC grant awards.
These regulations update the definitions
applicable to this program; remove the
existing selection criteria; and provide
the Secretary with flexibility to
determine the number and composition
of geographic regions for the EAC
program.
DATES: These regulations are effective
August 17, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britt
Jung, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3E206,
Washington, DC 20202–6135.
Telephone: (202) 205–4513 or by email:
britt.jung@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: On March
24, 2016, the Secretary published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
for the EAC program (81 FR 15665). In
the preamble of the NPRM, we
discussed on pages 15666 through
15667 the major changes proposed in
that document to improve the EAC
program. These included the following:
• Amending the section that governs
the existing geographic regions to allow
the Secretary flexibility in choosing the
number and composition of geographic
regions to be funded with each
competition.
• Adding religion to the areas of
desegregation assistance, adding a
definition for ‘‘special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation,’’
and amending the definition of ‘‘sex
desegregation’’ to clarify the protected
individuals identified by this term.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
• Removing the existing selection
criteria, to instead rely on the general
selection criteria listed under the
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) at
34 CFR 75.210.
• Removing the limitations and
exceptions established in current 34
CFR 270.6 on providing desegregation
assistance, to align these regulations
with those of other technical assistance
centers.
• Removing 34 CFR part 271, as the
SEA Desegregation program has not
been funded in twenty years, as well as
merging part 272 into part 270, so that
a single part covers the EAC program.
These final regulations contain
changes from the NPRM, which are fully
explained in the Analysis of Comments
and Changes section of this document.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the NPRM, 108 parties
submitted comments on the proposed
regulations. We discuss substantive
issues under the section number of the
item to which they pertain. Several
comments did not pertain to a specific
section of the proposed regulations. We
discuss these comments based on the
general topic area. Generally, we do not
address technical and other minor
changes. In addition, we do not address
comments that raise concerns not
directly related to the proposed
regulations.
Analysis of Comments and Changes:
An analysis of the comments and of any
changes in the regulations since
publication of the NPRM follows.
General Comments
Comment: Numerous commenters
wrote to express their support and
appreciation of the previous work of the
EACs.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates the support for this program
and for the past work of the EACs.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters wrote
to express their support for updating the
program name and related definitions to
refer to ‘‘Equity Assistance Centers’’
rather than Desegregation Assistance
Centers. However, a few commenters
objected to the Department amending
the definition of a ‘‘Desegregation
Assistance Center’’ to refer to it as an
Equity Assistance Center. These
commenters proposed alternate names,
such as Integration and Equity
Assistance Centers (IEACS),
Desegregation and Equity Assistance
Centers (DEACs) or Civil Rights Equity
Assistance Centers (CREACs).
Discussion: The Department
appreciates the support expressed by
many commenters for these changes.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The Department declines to adopt the
commenters’ alternate suggestions for
names, as we maintain that the term
‘‘equity’’ better reflects the breadth of
desegregation activities currently
undertaken by the regional centers.
Also, we note that the Department has
for some time referred to the regional
centers as ‘‘Equity Assistance Centers’’
in the notices inviting applications, in
cooperative agreements, and on the
Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education’s (OESE’s) Web page for the
grant program. Ultimately, the purpose
of the regional centers is to ensure
equitable access to educational
opportunities for all students without
regard to race, sex, national origin, or
religion. Therefore, we believe it is
appropriate to formally refer to the
regional centers as ‘‘Equity Assistance
Centers.’’
Changes: None.
Comment: Some commenters
requested that we delay the
implementation of these regulations
until we engage in further consultation
with the existing EACs, tribes, or other
stakeholders.
Discussion: The Department solicited
public comment on the open issues
affecting these regulations through the
NPRM. Existing EACs, along with other
stakeholders, were notified of the
proposed regulations multiple times
throughout the comment period. The
Department provided the existing EACs
with the same opportunity to comment
on the proposed regulations as all other
interested parties. Further, we note that
these proposed regulations do not
trigger the need for tribal consultation;
while American Indian and Alaska
Native students may benefit as a result
of the EAC program, the program is
aimed at servicing all LEAs seeking
assistance with desegregation problems,
and not directly Indian tribes. Thus, we
decline to postpone the implementation
of these regulations for the purpose of
further consultation.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the EACs renew a programmatic
focus on supporting school integration
efforts, and provide assistance for policy
efforts designed to bring students
together. This commenter also suggested
the Department increase EAC
accountability in reporting outputs,
outcomes, best practices, and what
works, to expand resources and
awareness to a wide array of
communities.
Discussion: The Department supports
the continued development of an EAC
program that works to ensure that
students are brought together through
eliminating segregation in schools on
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the basis of race, national origin, sex
and religion. The Department agrees
that accountability plays an important
role in this process, and directs this
commenter to our Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
measures, which measure the work of
the EACs using a variety of criteria, and
performance reporting requirements
including annual performance reports,
annual evaluations, and financial
reports. These can be found in the
notice inviting applications for new
awards published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register. When
running competitions for the EAC
program, the Department hopes to
attract applicants that will consider a
range of methods for addressing the
needs of each geographic region, which
may include identifying different
strategies to expand resources and
awareness to a wide array of
communities within the region. Finally,
as to the sharing of best practices, the
Department notes that under
§ 270.30(b), each EAC is expected to
coordinate assistance in its geographic
regions with appropriate SEAs,
Comprehensive Centers, Regional
Educational Laboratories, and other
Federal technical assistance centers,
which could include the soliciting and
sharing of best practices.
Changes: None.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
Removal of Previous 34 CFR Part 271
Comment: Some commenters
requested that the Department retain the
regulations for the SEA Desegregation
Program under existing 34 CFR part 271.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates, but disagrees with, these
comments. Congress has not funded the
SEA Desegregation program in more
than 20 years, and as a result, the
Department no longer administers this
program. Given these circumstances, the
Department believes that retaining the
SEA Desegregation program regulations
under part 271 is not in the public
interest, and could only result in public
confusion. Thus, the Department will
move forward in removing 34 CFR part
271, and consolidating current part 272
into part 270.
Changes: None.
Removal of Previous § 272.30: What
criteria does the Secretary use to make
a grant?
Comment: Several commenters
objected to the Department removing
the selection criteria under previous
§ 272.30. Specifically, some of these
commenters stated that the existing
selection criteria are necessary because
they are tailored to the special needs of
the civil rights community. Another
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
commenter requested that the selection
criteria specify that the EACs can
provide assistance in all desegregation
assistance areas, and that EACs can help
to combat religious discrimination
without decreasing other civil rights
protections. Another commenter
suggested that the Department consider
an understanding of the elements
required to effect real and lasting change
versus information dissemination.
Discussion: The Department believes
that using the general selection criteria
listed in 34 CFR 75.210 will provide the
Secretary with the necessary flexibility
to ensure that the selection criteria
reflect the needs and concerns
identified at the time of each
competition, including those of the civil
rights community. The general selection
criteria have been vetted and tested
across many Departmental programs,
and provide a wide range of factors for
evaluating applications in any
competition. In addition, adoption of
the general selection criteria would
allow the Secretary to improve the
selection process, based upon
experience gained in running the
program.
With regard to the concern that EACs
be able to provide assistance in all
desegregation assistance areas, we
decline to add this as a selection
criterion because we will be using the
general selection criteria under 34 CFR
75.210. However, the Department will
ensure that through those criteria, we
will select grantees that have the
capability to provide technical
assistance across all areas of
desegregation assistance. The
Department expects that each grantee
will have the capacity to provide all
types of desegregation assistance, in
accordance with requests for technical
assistance. Finally, with regard to the
concern that the selected EACs be able
to effect real and lasting change, we
expect that future grantees will continue
the strong work of current and past EAC
grantees, and will provide appropriate
levels of technical assistance depending
on the requests. This may take the form
of information dissemination, which is
often necessary to effect change.
However, we believe that the selected
EACs will be in the best position to
determine the appropriate level of
technical assistance in response to each
request and that such technical
assistance will be of sufficient quality,
intensity, and duration to lead to
improvements in practice among the
eligible entities receiving those services.
Changes: None.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
46809
§ 270.4 What types of projects are
authorized under this program?
Comment: Several commenters
expressed support for the addition of
‘‘community organizations’’ to the list of
parties that may receive desegregation
assistance under this program.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates the support for these
changes.
Changes: None.
§ 270.5 What geographic regions do
the EACs serve?
Comment: Several commenters asked
that the Department maintain ten
geographic regions, rather than reducing
to four geographic regions. Among
these, some commenters stated that
demand for EAC services is rising, and
expressed concern as to how four
geographic regions could meet those
demands. Some commenters requested
that we instead increase the number of
geographic regions.
Discussion: The Department believes
that allowing the Secretary to determine
the number and composition of
geographic regions for the program is
necessary to maximize the program
funds devoted to technical assistance.
As noted in the NPRM, Congress has
reduced funding for the EAC program
significantly since the program was first
created. The Department will limit the
number of centers to provide each
center with more funding, which will
help to ensure a greater percentage of
funds are used to provide technical
assistance and a smaller percentage of
funds are devoted to overhead costs.
Were the EAC program to receive
additional funding in the future, the
Department may consider increasing the
number of geographic regions, as
appropriate.
With regard to the commenters who
expressed concern that the demand for
EAC services is rising, the Department
notes that the regulations seek to
streamline EAC services. Thus, the
Department believes that these changes
will help alleviate issues of excess
demand, rather than aggravate them.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters asked the
Department to clarify how potential
grantees will be able to identify partners
and the needs of States if the geographic
regions will not be announced until the
notice inviting applications.
Discussion: The Department expects
that a data-driven approach to
identifying regional needs will help
potential applicants anticipate the needs
of each region and make better use of
existing resources, including other
Federal technical assistance providers
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
46810
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
and Federal, State, and local data
sources. In addition, the Department
anticipates that this will be an ongoing
process, and that needs of the States and
LEAs within each region will become
more apparent throughout the project
period. Similarly, while the Department
expects applicants will have baseline
knowledge of potential partners within
the geographic region, we hope that
grantees will identify new partners
throughout the project period, as
appropriate.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern with the proposed
criteria for determining the number and
boundaries of the geographic regions. In
addition, several commenters suggested
that changing these criteria during an
election year would create additional
risk to the program. Finally, some
commenters expressed general concern
that providing the Secretary with
flexibility to determine the number and
composition of geographic regions for
the program would expose the centers to
political influences.
Discussion: The Department has
identified objective criteria that will be
used to establish both the number and
the geographic boundaries of each
region to be served by the EACs.
Through the NPRM, we solicited
comments on what factors the Secretary
should consider when determining the
composition of States in each
geographic region, and gave careful
consideration to all suggestions. As
such, we believe that the criteria
identified are sufficient to ensure that
boundaries of the new geographic
regions are based on appropriate data,
and reflect the underlying needs of
those regions.
Similarly, because the Department
established the criteria for geographic
boundaries through public comment
and the boundaries will be based on
objective measures, we believe the
published criteria we will use when
determining the number and
composition of geographic regions for
the EAC program insulate the EAC
geographic boundary determinations
from political influence.
Changes: None.
Comment: Some commenters
suggested that the Department could
allow the centers within each existing
region to determine which States and
LEAs in its region should receive
focused attention based on available
data.
Discussion: Title IV and our
implementing regulations limit the
centers to providing services upon
request. The demand-driven nature of
the program precludes the regional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
centers from focusing on specific States
or LEAs without a request from those
States or LEAs. Please note that once an
EAC has developed materials in
response to a request for technical
assistance, that EAC may make those
materials available to other interested
parties.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern that these regulations
could jeopardize the relationships
between the existing centers and their
clients, or would compromise crosscenter collaboration. Similarly, several
commenters expressed concern that
changing the current EAC serving a
particular geographic region could affect
the viability of multi-year projects
underway in that region.
Discussion: While we appreciate
commenters’ concern that these
regulations could disrupt the
relationships between existing centers
and their clients, we note that the EAC
funds are awarded to centers through a
competitive grant process. Therefore,
there is always, and has always been, a
possibility that the center will change
during a new award cycle. The
Department seeks to ensure that
program funds are awarded to the most
qualified applicants, which will ensure
that program funds are used to
maximum effect.
The Department appreciates the
commenters’ commitment to
implementing comprehensive, multiyear plans for combating issues of
inequity within their region. The
Department notes that the EAC program
will continue to fund multi-year grants,
and the centers will continue to support
multi-year technical assistance activities
to improve equity, when necessary.
The Department agrees with
commenters that ensuring continuity of
services is essential to the work of the
EAC program. Therefore, we are revising
§ 270.30 to require that the EACs
selected following a new competition
will work with current EACs to support
a smooth transition and to minimize
disruption for the intended
beneficiaries.
Changes: We have revised § 270.30 to
include § 270.30(c), which requires that
the EACs selected following a new
competition must work with current
EACs to support a smooth transition and
to minimize disruption in the provision
of technical assistance.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern that, were the
Department to reduce the number of
geographic regions from 10 to 4, a
number of beneficiaries would no longer
receive services from the EAC program,
or would no longer be able to afford
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
them. Commenters expressed particular
concern that this could lead to a
reduction in services for English
learners, low-income, or rural students.
Similarly, some commenters expressed
concern that consolidating the
geographic regions would lead to
increased competition between the
LEAs in that region. Finally, several
commenters expressed a concern that
the EACs would focus on serving highly
impacted States.
Discussion: The Department does not
anticipate that changing the number of
geographic regions will result in a
reduction in EAC technical assistance
provided. First, with regard to demand
for services, we note that EACs provide
assistance where requested by school
boards or other responsible
governmental agencies. These services
are and will continue to be provided
free to responsible governmental
agencies and we do not anticipate any
impact on the number of requests for
assistance from the EACs because of the
reduction in the number of geographic
regions. With regard to the ability of the
EACs to continue to meet the demand
for services, the Department believes
that consolidating the number of
geographic regions will increase
efficiency in the use of time, staff,
money, and other resources and
increase the magnitude of direct
technical assistance. We also anticipate
that applicants will propose approaches
to technical assistance that include the
use of existing resources and emerging
technologies to improve coordination of
center staff and continuous oversight of
assistance activities. Furthermore, these
regulations do not alter the level of
funding established by Congress for the
EAC program. As such, the resources
available to fund EACs nationwide, as
demand dictates, remain the same. For
these reasons, we also disagree with the
assertion that consolidating the
geographic regions could lead to
heightened competition amongst the
LEAs within each consolidated region.
The Department agrees with
commenters that it is important to
ensure that LEAs with high numbers of
low-income students, rural LEAs, and
other traditionally underserved
populations continue to benefit from the
EAC program. The Department intends
to expand the reach of the EACs through
these regulations by improving the
effectiveness and efficiency of the
delivery of services.
We note that the regulations do not
use the terms ‘‘high impacted States’’ or
‘‘highly impacted States.’’ As noted
above, the regulations will not cause the
EACs to focus on certain States within
a region, because EACs provide services
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
when responsible governmental
agencies request assistance, not when
EACs conduct outreach. Thus, as is now
the case, EACs will continue to serve
eligible entities within an entire
geographic region, upon request for
assistance. Please note that once an EAC
has developed materials in response to
a request for technical assistance, that
EAC may make those materials available
to other interested parties.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern regarding the
potential costs associated with
consolidating the geographic regions. Of
these commenters, many were
concerned that consolidation would
result in overreliance on remote
technical assistance by the EACs.
Although some commenters supported
EACs increasing their use of technology,
many expressed a belief that the work
of the EACs necessitates face-to-face
interaction. In addition, some
commenters stated that the EACs could
not increase the use of remote technical
assistance because the EACs are already
utilizing technology to the maximum
extent possible. Moreover, some
commenters expressed concern that
poor and rural LEAs and Indian
reservations do not have the
technological infrastructure to support
remote technical assistance. Finally,
some commenters expressed concern
that consolidation of the geographic
regions would result in increased travel
costs, as well as the need for more staff
and infrastructure within each EAC.
Discussion: The Department believes
that the concerns of the commenters are
unwarranted. The Department stresses
that, while we will consolidate the
number of geographic regions, each
region will receive a commensurate
portion of EAC program funds. The
increased funding for each new
geographic region should at least
partially offset any increased costs for
travel, and enable the centers to accrue
the necessary staff and infrastructure to
serve that geographic region. The
Department expects that the EACs will
continue to provide on-the-ground
technical assistance, and appreciates
that such interaction is often a necessary
part of combatting entrenched issues
that contribute to segregation.
In order to reach a wide array of
eligible entities, we also expect that the
EACs will enhance their technical
assistance capacities through
technology. As noted in the NPRM, the
Internet now allows EACs to provide
effective and coordinated technical
assistance across much greater
geographic distances than would have
been possible when the previous
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
regulations were promulgated in 1987.
Thus, while we acknowledge that the
EACs already make great use of
technology, we expect that the EACs
will need to continue to expand their
use of technology to reflect the best
practices and most current capabilities
for providing remote technical
assistance. In addition, we note that the
current regulations are not intended to
curtail in-person technical assistance,
but rather acknowledge that significant
advances in technology enable EACs to
use a variety of methods for providing
technical assistance, and that decreases
in funding over the past three decades
demand that the EACs continue to find
novel methods of providing assistance
in order to reach a broad range of
eligible entities. Furthermore, we note
that under the current structure of ten
geographic regions, the EACs are
already integrating the use of technology
to serve the large, geographically
dispersed populations within the region
and cannot respond to every request
with in-person technical assistance.
Thus, the EACs will need to continue to
exercise professional judgment in
considering whether a request for
technical assistance can be addressed
through remote technical assistance.
The Department expects that centers
will consider whether there are any
barriers to providing and receiving
technical assistance remotely. As such,
the Department expects that highquality applicants for funding under the
EAC program will propose effective and
efficient ways to serve the needs of the
entire region.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters
expressed concern that reducing the
number of regions could negatively
affect the collaborative work that the
EACs conduct with the Office for Civil
Rights (OCR) and Department of Justice
(DOJ), or that EACs would have to limit
the role they play in supporting
individual LEAs reaching settlement
agreements with OCR or DOJ. Some of
these commenters stated that OCR needs
300 new field investigators, and that
reducing the number of EACs would
contribute to this void. Other
commenters stated that EACs provide
technical assistance and training to DOJ
and OCR, and expressed a concern that
these entities would no longer receive
training were the number of geographic
regions to be consolidated.
Discussion: The Department
anticipates that the EACs will continue
to collaborate with the OCR and DOJ, as
appropriate. The Department does not
anticipate that the EACs will scale back
collaboration with these entities,
because each EAC will receive funding
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
46811
commensurate with the size of the
geographic region. Thus, each EAC will
have comparable resources to support
LEAs in meeting settlement agreements,
upon request.
However, we note that while these
entities all address civil rights matters,
the role of the EACs is different from,
and independent of, the role of OCR and
DOJ. It would be inappropriate to base
any aspect of the EAC program on the
amount of resources devoted to
programs aimed at providing similar
services to eligible entities. Thus, it is
inappropriate to consider the number of
OCR field investigators when
considering the number of regions for
the EAC program. Finally, the
Department notes that persons served by
the EAC program are limited by section
270.3 to include public school
personnel, students, parents,
community organizations and other
community members. Thus, while the
Department anticipates that the EACs
will continue to collaborate with OCR
and DOJ, it would be inappropriate for
the EACs to provide technical assistance
to OCR or DOJ using grant funds
provided under these regulations.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters
proposed additional criteria the
Secretary should consider when
determining the size and number of the
geographic regions. One commenter
suggested the Secretary group
contiguous States into regions. Other
commenters suggested the Secretary
consider: Each proposed geographic
region’s history with inequities; whether
a geographic area contains urban,
suburban, rural, or frontier populations;
the size and diversity of the student
population; emerging issues in the field;
active school desegregation cases;
geographic miles served and number of
LEAs; and number of civil rights
complaints filed over a given time
period in each region. Additional
commenters suggested that the
Department consider the distrust of
Federal government agencies; the
historical relationship between the
Federal government and tribal schools,
and the element of trust within that
relationship; cultural affinity; the
weather; and the politics of the region.
Discussion: The Department agrees
with one commenter’s suggestion that
priority be given to grouping contiguous
States into regions, as States in similar
geographic regions tend to face similar
equity issues. The Department also
plans to examine each region’s history
in addressing issues of equity, active
school desegregation cases, number of
civil rights complaints, and emerging
issues in the field by examining the
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
46812
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
history of EAC and other Departmental
technical assistance activities. The
Department will limit its analysis to the
composition of urban, city, and rural
LEAs in each geographic region, because
these are the designations for which we
have available data. The size and
diversity of the student population is
included within § 270.5(c)(1). In
addition, the number of LEAs in each
geographic region is included under
§ 270.5(c)(2), and the Department
believes this is a better measurement of
the need of a region than geographic
miles covered. The Department declines
to incorporate all additional suggested
criteria, because they are not aligned
with the goals of the program and there
is no clear way of measuring those
suggested criteria.
Changes: We have revised § 270.5(c)
to include a consideration of the
geographic proximity of the States
within each region.
Comment: One commenter expressed
concern that consolidating the number
of EACs would expand the EACs’ scope
of responsibility into areas and issues
associated with geographic regions for
which they are not familiar.
Discussion: The Department expects
high-quality applicants to be able to
provide technical assistance across all
desegregation assistance areas the
program covers. The Department further
expects that, if an EAC did not have
experience in addressing a request for
technical assistance, it would develop
that expertise or partner with other
EACs or Federal technical assistance
centers to develop that expertise
collaboratively. Such coordination
would be within the scope of
§ 270.30(b), which requires EACs to
coordinate assistance with appropriate
SEAs, Comprehensive Centers, Regional
Educational Laboratories, and other
Federal technical assistance centers.
The Department expects high-quality
applicants to identify adequate supports
and leverage all available resources,
including non-Federal resources, in
light of the program’s current funding
level. In doing so, we believe that EACs
will have the capacity to effectively
respond to the particular needs of each
region.
Changes: None.
Section 270.7 What definitions apply
to this program?
Comment: Several commenters
expressed support for the Department
clarifying and updating the definition of
‘‘sex desegregation’’ to explain that sex
desegregation includes desegregation
based on transgender status, gender
identity, sex stereotypes, and pregnancy
and related conditions consistent with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
the Department’s interpretation of ‘‘sex’’
under Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) and
implementing regulations, and the
interpretations and rules of other
Federal agencies. No commenters
opposed including all of these terms in
the Department’s proposed definition.
In addition, some commenters suggested
that the definition of ‘‘sex
desegregation’’ should include
desegregation based on ‘‘sexual
orientation,’’ and that sex stereotyping
should specify that stereotypical notions
of gender include the sex-role
expectation that females should be
attracted to and romantically involved
only with males (and not females) and
that males should be attracted to and
romantically involved only with females
(and not males).
Discussion: In the NPRM, the
Department noted that it updated the
definition of ‘‘sex desegregation’’ to
clarify to whom it applies and highlight
some emerging issues for which EACs
may provide technical assistance,
including the treatment of students with
regard to sex stereotypes.
In the NPRM, the Department also
noted that the inclusion of ‘‘sex
stereotypes’’ was aligned with our
Office for Civil Rights’ interpretation of
the prohibition of sex discrimination in
Title IX and its regulations, and was
consistent with other Federal agencies’
recent regulatory proposals, which
defined ‘‘sex stereotypes’’ to include
treating a person differently because he
or she does not conform to sex-role
expectations by being in a relationship
with a person of the same sex. After the
NRPM, the Department of Health and
Human Services and the Department of
Labor both issued final regulations
providing that sex stereotyping includes
expectations related to the appropriate
roles and behavior of a certain sex. 81
FR 31,376, 31,468 (May 18, 2016) (to be
codified at 45 CFR 92.4); 81 FR 39,108,
39,168 (June 15, 2016) (to be codified at
41 CFR 60–20.7(a)(3)).
Some Federal district courts have
recognized in the wake of the Supreme
Court’s decision in Price Waterhouse v.
Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), that
discrimination on the basis of ‘‘sex’’
includes discrimination based on sex
stereotypes about sexual attraction and
sexual behavior or about deviations
from ‘‘heterosexually defined gender
norms.’’ See, e.g., Videckis v.
Pepperdine Univ., No.
CV1500298DDPJCX, 2015 WL 8916764
(C.D. Cal. Dec. 15, 2015); Isaacs v.
Felder, 2015 WL 6560655 (M.D. Ala.
Oct. 29, 2015); Baldwin v. Dep’t of
Transp., Appeal No. 0120133080,
Agency No. 2012–24738–FAA–03 (July
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
15, 2015) (‘‘Sexual orientation
discrimination . . . is sex
discrimination because it necessarily
involves discrimination based on gender
stereotypes.’’). For example, Videckis
held that the distinction between
discrimination based on gender
stereotyping and sexual orientation is
artificial, and that claims based on
sexual orientation are covered by Title
VII and Title IX as sex or gender
discrimination. As the Department
noted in the NPRM, interpretations of
Title IX and its regulations are
particularly relevant to the meaning of
‘‘sex’’ under Title IV because Congress’s
1972 amendment to Title IV to add sex
as an appropriate desegregation
assistance area was included in Title IX.
Discrimination against an individual
because he or she does not conform to
sex-role expectations by being attracted
to or in a relationship with a person of
the same sex will inevitably rely on sex
stereotypes. Therefore, in order to
provide clarity for EACs on a type of sex
discrimination on which they may
provide technical assistance, the
Department is amending the regulation
by adding this language after the
reference to ‘‘sex stereotypes’’ as an
example of one included in the
commentary of the NPRM.
Changes: The Department will amend
the definition of ‘‘sex desegregation’’ to
add the phrase ‘‘such as treating a
person differently because he or she
does not conform to sex-role
expectations because he or she is
attracted to or is in a relationship with
a person of the same sex’’ after ‘‘sex
stereotypes.’’
Comment: Several commenters
expressed support for the Department’s
proposal to add a definition of ‘‘religion
desegregation,’’ and to incorporate
religion into the definitions of
‘‘desegregation assistance’’ and
‘‘desegregation assistance areas.’’
Additional commenters supported the
addition, but requested that the
Department amend the definition of
‘‘religion desegregation’’ or provide
additional guidance to ensure that this
does not result in harm to other
students’ civil rights, result in
discrimination, or deprive any student
of educational opportunities due to
another student’s religious beliefs. In
addition, one commenter expressed that
the Department should add ‘‘religious
desegregation’’ only if additional funds
are provided. Finally, one commenter
opposed the addition of ‘‘religion
desegregation’’ as being out of alignment
with the other desegregation assistance
activities carried out under this
program.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Discussion: First, the Department
appreciates the support expressed by
many commenters for these changes.
The Department is satisfied that the
definition of ‘‘religion desegregation’’
set forth in the proposed regulations is
the most appropriate one for the work
of the EAC program. The Department
notes that religion is specifically
included in the definition of
‘‘desegregation’’ in Section 401 of Title
IV, the statute authorizing the EAC
program. Under Title IV the Secretary is
authorized to provide technical
assistance to support the desegregation
of public schools and the assignment of
students to schools without regard to
religion. The addition of ‘‘religious
desegregation’’ does not alter the civil
rights of students, but rather provides
the EACs the ability to assist schools to
address religion desegregation matters.
The Department is aware of an
increasing number of incidents of antiSemitic bullying and harassment in
public schools. See, e.g., T.E. v. Pine
Bush Cent. Sch. Dist., 58 F. Supp. 3d
332 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). In addition, the
Department is aware of reports
documenting that students who are or
are perceived as Hindu, Muslim, Sikh,
Arab, Middle Eastern, South Asian, or
Southeast Asian are frequent targets of
bullying and harassment. Given the
increasing religious diversity in the
United States, and the increased tension
that has developed in many of our
schools related to a student’s actual or
perceived religion, the Department
believes these regulations are necessary
to provide support and technical
assistance for schools to assist in
developing effective strategies to ensure
all students have a full opportunity to
participate in educational programs,
regardless of religion. The Department
believes that the need and ability for
EACs to provide technical assistance to
address religion desegregation should
not be tied to the EAC funding levels.
Accordingly, the Department declines to
change the regulations based on these
comments.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Department update the
definition of ‘‘race desegregation’’ to
reflect the nature of modern
desegregation efforts. Another
commenter expressed concern that the
caveat that ‘‘race desegregation’’ does
not mean the assignment of students to
public schools to correct conditions of
racial separation that are not the result
of State or local law or official action
was too limiting. This commenter
suggested that the Department define
racial desegregation ‘‘to include racial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
integration efforts permitted by law and
the Department’s guidance.’’
Discussion: The definition of ‘‘race
desegregation’’ is rooted in the
definition of ‘‘desegregation’’ under
section 401 of Title IV. In section 401(b),
Congress defined ‘‘desegregation’’ to
mean the assignment of students to
public schools and within such schools
without regard to their race, color,
religion, sex, or national origin. The
definition under section 401(b) specifies
that ‘‘desegregation’’ shall not mean the
assignment of students to public schools
in order to overcome racial imbalance.
Thus, the Department believes that the
current definition of ‘‘race
desegregation’’ incorporates the
statutory definition.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested
that the Department amend the
definition of ‘‘Special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation’’
to problems that arise ‘‘in the course of’’
rather than ‘‘as a result of’’
desegregation efforts. Another
commenter suggested that the
Department change the term ‘‘special
educational problems occasioned by
desegregation,’’ rather than add a
definition for the existing term. Both
expressed that the term and its
definition presented a deficit-based
perspective on desegregation activities,
rather than focusing on the benefits of
these activities.
Discussion: The term ‘‘special
educational problems occasioned by
desegregation’’ is rooted in section 403
of Title IV, which states that technical
assistance may, among other activities,
include making available to such
agencies information regarding effective
methods of coping with special
educational problems occasioned by
desegregation. Thus, we decline to alter
the term ‘‘special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation.’’ However,
the Department agrees that the
underlying definition would be better
served by referring to problems that
arise ‘‘in the course of’’ rather than ‘‘as
a result of’’ desegregation efforts
because the language of the former more
accurately reflects the scope of activities
covered under ‘‘special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation.’’
Changes: We have revised the
definition of ‘‘special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation’’
under § 270.7 to mean those issues that
arise in classrooms, schools, and
communities in the course of
desegregation efforts based on race,
national origin, sex, or religion.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that the Department adopt language
requiring greater parent and parent
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
46813
organization engagement in informing
EAC work with schools and LEAs.
Similarly, another commenter
advocated that the Department require
successful applicants to demonstrate
substantive partnership with parent
organizations.
Discussion: Proposed § 270.4 added
‘‘community organizations’’ to the list of
parties that may receive desegregation
assistance under this program. The
Department interprets ‘‘community
organizations’’ to include parent
organizations. The Department believes
that this addition will enable greater
parent organization involvement in EAC
technical assistance activities.
Furthermore, we note that parents of
students are eligible to receive technical
assistance under the EAC program.
With regard to the request that the
Department require successful
applicants to the EAC program to
demonstrate substantive partnership
with parent organizations, the
Department expects that the EACs will
engage all interested beneficiaries and
eligible stakeholders within an LEA that
requests technical assistance. However,
the Department believes that the EACs
are in the best position to assess who to
engage based on the factual situation
encountered, in order to successfully
address an identified need for
desegregation assistance. Thus, the
Department declines to add a
requirement that applicants demonstrate
a substantive partnership with parent
organizations.
Changes: None.
Section 270.32 What limitation is
imposed on providing Equity Assistance
under this program?
Comment: One commenter opposed
proposed § 270.32 and suggested that
the Department clarify that the
regulation will not prevent EACs from
assisting LEAs in need of support and
assistance with inclusive curriculum
design. Another commenter proposed
that the Department amend current
§ 270.6(b) to read that the activities
prohibited under § 270.6(a) do not
prohibit the DACs from assisting LEAs
with implementing appropriate
language services for English Learner
students.
Discussion: Consistent with the
General Education Provisions Act, 20
U.S.C. 1232(a), we cannot and do not
authorize centers to exercise direction
or control over the curriculum. The
Department believes it necessary to
amend previous § 270.6(b) because, as
drafted, § 270.6(b) could be
misconstrued to permit the
development or implementation of
activities for direct instruction;
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
46814
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
removing this provision will ensure
clarity. The Department agrees that
EACs could provide technical assistance
to ensure that English learner programs
do not unjustifiably segregate students
on the basis of national origin or English
learner status, consistent with our ‘‘Dear
Colleague Letter: English Learner
Students and Limited English Proficient
Parents’’ (Jan. 7, 2015), (https://
www2.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-el201501.pdf). Because the Department
has developed publicly available
guidance on the responsibilities of SEAs
and LEAs to ensure equal educational
opportunities for English learners, we
do not believe it is necessary to add this
to the regulation.
Changes: None.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
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.
Discussion of Costs and Benefits: We
have determined that the potential costs
associated with this regulatory action
will be minimal while the potential
benefits are significant.
For EAC grants, applicants may
anticipate costs in developing their
applications. Application, submission,
and participation in a competitive
discretionary grant program are
voluntary. The final regulations will
create flexibility for us to use general
selection criteria listed in EDGAR
75.210. We believe that any criterion
from EDGAR 75.210 used in a grant
competition will not impose a financial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
burden that applicants would not
otherwise incur in the development and
submission of a grant application. Other
losses may stem from the reduction of
the number of regional centers for those
applicants that do not receive a grant in
future funding years, including the costs
of phasing out those centers and
associated job losses. Additionally, due
to the consolidation of EACs, the
remaining geographic regions will cover
a larger geographic range. As a result,
future grantees may experience
increased travel costs in providing inperson technical assistance. However,
this should be offset in part by an
increased amount of funding,
commensurate with the size of its
geographic region.
We do not believe that reducing the
number of regions will prevent EACs
from providing technical assistance
across the country. Technological
advancements allow EACs to provide
effective and coordinated technical
assistance across much greater
geographic distances than when the
previous regulations were promulgated.
The benefits include enhancing
project design and quality of services to
better meet the statutory objectives of
the programs. These changes will allow
more funds to be used directly for
providing technical assistance to
responsible governmental agencies for
their work in equity and desegregation,
by reducing the amount of funds
directed to overhead costs. The
flexibility of the geographic regions will
increase the Department’s ability to be
strategic with limited resources. In
addition, these changes will result in
each center receiving a greater
percentage of the overall funds for the
program, and this greater percentage
and amount of funds for each selected
applicant will help to incentivize an
increased quality and diversity of
applicants.
In addition, the Secretary believes
that students covered under sex
desegregation and religion desegregation
will strongly benefit from the final
regulations. The revised definition of
‘‘sex desegregation’’ will provide
clarification regarding the scope of
issues covered under sex desegregation,
removing any confusion about
appropriate technical assistance. For
religion desegregation, grantees will
need to provide technical assistance to
responsible governmental agencies
seeking assistance on this subject, but
the costs associated with these new
technical assistance activities will be
covered by program funds.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These final regulations do not contain
any information collection
requirements.
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 these programs.
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 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 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.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number: 84.004D)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Parts 270,
271, and 272
Elementary and secondary education,
Equal educational opportunity, Grant
programs—education, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 12, 2016.
Ann Whalen,
Senior Advisor to the Secretary Delegated
the Duties of Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Secretary of Education
amends parts 270, 271, and 272 of title
34 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 270.3 Who may receive assistance under
this program?
1. Part 270 is revised to read as
follows:
■
PART 270—EQUITY ASSISTANCE
CENTER PROGRAM
Subpart A—General
Sec.
270.1 What is the Equity Assistance Center
Program?
270.2 Who is eligible to receive a grant
under this program?
270.3 Who may receive assistance under
this program?
270.4 What types of projects are authorized
under this program?
270.5 What geographic regions do the EACs
serve?
270.6 What regulations apply to this
program?
270.7 What definitions apply to this
program?
(a) The recipient of a grant under this
part may provide assistance only if
requested by school boards or other
responsible governmental agencies
located in its geographic region.
(b) The recipient may provide
assistance only to the following persons:
(1) Public school personnel.
(2) Students enrolled in public
schools, parents of those students,
community organizations and other
community members.
§ 270.4 What types of projects are
authorized under this program?
Subpart A—General
(a) The Secretary may award funds to
EACs for projects offering technical
assistance (including training) to school
boards and other responsible
governmental agencies, at their request,
for assistance in the preparation,
adoption, and implementation of plans
for the desegregation of public schools.
(b) A project must provide technical
assistance in all four of the
desegregation assistance areas, as
defined in 34 CFR 270.7.
(c) Desegregation assistance may
include, among other activities:
(1) Dissemination of information
regarding effective methods of coping
with special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation;
(2) Assistance and advice in coping
with these problems; and
(3) Training designed to improve the
ability of teachers, supervisors,
counselors, parents, community
members, community organizations,
and other elementary or secondary
school personnel to deal effectively with
special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation.
§ 270.1 What is the Equity Assistance
Center Program?
§ 270.5 What geographic regions do the
EACs serve?
Subpart B—[RESERVED]
Subpart C—How Does the Secretary Award
a Grant?
Sec.
270.20 How does the Secretary evaluate an
application for a grant?
270.21 How does the Secretary determine
the amount of a grant?
Subpart D—What Conditions Must I Meet
after I Receive a Grant?
Sec.
270.30 What conditions must be met by a
recipient of a grant?
270.31 What stipends and related
reimbursements are authorized under
this program?
270.32 What limitation is imposed on
providing Equity Assistance under this
program?
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000c—2000c–2,
2000c–5, unless otherwise noted.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
This program provides financial
assistance to operate regional Equity
Assistance Centers (EACs), to enable
them to provide technical assistance
(including training) at the request of
school boards and other responsible
governmental agencies in the
preparation, adoption, and
implementation of plans for the
desegregation of public schools, and in
the development of effective methods of
coping with special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation.
§ 270.2 Who is eligible to receive a grant
under this program?
A public agency (other than a State
educational agency or a school board) or
private, nonprofit organization is
eligible to receive a grant under this
program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
(a) The Secretary awards a grant to
provide race, sex, national origin, and
religion desegregation assistance under
this program to regional EACs serving
designated geographic regions.
(b) The Secretary announces in the
Federal Register the number of centers
and geographic regions for each
competition.
(c) The Secretary determines the
number and boundaries of each
geographic region for each competition
on the basis of one or more of the
following:
(1) Size and diversity of the student
population;
(2) The number of LEAs;
(3) The composition of urban, city,
and rural LEAs;
(4) The history and frequency of the
EAC and other Department technical
assistance activities;
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
46815
(5) Geographic proximity of the States
within each region; and
(6) The amount of funding available
for the competition.
§ 270.6 What regulations apply to this
program?
The following regulations apply to
this program:
(a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in
34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs),
part 77 (Definitions That Apply to
Department Regulations), part 79
(Intergovernmental Review of
Department of Education Programs and
Activities), and part 81 (General
Education Provisions Act—
Enforcement), except that 34 CFR
75.232 (relating to the cost analysis)
does not apply to grants under this
program.
(b) The regulations in this part.
(c) The Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit Requirements for Federal Awards
in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted in 2 CFR
part 3474 and the OMB Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide
Debarment and Suspension
(Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as
adopted in 2 CFR part 3485.
§ 270.7 What definitions apply to this
program?
In addition to the definitions in 34
CFR 77.1, the following definitions
apply to the regulations in this part:
Desegregation assistance means the
provision of technical assistance
(including training) in the areas of race,
sex, national origin, and religion
desegregation of public elementary and
secondary schools.
Desegregation assistance areas means
the areas of race, sex, national origin,
and religion desegregation.
English learner has the same meaning
under this part as the same term defined
in section 8101(20) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act, as
amended.
(Authority: Section 8101(20) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended by the Every Student
Succeeds Act, Pub. L. 114–95 (2015) (ESSA))
Equity Assistance Center means a
regional desegregation technical
assistance and training center funded
under this part.
National origin desegregation means
the assignment of students to public
schools and within those schools
without regard to their national origin,
including providing students such as
those who are English learners with a
full opportunity for participation in all
educational programs regardless of their
national origin.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
46816
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Public school means any elementary
or secondary educational institution
operated by a State, subdivision of a
State, or governmental agency within a
State, or operated wholly or
predominantly from or through the use
of governmental funds or property, or
funds or property derived from
governmental sources.
Public school personnel means school
board members and persons who are
employed by or who work in the
schools of a responsible governmental
agency, as that term is defined in this
section.
Race desegregation means the
assignment of students to public schools
and within those schools without regard
to their race, including providing
students with a full opportunity for
participation in all educational
programs regardless of their race. ‘‘Race
desegregation’’ does not mean the
assignment of students to public schools
to correct conditions of racial separation
that are not the result of State or local
law or official action.
Religion desegregation means the
assignment of students to public schools
and within those schools without regard
to their religion, including providing
students with a full opportunity for
participation in all educational
programs regardless of their religion.
Responsible governmental agency
means any school board, State,
municipality, LEA, or other
governmental unit legally responsible
for operating a public school or schools.
School board means any agency or
agencies that administer a system of one
or more public schools and any other
agency that is responsible for the
assignment of students to or within that
system.
Sex desegregation means the
assignment of students to public schools
and within those schools without regard
to their sex (including transgender
status; gender identity; sex stereotypes,
such as treating a person differently
because he or she does not conform to
sex-role expectations because he or she
is attracted to or is in a relationship
with a person of the same sex; and
pregnancy and related conditions),
including providing students with a full
opportunity for participation in all
educational programs regardless of their
sex.
Special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation means
those issues that arise in classrooms,
schools, and communities in the course
of desegregation efforts based on race,
national origin, sex, or religion. The
phrase does not refer to the provision of
special education and related services
for students with disabilities as defined
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.)
Subpart B—[RESERVED]
Subpart C—How Does the Secretary
Award a Grant?
§ 270.20 How does the Secretary evaluate
an application for a grant?
(a) The Secretary evaluates the
application on the basis of the criteria
in 34 CFR 75.210.
(b) The Secretary selects the highest
ranking application for each geographic
region to receive a grant.
§ 270.21 How does the Secretary
determine the amount of a grant?
The Secretary determines the amount
of a grant on the basis of:
(a) The amount of funds available for
all grants under this part;
(b) A cost analysis of the project (that
shows whether the applicant will
achieve the objectives of the project
with reasonable efficiency and economy
under the budget in the application), by
which the Secretary:
(1) Verifies the cost data in the
detailed budget for the project;
(2) Evaluates specific elements of
costs; and
(3) Examines costs to determine if
they are necessary, reasonable, and
allowable under applicable statutes and
regulations;
(c) Evidence supporting the
magnitude of the need of the
responsible governmental agencies for
desegregation assistance in the
geographic region and the cost of
providing that assistance to meet those
needs, as compared with the evidence
supporting the magnitude of the needs
for desegregation assistance, and the
cost of providing it, in all geographic
regions for which applications are
approved for funding;
(d) The size and the racial, ethnic, or
religious diversity of the student
population of the geographic region for
which the EAC will provide services;
and
(e) Any other information concerning
desegregation problems and proposed
activities that the Secretary finds
relevant in the applicant’s geographic
region.
Subpart D—What Conditions Must I
Meet after I Receive a Grant?
§ 270.30 What conditions must be met by
a recipient of a grant?
(a) A recipient of a grant under this
part must:
(1) Operate an EAC in the geographic
region to be served; and
(2) Have a full-time project director.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(b) A recipient of a grant under this
part must coordinate assistance in its
geographic region with appropriate
SEAs, Comprehensive Centers, Regional
Educational Laboratories, and other
Federal technical assistance centers. As
part of this coordination, the recipient
shall seek to prevent duplication of
assistance where an SEA,
Comprehensive Center, Regional
Educational Laboratory, or other Federal
technical assistance center may have
already provided assistance to the
responsible governmental agency.
(c) A recipient of a grant under this
part must communicate and coordinate
with the most recent EAC grant
recipient(s) in its region, as needed, to
ensure a smooth transition for ongoing
technical assistance under the EAC
program.
§ 270.31 What stipends and related
reimbursements are authorized under this
program?
(a) The recipient of an award under
this program may pay:
(1) Stipends to public school
personnel who participate in technical
assistance or training activities funded
under this part for the period of their
attendance, if the person to whom the
stipend is paid receives no other
compensation for that period; or
(2) Reimbursement to a responsible
governmental agency that pays
substitutes for public school personnel
who:
(i) Participate in technical assistance
or training activities funded under this
part; and
(ii) Are being compensated by that
responsible governmental agency for the
period of their attendance.
(b) A recipient may pay the stipends
and reimbursements described in this
section only if it demonstrates that the
payment of these costs is necessary to
the success of the technical assistance or
training activity, and will not exceed 20
percent of the total award.
(c) If a recipient is authorized by the
Secretary to pay stipends or
reimbursements (or any combination of
these payments), the recipient shall
determine the conditions and rates for
these payments in accordance with
appropriate State policies, or in the
absence of State policies, in accordance
with local policies.
(d) A recipient of a grant under this
part may pay a travel allowance only to
a person who participates in a technical
assistance or training activity under this
part.
(e) If the participant does not
complete the entire scheduled activity,
the recipient may pay the participant’s
transportation to his or her residence or
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
place of employment only if the
participant left the training activity
because of circumstances not reasonably
within his or her control.
§ 270.32 What limitation is imposed on
providing Equity Assistance under this
program?
A recipient of a grant under this
program may not use funds to assist in
the development or implementation of
activities or the development of
curriculum materials for the direct
instruction of students to improve their
academic and vocational achievement
levels.
PART 271 [REMOVED AND
RESERVED]
2. Under the authority of section 414
of the Department of Education
Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. 3474, part
271 is removed and reserved.
■
PART 272 [REMOVED AND
RESERVED]
3. Under the authority of section 414
of the Department of Education
Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. 3474, part
272 is removed and reserved.
■
[FR Doc. 2016–16811 Filed 7–15–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket ID ED–2016–OESE–0015; CFDA
Number: 84.004D]
Final Priority and Requirement—Equity
Assistance Centers
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final priority and requirement.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education
(Assistant Secretary) announces a
priority and a requirement under the
Equity Assistance Centers (EAC)
program. The Assistant Secretary may
use this priority and this requirement
for competitions in fiscal year 2016 and
later years. We take this action to
encourage applicants with a track record
of success or demonstrated expertise in
socioeconomic integration strategies
that are effective for addressing
problems occasioned by the
desegregation of schools based on race,
national origin, sex, or religion. We
intend for the priority and the
requirement to help ensure that grant
recipients have the capacity to support
responsible governmental agencies as
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES3
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jul 15, 2016
Jkt 238001
This priority and requirement is
effective August 17, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britt
Jung, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3E206,
Washington, DC 20202–6135.
Telephone: (202) 205–4513 or by email:
britt.jung@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.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose of Program: The EAC
program awards grants through
cooperative agreements to operate
regional EACs that provide technical
assistance (including training) at the
request of school boards and other
responsible governmental agencies in
the preparation, adoption, and
implementation of plans for the
desegregation of public schools and in
the development of effective methods of
addressing special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3; 42
U.S.C. 2000c—2000c–2 and 2000c–5.
34 CFR Chapter II
SUMMARY:
they seek to increase socioeconomic
diversity, to create successful plans for
desegregation, and to address special
educational problems occasioned by
bringing together students from different
social, economic, religious, and racial
backgrounds.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 270.
Note: We published a notice of final
regulations elsewhere in this issue of
the Federal Register.
We published a notice of proposed
priority and requirement for this
program in the Federal Register on
April 1, 2016 (81 FR 18818). That notice
contained background information and
our reasons for proposing the particular
priority and requirement.
There are no differences between the
proposed priority and requirement and
this final priority and requirement.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the notice of proposed
priority and requirement, one party
submitted a substantive comment on the
proposed priority and requirement.
Generally, we do not discuss technical
and other minor changes.
Analysis of Comment: An analysis of
the comment follows.
Comment: One commenter stated that
expertise in socioeconomic integration
strategies is valuable, but recommended
that we eliminate the proposed priority
on the basis that expertise in areas of
sex, race, and national origin
desegregation is more important. The
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
46817
commenter was particularly opposed to
the proposed priority being used as an
absolute priority. The commenter
asserted that it is more important to
include a priority for staff qualifications,
including expertise in Federal, State,
and local laws related to sex, race, and
national origin discrimination and
expertise in related research on what
works to increase all types of integration
and avoid discrimination.
Discussion: While we agree that staff
qualifications should include expertise
in Federal, State, and local laws related
to sex, race, and national origin
desegregation and related research, we
believe that a priority for expertise in
providing technical assistance to
increase socioeconomic diversity will
strengthen EAC programs without
detracting from the existing issue areas.
As noted in the notice of proposed
priority and requirement, more than
one-third of all American Indian/Alaska
Native students and nearly half of all
African-American and Latino students
attend high-poverty schools.1 Students
attending high-poverty schools continue
to have unequal access to: (1) Advanced
coursework; (2) the most effective
teachers; and (3) necessary funding and
supports.2 Moreover, research shows
that States with less socioeconomically
diverse schools tend to have larger
achievement gaps between low- and
higher-income students.3
We believe that socioeconomic
integration strategies can be vital tools
for EAC technical assistance centers in
their work to support all four areas of
desegregation assistance: Race, sex,
national origin, and religion. The
1 National Center for Education Statistics. (2014).
Digest of Education Statistics, Table 216.6.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/
d14/tables/dt14_216.60.asp.
2 See, e.g., National Center for Education
Statistics. (2013). Digest of Education Statistics,
Table 225.40. Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/
programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_225.40.asp.
Max, Jeffrey, and Steven Glazerman (2014). ‘‘Do
Disadvantaged Students Get Less Effective
Teaching?’’ U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance. Washington, DC: Government Printing
Office. Retrieved from: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/
20144010/pdf/20144010.pdf.
Gray, Lucinda, et al. Educational Technology in
U.S. Public Schools: Fall 2008 (Apr. 2010) (NCES
2010–034). U.S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics, available at: https://
nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010034.pdf.
Wells, John, and Laurie Lewis. Internet Access in
U.S. Public Schools and Classrooms: 1994–2005
(November 2006). U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics, available
at: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007020.pdf.
3 Mantil, Ann, Anne G. Perkins, and Stephanie
Aberger. (February 27, 2012). ‘‘The Challenge of
High Poverty Schools: How Feasible Is
Socioeconomic School Integration?’’ In ‘‘The Future
of School Integration,’’ Kahlenberg, Richard D., ed.
The Century Foundation. pp 155–222.
E:\FR\FM\18JYR3.SGM
18JYR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46807-46817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16811]
[[Page 46807]]
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 137
July 18, 2016
Part III
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
34 CFR Chapter II, Parts 270, 271, and 272
Equity Assistance Centers (Formerly Desegregation Assistance Centers
(DAC)); Final Priority and Requirement--Equity Assistance Centers;
Final Rules; Applications for New Awards; Equity Assistance Centers;
Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 137 / Monday, July 18, 2016 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 46808]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Parts 270, 271, and 272
RIN 1810-AB26
[Docket ID ED-2016-OESE-0006]
Equity Assistance Centers (Formerly Desegregation Assistance
Centers (DAC))
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the regulations that govern the Equity
Assistance Centers (EAC) program, authorized under Title IV of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title IV), and removes the regulations that
govern the State Educational Agency Desegregation (SEA Desegregation)
program, authorized under Title IV. These regulations govern the
application process for new EAC grant awards. These regulations update
the definitions applicable to this program; remove the existing
selection criteria; and provide the Secretary with flexibility to
determine the number and composition of geographic regions for the EAC
program.
DATES: These regulations are effective August 17, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britt Jung, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 3E206, Washington, DC 20202-
6135. Telephone: (202) 205-4513 or by email: britt.jung@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: On March 24, 2016, the Secretary published a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the EAC program (81 FR 15665).
In the preamble of the NPRM, we discussed on pages 15666 through 15667
the major changes proposed in that document to improve the EAC program.
These included the following:
Amending the section that governs the existing geographic
regions to allow the Secretary flexibility in choosing the number and
composition of geographic regions to be funded with each competition.
Adding religion to the areas of desegregation assistance,
adding a definition for ``special educational problems occasioned by
desegregation,'' and amending the definition of ``sex desegregation''
to clarify the protected individuals identified by this term.
Removing the existing selection criteria, to instead rely
on the general selection criteria listed under the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) at 34 CFR 75.210.
Removing the limitations and exceptions established in
current 34 CFR 270.6 on providing desegregation assistance, to align
these regulations with those of other technical assistance centers.
Removing 34 CFR part 271, as the SEA Desegregation program
has not been funded in twenty years, as well as merging part 272 into
part 270, so that a single part covers the EAC program.
These final regulations contain changes from the NPRM, which are
fully explained in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section of this
document.
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPRM, 108
parties submitted comments on the proposed regulations. We discuss
substantive issues under the section number of the item to which they
pertain. Several comments did not pertain to a specific section of the
proposed regulations. We discuss these comments based on the general
topic area. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor
changes. In addition, we do not address comments that raise concerns
not directly related to the proposed regulations.
Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and
of any changes in the regulations since publication of the NPRM
follows.
General Comments
Comment: Numerous commenters wrote to express their support and
appreciation of the previous work of the EACs.
Discussion: The Department appreciates the support for this program
and for the past work of the EACs.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters wrote to express their support for
updating the program name and related definitions to refer to ``Equity
Assistance Centers'' rather than Desegregation Assistance Centers.
However, a few commenters objected to the Department amending the
definition of a ``Desegregation Assistance Center'' to refer to it as
an Equity Assistance Center. These commenters proposed alternate names,
such as Integration and Equity Assistance Centers (IEACS),
Desegregation and Equity Assistance Centers (DEACs) or Civil Rights
Equity Assistance Centers (CREACs).
Discussion: The Department appreciates the support expressed by
many commenters for these changes. The Department declines to adopt the
commenters' alternate suggestions for names, as we maintain that the
term ``equity'' better reflects the breadth of desegregation activities
currently undertaken by the regional centers. Also, we note that the
Department has for some time referred to the regional centers as
``Equity Assistance Centers'' in the notices inviting applications, in
cooperative agreements, and on the Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education's (OESE's) Web page for the grant program. Ultimately, the
purpose of the regional centers is to ensure equitable access to
educational opportunities for all students without regard to race, sex,
national origin, or religion. Therefore, we believe it is appropriate
to formally refer to the regional centers as ``Equity Assistance
Centers.''
Changes: None.
Comment: Some commenters requested that we delay the implementation
of these regulations until we engage in further consultation with the
existing EACs, tribes, or other stakeholders.
Discussion: The Department solicited public comment on the open
issues affecting these regulations through the NPRM. Existing EACs,
along with other stakeholders, were notified of the proposed
regulations multiple times throughout the comment period. The
Department provided the existing EACs with the same opportunity to
comment on the proposed regulations as all other interested parties.
Further, we note that these proposed regulations do not trigger the
need for tribal consultation; while American Indian and Alaska Native
students may benefit as a result of the EAC program, the program is
aimed at servicing all LEAs seeking assistance with desegregation
problems, and not directly Indian tribes. Thus, we decline to postpone
the implementation of these regulations for the purpose of further
consultation.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the EACs renew a programmatic
focus on supporting school integration efforts, and provide assistance
for policy efforts designed to bring students together. This commenter
also suggested the Department increase EAC accountability in reporting
outputs, outcomes, best practices, and what works, to expand resources
and awareness to a wide array of communities.
Discussion: The Department supports the continued development of an
EAC program that works to ensure that students are brought together
through eliminating segregation in schools on
[[Page 46809]]
the basis of race, national origin, sex and religion. The Department
agrees that accountability plays an important role in this process, and
directs this commenter to our Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) measures, which measure the work of the EACs using a variety of
criteria, and performance reporting requirements including annual
performance reports, annual evaluations, and financial reports. These
can be found in the notice inviting applications for new awards
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. When running
competitions for the EAC program, the Department hopes to attract
applicants that will consider a range of methods for addressing the
needs of each geographic region, which may include identifying
different strategies to expand resources and awareness to a wide array
of communities within the region. Finally, as to the sharing of best
practices, the Department notes that under Sec. 270.30(b), each EAC is
expected to coordinate assistance in its geographic regions with
appropriate SEAs, Comprehensive Centers, Regional Educational
Laboratories, and other Federal technical assistance centers, which
could include the soliciting and sharing of best practices.
Changes: None.
Removal of Previous 34 CFR Part 271
Comment: Some commenters requested that the Department retain the
regulations for the SEA Desegregation Program under existing 34 CFR
part 271.
Discussion: The Department appreciates, but disagrees with, these
comments. Congress has not funded the SEA Desegregation program in more
than 20 years, and as a result, the Department no longer administers
this program. Given these circumstances, the Department believes that
retaining the SEA Desegregation program regulations under part 271 is
not in the public interest, and could only result in public confusion.
Thus, the Department will move forward in removing 34 CFR part 271, and
consolidating current part 272 into part 270.
Changes: None.
Removal of Previous Sec. 272.30: What criteria does the Secretary use
to make a grant?
Comment: Several commenters objected to the Department removing the
selection criteria under previous Sec. 272.30. Specifically, some of
these commenters stated that the existing selection criteria are
necessary because they are tailored to the special needs of the civil
rights community. Another commenter requested that the selection
criteria specify that the EACs can provide assistance in all
desegregation assistance areas, and that EACs can help to combat
religious discrimination without decreasing other civil rights
protections. Another commenter suggested that the Department consider
an understanding of the elements required to effect real and lasting
change versus information dissemination.
Discussion: The Department believes that using the general
selection criteria listed in 34 CFR 75.210 will provide the Secretary
with the necessary flexibility to ensure that the selection criteria
reflect the needs and concerns identified at the time of each
competition, including those of the civil rights community. The general
selection criteria have been vetted and tested across many Departmental
programs, and provide a wide range of factors for evaluating
applications in any competition. In addition, adoption of the general
selection criteria would allow the Secretary to improve the selection
process, based upon experience gained in running the program.
With regard to the concern that EACs be able to provide assistance
in all desegregation assistance areas, we decline to add this as a
selection criterion because we will be using the general selection
criteria under 34 CFR 75.210. However, the Department will ensure that
through those criteria, we will select grantees that have the
capability to provide technical assistance across all areas of
desegregation assistance. The Department expects that each grantee will
have the capacity to provide all types of desegregation assistance, in
accordance with requests for technical assistance. Finally, with regard
to the concern that the selected EACs be able to effect real and
lasting change, we expect that future grantees will continue the strong
work of current and past EAC grantees, and will provide appropriate
levels of technical assistance depending on the requests. This may take
the form of information dissemination, which is often necessary to
effect change. However, we believe that the selected EACs will be in
the best position to determine the appropriate level of technical
assistance in response to each request and that such technical
assistance will be of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to
lead to improvements in practice among the eligible entities receiving
those services.
Changes: None.
Sec. 270.4 What types of projects are authorized under this program?
Comment: Several commenters expressed support for the addition of
``community organizations'' to the list of parties that may receive
desegregation assistance under this program.
Discussion: The Department appreciates the support for these
changes.
Changes: None.
Sec. 270.5 What geographic regions do the EACs serve?
Comment: Several commenters asked that the Department maintain ten
geographic regions, rather than reducing to four geographic regions.
Among these, some commenters stated that demand for EAC services is
rising, and expressed concern as to how four geographic regions could
meet those demands. Some commenters requested that we instead increase
the number of geographic regions.
Discussion: The Department believes that allowing the Secretary to
determine the number and composition of geographic regions for the
program is necessary to maximize the program funds devoted to technical
assistance. As noted in the NPRM, Congress has reduced funding for the
EAC program significantly since the program was first created. The
Department will limit the number of centers to provide each center with
more funding, which will help to ensure a greater percentage of funds
are used to provide technical assistance and a smaller percentage of
funds are devoted to overhead costs. Were the EAC program to receive
additional funding in the future, the Department may consider
increasing the number of geographic regions, as appropriate.
With regard to the commenters who expressed concern that the demand
for EAC services is rising, the Department notes that the regulations
seek to streamline EAC services. Thus, the Department believes that
these changes will help alleviate issues of excess demand, rather than
aggravate them.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters asked the Department to clarify how
potential grantees will be able to identify partners and the needs of
States if the geographic regions will not be announced until the notice
inviting applications.
Discussion: The Department expects that a data-driven approach to
identifying regional needs will help potential applicants anticipate
the needs of each region and make better use of existing resources,
including other Federal technical assistance providers
[[Page 46810]]
and Federal, State, and local data sources. In addition, the Department
anticipates that this will be an ongoing process, and that needs of the
States and LEAs within each region will become more apparent throughout
the project period. Similarly, while the Department expects applicants
will have baseline knowledge of potential partners within the
geographic region, we hope that grantees will identify new partners
throughout the project period, as appropriate.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern with the proposed
criteria for determining the number and boundaries of the geographic
regions. In addition, several commenters suggested that changing these
criteria during an election year would create additional risk to the
program. Finally, some commenters expressed general concern that
providing the Secretary with flexibility to determine the number and
composition of geographic regions for the program would expose the
centers to political influences.
Discussion: The Department has identified objective criteria that
will be used to establish both the number and the geographic boundaries
of each region to be served by the EACs. Through the NPRM, we solicited
comments on what factors the Secretary should consider when determining
the composition of States in each geographic region, and gave careful
consideration to all suggestions. As such, we believe that the criteria
identified are sufficient to ensure that boundaries of the new
geographic regions are based on appropriate data, and reflect the
underlying needs of those regions.
Similarly, because the Department established the criteria for
geographic boundaries through public comment and the boundaries will be
based on objective measures, we believe the published criteria we will
use when determining the number and composition of geographic regions
for the EAC program insulate the EAC geographic boundary determinations
from political influence.
Changes: None.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the Department could allow
the centers within each existing region to determine which States and
LEAs in its region should receive focused attention based on available
data.
Discussion: Title IV and our implementing regulations limit the
centers to providing services upon request. The demand-driven nature of
the program precludes the regional centers from focusing on specific
States or LEAs without a request from those States or LEAs. Please note
that once an EAC has developed materials in response to a request for
technical assistance, that EAC may make those materials available to
other interested parties.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that these
regulations could jeopardize the relationships between the existing
centers and their clients, or would compromise cross-center
collaboration. Similarly, several commenters expressed concern that
changing the current EAC serving a particular geographic region could
affect the viability of multi-year projects underway in that region.
Discussion: While we appreciate commenters' concern that these
regulations could disrupt the relationships between existing centers
and their clients, we note that the EAC funds are awarded to centers
through a competitive grant process. Therefore, there is always, and
has always been, a possibility that the center will change during a new
award cycle. The Department seeks to ensure that program funds are
awarded to the most qualified applicants, which will ensure that
program funds are used to maximum effect.
The Department appreciates the commenters' commitment to
implementing comprehensive, multi-year plans for combating issues of
inequity within their region. The Department notes that the EAC program
will continue to fund multi-year grants, and the centers will continue
to support multi-year technical assistance activities to improve
equity, when necessary.
The Department agrees with commenters that ensuring continuity of
services is essential to the work of the EAC program. Therefore, we are
revising Sec. 270.30 to require that the EACs selected following a new
competition will work with current EACs to support a smooth transition
and to minimize disruption for the intended beneficiaries.
Changes: We have revised Sec. 270.30 to include Sec. 270.30(c),
which requires that the EACs selected following a new competition must
work with current EACs to support a smooth transition and to minimize
disruption in the provision of technical assistance.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that, were the
Department to reduce the number of geographic regions from 10 to 4, a
number of beneficiaries would no longer receive services from the EAC
program, or would no longer be able to afford them. Commenters
expressed particular concern that this could lead to a reduction in
services for English learners, low-income, or rural students.
Similarly, some commenters expressed concern that consolidating the
geographic regions would lead to increased competition between the LEAs
in that region. Finally, several commenters expressed a concern that
the EACs would focus on serving highly impacted States.
Discussion: The Department does not anticipate that changing the
number of geographic regions will result in a reduction in EAC
technical assistance provided. First, with regard to demand for
services, we note that EACs provide assistance where requested by
school boards or other responsible governmental agencies. These
services are and will continue to be provided free to responsible
governmental agencies and we do not anticipate any impact on the number
of requests for assistance from the EACs because of the reduction in
the number of geographic regions. With regard to the ability of the
EACs to continue to meet the demand for services, the Department
believes that consolidating the number of geographic regions will
increase efficiency in the use of time, staff, money, and other
resources and increase the magnitude of direct technical assistance. We
also anticipate that applicants will propose approaches to technical
assistance that include the use of existing resources and emerging
technologies to improve coordination of center staff and continuous
oversight of assistance activities. Furthermore, these regulations do
not alter the level of funding established by Congress for the EAC
program. As such, the resources available to fund EACs nationwide, as
demand dictates, remain the same. For these reasons, we also disagree
with the assertion that consolidating the geographic regions could lead
to heightened competition amongst the LEAs within each consolidated
region.
The Department agrees with commenters that it is important to
ensure that LEAs with high numbers of low-income students, rural LEAs,
and other traditionally underserved populations continue to benefit
from the EAC program. The Department intends to expand the reach of the
EACs through these regulations by improving the effectiveness and
efficiency of the delivery of services.
We note that the regulations do not use the terms ``high impacted
States'' or ``highly impacted States.'' As noted above, the regulations
will not cause the EACs to focus on certain States within a region,
because EACs provide services
[[Page 46811]]
when responsible governmental agencies request assistance, not when
EACs conduct outreach. Thus, as is now the case, EACs will continue to
serve eligible entities within an entire geographic region, upon
request for assistance. Please note that once an EAC has developed
materials in response to a request for technical assistance, that EAC
may make those materials available to other interested parties.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern regarding the
potential costs associated with consolidating the geographic regions.
Of these commenters, many were concerned that consolidation would
result in overreliance on remote technical assistance by the EACs.
Although some commenters supported EACs increasing their use of
technology, many expressed a belief that the work of the EACs
necessitates face-to-face interaction. In addition, some commenters
stated that the EACs could not increase the use of remote technical
assistance because the EACs are already utilizing technology to the
maximum extent possible. Moreover, some commenters expressed concern
that poor and rural LEAs and Indian reservations do not have the
technological infrastructure to support remote technical assistance.
Finally, some commenters expressed concern that consolidation of the
geographic regions would result in increased travel costs, as well as
the need for more staff and infrastructure within each EAC.
Discussion: The Department believes that the concerns of the
commenters are unwarranted. The Department stresses that, while we will
consolidate the number of geographic regions, each region will receive
a commensurate portion of EAC program funds. The increased funding for
each new geographic region should at least partially offset any
increased costs for travel, and enable the centers to accrue the
necessary staff and infrastructure to serve that geographic region. The
Department expects that the EACs will continue to provide on-the-ground
technical assistance, and appreciates that such interaction is often a
necessary part of combatting entrenched issues that contribute to
segregation.
In order to reach a wide array of eligible entities, we also expect
that the EACs will enhance their technical assistance capacities
through technology. As noted in the NPRM, the Internet now allows EACs
to provide effective and coordinated technical assistance across much
greater geographic distances than would have been possible when the
previous regulations were promulgated in 1987. Thus, while we
acknowledge that the EACs already make great use of technology, we
expect that the EACs will need to continue to expand their use of
technology to reflect the best practices and most current capabilities
for providing remote technical assistance. In addition, we note that
the current regulations are not intended to curtail in-person technical
assistance, but rather acknowledge that significant advances in
technology enable EACs to use a variety of methods for providing
technical assistance, and that decreases in funding over the past three
decades demand that the EACs continue to find novel methods of
providing assistance in order to reach a broad range of eligible
entities. Furthermore, we note that under the current structure of ten
geographic regions, the EACs are already integrating the use of
technology to serve the large, geographically dispersed populations
within the region and cannot respond to every request with in-person
technical assistance. Thus, the EACs will need to continue to exercise
professional judgment in considering whether a request for technical
assistance can be addressed through remote technical assistance. The
Department expects that centers will consider whether there are any
barriers to providing and receiving technical assistance remotely. As
such, the Department expects that high-quality applicants for funding
under the EAC program will propose effective and efficient ways to
serve the needs of the entire region.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that reducing the
number of regions could negatively affect the collaborative work that
the EACs conduct with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and Department
of Justice (DOJ), or that EACs would have to limit the role they play
in supporting individual LEAs reaching settlement agreements with OCR
or DOJ. Some of these commenters stated that OCR needs 300 new field
investigators, and that reducing the number of EACs would contribute to
this void. Other commenters stated that EACs provide technical
assistance and training to DOJ and OCR, and expressed a concern that
these entities would no longer receive training were the number of
geographic regions to be consolidated.
Discussion: The Department anticipates that the EACs will continue
to collaborate with the OCR and DOJ, as appropriate. The Department
does not anticipate that the EACs will scale back collaboration with
these entities, because each EAC will receive funding commensurate with
the size of the geographic region. Thus, each EAC will have comparable
resources to support LEAs in meeting settlement agreements, upon
request.
However, we note that while these entities all address civil rights
matters, the role of the EACs is different from, and independent of,
the role of OCR and DOJ. It would be inappropriate to base any aspect
of the EAC program on the amount of resources devoted to programs aimed
at providing similar services to eligible entities. Thus, it is
inappropriate to consider the number of OCR field investigators when
considering the number of regions for the EAC program. Finally, the
Department notes that persons served by the EAC program are limited by
section 270.3 to include public school personnel, students, parents,
community organizations and other community members. Thus, while the
Department anticipates that the EACs will continue to collaborate with
OCR and DOJ, it would be inappropriate for the EACs to provide
technical assistance to OCR or DOJ using grant funds provided under
these regulations.
Changes: None.
Comment: Several commenters proposed additional criteria the
Secretary should consider when determining the size and number of the
geographic regions. One commenter suggested the Secretary group
contiguous States into regions. Other commenters suggested the
Secretary consider: Each proposed geographic region's history with
inequities; whether a geographic area contains urban, suburban, rural,
or frontier populations; the size and diversity of the student
population; emerging issues in the field; active school desegregation
cases; geographic miles served and number of LEAs; and number of civil
rights complaints filed over a given time period in each region.
Additional commenters suggested that the Department consider the
distrust of Federal government agencies; the historical relationship
between the Federal government and tribal schools, and the element of
trust within that relationship; cultural affinity; the weather; and the
politics of the region.
Discussion: The Department agrees with one commenter's suggestion
that priority be given to grouping contiguous States into regions, as
States in similar geographic regions tend to face similar equity
issues. The Department also plans to examine each region's history in
addressing issues of equity, active school desegregation cases, number
of civil rights complaints, and emerging issues in the field by
examining the
[[Page 46812]]
history of EAC and other Departmental technical assistance activities.
The Department will limit its analysis to the composition of urban,
city, and rural LEAs in each geographic region, because these are the
designations for which we have available data. The size and diversity
of the student population is included within Sec. 270.5(c)(1). In
addition, the number of LEAs in each geographic region is included
under Sec. 270.5(c)(2), and the Department believes this is a better
measurement of the need of a region than geographic miles covered. The
Department declines to incorporate all additional suggested criteria,
because they are not aligned with the goals of the program and there is
no clear way of measuring those suggested criteria.
Changes: We have revised Sec. 270.5(c) to include a consideration
of the geographic proximity of the States within each region.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that consolidating the
number of EACs would expand the EACs' scope of responsibility into
areas and issues associated with geographic regions for which they are
not familiar.
Discussion: The Department expects high-quality applicants to be
able to provide technical assistance across all desegregation
assistance areas the program covers. The Department further expects
that, if an EAC did not have experience in addressing a request for
technical assistance, it would develop that expertise or partner with
other EACs or Federal technical assistance centers to develop that
expertise collaboratively. Such coordination would be within the scope
of Sec. 270.30(b), which requires EACs to coordinate assistance with
appropriate SEAs, Comprehensive Centers, Regional Educational
Laboratories, and other Federal technical assistance centers. The
Department expects high-quality applicants to identify adequate
supports and leverage all available resources, including non-Federal
resources, in light of the program's current funding level. In doing
so, we believe that EACs will have the capacity to effectively respond
to the particular needs of each region.
Changes: None.
Section 270.7 What definitions apply to this program?
Comment: Several commenters expressed support for the Department
clarifying and updating the definition of ``sex desegregation'' to
explain that sex desegregation includes desegregation based on
transgender status, gender identity, sex stereotypes, and pregnancy and
related conditions consistent with the Department's interpretation of
``sex'' under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX)
and implementing regulations, and the interpretations and rules of
other Federal agencies. No commenters opposed including all of these
terms in the Department's proposed definition. In addition, some
commenters suggested that the definition of ``sex desegregation''
should include desegregation based on ``sexual orientation,'' and that
sex stereotyping should specify that stereotypical notions of gender
include the sex-role expectation that females should be attracted to
and romantically involved only with males (and not females) and that
males should be attracted to and romantically involved only with
females (and not males).
Discussion: In the NPRM, the Department noted that it updated the
definition of ``sex desegregation'' to clarify to whom it applies and
highlight some emerging issues for which EACs may provide technical
assistance, including the treatment of students with regard to sex
stereotypes.
In the NPRM, the Department also noted that the inclusion of ``sex
stereotypes'' was aligned with our Office for Civil Rights'
interpretation of the prohibition of sex discrimination in Title IX and
its regulations, and was consistent with other Federal agencies' recent
regulatory proposals, which defined ``sex stereotypes'' to include
treating a person differently because he or she does not conform to
sex-role expectations by being in a relationship with a person of the
same sex. After the NRPM, the Department of Health and Human Services
and the Department of Labor both issued final regulations providing
that sex stereotyping includes expectations related to the appropriate
roles and behavior of a certain sex. 81 FR 31,376, 31,468 (May 18,
2016) (to be codified at 45 CFR 92.4); 81 FR 39,108, 39,168 (June 15,
2016) (to be codified at 41 CFR 60-20.7(a)(3)).
Some Federal district courts have recognized in the wake of the
Supreme Court's decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228
(1989), that discrimination on the basis of ``sex'' includes
discrimination based on sex stereotypes about sexual attraction and
sexual behavior or about deviations from ``heterosexually defined
gender norms.'' See, e.g., Videckis v. Pepperdine Univ., No.
CV1500298DDPJCX, 2015 WL 8916764 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 15, 2015); Isaacs v.
Felder, 2015 WL 6560655 (M.D. Ala. Oct. 29, 2015); Baldwin v. Dep't of
Transp., Appeal No. 0120133080, Agency No. 2012-24738-FAA-03 (July 15,
2015) (``Sexual orientation discrimination . . . is sex discrimination
because it necessarily involves discrimination based on gender
stereotypes.''). For example, Videckis held that the distinction
between discrimination based on gender stereotyping and sexual
orientation is artificial, and that claims based on sexual orientation
are covered by Title VII and Title IX as sex or gender discrimination.
As the Department noted in the NPRM, interpretations of Title IX and
its regulations are particularly relevant to the meaning of ``sex''
under Title IV because Congress's 1972 amendment to Title IV to add sex
as an appropriate desegregation assistance area was included in Title
IX. Discrimination against an individual because he or she does not
conform to sex-role expectations by being attracted to or in a
relationship with a person of the same sex will inevitably rely on sex
stereotypes. Therefore, in order to provide clarity for EACs on a type
of sex discrimination on which they may provide technical assistance,
the Department is amending the regulation by adding this language after
the reference to ``sex stereotypes'' as an example of one included in
the commentary of the NPRM.
Changes: The Department will amend the definition of ``sex
desegregation'' to add the phrase ``such as treating a person
differently because he or she does not conform to sex-role expectations
because he or she is attracted to or is in a relationship with a person
of the same sex'' after ``sex stereotypes.''
Comment: Several commenters expressed support for the Department's
proposal to add a definition of ``religion desegregation,'' and to
incorporate religion into the definitions of ``desegregation
assistance'' and ``desegregation assistance areas.'' Additional
commenters supported the addition, but requested that the Department
amend the definition of ``religion desegregation'' or provide
additional guidance to ensure that this does not result in harm to
other students' civil rights, result in discrimination, or deprive any
student of educational opportunities due to another student's religious
beliefs. In addition, one commenter expressed that the Department
should add ``religious desegregation'' only if additional funds are
provided. Finally, one commenter opposed the addition of ``religion
desegregation'' as being out of alignment with the other desegregation
assistance activities carried out under this program.
[[Page 46813]]
Discussion: First, the Department appreciates the support expressed
by many commenters for these changes. The Department is satisfied that
the definition of ``religion desegregation'' set forth in the proposed
regulations is the most appropriate one for the work of the EAC
program. The Department notes that religion is specifically included in
the definition of ``desegregation'' in Section 401 of Title IV, the
statute authorizing the EAC program. Under Title IV the Secretary is
authorized to provide technical assistance to support the desegregation
of public schools and the assignment of students to schools without
regard to religion. The addition of ``religious desegregation'' does
not alter the civil rights of students, but rather provides the EACs
the ability to assist schools to address religion desegregation
matters. The Department is aware of an increasing number of incidents
of anti-Semitic bullying and harassment in public schools. See, e.g.,
T.E. v. Pine Bush Cent. Sch. Dist., 58 F. Supp. 3d 332 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).
In addition, the Department is aware of reports documenting that
students who are or are perceived as Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Arab, Middle
Eastern, South Asian, or Southeast Asian are frequent targets of
bullying and harassment. Given the increasing religious diversity in
the United States, and the increased tension that has developed in many
of our schools related to a student's actual or perceived religion, the
Department believes these regulations are necessary to provide support
and technical assistance for schools to assist in developing effective
strategies to ensure all students have a full opportunity to
participate in educational programs, regardless of religion. The
Department believes that the need and ability for EACs to provide
technical assistance to address religion desegregation should not be
tied to the EAC funding levels. Accordingly, the Department declines to
change the regulations based on these comments.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department update the
definition of ``race desegregation'' to reflect the nature of modern
desegregation efforts. Another commenter expressed concern that the
caveat that ``race desegregation'' does not mean the assignment of
students to public schools to correct conditions of racial separation
that are not the result of State or local law or official action was
too limiting. This commenter suggested that the Department define
racial desegregation ``to include racial integration efforts permitted
by law and the Department's guidance.''
Discussion: The definition of ``race desegregation'' is rooted in
the definition of ``desegregation'' under section 401 of Title IV. In
section 401(b), Congress defined ``desegregation'' to mean the
assignment of students to public schools and within such schools
without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
The definition under section 401(b) specifies that ``desegregation''
shall not mean the assignment of students to public schools in order to
overcome racial imbalance. Thus, the Department believes that the
current definition of ``race desegregation'' incorporates the statutory
definition.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested that the Department amend the
definition of ``Special educational problems occasioned by
desegregation'' to problems that arise ``in the course of'' rather than
``as a result of'' desegregation efforts. Another commenter suggested
that the Department change the term ``special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation,'' rather than add a definition for the
existing term. Both expressed that the term and its definition
presented a deficit-based perspective on desegregation activities,
rather than focusing on the benefits of these activities.
Discussion: The term ``special educational problems occasioned by
desegregation'' is rooted in section 403 of Title IV, which states that
technical assistance may, among other activities, include making
available to such agencies information regarding effective methods of
coping with special educational problems occasioned by desegregation.
Thus, we decline to alter the term ``special educational problems
occasioned by desegregation.'' However, the Department agrees that the
underlying definition would be better served by referring to problems
that arise ``in the course of'' rather than ``as a result of''
desegregation efforts because the language of the former more
accurately reflects the scope of activities covered under ``special
educational problems occasioned by desegregation.''
Changes: We have revised the definition of ``special educational
problems occasioned by desegregation'' under Sec. 270.7 to mean those
issues that arise in classrooms, schools, and communities in the course
of desegregation efforts based on race, national origin, sex, or
religion.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Department adopt language
requiring greater parent and parent organization engagement in
informing EAC work with schools and LEAs. Similarly, another commenter
advocated that the Department require successful applicants to
demonstrate substantive partnership with parent organizations.
Discussion: Proposed Sec. 270.4 added ``community organizations''
to the list of parties that may receive desegregation assistance under
this program. The Department interprets ``community organizations'' to
include parent organizations. The Department believes that this
addition will enable greater parent organization involvement in EAC
technical assistance activities. Furthermore, we note that parents of
students are eligible to receive technical assistance under the EAC
program.
With regard to the request that the Department require successful
applicants to the EAC program to demonstrate substantive partnership
with parent organizations, the Department expects that the EACs will
engage all interested beneficiaries and eligible stakeholders within an
LEA that requests technical assistance. However, the Department
believes that the EACs are in the best position to assess who to engage
based on the factual situation encountered, in order to successfully
address an identified need for desegregation assistance. Thus, the
Department declines to add a requirement that applicants demonstrate a
substantive partnership with parent organizations.
Changes: None.
Section 270.32 What limitation is imposed on providing Equity
Assistance under this program?
Comment: One commenter opposed proposed Sec. 270.32 and suggested
that the Department clarify that the regulation will not prevent EACs
from assisting LEAs in need of support and assistance with inclusive
curriculum design. Another commenter proposed that the Department amend
current Sec. 270.6(b) to read that the activities prohibited under
Sec. 270.6(a) do not prohibit the DACs from assisting LEAs with
implementing appropriate language services for English Learner
students.
Discussion: Consistent with the General Education Provisions Act,
20 U.S.C. 1232(a), we cannot and do not authorize centers to exercise
direction or control over the curriculum. The Department believes it
necessary to amend previous Sec. 270.6(b) because, as drafted, Sec.
270.6(b) could be misconstrued to permit the development or
implementation of activities for direct instruction;
[[Page 46814]]
removing this provision will ensure clarity. The Department agrees that
EACs could provide technical assistance to ensure that English learner
programs do not unjustifiably segregate students on the basis of
national origin or English learner status, consistent with our ``Dear
Colleague Letter: English Learner Students and Limited English
Proficient Parents'' (Jan. 7, 2015), (https://www2.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-el-201501.pdf). Because the Department has developed publicly
available guidance on the responsibilities of SEAs and LEAs to ensure
equal educational opportunities for English learners, we do not believe
it is necessary to add this to the regulation.
Changes: None.
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.
Discussion of Costs and Benefits: We have determined that the
potential costs associated with this regulatory action will be minimal
while the potential benefits are significant.
For EAC grants, applicants may anticipate costs in developing their
applications. Application, submission, and participation in a
competitive discretionary grant program are voluntary. The final
regulations will create flexibility for us to use general selection
criteria listed in EDGAR 75.210. We believe that any criterion from
EDGAR 75.210 used in a grant competition will not impose a financial
burden that applicants would not otherwise incur in the development and
submission of a grant application. Other losses may stem from the
reduction of the number of regional centers for those applicants that
do not receive a grant in future funding years, including the costs of
phasing out those centers and associated job losses. Additionally, due
to the consolidation of EACs, the remaining geographic regions will
cover a larger geographic range. As a result, future grantees may
experience increased travel costs in providing in-person technical
assistance. However, this should be offset in part by an increased
amount of funding, commensurate with the size of its geographic region.
We do not believe that reducing the number of regions will prevent
EACs from providing technical assistance across the country.
Technological advancements allow EACs to provide effective and
coordinated technical assistance across much greater geographic
distances than when the previous regulations were promulgated.
The benefits include enhancing project design and quality of
services to better meet the statutory objectives of the programs. These
changes will allow more funds to be used directly for providing
technical assistance to responsible governmental agencies for their
work in equity and desegregation, by reducing the amount of funds
directed to overhead costs. The flexibility of the geographic regions
will increase the Department's ability to be strategic with limited
resources. In addition, these changes will result in each center
receiving a greater percentage of the overall funds for the program,
and this greater percentage and amount of funds for each selected
applicant will help to incentivize an increased quality and diversity
of applicants.
In addition, the Secretary believes that students covered under sex
desegregation and religion desegregation will strongly benefit from the
final regulations. The revised definition of ``sex desegregation'' will
provide clarification regarding the scope of issues covered under sex
desegregation, removing any confusion about appropriate technical
assistance. For religion desegregation, grantees will need to provide
technical assistance to responsible governmental agencies seeking
assistance on this subject, but the costs associated with these new
technical assistance activities will be covered by program funds.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
These final regulations do not contain any information collection
requirements.
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 these programs.
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 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 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.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 84.004D)
List of Subjects in 34 CFR Parts 270, 271, and 272
Elementary and secondary education, Equal educational opportunity,
Grant programs--education, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 12, 2016.
Ann Whalen,
Senior Advisor to the Secretary Delegated the Duties of Assistant
Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary of
Education amends parts 270, 271, and 272 of title 34 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
[[Page 46815]]
0
1. Part 270 is revised to read as follows:
PART 270--EQUITY ASSISTANCE CENTER PROGRAM
Subpart A--General
Sec.
270.1 What is the Equity Assistance Center Program?
270.2 Who is eligible to receive a grant under this program?
270.3 Who may receive assistance under this program?
270.4 What types of projects are authorized under this program?
270.5 What geographic regions do the EACs serve?
270.6 What regulations apply to this program?
270.7 What definitions apply to this program?
Subpart B--[RESERVED]
Subpart C--How Does the Secretary Award a Grant?
Sec.
270.20 How does the Secretary evaluate an application for a grant?
270.21 How does the Secretary determine the amount of a grant?
Subpart D--What Conditions Must I Meet after I Receive a Grant?
Sec.
270.30 What conditions must be met by a recipient of a grant?
270.31 What stipends and related reimbursements are authorized under
this program?
270.32 What limitation is imposed on providing Equity Assistance
under this program?
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2000c--2000c-2, 2000c-5, unless otherwise
noted.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 270.1 What is the Equity Assistance Center Program?
This program provides financial assistance to operate regional
Equity Assistance Centers (EACs), to enable them to provide technical
assistance (including training) at the request of school boards and
other responsible governmental agencies in the preparation, adoption,
and implementation of plans for the desegregation of public schools,
and in the development of effective methods of coping with special
educational problems occasioned by desegregation.
Sec. 270.2 Who is eligible to receive a grant under this program?
A public agency (other than a State educational agency or a school
board) or private, nonprofit organization is eligible to receive a
grant under this program.
Sec. 270.3 Who may receive assistance under this program?
(a) The recipient of a grant under this part may provide assistance
only if requested by school boards or other responsible governmental
agencies located in its geographic region.
(b) The recipient may provide assistance only to the following
persons:
(1) Public school personnel.
(2) Students enrolled in public schools, parents of those students,
community organizations and other community members.
Sec. 270.4 What types of projects are authorized under this program?
(a) The Secretary may award funds to EACs for projects offering
technical assistance (including training) to school boards and other
responsible governmental agencies, at their request, for assistance in
the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans for the
desegregation of public schools.
(b) A project must provide technical assistance in all four of the
desegregation assistance areas, as defined in 34 CFR 270.7.
(c) Desegregation assistance may include, among other activities:
(1) Dissemination of information regarding effective methods of
coping with special educational problems occasioned by desegregation;
(2) Assistance and advice in coping with these problems; and
(3) Training designed to improve the ability of teachers,
supervisors, counselors, parents, community members, community
organizations, and other elementary or secondary school personnel to
deal effectively with special educational problems occasioned by
desegregation.
Sec. 270.5 What geographic regions do the EACs serve?
(a) The Secretary awards a grant to provide race, sex, national
origin, and religion desegregation assistance under this program to
regional EACs serving designated geographic regions.
(b) The Secretary announces in the Federal Register the number of
centers and geographic regions for each competition.
(c) The Secretary determines the number and boundaries of each
geographic region for each competition on the basis of one or more of
the following:
(1) Size and diversity of the student population;
(2) The number of LEAs;
(3) The composition of urban, city, and rural LEAs;
(4) The history and frequency of the EAC and other Department
technical assistance activities;
(5) Geographic proximity of the States within each region; and
(6) The amount of funding available for the competition.
Sec. 270.6 What regulations apply to this program?
The following regulations apply to this program:
(a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations
(EDGAR) in 34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs), part 77 (Definitions
That Apply to Department Regulations), part 79 (Intergovernmental
Review of Department of Education Programs and Activities), and part 81
(General Education Provisions Act--Enforcement), except that 34 CFR
75.232 (relating to the cost analysis) does not apply to grants under
this program.
(b) The regulations in this part.
(c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted in
2 CFR part 3474 and the OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide
Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted
in 2 CFR part 3485.
Sec. 270.7 What definitions apply to this program?
In addition to the definitions in 34 CFR 77.1, the following
definitions apply to the regulations in this part:
Desegregation assistance means the provision of technical
assistance (including training) in the areas of race, sex, national
origin, and religion desegregation of public elementary and secondary
schools.
Desegregation assistance areas means the areas of race, sex,
national origin, and religion desegregation.
English learner has the same meaning under this part as the same
term defined in section 8101(20) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, as amended.
(Authority: Section 8101(20) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act,
Pub. L. 114-95 (2015) (ESSA))
Equity Assistance Center means a regional desegregation technical
assistance and training center funded under this part.
National origin desegregation means the assignment of students to
public schools and within those schools without regard to their
national origin, including providing students such as those who are
English learners with a full opportunity for participation in all
educational programs regardless of their national origin.
[[Page 46816]]
Public school means any elementary or secondary educational
institution operated by a State, subdivision of a State, or
governmental agency within a State, or operated wholly or predominantly
from or through the use of governmental funds or property, or funds or
property derived from governmental sources.
Public school personnel means school board members and persons who
are employed by or who work in the schools of a responsible
governmental agency, as that term is defined in this section.
Race desegregation means the assignment of students to public
schools and within those schools without regard to their race,
including providing students with a full opportunity for participation
in all educational programs regardless of their race. ``Race
desegregation'' does not mean the assignment of students to public
schools to correct conditions of racial separation that are not the
result of State or local law or official action.
Religion desegregation means the assignment of students to public
schools and within those schools without regard to their religion,
including providing students with a full opportunity for participation
in all educational programs regardless of their religion.
Responsible governmental agency means any school board, State,
municipality, LEA, or other governmental unit legally responsible for
operating a public school or schools.
School board means any agency or agencies that administer a system
of one or more public schools and any other agency that is responsible
for the assignment of students to or within that system.
Sex desegregation means the assignment of students to public
schools and within those schools without regard to their sex (including
transgender status; gender identity; sex stereotypes, such as treating
a person differently because he or she does not conform to sex-role
expectations because he or she is attracted to or is in a relationship
with a person of the same sex; and pregnancy and related conditions),
including providing students with a full opportunity for participation
in all educational programs regardless of their sex.
Special educational problems occasioned by desegregation means
those issues that arise in classrooms, schools, and communities in the
course of desegregation efforts based on race, national origin, sex, or
religion. The phrase does not refer to the provision of special
education and related services for students with disabilities as
defined under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20
U.S.C. 1400 et seq.)
Subpart B--[RESERVED]
Subpart C--How Does the Secretary Award a Grant?
Sec. 270.20 How does the Secretary evaluate an application for a
grant?
(a) The Secretary evaluates the application on the basis of the
criteria in 34 CFR 75.210.
(b) The Secretary selects the highest ranking application for each
geographic region to receive a grant.
Sec. 270.21 How does the Secretary determine the amount of a grant?
The Secretary determines the amount of a grant on the basis of:
(a) The amount of funds available for all grants under this part;
(b) A cost analysis of the project (that shows whether the
applicant will achieve the objectives of the project with reasonable
efficiency and economy under the budget in the application), by which
the Secretary:
(1) Verifies the cost data in the detailed budget for the project;
(2) Evaluates specific elements of costs; and
(3) Examines costs to determine if they are necessary, reasonable,
and allowable under applicable statutes and regulations;
(c) Evidence supporting the magnitude of the need of the
responsible governmental agencies for desegregation assistance in the
geographic region and the cost of providing that assistance to meet
those needs, as compared with the evidence supporting the magnitude of
the needs for desegregation assistance, and the cost of providing it,
in all geographic regions for which applications are approved for
funding;
(d) The size and the racial, ethnic, or religious diversity of the
student population of the geographic region for which the EAC will
provide services; and
(e) Any other information concerning desegregation problems and
proposed activities that the Secretary finds relevant in the
applicant's geographic region.
Subpart D--What Conditions Must I Meet after I Receive a Grant?
Sec. 270.30 What conditions must be met by a recipient of a grant?
(a) A recipient of a grant under this part must:
(1) Operate an EAC in the geographic region to be served; and
(2) Have a full-time project director.
(b) A recipient of a grant under this part must coordinate
assistance in its geographic region with appropriate SEAs,
Comprehensive Centers, Regional Educational Laboratories, and other
Federal technical assistance centers. As part of this coordination, the
recipient shall seek to prevent duplication of assistance where an SEA,
Comprehensive Center, Regional Educational Laboratory, or other Federal
technical assistance center may have already provided assistance to the
responsible governmental agency.
(c) A recipient of a grant under this part must communicate and
coordinate with the most recent EAC grant recipient(s) in its region,
as needed, to ensure a smooth transition for ongoing technical
assistance under the EAC program.
Sec. 270.31 What stipends and related reimbursements are authorized
under this program?
(a) The recipient of an award under this program may pay:
(1) Stipends to public school personnel who participate in
technical assistance or training activities funded under this part for
the period of their attendance, if the person to whom the stipend is
paid receives no other compensation for that period; or
(2) Reimbursement to a responsible governmental agency that pays
substitutes for public school personnel who:
(i) Participate in technical assistance or training activities
funded under this part; and
(ii) Are being compensated by that responsible governmental agency
for the period of their attendance.
(b) A recipient may pay the stipends and reimbursements described
in this section only if it demonstrates that the payment of these costs
is necessary to the success of the technical assistance or training
activity, and will not exceed 20 percent of the total award.
(c) If a recipient is authorized by the Secretary to pay stipends
or reimbursements (or any combination of these payments), the recipient
shall determine the conditions and rates for these payments in
accordance with appropriate State policies, or in the absence of State
policies, in accordance with local policies.
(d) A recipient of a grant under this part may pay a travel
allowance only to a person who participates in a technical assistance
or training activity under this part.
(e) If the participant does not complete the entire scheduled
activity, the recipient may pay the participant's transportation to his
or her residence or
[[Page 46817]]
place of employment only if the participant left the training activity
because of circumstances not reasonably within his or her control.
Sec. 270.32 What limitation is imposed on providing Equity Assistance
under this program?
A recipient of a grant under this program may not use funds to
assist in the development or implementation of activities or the
development of curriculum materials for the direct instruction of
students to improve their academic and vocational achievement levels.
PART 271 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]
0
2. Under the authority of section 414 of the Department of Education
Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. 3474, part 271 is removed and reserved.
PART 272 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]
0
3. Under the authority of section 414 of the Department of Education
Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. 3474, part 272 is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 2016-16811 Filed 7-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P