Head Start Designation Renewal System Improvements, 6503-6506 [2018-02902]
Download as PDF
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. This action merely proposes to
approve changes to the
Commonwealth’s maintenance plan
emissions inventory and associated
MVEBs to remove reliance on emissions
reductions from the federal RFG
program requirements. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any
Indian reservation land or in any other
area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rulemaking does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:09 Feb 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 6, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–03078 Filed 2–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0335; FRL–9973–
43—Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Texas;
Disapproval of Interstate Transport
State Implementation Plan Revision for
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS;
Withdrawal of Proposed Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Withdrawal of proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is withdrawing its
proposed rule to disapprove the portion
of the November 23, 2009 Texas State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal
that intended to demonstrate that the
SIP met Clean Act (CAA) requirements
to prohibit emissions which will
significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) in other states.
DATES: The proposed rule published on
April 13, 2011 (76 FR 20602) is
withdrawn as of February 14, 2018.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0335. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov website.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6503
the EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl
Young, (214) 665–6645, young.carl@
epa.gov.
In an
April 13, 2011 action EPA proposed to
disapprove the portion of a November
23, 2009 Texas SIP submittal that
intended to demonstrate that the SIP
met the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit emissions
which will significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in other states (76 FR 20602).
EPA is now withdrawing the proposal.
In a separate Federal Register action
published in conjunction with this
withdrawal EPA is proposing to approve
this portion of the SIP submittal. The
rationale for the proposed approval is
detailed in that proposal.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: February 7, 2018.
Anne Idsal,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2018–02893 Filed 2–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
45 CFR Part 1304
RIN 0970–AC63
Head Start Designation Renewal
System Improvements
Office of Head Start (OHS),
Administration for Children and
Families (ACF), Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Request for comments; re-issue.
AGENCY:
OHS issues this request for
comments to invite public feedback on
information we inadvertently omitted
from the ‘‘CLASS Condition of the Head
Start Designation Renewal System,’’
request for comments, published on
December 8, 2017. The document
withdrawing the ‘‘CLASS Condition of
the Head Start Designation Renewal
System’’ request for comments is
published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register. This request for
comments is similar to the withdrawn
publication in that it invites the public
to comment on specific changes OHS is
considering for the CLASS condition, as
well as other Designation Renewal
System (DRS) conditions and processes
more broadly. Additionally, OHS seeks
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14FEP1.SGM
14FEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
6504
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
comments on ways it can: Incentivize
robust competition to include new
applicants, facilitate smooth transitions
when there is a new grantee as a result
of competition, and improve the DRS
processes. The comment period is 30
days to allow for the public to address
the additional issues in this reissued
request for comments. We will consider
comments submitted under the ‘‘CLASS
Condition of the Head Start Designation
Renewal System’’ request for comments.
DATES: Submit comments by March 16,
2018.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by [docket number and/or
RIN number], by either of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
instructions for sending comments. We
prefer to receive comments via this
method.
• Mail: Office of Head Start,
Attention: Colleen Rathgeb, Director,
Division of Planning, Oversight and
Policy, 330 C Street SW, Washington,
DC 20024.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include our agency name and the
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
notice. All comments will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. We
accept anonymous comments. If you
wish to remain anonymous, enter
‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colleen Rathgeb, Director, Division of
Planning, Oversight and Policy, Office
of Head Start, [colleen.rathgeb@
acf.hhs.gov], (202) 358–3263 (not a tollfree call). Deaf and hearing impaired
individuals may call the Federal Dual
Party Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent
with the December 8, 2017, publication
(82 FR 57905), OHS invites public
comment on several specific changes
being considered for the CLASS
condition of the DRS as outlined in the
Head Start Program Performance
Standards. We also invite public
comment on other improvements to the
DRS based on feedback from
stakeholders, grantees, and the results of
the DRS implementation evaluation. In
particular, we are considering changes
to the CLASS condition with a goal of
improving implementation and
transparency of the DRS. Changes being
considered include removal of the
‘‘lowest 10 percent’’ provision of the
CLASS condition, an increase of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:09 Feb 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
minimum thresholds for the Emotional
Support and Classroom Organization
domains to a score of 5, removal of the
minimum threshold for the Instructional
Support domain, and establishment of
authority for the Secretary to set an
absolute minimum threshold for the
Instructional Support domain prior to
the start of each fiscal year to be applied
for DRS CLASS reviews in the same
fiscal year. OHS requests feedback on
these possible changes and alternative
changes to the CLASS condition.
Particularly in ways the Instructional
Support and other thresholds could be
set and/or adjusted that would
incentivize continuous program
improvement while acknowledging the
current state of the field. OHS also
invites feedback on other conditions of
the DRS and the way it is implemented.
Background Information
The Head Start program provides
grants to local public and private nonprofit and for-profit agencies to provide
comprehensive education and child
development services to economically
disadvantaged children, from birth to
age five, and families and to help young
children develop the skills they need to
be successful in school. Our agencies
provide these families comprehensive
services to support children’s cognitive,
social, and emotional development. In
addition to education services, agencies
provide children and their families with
health, nutrition, social, and other
services.
To drive program quality
improvement, the Improving Head Start
for School Readiness Act of 2007, Public
Law 110–134, (the Act) required HHS to
develop a system to facilitate
designation of Head Start grantees
delivering a high-quality and
comprehensive program for a period of
5 years and required grantees not
delivering high-quality and
comprehensive services to enter open
competition for continued funding.
Prior to the Act, when HHS designated
a Head Start agency, it remained a Head
Start grantee indefinitely unless the
grantee either relinquished funding or
HHS terminated its grant.
To meet the requirement in the Act,
HHS established the DRS, which is
described in 45 CFR 1304.10 through
16. The DRS includes seven conditions.
If an agency meets any of the seven
conditions, it must compete with other
providers in the community for renewed
grant funding. The seven conditions are:
(1) A deficiency under section
641A(c)(1)(A), (C), or (D) of the Act; (2)
failure to establish, utilize, and analyze
children’s progress on agencyestablished School Readiness goals; (3)
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
scores below minimum thresholds in
the Classroom Assessment Scoring
System: Pre-K (CLASS) domains or in
the lowest 10 percent in any of the three
domains of the agencies monitored in a
given year unless the average score is
equal to or above the standard of
excellence; (4) revocation of a license to
operate a center or program; (5)
suspension from the program; (6)
debarment from receiving federal or
state funds or disqualified from the
Child and Adult Care Food Program; or
(7) an audit finding of at risk for failing
to continue as ‘‘a going concern.’’ The
Act also requires HHS to periodically
evaluate whether or not the DRS criteria
are applied in a manner that is
transparent, reliable, and valid.
Section 641(c)(1)(D) of the Act
requires the DRS to be based in part on
classroom quality as measured under
section 641A(c)(2)(F), which refers to a
valid and reliable research-based
observational instrument, implemented
by qualified individuals with
demonstrated reliability that assesses
classroom quality. To include assessing
multiple dimensions of teacher-child
interactions that is linked to positive
child development and later
achievement. The third condition of the
DRS is based on use of the CLASS,
which is an observational measurement
tool for assessing the quality of teacherchild interactions and classroom
processes in three broad domains that
support children’s learning and
development: Emotional Support,
Classroom Organization, and
Instructional Support.
Changes to DRS Under Consideration
Since HHS established the DRS, all
grantees that had indefinite project
periods have completed the DRS
process. Based on CLASS data,
observations collected throughout these
cohorts, results of a recent evaluation,
and feedback from the community, we
are considering changes to the DRS in
order to better improve implementation
of the system, including changes to the
CLASS condition.
The CLASS Condition
There are concerns about some
aspects of the CLASS condition of the
DRS that have been raised by Head Start
grantees as well as in the recent
evaluation. First, the requirement for
grantees with the lowest 10 percent of
scores on any of the three CLASS
domains to compete may not be
optimally targeting the grantees for
competition with the lowest measures of
classroom quality. For example,
grantees have been required to compete
due to an Emotional Support score of
E:\FR\FM\14FEP1.SGM
14FEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
5.69, which is very close to the Standard
of Excellence (a 6—which developers of
the CLASS deem the highest quality). In
addition, grantees scoring slightly
higher than the minimum threshold in
Instructional Support (e.g., score of 2.3)
do not have to compete unless they fall
into the lowest 10 percent of all
grantees’ scores for Instructional
Support, which has been very close to
the minimum threshold. We are
considering an approach to establish
higher specific thresholds that
demonstrate an established acceptable
level of quality in Emotional Support
and Classroom Organization and an
adjustable threshold for the
Instructional Support domain where
there is the greatest potential and need
for program improvement.
Second, we understand that the delay
between completion of the CLASS
review and grantees knowing their DRS
designation status, due to the need to
collect and analyze a full monitoring
year’s CLASS scores to determine the
lowest 10 percent. This creates
uncertainty, stress, and concern among
grantees, grantee staff, and families.
Because classroom quality in Head Start
programs is improving as demonstrated
by recent analysis of data from the 2006,
2009, and 2014, cohorts of the Head
Start Family and Child Experiences
Survey (FACES),1 we are exploring
options for the CLASS condition that
would better balance an ability to drive
quality improvement over time with an
approach that would be more
transparent, timely, and less
burdensome for programs.
To inform our development of a
notice of proposed rulemaking to
change the DRS CLASS condition to
meet the objectives described above, we
are requesting public comments on
several specific changes being
considered. The changes under
consideration are as follows:
1. Remove the ‘‘lowest 10 percent’’
provision of the CLASS condition
described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(2).
2. Increase the minimum threshold
described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(1)(i) for
the Emotional Support domain from 4 to
5.
3. Increase the minimum threshold
described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(1)(ii) for
Classroom Organization from 3 to 5.
4. Remove the minimum threshold for
the Instructional Support domain
described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(1)(iii)
and instead provide authority for the
Secretary to set an absolute minimum
1 Aikens, N., Bush, C., Gleason, P., Malone, L., &
Tarullo, L. (2016). Tracking Quality in Head Start
Classrooms: FACES 2006 to FACES 2014.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:09 Feb 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
threshold for the Instructional Support
domain, considering the most recent
CLASS data, by August 1 of each year
to be used for CLASS Reviews
conducted in the following fiscal year
(October 1 through September 30).
Together, these changes would allow
grantees to know by August 1, before
CLASS Reviews are conducted for the
coming fiscal year, the exact threshold
of classroom quality in each of the three
domains that will be used to determine
which grantees will be subject to an
open competition for funding and
which grantees will receive renewed
funding non-competitively. Grantees
would no longer have to wait until
several months following the conclusion
of the CLASS reviews for the fiscal year
(September 30) to learn the lowest 10
percent cutoff in each of the 3 domains.
Setting minimum thresholds of 5 in the
Emotional Support and Classroom
Organization domains would set a clear
and consistent expectation of quality for
all Head Start programs. Allowing the
Secretary to set the minimum threshold
in the Instructional Support domain
prior to the start of each program year
and monitoring year would allow for
consideration of the most recent CLASS
data for Head Start grantees while still
supporting continuous quality
improvement across the program as a
whole.
Other Areas of Improvement
In addition to the CLASS condition,
we are interested in receiving feedback
about other conditions and
improvements that could be made to
DRS. This includes actions we can take
without regulatory changes to ensure
the DRS process is transparent, timely,
and results in higher quality programs.
To inform our development of a
notice of proposed rulemaking and
continue improving the DRS, we are
specifically requesting comments on:
• Changes OHS can make to
incentivize robust competition,
including ways OHS can ensure there
are new and quality applicants at the
local level;
• Changes OHS can make to facilitate
an orderly transition between grantees
without disrupting services for children
(when recompetition is required and the
incumbent does not regain its grant);
and,
• Any other administrative changes
OHS can make to the system that do not
require regulatory changes, including
changes to monitoring processes and
timing of notifications and awards.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6505
What We Are Looking for in Public
Comments
We invite comments about the
specific changes being considered for
the DRS CLASS condition as well as
alternatives to these changes that would
continue to improve program quality,
while balancing the need to continue to
provide transparency to grantees about
what they will be measured on and
being mindful of burden on grantees.
We also invite comments about any
unintended consequences of removing
the lowest 10 percent condition and
whether an absolute threshold could
influence scores. We are particularly
interested in recommendations related
to how the Secretary would consider
establishing the minimum threshold for
Instructional Support, including in what
increments to raise the threshold, what
data to base the absolute thresholds on,
and how often to revise the threshold.
For example, the regulation could
establish an initial Instructional Support
threshold (e.g., 2.3 or 2.5) that could be
raised in increments of 0.1 based on
certain criteria related to the available
CLASS data from all prior years of Head
Start monitoring, or the threshold could
be set one standard deviation below the
mean Instructional Support score over
the 3 or 5 previous fiscal years. We are
interested in other ideas of ways the
Instructional Support threshold could
be set and/or adjusted that would
incentivize program improvement while
acknowledging the current state of the
field. We are also interested in feedback
on another potential change to establish
or maintain a minimum absolute
threshold (such as a 2) that would
require competition and a higher
threshold (such as 2.5 or 3) and require
grantees to focus on quality
improvement before they were
reevaluated to see if their Instructional
Support score has improved. Only
grantees without improvement or still
below the threshold would then have to
compete. We are also interested in
whether we should align the approach
for Instructional Support with the other
CLASS domains. We are interested in
feedback on each of these possible
approaches as well as others suggested
by the field.
If commenters do not support the
changes being considered, comments
offering alternative proposals to the
CLASS condition, whether changes to
the absolute thresholds or the relative
10 percent threshold, or to other
conditions of the DRS would be
particularly helpful.
We are also particularly interested in
soliciting feedback on other changes to
DRS implementation that would spur
E:\FR\FM\14FEP1.SGM
14FEP1
6506
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2018 / Proposed Rules
local competition and improve the DRS
process for grantees.
Ann Linehan,
Acting Director, Office of Head Start.
[FR Doc. 2018–02902 Filed 2–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
45 CFR Part 1304
RIN 0970–AC63
CLASS Condition of the Head Start
Designation Renewal System
Office of Head Start (OHS),
Administration for Children and
Families (ACF), Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Request for comments;
withdrawal
AGENCY:
OHS withdraws the ‘‘CLASS
Condition of the Head Start Designation
Renewal System’’ request for comments,
published in the Federal Register on
December 8, 2017. OHS simultaneously
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:09 Feb 13, 2018
Jkt 244001
issues the ‘‘Head Start Designation
Renewal System Improvements’’ request
for comments, located elsewhere in the
same issue of the Federal Register. The
‘‘Head Start Designation Renewal
System Improvements’’ request for
comments contains information we
inadvertently omitted from the ‘‘CLASS
Condition of the Head Start Designation
Renewal System’’ request for comment
publication.
DATES: As of February 14, 2018, the
proposed rule published December 8,
2017, at 82 FR 57905, is withdrawn.
ADDRESSES: Division of Planning,
Oversight and Policy, Office of Head
Start, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colleen Rathgeb, Director, Division of
Planning, Oversight and Policy, Office
of Head Start, [colleen.rathgeb@
acf.hhs.gov], (202) 358–3263 (not a tollfree call). Deaf and hearing impaired
individuals may call the Federal Dual
Party Relay Service at 1–800–877–8339
between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OHS
published the ‘‘CLASS Condition of the
Head Start Designation Renewal
System’’ request for comments on
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
December 8, 2017, to solicit comments
from the public on changes we are
considering to the Designation Renewal
System (DRS). We unintentionally
omitted language from the document
that specifically asks the public to
consider what changes OHS can make to
incentivize robust competition and to
facilitate orderly transitions between
grantees when an incumbent does not
regain its grant after competition, as
well as any other administrative
changes that do not require regulatory
action.
We believe public feedback on the
omitted language is important and can
help us make better informed decisions
about the DRS. For that reason, we
withdraw the ‘‘CLASS Condition of the
Head Start Designation Renewal
System’’ request for comments, and we
are publishing a new request for
comments, titled ‘‘Head Start
Designation Renewal System
Improvements,’’ elsewhere in this issue
of the Federal Register.
Dated: February 7, 2018.
Ann Linehan,
Acting Director, Office of Head Start.
[FR Doc. 2018–02901 Filed 2–13–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
E:\FR\FM\14FEP1.SGM
14FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 14, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6503-6506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-02902]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Part 1304
RIN 0970-AC63
Head Start Designation Renewal System Improvements
AGENCY: Office of Head Start (OHS), Administration for Children and
Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Request for comments; re-issue.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: OHS issues this request for comments to invite public feedback
on information we inadvertently omitted from the ``CLASS Condition of
the Head Start Designation Renewal System,'' request for comments,
published on December 8, 2017. The document withdrawing the ``CLASS
Condition of the Head Start Designation Renewal System'' request for
comments is published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
This request for comments is similar to the withdrawn publication in
that it invites the public to comment on specific changes OHS is
considering for the CLASS condition, as well as other Designation
Renewal System (DRS) conditions and processes more broadly.
Additionally, OHS seeks
[[Page 6504]]
comments on ways it can: Incentivize robust competition to include new
applicants, facilitate smooth transitions when there is a new grantee
as a result of competition, and improve the DRS processes. The comment
period is 30 days to allow for the public to address the additional
issues in this reissued request for comments. We will consider comments
submitted under the ``CLASS Condition of the Head Start Designation
Renewal System'' request for comments.
DATES: Submit comments by March 16, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by [docket number and/or
RIN number], by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow instructions for sending comments. We prefer to receive comments
via this method.
Mail: Office of Head Start, Attention: Colleen Rathgeb,
Director, Division of Planning, Oversight and Policy, 330 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20024.
Instructions: All submissions received must include our agency name
and the docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
notice. All comments will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. We
accept anonymous comments. If you wish to remain anonymous, enter ``N/
A'' in the required fields.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colleen Rathgeb, Director, Division of
Planning, Oversight and Policy, Office of Head Start,
[[email protected]], (202) 358-3263 (not a toll-free call).
Deaf and hearing impaired individuals may call the Federal Dual Party
Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent with the December 8, 2017,
publication (82 FR 57905), OHS invites public comment on several
specific changes being considered for the CLASS condition of the DRS as
outlined in the Head Start Program Performance Standards. We also
invite public comment on other improvements to the DRS based on
feedback from stakeholders, grantees, and the results of the DRS
implementation evaluation. In particular, we are considering changes to
the CLASS condition with a goal of improving implementation and
transparency of the DRS. Changes being considered include removal of
the ``lowest 10 percent'' provision of the CLASS condition, an increase
of the minimum thresholds for the Emotional Support and Classroom
Organization domains to a score of 5, removal of the minimum threshold
for the Instructional Support domain, and establishment of authority
for the Secretary to set an absolute minimum threshold for the
Instructional Support domain prior to the start of each fiscal year to
be applied for DRS CLASS reviews in the same fiscal year. OHS requests
feedback on these possible changes and alternative changes to the CLASS
condition. Particularly in ways the Instructional Support and other
thresholds could be set and/or adjusted that would incentivize
continuous program improvement while acknowledging the current state of
the field. OHS also invites feedback on other conditions of the DRS and
the way it is implemented.
Background Information
The Head Start program provides grants to local public and private
non-profit and for-profit agencies to provide comprehensive education
and child development services to economically disadvantaged children,
from birth to age five, and families and to help young children develop
the skills they need to be successful in school. Our agencies provide
these families comprehensive services to support children's cognitive,
social, and emotional development. In addition to education services,
agencies provide children and their families with health, nutrition,
social, and other services.
To drive program quality improvement, the Improving Head Start for
School Readiness Act of 2007, Public Law 110-134, (the Act) required
HHS to develop a system to facilitate designation of Head Start
grantees delivering a high-quality and comprehensive program for a
period of 5 years and required grantees not delivering high-quality and
comprehensive services to enter open competition for continued funding.
Prior to the Act, when HHS designated a Head Start agency, it remained
a Head Start grantee indefinitely unless the grantee either
relinquished funding or HHS terminated its grant.
To meet the requirement in the Act, HHS established the DRS, which
is described in 45 CFR 1304.10 through 16. The DRS includes seven
conditions. If an agency meets any of the seven conditions, it must
compete with other providers in the community for renewed grant
funding. The seven conditions are: (1) A deficiency under section
641A(c)(1)(A), (C), or (D) of the Act; (2) failure to establish,
utilize, and analyze children's progress on agency-established School
Readiness goals; (3) scores below minimum thresholds in the Classroom
Assessment Scoring System: Pre-K (CLASS) domains or in the lowest 10
percent in any of the three domains of the agencies monitored in a
given year unless the average score is equal to or above the standard
of excellence; (4) revocation of a license to operate a center or
program; (5) suspension from the program; (6) debarment from receiving
federal or state funds or disqualified from the Child and Adult Care
Food Program; or (7) an audit finding of at risk for failing to
continue as ``a going concern.'' The Act also requires HHS to
periodically evaluate whether or not the DRS criteria are applied in a
manner that is transparent, reliable, and valid.
Section 641(c)(1)(D) of the Act requires the DRS to be based in
part on classroom quality as measured under section 641A(c)(2)(F),
which refers to a valid and reliable research-based observational
instrument, implemented by qualified individuals with demonstrated
reliability that assesses classroom quality. To include assessing
multiple dimensions of teacher-child interactions that is linked to
positive child development and later achievement. The third condition
of the DRS is based on use of the CLASS, which is an observational
measurement tool for assessing the quality of teacher-child
interactions and classroom processes in three broad domains that
support children's learning and development: Emotional Support,
Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support.
Changes to DRS Under Consideration
Since HHS established the DRS, all grantees that had indefinite
project periods have completed the DRS process. Based on CLASS data,
observations collected throughout these cohorts, results of a recent
evaluation, and feedback from the community, we are considering changes
to the DRS in order to better improve implementation of the system,
including changes to the CLASS condition.
The CLASS Condition
There are concerns about some aspects of the CLASS condition of the
DRS that have been raised by Head Start grantees as well as in the
recent evaluation. First, the requirement for grantees with the lowest
10 percent of scores on any of the three CLASS domains to compete may
not be optimally targeting the grantees for competition with the lowest
measures of classroom quality. For example, grantees have been required
to compete due to an Emotional Support score of
[[Page 6505]]
5.69, which is very close to the Standard of Excellence (a 6--which
developers of the CLASS deem the highest quality). In addition,
grantees scoring slightly higher than the minimum threshold in
Instructional Support (e.g., score of 2.3) do not have to compete
unless they fall into the lowest 10 percent of all grantees' scores for
Instructional Support, which has been very close to the minimum
threshold. We are considering an approach to establish higher specific
thresholds that demonstrate an established acceptable level of quality
in Emotional Support and Classroom Organization and an adjustable
threshold for the Instructional Support domain where there is the
greatest potential and need for program improvement.
Second, we understand that the delay between completion of the
CLASS review and grantees knowing their DRS designation status, due to
the need to collect and analyze a full monitoring year's CLASS scores
to determine the lowest 10 percent. This creates uncertainty, stress,
and concern among grantees, grantee staff, and families. Because
classroom quality in Head Start programs is improving as demonstrated
by recent analysis of data from the 2006, 2009, and 2014, cohorts of
the Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES),\1\ we are
exploring options for the CLASS condition that would better balance an
ability to drive quality improvement over time with an approach that
would be more transparent, timely, and less burdensome for programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Aikens, N., Bush, C., Gleason, P., Malone, L., & Tarullo, L.
(2016). Tracking Quality in Head Start Classrooms: FACES 2006 to
FACES 2014. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To inform our development of a notice of proposed rulemaking to
change the DRS CLASS condition to meet the objectives described above,
we are requesting public comments on several specific changes being
considered. The changes under consideration are as follows:
1. Remove the ``lowest 10 percent'' provision of the CLASS
condition described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(2).
2. Increase the minimum threshold described in 45 CFR
1304.11(c)(1)(i) for the Emotional Support domain from 4 to 5.
3. Increase the minimum threshold described in 45 CFR
1304.11(c)(1)(ii) for Classroom Organization from 3 to 5.
4. Remove the minimum threshold for the Instructional Support
domain described in 45 CFR 1304.11(c)(1)(iii) and instead provide
authority for the Secretary to set an absolute minimum threshold for
the Instructional Support domain, considering the most recent CLASS
data, by August 1 of each year to be used for CLASS Reviews conducted
in the following fiscal year (October 1 through September 30).
Together, these changes would allow grantees to know by August 1,
before CLASS Reviews are conducted for the coming fiscal year, the
exact threshold of classroom quality in each of the three domains that
will be used to determine which grantees will be subject to an open
competition for funding and which grantees will receive renewed funding
non-competitively. Grantees would no longer have to wait until several
months following the conclusion of the CLASS reviews for the fiscal
year (September 30) to learn the lowest 10 percent cutoff in each of
the 3 domains. Setting minimum thresholds of 5 in the Emotional Support
and Classroom Organization domains would set a clear and consistent
expectation of quality for all Head Start programs. Allowing the
Secretary to set the minimum threshold in the Instructional Support
domain prior to the start of each program year and monitoring year
would allow for consideration of the most recent CLASS data for Head
Start grantees while still supporting continuous quality improvement
across the program as a whole.
Other Areas of Improvement
In addition to the CLASS condition, we are interested in receiving
feedback about other conditions and improvements that could be made to
DRS. This includes actions we can take without regulatory changes to
ensure the DRS process is transparent, timely, and results in higher
quality programs.
To inform our development of a notice of proposed rulemaking and
continue improving the DRS, we are specifically requesting comments on:
Changes OHS can make to incentivize robust competition,
including ways OHS can ensure there are new and quality applicants at
the local level;
Changes OHS can make to facilitate an orderly transition
between grantees without disrupting services for children (when
recompetition is required and the incumbent does not regain its grant);
and,
Any other administrative changes OHS can make to the
system that do not require regulatory changes, including changes to
monitoring processes and timing of notifications and awards.
What We Are Looking for in Public Comments
We invite comments about the specific changes being considered for
the DRS CLASS condition as well as alternatives to these changes that
would continue to improve program quality, while balancing the need to
continue to provide transparency to grantees about what they will be
measured on and being mindful of burden on grantees. We also invite
comments about any unintended consequences of removing the lowest 10
percent condition and whether an absolute threshold could influence
scores. We are particularly interested in recommendations related to
how the Secretary would consider establishing the minimum threshold for
Instructional Support, including in what increments to raise the
threshold, what data to base the absolute thresholds on, and how often
to revise the threshold. For example, the regulation could establish an
initial Instructional Support threshold (e.g., 2.3 or 2.5) that could
be raised in increments of 0.1 based on certain criteria related to the
available CLASS data from all prior years of Head Start monitoring, or
the threshold could be set one standard deviation below the mean
Instructional Support score over the 3 or 5 previous fiscal years. We
are interested in other ideas of ways the Instructional Support
threshold could be set and/or adjusted that would incentivize program
improvement while acknowledging the current state of the field. We are
also interested in feedback on another potential change to establish or
maintain a minimum absolute threshold (such as a 2) that would require
competition and a higher threshold (such as 2.5 or 3) and require
grantees to focus on quality improvement before they were reevaluated
to see if their Instructional Support score has improved. Only grantees
without improvement or still below the threshold would then have to
compete. We are also interested in whether we should align the approach
for Instructional Support with the other CLASS domains. We are
interested in feedback on each of these possible approaches as well as
others suggested by the field.
If commenters do not support the changes being considered, comments
offering alternative proposals to the CLASS condition, whether changes
to the absolute thresholds or the relative 10 percent threshold, or to
other conditions of the DRS would be particularly helpful.
We are also particularly interested in soliciting feedback on other
changes to DRS implementation that would spur
[[Page 6506]]
local competition and improve the DRS process for grantees.
Ann Linehan,
Acting Director, Office of Head Start.
[FR Doc. 2018-02902 Filed 2-13-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P