Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program-Stepping-Up Technology Implementation, 38122-38132 [2020-13737]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
38122
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
102–3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the
public or interested organizations may
submit written comments or statements
to the Board about its mission and/or
the topics to be addressed in this virtual
public meeting. Written comments or
statements should be submitted to Mr.
Pointon, the committee DFO, or Mr.
Riley, a committee ADFO, via electronic
mail, the preferred mode of submission,
at the addresses listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
in the following formats: Adobe Acrobat
or Microsoft Word. The comment or
statement must include the author’s
name, title, affiliation, address, and
daytime telephone number. Written
comments or statements being
submitted in response to the agenda set
forth in this notice must be received by
the committee DFO or ADFO at least
five (5) business days prior to the
meeting so that they may be made
available to the Board for its
consideration prior to the meeting.
Written comments or statements
received after this date may not be
provided to the Board until its next
meeting. Please note that because the
Board operates under the provisions of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended, all written comments will be
treated as public documents and will be
made available for public inspection.
Verbal Comments: Members of the
public will be permitted to make verbal
comments during the virtual public
meeting only at the time and in the
manner allowed herein. If a member of
the public is interested in making a
verbal comment at the open virtual
meeting, that individual must submit a
request, with a brief statement of the
subject matter to be addressed by the
comment, at least three business (3)
days in advance to the committee DFO
or ADFO, via electronic mail, the
preferred mode of submission, at the
addresses listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. The
committee DFO and ADFO will log each
request to make a comment, in the order
received, and determine whether the
subject matter of each comment is
relevant to the Board’s mission and/or
the topics to be addressed in this public
meeting. A 15-minute period near the
end of the meeting will be available for
verbal public comments. Members of
the public who have requested to make
a verbal comment and whose comments
have been deemed relevant under the
process described above, will be allotted
no more than three (3) minutes during
this period, and will be invited to speak
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
in the order in which their requests
were received by the DFO and ADFO.
Thomas Patrick Smith,
Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division,
Directorate of Civil Works, U.S. Army Corp
of Engineers.
[FR Doc. 2020–13543 Filed 6–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
Telephone: (202) 245–6039. Email:
Terry.Jackson@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:
Full Text of Announcement
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards;
Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals With
Disabilities Program—Stepping-Up
Technology Implementation
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) is issuing a notice inviting
applications for new awards for fiscal
year (FY) 2020 for Educational
Technology, Media, and Materials for
Individuals with Disabilities—Steppingup Technology Implementation, Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
number 84.327S. This notice relates to
the approved information collection
under OMB control number 1820–0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 25, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: August 14, 2020.
Date of 84.327S Pre-Application
Meeting: OSERS will conduct a preapplication meeting specific to these
competitions via webinar on July 6,
2020, at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. In
addition, no later than June 30, 2020,
the Office of Special Education
Programs (OSEP) will post a prerecorded informational webinar
designed to provide technical assistance
to interested applicants. Information
about the teleconference and the prerecorded webinar may be found at
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/
new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for
obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common
Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary
Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 13, 2019
(84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-201902-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 5128, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202–5076.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of
the Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals with
Disabilities Program are to (1) improve
results for children with disabilities by
promoting the development,
demonstration, and use of technology;
(2) support educational activities
designed to be of educational value in
the classroom for children with
disabilities; (3) provide support for
captioning and video description that is
appropriate for use in the classroom;
and (4) provide accessible educational
materials to children with disabilities in
a timely manner.1
Priorities: This competition includes
two absolute priorities. In accordance
with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), these
priorities are from allowable activities
specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and
681(d) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20
U.S.C. 1474(c)(1)(D) and 1481(d).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2020 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition,
these priorities are absolute priorities.
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider
only applications that meet either
Absolute Priority 1 or Absolute Priority
2. Applicants may apply under both
absolute priorities but must submit
separate applications.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1—Providing
Technology-Based Professional
Development to Trainers of Special
Education Teachers to Support Children
With Disabilities.
Background:
Technology has enhanced
professional development learning
opportunities for teachers by expanding
1 Applicants should note that other laws,
including the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may
require that State educational agencies (SEAs) and
local educational agencies (LEAs) provide
captioning, video description, and other accessible
educational materials to students with disabilities
when these materials are necessary to provide
equally integrated and equally effective access to
the benefits of the educational program or activity,
or as part of a ‘‘free appropriate public education’’
as defined in 34 CFR 104.33.
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
access to information and resources that
support their content expertise and
pedagogy and promote their
professional growth. As an alternative to
face-to-face professional development
that can be expensive or impracticable
(e.g., during an emergency), professional
development facilitated by technology
has the potential to more efficiently
shape and impact teaching practices.
Some examples of the technologies that
can be used to support teacher learning
include virtual coaching, in which a
coach interacts electronically with
teachers to improve teaching skills;
learning management systems (LMS)
that allow sharing of documents and
data in one central location; and
gamification, which involves bringing
elements associated with video games
into the learning environment to
increase engagement and making tasks
challenging.
McAleavy et al. (2018) noted that
using technology to support teachers’
professional learning can promote
collaboration through professional
learning communities and communities
of practice. In addition, technology that
can be used to build the skills of
teachers and related services personnel
in rural or remote areas may be more
cost-effective than face-to-face trainings
and will offer flexibility that allows
teachers to train at a time and place that
suits them.
However, regardless of the delivery,
effective professional development must
go beyond learning new materials and
skills; it must also support teachers and
related services personnel in improving
classroom instruction and student
learning (Gess-Newsome et al., 2003).
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017)
indicated that effective professional
development should have the following
features: (1) Be content focused, (2)
incorporate active learning utilizing
adult learning principles, (3) support
collaboration, (4) use models and
modeling of effective practices, (5)
provide coaching and expert support,
(6) offer opportunities for feedback and
reflection, and (7) be of sustained
duration.
The Department therefore intends to
fund three cooperative agreements to (a)
identify strategies needed to implement
and integrate an existing technologybased tool or approach, based on at least
promising evidence,2 into the provision
of teacher in-service training; and (b)
provide ongoing technology-based
professional development and coaching
for in-service trainers in the use of
technology to, and understanding of
2 Section 8002 of Elementary and Secondary
Education Act, as amended (ESEA) (2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
how the technology may, support
teachers to improve classroom and
remote learning environment
instruction and learning outcomes for
children with disabilities in prekindergarten through grade 12 (PK–12)
settings.
Projects must be awarded and
operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements
contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under
this priority, applicants, at a minimum,
must—
(a) Build partnerships with LEAs, at
least one of which is in a rural location
and that includes public and nonpublic
schools, to support teacher in-service
trainers in the understanding, use, and
delivery of a technology-based tool or
approach that will support teacher inservice training for instruction of
children with disabilities in PK–12
instructional settings, including
classrooms and remote learning
environments;
(b) Increase the capacity of teacher inservice trainers to effectively use and
implement a technology-based tool or
approach that supports teacher
classroom and remote learning
environment instruction and
professional growth;
(c) Develop an implementation
package of products and resources that
will help teacher in-service trainers to
use a technology-based tool or
approach; and
(d) Evaluate the effectiveness of the
in-service training conducted using the
technology-based tool or approach.
In addition to these programmatic
requirements, to be considered for
funding under this priority, applicants
must meet the following application and
administrative requirements in this
priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed
project will—
(1) Address the need for a technologybased tool or approach and identify
specific gaps and weaknesses,
infrastructure, or opportunities to
support teacher in-service training. To
meet this requirement the applicant
must—
(i) Identify a fully developed
technology-based tool or approach that
is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based
tool or approach will improve teacher
in-service training and the capacity of
teachers to deliver instruction or
services for PK–12 children with
disabilities;
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38123
(iii) Present applicable national, State,
regional, or local data demonstrating the
need for the identified technology-based
tool or approach in teacher in-service
training to support children with
disabilities;
(iv) Identify current policies,
procedures, and practices used by
teacher in-service trainers that
incorporate technology-based tools or
approaches to meet their training needs;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or
challenges, including challenges using
the identified technology-based tools or
approaches in providing teacher inservice training; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of
the identified technology-based tool or
approach on teacher in-service trainers,
teachers, families and children with
disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the
proposed project will—
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment
for members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
describe how it will—
(i) Identify the needs of the intended
recipients for ongoing coaching and
supports;
(ii) Identify potential strategies to
provide recipients of the in-service
training with the flexibility to
personalize their own learning and
coaching supports; and
(iii) Ensure that products and
resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and
intended outcomes. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
provide—
(i) Measurable intended project
outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 3
or conceptual framework by which the
proposed project will achieve its
intended outcomes that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs,
and intended outcomes of the proposed
project;
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual
framework (and provide a copy in
Appendix A) to develop project plans
and activities describing any underlying
concepts, assumptions, expectations,
3 Logic model (also referred to as a theory of
action) means a framework that identifies key
project components of the proposed project (i.e., the
active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be
critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and
describes the theoretical and operational
relationships among the key project components
and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
38124
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
beliefs, or theories, as well as the
presumed relationships or linkages
among these variables, and any
empirical support for this framework;
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Note: The following websites provide more
information on logic models and conceptual
frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/
logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/
resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tadproject-logic-model-and-conceptualframework.
(4) Be based on current research. To
meet this requirement, the applicant
must—
(i) Describe how the proposed project
will align to current research, policies,
and practices related to the benefits,
services, or opportunities that are
available using the technology-based
tool or approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project
will incorporate current research and
practices to guide the development and
delivery of its products and resources,
including accessibility and usability;
and
(iii) Document that the technology
tool used by the project is fully
developed, based on at least promising
evidence, and addresses, at a minimum,
the following principles of universal
design for learning (UDL):
(A) Multiple means of presentation so
that information can be delivered in
more than one way (e.g., specialized
software and websites, screen readers
that include features such as text-tospeech, changeable color contrast,
alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression that
allow knowledge to be exhibited
through options such as writing, online
concept mapping, or speech-to-text
programs, where appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to
stimulate interest in and motivation for
learning (e.g., options among several
different learning activities or content
for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased
collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new products and
resources that are of high quality and
sufficient intensity and duration to
achieve the intended outcomes of the
proposed project. To address this
requirement, the applicant must—
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and
selecting a wide range of settings where
children with disabilities are served,
which must include the following:
(A) Three development sites.
Development sites are the sites in which
iterative development of the products
and resources intended to support the
implementation of technology tools will
occur. The project must start
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
implementing the technology tool with
one development site in year one of the
project period and two additional
development sites in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the
sites in which try-out, formative
evaluation, and refinement of the
products and resources will occur. The
project must work with the four pilot
sites during years three and four of the
project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites.
Dissemination/scale-up sites will be
selected if the project is extended for a
fifth year. Dissemination/scale-up sites
will be used to (a) refine the products
for use by educators, and (b) evaluate
the performance of the technology tool.
Dissemination/scale-up sites will
receive less technical assistance (TA)
from the project than development and
pilot sites. Also, dissemination/scale-up
sites will extend the benefits of the
technology tool to additional students.
To be selected as a dissemination/scaleup site, eligible sites must commit to
working with the project to implement
the technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than
one category (i.e., development, pilot,
dissemination/scale-up).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven
development and pilot sites must be in
settings other than traditional public
elementary and secondary schools and
include at least one rural site. A
minimum of four of the 10
dissemination/scale-up sites must be in
settings other than traditional public
elementary and secondary schools and
include at least one rural site. These
non-traditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each
category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the
development and pilot sites, including
student demographics and other
pertinent data (e.g., whether the settings
are schools identified for
comprehensive or targeted support and
improvement in accordance with
section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii), (c)(4)(D), or
(d)(2)(C)–(D) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended (ESEA));
(iii) Provide its plan for
dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute
information, products, and services to
varied intended audiences, using a
variety of dissemination strategies, to
promote awareness and use of the
project’s products and resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the
project will sustain project activities
after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final
products disseminated to help sites
effectively implement technology tools
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will be both open educational resources
(OER) and licensed through an open
access licensing authority.
(c) In the narrative section of the
application under ‘‘Quality of the
project evaluation,’’ include an
evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs.
The evaluation plan must describe
measures of progress in implementation,
including the criteria for determining
the extent to which the project’s
products and resources have met the
goals for reaching the project’s target
population; measures of intended
outcomes or results of the project’s
activities in order to evaluate those
activities; and how well the goals or
objectives of the proposed project, as
described in its logic model, have been
met. The applicant must provide an
assurance that, in designing the
evaluation plan, it will—
(1) Provide a logic model or
conceptual framework that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, project
evaluation, methods, performance
measures, outputs, and outcomes of the
proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the
activities described in this priority;
(3) Provide a plan, linked to the
proposed project’s logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative
evaluation of the proposed project’s
activities. The plan must describe how
the formative evaluation will use clear
performance objectives to ensure
continuous improvement in the
operation of the proposed project,
including objective measures of progress
in implementing the project and
ensuring the quality of products and
resources;
(4) Describe a plan or method for
assessing—
(i) The development and pilot sites’
current teacher in-service training uses
and needs, any current in-service
technology investments, and the
knowledge and availability of dedicated
on-site in-service training personnel;
(ii) The readiness of development and
pilot sites to pilot or try-out the
technology-based teacher in-service
training, including at a minimum, their
current infrastructure, available
resources, and ability to build capacity;
(iii) Whether the technology-based
tool or approach has achieved its
intended outcomes for teacher inservice trainers and PK–12 teachers; and
(iv) Ongoing training needs of inservice trainers to implement with
fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative
data from the in-service training to
refine and evaluate the products;
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth
year—
(i) Provide the implementation
package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool
or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites, one of which
must be rural, in year five; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the
success of the project’s products and
resources in supporting implementation
of the technology-based tool or
approach in teacher in-service training
sites; and
(7) By the end of the project period,
provide—
(i) Information on the products and
resources, as supported by the project
evaluation, including any accessibility
features, that will enable other sites to
implement and sustain implementation
of the technology-based tool or
approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology
Implementation Report, including data
on how in-service trainers used the
technology-based tool or approach, and
how the technology-based tool or
approach was implemented with
fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technologybased tool or approach changed inservice trainers’ practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or
scaling up the technology-based tool or
approach and accompanying products
beyond the sites directly involved in the
project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of
project personnel,’’ how—
(1) The proposed project will
encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of
groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project
personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications
and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key
partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable
in relation to the anticipated results and
benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’
how—
(1) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the project’s intended
outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget. To address this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for
key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for
accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any
consultants and subcontractors will be
allocated and how these allocations are
appropriate and adequate to achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality,
relevant, and useful to recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit
from a diversity of perspectives,
including those of families, educators,
researchers, and policy makers, among
others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application
requirements. The applicant must
include—
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading
charts and timelines, as applicable, to
illustrate the management plan
described in the narrative; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the
following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off
meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually
after receipt of the award, and an annual
planning meeting in Washington, DC,
with the Office of Special Education
Programs (OSEP) project officer and
other relevant staff during each
subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the
award, a post-award teleconference must be
held between the OSEP project officer and
the grantee’s project director or other
authorized representative.
(ii) A two and one-half-day project
directors’ conference in Washington,
DC, or a virtual conference during each
year of the project period.
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to
attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and
other meetings, as requested by OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review
meeting during the last half of the
second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide
coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this
priority must—
(a) Participate in monthly conferencecall discussions to share and collaborate
on implementation and project issues;
and
(b) Provide information annually
using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38125
and the processes for installation and
use of the technology-based tool or
approach (i.e., the implementation
process).
Note: The following website provides more
information about implementation research:
https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/nationalimplementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project
one year beyond the initial 48 months
to work with dissemination/scale-up
sites if the grantee is achieving the
intended outcomes of the project (as
demonstrated by data gathered as part of
the project evaluation) and making a
positive contribution to the
implementation of a technology-based
tool or approach based on at least
promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each
applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month
period. In deciding whether to continue
funding the project for the fifth year, the
Secretary will consider the requirements
of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider—
(a) The recommendation of a review
team consisting of the OSEP project
officer and other experts selected by the
Secretary. This review will be held
during the last half of the second year
of the project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with
which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have
been or are being met by the project; and
(c) The degree to which the project’s
activities have changed practices and
improved outcomes for PK–12 children
with disabilities.
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., &
Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher
Professional Development. Learning
Policy Institute. https://
learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/
teacher-prof-dev.
Gess-Newsome, J., Blocher, J.M., Clark, J.,
Menasco, J., & Willis, E.M. (2003).
Technology infused professional
development: A framework for
development and analysis.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and
Teacher Education, 3(3). https://
citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/
general/technology-infused-professionaldevelopment-a-framework-fordevelopment-and-analysis.
McAleavy, T., Hall-Chen, A., Horrocks, S., &
Riggall, A. (2018). Technology-supported
professional development for teachers:
Lessons from developing countries.
Education Development Trust. https://
eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386.
Absolute Priority 2—Improving Social
Skill Development for Students with
Disabilities Through the Use of Socially
Assistive Robotics (SAR).
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
38126
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
Background:
For students with disabilities,
interpersonal skills, such as active
listening, effective communication, and
recognizing and understanding the
points of view of others, are important
to the development of healthy
relationships and successful placement
into the least restrictive environment.
The lack of appropriate social skills can
negatively impact student learning, can
result in poor peer social interactions,
and may lead to suspension, expulsion,
and dropping out of school (Murry,
2018). Programs that support social skill
development in school settings are
important to ensure children do not
learn in isolation, promote positive
relationships, facilitate improved
learning outcomes, and provide crucial
skill sets that allow children to work
alone and with others in the school
setting (Connolly et al., 2016).
Implementing social skill development
in a systematic, school-wide approach is
more beneficial than fragmented
approaches, as it allows students’ social
skills to be cultivated along with
academic skills and creates a common
climate and culture throughout the
school (DePaoli et al., 2017).
Making technology and SAR part of
learning and social skill development
for children with disabilities has
become more prevalent over the years.
Technology-based interventions, such as
humanoid robots controlled by a human
trainer and robotic therapeutic
interventions that target repetitive
behaviors and affective states in
children with autism spectrum disorder
(ASD), have been found to be beneficial
for improving a wide range of skills and
behaviors, including social and
emotional skills, communication skills,
academic skills, and challenging
behaviors. Recent advancements in SAR
have created an alternative educational
approach to providing social skills
supports for students with ASD. With
machine learning, robots can predict a
child’s engagement based on their eye
contact, dialogue, and other behavioral
cues and then react and reengage them
to help lengthen the time the child stays
engaged in the therapeutic activity (Jain
et al., 2020; Hao, 2020). SAR can help
to provide an affordable, accessible, and
personalized intervention and reduce
the need for human interventions for
students with ASD (Jain et al., 2020).
Furthermore, SAR provide
opportunities for students to learn
through non-threatening, threedimensional inanimate objects, while
also providing opportunities to learn
through imitation and interactions that
encourage autonomous social behavior
(Tennyson et al., 2016).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
The Department therefore intends to
fund two cooperative agreements to
identify strategies needed to implement
and integrate SAR to (a) help improve
the social skills of children with
disabilities; and (b) provide ongoing
professional development and coaching
for educators, students, or families in
the use and understanding of how the
technology can improve social skills
and learning outcomes for children with
disabilities in PK–12 settings.4
Projects must be awarded and
operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements
contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under
this priority, applicants, at a minimum,
must—
(a) Increase the capacity of educators,
students, and families to effectively
understand and implement SAR
(referred to as a technology-based tool or
approach in the remainder of the
priority) to instruct and support social
skills development for children with
disabilities;
(b) Improve the social skill
interactions of students with disabilities
as a result of using a technology-based
tool or approach;
(c) Develop an implementation
package of products and resources that
will help educators and school sites to
understand and use a technology-based
tool or approach;
(d) Evaluate the impact of a
technology-based tool or approach on
achieving the intended outcomes; and
(e) Ensure that a technology-based
tool or approach meets the
accessibility 5 and usability needs of the
intended users.
In addition to these programmatic
requirements, to be considered for
funding under this priority, applicants
must meet the following application and
administrative requirements in this
priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed
project will—
(1) Address the need for the
technology-based tool or approach and
4 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘settings’’
include general education classrooms; special
education classrooms; charter schools; high-quality
early childhood programs; private schools,
including parochial schools; home education; after
school programs; juvenile justice facilities; remote
learning environments and any other settings in
which students may receive services under IDEA.
5 Technology should meet current industry
standards and guidelines for accessibility (e.g., Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 AA
and section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act). For
additional information on WCAG 2.0 please refer to
www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
identify specific gaps and weaknesses or
opportunities to support teachers in the
instructional setting, including
classroom and remote learning
environments. To meet this requirement
the applicant must—
(i) Identify a fully developed
technology-based tool or approach that
is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based
tool or approach will improve the social
skills of PK–12 children with
disabilities;
(iii) Present applicable national, State,
regional, or local data demonstrating the
need for the identified technology-based
tool or approach in classrooms and
remote learning environments to
support the development of social skills
in PK–12 children with disabilities;
(iv) Document that the technologybased tool or approach used by the
project is fully developed and based on
at least promising evidence and how the
technology-based tool or approach will
better enable teachers to deliver
instruction or services across subject
areas for PK–12 children with
disabilities;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or
challenges, including challenges with
the use of the identified technologybased tool or approach, faced by schools
and teachers; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of
the identified technology-based tool or
approach on schools, teachers, families,
and children with disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the
proposed project will—
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment
for members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
describe how it will—
(i) Identify the needs of the intended
recipients for ongoing coaching and
professional development supports; and
(ii) Ensure that products and
resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and
intended outcomes. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
provide—
(i) Measurable intended project
outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 6
or conceptual framework by which the
6 Logic model (also referred to as a theory of
action) means a framework that identifies key
project components of the proposed project (i.e., the
active ‘‘ingredients’’ that are hypothesized to be
critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and
describes the theoretical and operational
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
proposed project will achieve its
intended outcomes that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs,
and intended outcomes of the proposed
project;
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual
framework (and provide a copy in
Appendix A) to develop project plans
and activities describing any underlying
concepts, assumptions, expectations,
beliefs, or theories, as well as the
presumed relationships or linkages
among these variables, and any
empirical support for this framework;
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Note: The following websites provide more
information on logic models and conceptual
frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/
logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/
resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tadproject-logic-model-and-conceptualframework.
(4) Be based on current research. To
meet this requirement, the applicant
must—
(i) Describe how the proposed project
will align to current research, policies,
and practices related to the benefits,
services, or opportunities that are
available using the technology-based
tool or approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project
will incorporate current research and
practices to guide the development and
delivery of its products and resources,
including accessibility and usability;
and
(iii) Document that the technology
tool used by the project is fully
developed, based on at least promising
evidence, and addresses, at a minimum,
the following principles of UDL:
(A) Multiple means of presentation so
that students can approach information
in more than one way (e.g., specialized
software and websites, screen readers
that include features such as text-tospeech, changeable color contrast,
alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression so
that all students can demonstrate
knowledge through options such as
writing, online concept mapping, or
speech-to-text programs, where
appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to
stimulate interest in and motivation for
learning (e.g., options among several
different learning activities or content
for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased
collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new products and
resources that are of high quality and
sufficient intensity and duration to
relationships among the key project components
and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
achieve the intended outcomes of the
proposed project. To address this
requirement, the applicant must—
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and
selecting a wide range of settings where
children with disabilities are served and
that must include the following:
(A) Three development sites.
Development sites are the sites in which
iterative development of the products
and resources intended to support the
implementation of technology tools will
occur. The project must start
implementing the technology tool with
one development site in year one of the
project period and two additional
development sites in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the
sites in which try-out, formative
evaluation, and refinement of the
products and resources will occur. The
project must work with the four pilot
sites during years three and four of the
project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites.
Dissemination sites will be selected if
the project is extended for a fifth year.
Dissemination sites will be used to (a)
refine the products for use by educators,
and (b) evaluate the performance of the
technology tool. Dissemination sites
will receive less TA from the project
than development or pilot sites. Also,
dissemination sites will extend the
benefits of the technology tool to
additional students. To be selected as a
dissemination site, eligible sites must
commit to working with the project to
implement the technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than
one category (i.e., development, pilot,
dissemination).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven
development and pilot sites must be in
settings other than traditional public
elementary and secondary schools and
include at least one rural site. A
minimum of four of the 10
dissemination sites must be in settings
other than traditional public elementary
and secondary schools and include at
least one rural site. These nontraditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each
category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the
development and pilot sites, including
student demographics and other
pertinent data (e.g., whether the settings
are schools identified for
comprehensive or targeted support and
improvement in accordance with
section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii), (c)(4)(D), or
(d)(2)(C)–(D) of the ESEA);
(iii) Provide its plan for
dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute
information, products, and services to
varied intended audiences, using a
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38127
variety of dissemination strategies, to
promote awareness and use of the
project’s products and resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the
project will sustain project activities
after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final
products disseminated to help sites
effectively implement technology tools
will be both OER and licensed through
an open access licensing authority.
(c) In the narrative section of the
application under ‘‘Quality of the
project evaluation,’’ include an
evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs.
The evaluation plan must describe
measures of progress in implementation,
including the criteria for determining
the extent to which the project’s
products and resources have met the
goals for reaching the project’s target
population; measures of intended
outcomes or results of the project’s
activities in order to evaluate those
activities; and how well the goals or
objectives of the proposed project, as
described in its logic model, have been
met.
The applicant must provide an
assurance that, in designing the
evaluation plan, it will—
(1) Provide a logic model or
conceptual framework that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, project
evaluation, methods, performance
measures, outputs, and outcomes of the
proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the
project activities described in this
priority;
(3) Provide a plan, linked to the
proposed project’s logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative
evaluation of the proposed project’s
activities. The plan must describe how
the formative evaluation will use clear
performance objectives to ensure
continuous improvement in the
operation of the proposed project,
including objective measures of progress
in implementing the project and
ensuring the quality of products and
resources;
(4) Identify and develop resources and
products that create accessible learning
opportunities for all children, including
children with disabilities and children
with high needs, and make possible the
sustained implementation of the
selected technology tool. Development
of the products must be an iterative
process beginning in a single
development school and continuing
through repeated cycles of development
and refinement in the other
development sites, followed by a
formative evaluation and refinement in
the pilot sites. The products and
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
38128
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
resources must, at a minimum,
include—
(i) An instrument or method for
assessing—
(A) The site staff’s current technology
uses and needs, current technology
investments, firewall issues, and the
knowledge and availability of dedicated
on-site technology personnel;
(B) The readiness of development and
pilot school sites to pilot or try-out the
technology-based tool or approach,
including at a minimum, their current
infrastructure, available resources, and
ability to build capacity;
(C) Whether the technology-based tool
or approach has achieved its intended
outcomes for the end-user(s); and
(D) Ongoing training needs of
teachers, students, or families to
implement the technology-based tool or
approach with fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative
data to refine and evaluate the products;
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth
year—
(i) Provide the implementation
package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool
or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the
success of the project’s products and
resources in supporting implementation
of the technology-based tool or
approach; and
(7) By the end of the project period,
provide—
(i) Information on the products and
resources, as supported by the project
evaluation, including any accessibility
features, that will enable other sites to
implement and sustain implementation
of the technology-based tool or
approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology
Implementation Report, including data
on how teachers, students, and families
used the technology-based tool or
approach, and how the technologybased tool or approach was
implemented with fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technologybased tool or approach changed teacher
practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or
scaling up the technology-based tool or
approach and accompanying products
beyond the sites directly involved in the
project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of
project personnel,’’ how—
(1) The proposed project will
encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of
groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project
personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications
and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key
partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable
in relation to the anticipated results and
benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’
how—
(1) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the project’s intended
outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for
key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for
accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any
consultants and subcontractors will be
allocated and how these allocations are
appropriate and adequate to achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality,
relevant, and useful to recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit
from a diversity of perspectives,
including those of families, educators,
researchers, and policy makers, among
others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application
requirements. The applicant must
include—
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading
charts and timelines, as applicable, to
illustrate the management plan
described in the narrative; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the
following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off
meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt
of the award, and an annual planning
meeting in Washington, DC, with the
OSEP project officer and other relevant
staff during each subsequent year of the
project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the
award, a post-award teleconference must be
held between the OSEP project officer and
the grantee’s project director or other
authorized representative.
(ii) A two and one-half-day project
directors’ conference in Washington,
DC, during each year of the project
period.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to
attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and
other meetings, as requested by OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review
meeting during the last half of the
second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide
coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this
priority must—
(a) Participate in monthly conferencecall discussions to share and collaborate
on implementation and project issues;
and
(b) Provide information annually
using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site
selection, and the processes for
installation and use of the technologybased tool or approach (i.e., the
implementation process).
Note: The following website provides more
information about implementation research:
https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/nationalimplementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project
one year beyond the initial 48 months
to work with dissemination/scale-up
sites if the grantee is achieving the
intended outcomes of the project (as
demonstrated by data gathered as part of
the project evaluation) and making a
positive contribution to the
implementation of a technology-based
tool or approach based on at least
promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each
applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month
period. In deciding whether to continue
funding the project for the fifth year, the
Secretary will consider the requirements
of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider—
(a) The recommendation of a review
team consisting of the OSEP project
officer and other experts selected by the
Secretary. This review will be held
during the last half of the second year
of the project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with
which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have
been or are being met by the project; and
(c) The degree to which the project’s
activities have changed practices and
improved outcomes for PK–12 children
with disabilities.
References
Connolly, P., Miller, S., Mooney, J., Sloan, S.,
& Hanratty, J. (2016). Universal schoolbased programmes for improving social
and emotional outcomes in children
aged 3–11 years: A systematic review
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
and meta-analysis. The Campbell
Collaboration.
www.campbellcollaboration.org/media/
k2/attachments/Connolly_Universal_
Schoolbased_Programmes_Title.pdf.
DePaoli, J. L., Atwell, M.N., & Bridgeland, J.
(2017). Ready to lead: A national
principal survey on how social and
emotional learning can prepare children
and transform schools. www.casel.org/
wp-content/uploads/2017/11/
ReadyToLead_FINAL.pdf.
Hao, K. (2020, February 26). Robots that
teach autistic kids social skills could
help them develop. MIT Technology
Review. www.technologyreview.com/s/
615288/ai-robots-teach-autistic-kidssocial-skills-development/.
Jain, S., Thiagarajan, B., Shi, Z., Clabaugh, C.,
& Mataric´, M.J. (2020). Modeling
engagement in long-term, in-home
socially assistive robot interventions for
children with autism spectrum
disorders. Science Robotics, 5(3). https://
doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aaz3791.
Murry, F. (2018). Using assistive technology
to generate social skills use for students
with emotional behavior disorders. Rural
Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 235–
244. https://doi.org/10.1177/
8756870518801367.
Tennyson, M. F., Kuester, D. A., Casteel, J.,
& Nikolopoulos, C. (2016). Accessible
robots for improving social skills of
individuals with autism. Journal of
Artificial Intelligence and Soft
Computing Research, 6(4), 267–277.
https://doi.org/10.1515/jaiscr-2016-0020.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking:
Under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department
generally offers interested parties the
opportunity to comment on proposed
priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA,
however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to
the priorities in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474
and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR
parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98,
and 99. (b) The Office of Management
and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on
Governmentwide Debarment and
Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR
part 180, as adopted and amended as
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3485. (c) The Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for
Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as
adopted and amended as regulations of
the Department in 2 CFR part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79
apply to all applicants except federally
recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86
apply to institutions of higher education
(IHEs) only.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative
agreements.
Estimated Available Funds:
$2,500,000.
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in FY
2021 from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $450,000
to $500,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards:
$475,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make
an award exceeding $2,500,000 for the
60-month project period.
Estimated Number of Awards: 5.
Note: The Department is not bound by any
estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs,
including public charter schools that
operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs;
other public agencies; private nonprofit
organizations; freely associated States
and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or
Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
program does not require cost sharing or
matching.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this
competition may not award subgrants to
entities to directly carry out project
activities described in its application.
Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may
contract for supplies, equipment, and
other services in accordance with 2 CFR
part 200.
4. Other General Requirements: (a)
Recipients of funding under this
competition must make positive efforts
to employ and advance in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities
(see section 606 of IDEA).
(b) Each applicant for, and recipient
of, funding must, with respect to the
aspects of their proposed project
relating to the absolute priority, involve
individuals with disabilities, or parents
of individuals with disabilities ages
birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the
project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Application Submission
Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education
Discretionary Grant Programs,
published in the Federal Register on
February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38129
available at www.govinfo.gov/content/
pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf,
which contain requirements
andinformation on how to submit an
application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This
competition is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
CFR part 79. However, under 34 CFR
79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental
review in order to make awards by the
end of FY 2020.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference
regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The
application narrative (Part III of the
application) is where you, the applicant,
address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your
application. We recommend that you (1)
limit the application narrative to no
more than 50 pages and (2) use the
following standards:
• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ × 11″, on one side
only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom,
and both sides.
• Double-space (no more than three
lines per vertical inch) all text in the
application narrative, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations,
reference citations, and captions, as well
as all text in charts, tables, figures,
graphs, and screen shots.
• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
• Use one of the following fonts:
Times New Roman, Courier, Courier
New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not
apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the
narrative budget justification; Part IV,
the assurances and certifications; or the
abstract (follow the guidance provided
in the application package for
completing the abstract), the table of
contents, the list of priority
requirements, the resumes, the reference
list, the letters of support, or the
appendices. However, the
recommended page limit does apply to
all of the application narrative,
including all text in charts, tables,
figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection
criteria for this competition are from 34
CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
significance of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the significance of
the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or
issue to be addressed by the proposed
project;
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
38130
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps
or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have
been identified and will be addressed by
the proposed project, including the
nature and magnitude of those gaps or
weaknesses;
(iii) The potential contribution of the
proposed project to increased
knowledge or understanding of
educational problems, issues, or
effective strategies; and
(iv) The potential replicability of the
proposed project or strategies,
including, as appropriate, the potential
for implementation in a variety of
settings.
(b) Quality of project services (30
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
services to be provided by the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the
quality and sufficiency of strategies for
ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are
members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to
be provided by the proposed project
reflect up-to-date knowledge from
research and effective practice;
(ii) The extent to which the training
or professional development services to
be provided by the proposed project are
of sufficient quality, intensity, and
duration to lead to improvements in
practice among the recipients of those
services;
(iii) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
involve the collaboration of appropriate
partners for maximizing the
effectiveness of project services;
(iv) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
are appropriate to the needs of the
intended recipients or beneficiaries of
those services; and
(v) The likely impact of the services
to be provided by the proposed project
on the intended recipients of those
services.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation
(20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
appropriate to the goals, objectives, and
outcomes of the proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation include the use of
objective performance measures that are
clearly related to the intended outcomes
of the project and will produce
quantitative and qualitative data to the
extent possible;
(iii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation provide for examining the
effectiveness of project implementation
strategies;
(iv) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation will provide performance
feedback and permit periodic
assessment of progress toward achieving
intended outcomes; and
(v) The extent to which the evaluation
plan clearly articulates the key project
components, mediators, and outcomes,
as well as a measurable threshold for
acceptable implementation.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality
of project personnel (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
adequacy of resources for the proposed
project and the quality of the personnel
who will carry out the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of
project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the
applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are
members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of the
project director or principal
investigator;
(ii) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of key
project personnel;
(iii) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of
project consultants or subcontractors;
(iv) The adequacy of support,
including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the
applicant organization or the lead
applicant organization;
(v) The relevance and demonstrated
commitment of each partner in the
proposed project to the implementation
and success of the project; and
(vi) The extent to which the costs are
reasonable in relation to the objectives,
design, and potential significance of the
proposed project.
(e) Quality of the management plan
(15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the management plan for the
proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
management plan for the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management
plan to achieve the objectives of the
proposed project on time and within
budget, including clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and
milestones for accomplishing project
tasks;
(ii) The extent to which the time
commitments of the project director and
principal investigator and other key
project personnel are appropriate and
adequate to meet the objectives of the
proposed project;
(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for
ensuring high-quality products and
services from the proposed project;
(iv) How the applicant will ensure
that a diversity of perspectives are
brought to bear in the operation of the
proposed project, including those of
parents, teachers, the business
community, a variety of disciplinary
and professional fields, recipients or
beneficiaries of services, or others, as
appropriate; and
(v) The adequacy of procedures for
ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the
proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We
remind potential applicants that in
reviewing applications in any
discretionary grant competition, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR
75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the
applicant in carrying out a previous
award, such as the applicant’s use of
funds, achievement of project
objectives, and compliance with grant
conditions. The Secretary may also
consider whether the applicant failed to
submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable
quality.
In addition, in making a competitive
grant award, the Secretary requires
various assurances, including those
applicable to Federal civil rights laws
that prohibit discrimination in programs
or activities receiving Federal financial
assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection
Process Factors: In the past, the
Department has had difficulty finding
peer reviewers for certain competitions
because so many individuals who are
eligible to serve as peer reviewers have
conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of
IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of
reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some
discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two
or more groups and ranked and selected
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
for funding within specific groups. This
procedure will make it easier for the
Department to find peer reviewers by
ensuring that greater numbers of
individuals who are eligible to serve as
reviewers for any particular group of
applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality,
independence, and fairness of the
review process, while permitting panel
members to review applications under
discretionary grant competitions for
which they also have submitted
applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific
Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under
this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by
applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the
Secretary may impose specific
conditions and, in appropriate
circumstances, high-risk conditions on a
grant if the applicant or grantee is not
financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a
financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2
CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant;
or is otherwise not responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System:
If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that
over the course of the project period
may exceed the simplified acquisition
threshold (currently $250,000), under 2
CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a
judgment about your integrity, business
ethics, and record of performance under
Federal awards—that is, the risk posed
by you as an applicant—before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider
any information about you that is in the
integrity and performance system
(currently referred to as the Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS)),
accessible through the System for
Award Management. You may review
and comment on any information about
yourself that a Federal agency
previously entered and that is currently
in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of
your currently active grants, cooperative
agreements, and procurement contracts
from the Federal Government exceeds
$10,000,000, the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII,
require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually.
Please review the requirements in 2 CFR
part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant
plus all the other Federal funds you
receive exceed $10,000,000.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application
is successful, we notify your U.S.
Representative and U.S. Senators and
send you a Grant Award Notification
(GAN); or we may send you an email
containing a link to access an electronic
version of your GAN. We may notify
you informally, also.
If your application is not evaluated or
not selected for funding, we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy
requirements in the application package
and reference these and other
requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining
the terms and conditions of an award in
the Applicable Regulations section of
this notice and include these and other
specific conditions in the GAN. The
GAN also incorporates your approved
application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements:
Unless an exception applies, if you are
awarded a grant under this competition,
you will be required to openly license
to the public grant deliverables created
in whole, or in part, with Department
grant funds. When the deliverable
consists of modifications to pre-existing
works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately
identified and only to the extent that
open licensing is permitted under the
terms of any licenses or other legal
restrictions on the use of pre-existing
works. Additionally, a grantee that is
awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public
grant deliverables. This dissemination
plan can be developed and submitted
after your application has been
reviewed and selected for funding. For
additional information on the open
licensing requirements please refer to 2
CFR 3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a
grant under this competition, you must
ensure that you have in place the
necessary processes and systems to
comply with the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive
funding under the competition. This
does not apply if you have an exception
under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period,
you must submit a final performance
report, including financial information,
as directed by the Secretary. If you
receive a multiyear award, you must
submit an annual performance report
that provides the most current
performance and financial expenditure
information as directed by the Secretary
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38131
under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary
may also require more frequent
performance reports under 34 CFR
75.720(c). For specific requirements on
reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/
fund/grant/apply/appforms/
appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the
Secretary may provide a grantee with
additional funding for data collection
analysis and reporting. In this case the
Secretary establishes a data collection
period.
5. Performance Measures: Under the
Government Performance Results
Modernization Act of 2010, the
Department has established a set of
performance measures, including longterm measures, that are designed to
yield information on various aspects of
the effectiveness and quality of the
Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials (ETechM2) for Individuals
with Disabilities Program. These
measures are:
• Program Performance Measure 1:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be of
high quality by an independent review
panel of experts qualified to review the
substantial content of the products and
services.
• Program Performance Measure 2:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be of
high relevance to improving outcomes
for infants, toddlers, children, and
youth with disabilities.
• Program Performance Measure 3:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be
useful in improving results for infants,
toddlers, children, and youth with
disabilities.
• Program Performance Measure 4.1:
The Federal cost per unit of accessible
educational materials funded by the
ETechM2 Program.
• Program Performance Measure 4.2:
The Federal cost per unit of accessible
educational materials from the National
Instructional Materials Accessibility
Center funded by the ETechM2
Program.
• Program Performance Measure 4.3:
The Federal cost per unit of video
description funded by the ETechM2
Program.
These measures apply to projects
funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on
these measures as directed by OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report
information on their project’s
performance in annual performance
reports and additional performance data
to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and
75.591).
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
38132
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 123 / Thursday, June 25, 2020 / Notices
6. Continuation Awards: In making a
continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among
other things: whether a grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the goals and objectives of the project;
whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its
approved application and budget; and,
if the Secretary has established
performance measurement
requirements, the performance targets in
the grantee’s approved application.
In making a continuation award, the
Secretary also considers whether the
grantee is operating in compliance with
the assurances in its approved
application, including those applicable
to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance
from the Department (34 CFR 100.4,
104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document
and a copy of the application package in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. 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.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services
Administration. Delegated the authority to
perform the functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2020–13737 Filed 6–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:15 Jun 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Advisory Committee on
Institutional Quality and Integrity
National Advisory Committee
on Institutional Quality and Integrity
(NACIQI), Office of Postsecondary
Education, U.S. Department of
Education.
ACTION: Announcement of an open
meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
agenda, time, and instructions for
participation in the July 29 & 30, 2020
virtual meeting of the National Advisory
Committee on Institutional Quality and
Integrity (NACIQI) and provides
information to members of the public
regarding the meeting, including
requesting to make oral comments or
submit written statements. The notice of
this meeting is required under section
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) and section
114(d)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act
(HEA) of 1965, as amended.
DATES: The virtual NACIQI meeting will
be held on July 29 & 30, 2020, from 9:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George Alan Smith, Executive Director/
Designated Federal Official, NACIQI,
U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue SW, Room 271–03,
Washington, DC 20202, telephone: (202)
453–7757, or email:
George.Alan.Smith@ed.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
NACIQI’s Statutory Authority and
Function: NACIQI is established under
section 114 of the HEA. NACIQI advises
the Secretary of Education with respect
to:
• The establishment and enforcement
of the standards of accrediting agencies
or associations under subpart 2, part G,
Title IV of the HEA, as amended.
• The recognition of specific
accrediting agencies or associations.
• The preparation and publication of
the list of nationally recognized
accrediting agencies and associations.
• The eligibility and certification
process for institutions of higher
education under Title IV of the HEA and
part C, subchapter I, chapter 34, Title
42, together with recommendations for
improvement in such process.
• The relationship between (1)
accreditation of institutions of higher
education and the certification and
eligibility of such institutions, and (2)
State licensing responsibilities with
respect to such institutions.
• Any other advisory function
relating to accreditation and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
institutional eligibility that the
Secretary of Education may prescribe by
regulation.
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Day Web Links: Each meeting
will be held virtually and will begin at
9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. When
speaking, U.S. Department of Education
staff, agency representatives, and
NACIQI members may be visible to the
public. Public commenters will appear
by audio only. You may register for the
meeting on your computer with each
day’s designated entry link, which are
listed below, after which you will
receive an email containing
personalized dial in details, access code,
and conference weblink.
Entry Link for Wednesday, July 29, 2020
https://ems8.intellor.com
?do=register&t=1&p=827612.
Entry Link for Thursday, July 30, 2020
https://ems8.intellor.com
?do=register&t=1&p=827610.
Agenda items for the July 29 & 30,
2020 virtual meeting are listed below.
Please note that the Accrediting Council
for Independent Colleges and Schools’
Compliance Report has been
rescheduled for the February 2021
meeting.
Application for Renewal of Recognition
(State Agency for the Approval of
Vocational Education)
1. Puerto Rico State Agency for the
Approval of Public Postsecondary
Vocational, Technical Institutions and
Programs.
Applications for Renewal of Recognition
(State Agency for the Approval of Nurse
Education)
1. New York State Board of Regents,
State Education Department, Office of
the Professions (Nursing Education).
2. Missouri State Board of Nursing.
Application for Reorganization and
Curriculum Change by Federal Agencies
and Institutions
1. National Intelligence University:
Undergoing Substantive Change
(Reorganization/Command Change from
Department of Defense to Director of
National Intelligence).
2. U.S. Army Command and General
Staff College: Undergoing Substantive
Change (Curriculum Change).
Review of Agency Recognition During
the Period of Recognition, in accordance
with the procedures set forth in 34 CFR
602.33.
1. Higher Learning Commission
(HLC).
The review by the Department’s
Office of Postsecondary Education has
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 123 (Thursday, June 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38122-38132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13737]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program--Stepping-Up
Technology Implementation
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2020 for
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with
Disabilities--Stepping-up Technology Implementation, Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.327S. This notice relates to the
approved information collection under OMB control number 1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 25, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 14, 2020.
Date of 84.327S Pre-Application Meeting: OSERS will conduct a pre-
application meeting specific to these competitions via webinar on July
6, 2020, at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. In addition, no later than June
30, 2020, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post a
pre-recorded informational webinar designed to provide technical
assistance to interested applicants. Information about the
teleconference and the pre-recorded webinar may be found at
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5128, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6039. Email:
[email protected].
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:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Educational Technology,
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to
(1) improve results for children with disabilities by promoting the
development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) support
educational activities designed to be of educational value in the
classroom for children with disabilities; (3) provide support for
captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the
classroom; and (4) provide accessible educational materials to children
with disabilities in a timely manner.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Applicants should note that other laws, including the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28
CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State
educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs)
provide captioning, video description, and other accessible
educational materials to students with disabilities when these
materials are necessary to provide equally integrated and equally
effective access to the benefits of the educational program or
activity, or as part of a ``free appropriate public education'' as
defined in 34 CFR 104.33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priorities: This competition includes two absolute priorities. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), these priorities are from
allowable activities specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C.
1474(c)(1)(D) and 1481(d).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet either Absolute
Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2. Applicants may apply under both
absolute priorities but must submit separate applications.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Providing Technology-Based Professional
Development to Trainers of Special Education Teachers to Support
Children With Disabilities.
Background:
Technology has enhanced professional development learning
opportunities for teachers by expanding
[[Page 38123]]
access to information and resources that support their content
expertise and pedagogy and promote their professional growth. As an
alternative to face-to-face professional development that can be
expensive or impracticable (e.g., during an emergency), professional
development facilitated by technology has the potential to more
efficiently shape and impact teaching practices. Some examples of the
technologies that can be used to support teacher learning include
virtual coaching, in which a coach interacts electronically with
teachers to improve teaching skills; learning management systems (LMS)
that allow sharing of documents and data in one central location; and
gamification, which involves bringing elements associated with video
games into the learning environment to increase engagement and making
tasks challenging.
McAleavy et al. (2018) noted that using technology to support
teachers' professional learning can promote collaboration through
professional learning communities and communities of practice. In
addition, technology that can be used to build the skills of teachers
and related services personnel in rural or remote areas may be more
cost-effective than face-to-face trainings and will offer flexibility
that allows teachers to train at a time and place that suits them.
However, regardless of the delivery, effective professional
development must go beyond learning new materials and skills; it must
also support teachers and related services personnel in improving
classroom instruction and student learning (Gess-Newsome et al., 2003).
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) indicated that effective professional
development should have the following features: (1) Be content focused,
(2) incorporate active learning utilizing adult learning principles,
(3) support collaboration, (4) use models and modeling of effective
practices, (5) provide coaching and expert support, (6) offer
opportunities for feedback and reflection, and (7) be of sustained
duration.
The Department therefore intends to fund three cooperative
agreements to (a) identify strategies needed to implement and integrate
an existing technology-based tool or approach, based on at least
promising evidence,\2\ into the provision of teacher in-service
training; and (b) provide ongoing technology-based professional
development and coaching for in-service trainers in the use of
technology to, and understanding of how the technology may, support
teachers to improve classroom and remote learning environment
instruction and learning outcomes for children with disabilities in
pre-kindergarten through grade 12 (PK-12) settings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Section 8002 of Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as
amended (ESEA) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a
minimum, must--
(a) Build partnerships with LEAs, at least one of which is in a
rural location and that includes public and nonpublic schools, to
support teacher in-service trainers in the understanding, use, and
delivery of a technology-based tool or approach that will support
teacher in-service training for instruction of children with
disabilities in PK-12 instructional settings, including classrooms and
remote learning environments;
(b) Increase the capacity of teacher in-service trainers to
effectively use and implement a technology-based tool or approach that
supports teacher classroom and remote learning environment instruction
and professional growth;
(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources
that will help teacher in-service trainers to use a technology-based
tool or approach; and
(d) Evaluate the effectiveness of the in-service training conducted
using the technology-based tool or approach.
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following
application and administrative requirements in this priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address the need for a technology-based tool or approach and
identify specific gaps and weaknesses, infrastructure, or opportunities
to support teacher in-service training. To meet this requirement the
applicant must--
(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach
that is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will
improve teacher in-service training and the capacity of teachers to
deliver instruction or services for PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data
demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or
approach in teacher in-service training to support children with
disabilities;
(iv) Identify current policies, procedures, and practices used by
teacher in-service trainers that incorporate technology-based tools or
approaches to meet their training needs;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including
challenges using the identified technology-based tools or approaches in
providing teacher in-service training; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-
based tool or approach on teacher in-service trainers, teachers,
families and children with disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing
coaching and supports;
(ii) Identify potential strategies to provide recipients of the in-
service training with the flexibility to personalize their own learning
and coaching supports; and
(iii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model \3\ or conceptual framework by
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to
be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project
components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy
in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any
underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations,
[[Page 38124]]
beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to current
research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or
opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or
approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current
research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its
products and resources, including accessibility and usability; and
(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is
fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses,
at a minimum, the following principles of universal design for learning
(UDL):
(A) Multiple means of presentation so that information can be
delivered in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and
websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech,
changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression that allow knowledge to be
exhibited through options such as writing, online concept mapping, or
speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and
motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning
activities or content for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new products and resources that are of high quality and
sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of
the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must--
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting a wide range of
settings where children with disabilities are served, which must
include the following:
(A) Three development sites. Development sites are the sites in
which iterative development of the products and resources intended to
support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project
must start implementing the technology tool with one development site
in year one of the project period and two additional development sites
in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out,
formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will
occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years
three and four of the project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites. Dissemination/scale-up sites will be
selected if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination/
scale-up sites will be used to (a) refine the products for use by
educators, and (b) evaluate the performance of the technology tool.
Dissemination/scale-up sites will receive less technical assistance
(TA) from the project than development and pilot sites. Also,
dissemination/scale-up sites will extend the benefits of the technology
tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination/scale-up
site, eligible sites must commit to working with the project to
implement the technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e.,
development, pilot, dissemination/scale-up).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites
must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and
secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of
four of the 10 dissemination/scale-up sites must be in settings other
than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at
least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites,
including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether
the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted
support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii),
(c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)-(D) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA));
(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute information, products, and
services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination
strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project's products and
resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project
activities after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help
sites effectively implement technology tools will be both open
educational resources (OER) and licensed through an open access
licensing authority.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must
describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria
for determining the extent to which the project's products and
resources have met the goals for reaching the project's target
population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's
activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the
goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic
model, have been met. The applicant must provide an assurance that, in
designing the evaluation plan, it will--
(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at
a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods,
performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the activities described in this
priority;
(3) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project's logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed
project's activities. The plan must describe how the formative
evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including
objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring
the quality of products and resources;
(4) Describe a plan or method for assessing--
(i) The development and pilot sites' current teacher in-service
training uses and needs, any current in-service technology investments,
and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site in-service
training personnel;
(ii) The readiness of development and pilot sites to pilot or try-
out the technology-based teacher in-service training, including at a
minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability
to build capacity;
(iii) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved
its intended outcomes for teacher in-service trainers and PK-12
teachers; and
(iv) Ongoing training needs of in-service trainers to implement
with fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative data from the in-service
training to refine and evaluate the products;
[[Page 38125]]
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year--
(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites, one of which must be rural, in year five; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project's
products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-
based tool or approach in teacher in-service training sites; and
(7) By the end of the project period, provide--
(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the
project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will
enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the
technology-based tool or approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including
data on how in-service trainers used the technology-based tool or
approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented
with fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed in-
service trainers' practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based
tool or approach and accompanying products beyond the sites directly
involved in the project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including those of families, educators, researchers, and
policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must include--
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as
applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or
virtually after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in
Washington, DC, with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of
the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative.
(ii) A two and one-half-day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, or a virtual conference during each year of the project
period.
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review meeting during the last half
of the second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and
collaborate on implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide information annually using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection and the processes for
installation and use of the technology-based tool or approach (i.e.,
the implementation process).
Note: The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48
months to work with dissemination/scale-up sites if the grantee is
achieving the intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data
gathered as part of the project evaluation) and making a positive
contribution to the implementation of a technology-based tool or
approach based on at least promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month period. In deciding whether to
continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will
consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP
project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This
review will be held during the last half of the second year of the
project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The degree to which the project's activities have changed
practices and improved outcomes for PK-12 children with disabilities.
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective
Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev.
Gess-Newsome, J., Blocher, J.M., Clark, J., Menasco, J., & Willis,
E.M. (2003). Technology infused professional development: A
framework for development and analysis. Contemporary Issues in
Technology and Teacher Education, 3(3). https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis.
McAleavy, T., Hall-Chen, A., Horrocks, S., & Riggall, A. (2018).
Technology-supported professional development for teachers: Lessons
from developing countries. Education Development Trust. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386.
Absolute Priority 2--Improving Social Skill Development for
Students with Disabilities Through the Use of Socially Assistive
Robotics (SAR).
[[Page 38126]]
Background:
For students with disabilities, interpersonal skills, such as
active listening, effective communication, and recognizing and
understanding the points of view of others, are important to the
development of healthy relationships and successful placement into the
least restrictive environment. The lack of appropriate social skills
can negatively impact student learning, can result in poor peer social
interactions, and may lead to suspension, expulsion, and dropping out
of school (Murry, 2018). Programs that support social skill development
in school settings are important to ensure children do not learn in
isolation, promote positive relationships, facilitate improved learning
outcomes, and provide crucial skill sets that allow children to work
alone and with others in the school setting (Connolly et al., 2016).
Implementing social skill development in a systematic, school-wide
approach is more beneficial than fragmented approaches, as it allows
students' social skills to be cultivated along with academic skills and
creates a common climate and culture throughout the school (DePaoli et
al., 2017).
Making technology and SAR part of learning and social skill
development for children with disabilities has become more prevalent
over the years. Technology-based interventions, such as humanoid robots
controlled by a human trainer and robotic therapeutic interventions
that target repetitive behaviors and affective states in children with
autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have been found to be beneficial for
improving a wide range of skills and behaviors, including social and
emotional skills, communication skills, academic skills, and
challenging behaviors. Recent advancements in SAR have created an
alternative educational approach to providing social skills supports
for students with ASD. With machine learning, robots can predict a
child's engagement based on their eye contact, dialogue, and other
behavioral cues and then react and reengage them to help lengthen the
time the child stays engaged in the therapeutic activity (Jain et al.,
2020; Hao, 2020). SAR can help to provide an affordable, accessible,
and personalized intervention and reduce the need for human
interventions for students with ASD (Jain et al., 2020). Furthermore,
SAR provide opportunities for students to learn through non-
threatening, three-dimensional inanimate objects, while also providing
opportunities to learn through imitation and interactions that
encourage autonomous social behavior (Tennyson et al., 2016).
The Department therefore intends to fund two cooperative agreements
to identify strategies needed to implement and integrate SAR to (a)
help improve the social skills of children with disabilities; and (b)
provide ongoing professional development and coaching for educators,
students, or families in the use and understanding of how the
technology can improve social skills and learning outcomes for children
with disabilities in PK-12 settings.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For the purposes of this priority, ``settings'' include
general education classrooms; special education classrooms; charter
schools; high-quality early childhood programs; private schools,
including parochial schools; home education; after school programs;
juvenile justice facilities; remote learning environments and any
other settings in which students may receive services under IDEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a
minimum, must--
(a) Increase the capacity of educators, students, and families to
effectively understand and implement SAR (referred to as a technology-
based tool or approach in the remainder of the priority) to instruct
and support social skills development for children with disabilities;
(b) Improve the social skill interactions of students with
disabilities as a result of using a technology-based tool or approach;
(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources
that will help educators and school sites to understand and use a
technology-based tool or approach;
(d) Evaluate the impact of a technology-based tool or approach on
achieving the intended outcomes; and
(e) Ensure that a technology-based tool or approach meets the
accessibility \5\ and usability needs of the intended users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Technology should meet current industry standards and
guidelines for accessibility (e.g., Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 AA and section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act).
For additional information on WCAG 2.0 please refer to www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following
application and administrative requirements in this priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address the need for the technology-based tool or approach and
identify specific gaps and weaknesses or opportunities to support
teachers in the instructional setting, including classroom and remote
learning environments. To meet this requirement the applicant must--
(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach
that is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will
improve the social skills of PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data
demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or
approach in classrooms and remote learning environments to support the
development of social skills in PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iv) Document that the technology-based tool or approach used by
the project is fully developed and based on at least promising evidence
and how the technology-based tool or approach will better enable
teachers to deliver instruction or services across subject areas for
PK-12 children with disabilities;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including
challenges with the use of the identified technology-based tool or
approach, faced by schools and teachers; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-
based tool or approach on schools, teachers, families, and children
with disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing
coaching and professional development supports; and
(ii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model \6\ or conceptual framework by
which the
[[Page 38127]]
proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the
proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to
be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project
components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy
in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any
underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories,
as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these
variables, and any empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to current
research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or
opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or
approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current
research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its
products and resources, including accessibility and usability; and
(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is
fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses,
at a minimum, the following principles of UDL:
(A) Multiple means of presentation so that students can approach
information in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and
websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech,
changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression so that all students can
demonstrate knowledge through options such as writing, online concept
mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and
motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning
activities or content for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new products and resources that are of high quality and
sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of
the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must--
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting a wide range of
settings where children with disabilities are served and that must
include the following:
(A) Three development sites. Development sites are the sites in
which iterative development of the products and resources intended to
support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project
must start implementing the technology tool with one development site
in year one of the project period and two additional development sites
in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out,
formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will
occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years
three and four of the project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites. Dissemination sites will be selected
if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination sites will
be used to (a) refine the products for use by educators, and (b)
evaluate the performance of the technology tool. Dissemination sites
will receive less TA from the project than development or pilot sites.
Also, dissemination sites will extend the benefits of the technology
tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination site,
eligible sites must commit to working with the project to implement the
technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e.,
development, pilot, dissemination).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites
must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and
secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of
four of the 10 dissemination sites must be in settings other than
traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at
least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites,
including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether
the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted
support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii),
(c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)-(D) of the ESEA);
(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute information, products, and
services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination
strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project's products and
resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project
activities after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help
sites effectively implement technology tools will be both OER and
licensed through an open access licensing authority.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must
describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria
for determining the extent to which the project's products and
resources have met the goals for reaching the project's target
population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's
activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the
goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic
model, have been met.
The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the
evaluation plan, it will--
(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at
a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods,
performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the project activities described in
this priority;
(3) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project's logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed
project's activities. The plan must describe how the formative
evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including
objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring
the quality of products and resources;
(4) Identify and develop resources and products that create
accessible learning opportunities for all children, including children
with disabilities and children with high needs, and make possible the
sustained implementation of the selected technology tool. Development
of the products must be an iterative process beginning in a single
development school and continuing through repeated cycles of
development and refinement in the other development sites, followed by
a formative evaluation and refinement in the pilot sites. The products
and
[[Page 38128]]
resources must, at a minimum, include--
(i) An instrument or method for assessing--
(A) The site staff's current technology uses and needs, current
technology investments, firewall issues, and the knowledge and
availability of dedicated on-site technology personnel;
(B) The readiness of development and pilot school sites to pilot or
try-out the technology-based tool or approach, including at a minimum,
their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build
capacity;
(C) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved its
intended outcomes for the end-user(s); and
(D) Ongoing training needs of teachers, students, or families to
implement the technology-based tool or approach with fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative data to refine and evaluate the
products;
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year--
(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project's
products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-
based tool or approach; and
(7) By the end of the project period, provide--
(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the
project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will
enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the
technology-based tool or approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including
data on how teachers, students, and families used the technology-based
tool or approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was
implemented with fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed
teacher practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based
tool or approach and accompanying products beyond the sites directly
involved in the project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,'' how--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including those of families, educators, researchers, and
policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must include--
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as
applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC,
after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in
Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff
during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative.
(ii) A two and one-half-day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period.
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review meeting during the last half
of the second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and
collaborate on implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide information annually using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection, and the processes for
installation and use of the technology-based tool or approach (i.e.,
the implementation process).
Note: The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48
months to work with dissemination/scale-up sites if the grantee is
achieving the intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data
gathered as part of the project evaluation) and making a positive
contribution to the implementation of a technology-based tool or
approach based on at least promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month period. In deciding whether to
continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will
consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP
project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This
review will be held during the last half of the second year of the
project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The degree to which the project's activities have changed
practices and improved outcomes for PK-12 children with disabilities.
References
Connolly, P., Miller, S., Mooney, J., Sloan, S., & Hanratty, J.
(2016). Universal school-based programmes for improving social and
emotional outcomes in children aged 3-11 years: A systematic review
[[Page 38129]]
and meta-analysis. The Campbell Collaboration.
www.campbellcollaboration.org/media/k2/attachments/Connolly_Universal_Schoolbased_Programmes_Title.pdf.
DePaoli, J. L., Atwell, M.N., & Bridgeland, J. (2017). Ready to
lead: A national principal survey on how social and emotional
learning can prepare children and transform schools. www.casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ReadyToLead_FINAL.pdf.
Hao, K. (2020, February 26). Robots that teach autistic kids social
skills could help them develop. MIT Technology Review.
www.technologyreview.com/s/615288/ai-robots-teach-autistic-kids-social-skills-development/.
Jain, S., Thiagarajan, B., Shi, Z., Clabaugh, C., & Matari[cacute],
M.J. (2020). Modeling engagement in long-term, in-home socially
assistive robot interventions for children with autism spectrum
disorders. Science Robotics, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aaz3791.
Murry, F. (2018). Using assistive technology to generate social
skills use for students with emotional behavior disorders. Rural
Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518801367.
Tennyson, M. F., Kuester, D. A., Casteel, J., & Nikolopoulos, C.
(2016). Accessible robots for improving social skills of individuals
with autism. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing
Research, 6(4), 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1515/jaiscr-2016-0020.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section
681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the
APA inapplicable to the priorities in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: $2,500,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2021 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $450,000 to $500,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $475,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,500,000 for
the 60-month project period.
Estimated Number of Awards: 5.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter
schools that operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public
agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and
outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may
contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with
2 CFR part 200.
4. Other General Requirements: (a) Recipients of funding under this
competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
IDEA).
(b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding must, with
respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the
absolute priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which
contain requirements andinformation on how to submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However,
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to
make awards by the end of FY 2020.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of
the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend
that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages
and (2) use the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover
sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the
abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for
completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority
requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support,
or the appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to
all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables,
figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the
proposed project;
[[Page 38130]]
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses;
(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to
increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues,
or effective strategies; and
(iv) The potential replicability of the proposed project or
strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation
in a variety of settings.
(b) Quality of project services (30 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective
practice;
(ii) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services;
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for
maximizing the effectiveness of project services;
(iv) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project are appropriate to the needs of the intended
recipients or beneficiaries of those services; and
(v) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the
proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible;
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies;
(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes; and
(v) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the
key project components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a
measurable threshold for acceptable implementation.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (20
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator;
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of key project personnel;
(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors;
(iv) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization;
(v) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project;
and
(vi) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed
project.
(e) Quality of the management plan (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks;
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project;
(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project;
(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate; and
(v) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected
[[Page 38131]]
for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier
for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater
numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any
particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It
also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the
review process, while permitting panel members to review applications
under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have
submitted applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
3474.10, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the
applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This
dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance Results
Modernization Act of 2010, the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials (ETechM2)
for Individuals with Disabilities Program. These measures are:
Program Performance Measure 1: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be of high quality by an
independent review panel of experts qualified to review the substantial
content of the products and services.
Program Performance Measure 2: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be of high relevance to
improving outcomes for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with
disabilities.
Program Performance Measure 3: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be useful in improving results
for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
Program Performance Measure 4.1: The Federal cost per unit
of accessible educational materials funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measure 4.2: The Federal cost per unit
of accessible educational materials from the National Instructional
Materials Accessibility Center funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit
of video description funded by the ETechM2 Program.
These measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by
OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual performance reports and additional performance
data to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 75.591).
[[Page 38132]]
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the
performance targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to
the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. 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.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration. Delegated the
authority to perform the functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2020-13737 Filed 6-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
