Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection Criteria-Promise Neighborhoods (PN) Program, 38801-38806 [2020-13158]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
J–511 [Amended]
From Dillingham, AK; via INT Dillingham
059° and Anchorage, AK 247° radials, to
Anchorage, AK; Gulkana, AK; to Intersection
of Gulkana 078° (M), 102° (T) radial; and
Northway 137° (M), 161° (T) radial.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 22,
2020.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations
Group.
[FR Doc. 2020–13807 Filed 6–26–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2020–OESE–0037]
Proposed Priorities, Requirements,
Definitions, and Selection Criteria—
Promise Neighborhoods (PN) Program
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Secretary for
Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria under
the PN program, Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number
84.215N. The Assistant Secretary may
use these priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2020
and later years. We take this action to
make program improvements based on
lessons learned over the last decade and
to improve program outcomes.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before July 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery,
or hand delivery. We will not accept
comments submitted by fax or by email
or those submitted after the comment
period. To ensure that we do not receive
duplicate copies, please submit your
comments only once. In addition, please
include the Docket ID at the top of your
comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
www.regulations.gov to submit your
comments electronically. Information
on using Regulations.gov, including
instructions for accessing agency
documents, submitting comments, and
viewing the docket is available on the
site under ‘‘How to use
Regulations.gov’’ in the Help section.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or
Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver
your comments about the proposed
priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria, address them to
Adrienne Hawkins, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 4W220, Washington, DC 20202.
Privacy Note: The Department of
Education’s (Department) policy is to
make all comments received from
members of the public available for
public viewing in their entirety on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
commenters should be careful to
include in their comments only
information that they wish to make
publicly available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adrienne Hawkins, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 4W220, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453–5638. Email:
Adrienne.Hawkins@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877–
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you
to submit comments regarding these
proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria. To
ensure that your comments have
maximum effect in developing the
notice of final priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria, we
urge you to identify clearly the specific
proposed priority, requirement,
definition, or selection criterion that
each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in
complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 13371 and their
overall requirement of reducing
regulatory burden that might result from
these proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria. Please
let us know of any further ways we
could reduce potential costs or increase
potential benefits while preserving the
effective and efficient administration of
the program.
During and after the comment period,
you may inspect all public comments
about these proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria at 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20202 between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday
of each week except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With
Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38801
provide an appropriate accommodation
or auxiliary aid to an individual with a
disability who needs assistance to
review the comments or other
documents in the public rulemaking
record for the proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of
accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The PN program
is authorized under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended by the Every Student Succeeds
Act (ESEA). The purpose of the PN
program is to significantly improve the
academic and developmental outcomes
of children living in the most distressed
communities of the United States,
including ensuring school readiness,
high school graduation, and access to a
community-based continuum of highquality services. The program serves
neighborhoods with high concentrations
of low-income individuals; multiple
signs of distress, which may include
high rates of poverty, childhood obesity,
academic failure, and juvenile
delinquency, adjudication, or
incarceration; and schools
implementing comprehensive support
and improvement activities or targeted
support and improvement activities
under section 1111(d) of the ESEA. All
strategies in the continuum of solutions
must be accessible to children with
disabilities and English learners.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7273–
7274.
Proposed Priorities
This document contains four
proposed priorities.
Background: Beginning in 2010, and
in the FY 2017 competition, the PN
program used absolute priorities for
rural, Tribal, and non-rural, non-Tribal
applicants to create three different
funding slates. Multiple funding slates
created a level playing field for different
applicants by allowing applicants with
similar challenges and circumstances to
compete against one another. The three
absolute priorities resulted in a mix of
rural, Tribal, and non-rural, non-Tribal
grantees. Over the years, the PN
program has awarded 54 grants to urban
communities, 13 grants to rural
communities, and 6 grants to Tribal
communities. Without multiple slates
there would have been much fewer rural
and Tribal grants. Therefore, in this
document the Department proposes to
establish priorities for non-rural, nonTribal and for Tribal communities under
Proposed Priorities 1 and 2. The
Secretary’s Administrative Priorities (85
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
38802
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
FR 13640), which are available for use
in the PN program, already include a
priority for rural applicants. In future
competitions, separate slates will be
utilized to determine rural, Tribal, and
non-rural, non-Tribal grantees.)
Proposed Priority 1—Non-Rural and
Non-Tribal Communities.
To meet this priority, an applicant
must propose to implement a PN
strategy that serves one or more nonrural or non-Tribal communities.
Proposed Priority 2—Tribal
Communities.
To meet this priority, an applicant
must propose to implement a PN
strategy that serves one or more Indian
Tribes (as defined in this notice).
Proposed Priority 3—CommunityLevel Opioid Abuse Prevention Efforts.
Background: In 2017, in response to
the opioid crisis 1 plaguing many
communities across the country, the
Department created a priority for
applicants that proposed to leverage
other Federal resources available to fight
opioid addiction. The Department
awarded competitive preference points
to applicants that demonstrated receipt
of a Drug Free Communities (DFC)
Support Program Grant from the Office
of National Drug Policy to prevent
opioid abuse (as one of its areas of
focus) or a partnership with a DFC
grantee as demonstrated by a
memorandum of understanding. Of the
80 applications received in the 2017
competition, 40 applicants addressed
this priority as a need in their
communities and all applicants who
received awards in 2017 addressed this
priority. Funded grantees have
leveraged these resources to provide
direct support to families devastated by
the opioid crisis through mental health
support and drug prevention resources
in schools where children are affected
by this epidemic. Through Proposed
Priority 3, the Department seeks to
continue to address the opioid crisis in
PN communities while also expanding
the eligibility pool beyond projects
supported with Federal resources.
Proposed Priority 3:
To meet this priority, an applicant
must: (1) Demonstrate how it will
partner with an organization that
conducts high-quality, community-level
activities to prevent opioid abuse, such
as an organization supported by an
Office of National Drug Control Policy,
DFC Support Program grant, in PN
communities; (2) describe the partner
organization’s record of success in
approaching opioid abuse prevention at
1 ‘‘STATCAST—Week of September 9, 2019.’’
STATCAST, 2019, www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/
podcasts/20190911/20190911.htm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
the community level; and (3) provide, in
its application, a memorandum of
understanding between it and the
partner organization responsible for
managing the effort. The memorandum
of understanding must indicate a
commitment on the part of the applicant
to coordinate implementation and align
resources to the greatest extent
practicable.
Proposed Priority 4—Evidence-Based
Activities to Support Academic
Achievement.
Background: Over the last 10 years,
PN grantees attempted to significantly
improve the academic achievement of
children served by providing supports
external to classroom instruction. While
most grantees achieved some success in
improving the academic achievement of
students in the neighborhoods served,
other grantees experienced challenges
due to external factors such as change
of school administration, housing
affordability, family mobility, and
school or neighborhood safety issues.
Although our grantees attempt to
resolve these issues through
partnerships, these issues take time to
resolve individually and collectively.
Grantees with success in supporting
students’ successful transition to the
next grade level, and completion of
postsecondary education attributed the
success to providing evidence-based
instructional and comprehensive service
strategies.
Proposed Priority 4:
Projects that propose to use evidencebased (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c))
activities, strategies, or interventions
that support teaching practices that will
lead to increasing student achievement
(as defined in this notice), graduation
rates, and career readiness.
Proposed Priority 5—CommunityBased Crime Reduction Efforts.
Background: In 2011, the Department
responded to challenges many
neighborhoods were facing with crime—
and specifically its effects on school
safety, chronic absenteeism, and
juvenile delinquency—by establishing a
priority for the PN program focused on
crime reduction. Through ongoing
collaboration with the Department of
Justice (DOJ), the Department provided
supplemental funding to organizations
with PN and Byrne Criminal Justice
Innovation grants to further enhance
community-based crime prevention
efforts. In 2017, recognizing these efforts
could be expanded to the pool of
applicants through the PN competition,
the Department established a
competitive preference priority to
encourage ongoing collaboration
between education and public safety
efforts. Ultimately, we awarded two new
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
grants to organizations partnering with
a Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation
grantee. These grantees have yielded
results that have improved school safety
and chronic absenteeism in their
communities. In 2018, the DOJ renamed
the Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation
program to the Innovations in
Community-Based Crime Reduction
Program. Additionally, DOJ continues to
implement the Formerly Incarcerated
Reenter Society Transformed Safely
Transitioning Every Person (FIRST
STEP) initiative to support the re-entry
of formerly incarcerated individuals
into their communities. This proposed
priority would allow us to support the
connection of these important
community-based public safety
initiatives to PN communities by
aligning education and public safety
efforts.
Proposed Priority 5:
To meet this priority, an applicant
must: (1) Demonstrate how it will
partner with an organization that
conducts high-quality activities focused
on the re-entry of formerly incarcerated
individuals or on community-based
crime reduction activities, such as an
organization supported by a U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ), Innovations
in Community-Based Crime Reduction
Program grant, a grant authorized under
the Second Chance Act, as reauthorized
under the. Formerly Incarcerated
Reenter Society Transformed Safely
Transitioning Every Person (FIRST
STEP) Act, or DOJ Office of Justice
Programs competitive grants related to
juvenile justice and delinquency
prevention; (2) describe the partner
organization’s record of success with
supporting the re-entry of formerly
incarcerated individuals or communitybased crime reduction and how their
efforts will be coordinated with the PN
activities of this grant; and (3) provide,
in its application, a memorandum of
understanding between it and a partner
organization managing the effort. The
memorandum of understanding must
indicate a commitment on the part of
the applicant to coordinate
implementation and align resources to
the greatest extent practicable.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each
priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority, we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
Background: The Assistant Secretary
proposes application requirements to be
used in conjunction with those in
section 4624(a) of the ESEA. In general,
the Department believes, based on past
experiences administering this program,
that these proposed requirements are
necessary for the proper consideration
of applications and would increase the
likelihood of successful projects.
Through the years, the program has
pushed the field to embrace data-driven
efforts to improve outcomes from cradle
to career at the population level. Key
elements proposed in this document
would help us to further target PN funds
on interventions in school, college, and
career settings.
In addition, through proposed
enhanced application requirements the
program seeks to better support
applicants and grantees to report highquality site-level data. PN grantees have
improved significantly in this area over
the past several years through our
technical assistance efforts, and we
believe that the proposed application
requirements would further support the
Department’s and grantees’ ability to
make data-informed decisions. The
program seeks to clarify and enhance
the statutory definitions and selection
criteria to coincide with improvements
to the overall purpose and structure of
the PN program.
The proposed application
requirements are intended to: (1) Assist
applicants with clearly demonstrating
the need for the project and proposed
solutions (activities, strategies, and
interventions) specific to the
neighborhood’s need; (2) acknowledge
the critical role and direct, ongoing
involvement that local educational
agencies (LEAs) and schools should
have in identifying and implementing
solutions, especially those specific to
improving academic outcomes; (3)
ensure that an applicant has a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
preexisting presence, as demonstrated
by the applicant’s past history providing
programs and services, in the
neighborhood to be served and is
representative of that neighborhood; and
(4) ensure that an applicant will design
its project to prepare and empower
families to be active in choosing the
educational and other supports that best
meet the needs of students in the
community. We believe the proposed
requirements would not only improve
the application and review process but
also improve program outcomes.
Proposed Application Requirements
The Assistant Secretary proposes the
following application requirements for
this program. We may apply one or
more of these requirements in any year
in which this program is in effect.
Proposed Application Requirements:
To be considered for an award under
this competition, an applicant must
provide the following—
(1) In addressing the application
requirements in sections 4624(a)(4),(5),
and (7) of the ESEA, an applicant must
clearly demonstrate needs, including, a
segmentation analysis, gaps in services,
and any available data from within the
last 3 years to demonstrate needs. The
applicant should also describe proposed
activities that address these needs and
the extent to which these activities are
evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1(c). The applicant should also
describe their, or partner organizations
if applicable, experience providing
these activities including any data
demonstrating effectiveness.
(2) In addressing the requirement in
section 4624(a)(6) of the ESEA, an
applicant must provide a description of
the process used to develop the
application, which must include the
involvement of an LEA(s) (including but
not limited to the LEA’s or LEAs’
involvement in the creation and
planning of the application and a signed
Memorandum of Understanding) and at
least one public elementary or
secondary school that is located within
the identified geographic area that the
grant will serve.
(3) An applicant must demonstrate
that its proposed project—
(a) Is representative of the geographic
area proposed to be served (as defined
in this notice); and
(b) Would provide a majority of the
solutions from the applicant’s proposed
pipeline services in the geographic area
proposed to be served.
(4) In addressing the requirement in
section 4624(a)(9) of the ESEA, an
applicant must describe the process it
will use to establish and maintain a
family navigation system (as defined in
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38803
this notice), including an explanation of
the process the applicant will use to
establish and maintain family and
community engagement.
Proposed Definitions
The Assistant Secretary proposes the
following definitions for this program.
We may apply one or more of these
definitions in any year in which this
program is in effect.
Background: To ensure a common
understanding of the proposed
priorities, requirements, and selection
criteria, we propose definitions that are
critical to the statutory and policy
purposes of the PN program. We
propose these definitions in order to
clarify expectations for applicants for
PN program grants and to ensure that
the review process for applications for
PN grants remains as transparent as
possible.
Proposed Definitions
Family navigation system means a
service delivery model that includes
coordinators who teach, mentor, and
collaborate with students and their
families, as well as community
members, to choose interventions,
treatments, or solutions provided by the
grantee and that best meet the needs of
students and their families. Students
and their families can select services
and supports based on available services
and individual needs, as well as
advocate for additional services.
Graduation rate means the four-year
adjusted cohort graduation rate or
extended-year adjusted cohort
graduation rate as defined in section
8101(25) and (23) of the ESEA.
Indian Tribe means an Indian Tribe or
Tribal Organization as defined in
section 4 of the Indian Selfdetermination Act (25 U.S. 450b).
Indicators of need means currently
available data that describe—
(a) Education need, which means—
(1) All or a portion of the
neighborhood includes or is within the
attendance zone of a low-performing
school that is a high school, especially
one in which the graduation rate (as
defined in this notice) is less than 60
percent or a school that can be
characterized as low-performing based
on another proxy indicator, such as
students’ on-time progression from
grade to grade; and
(2) Other indicators, such as
significant achievement gaps between
subgroups of students (as identified in
section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi) of the ESEA),
within a school or LEA, high teacher
and principal turnover, or high student
absenteeism; and
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
38804
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(b) Family and community support
need, which means—
(1) Percentages of children with
preventable chronic health conditions
(e.g., asthma, poor nutrition, dental
problems, obesity) or avoidable
developmental delays;
(2) Immunization rates;
(3) Rates of crime, including violent
crime;
(4) Student mobility rates;
(5) Teenage birth rates;
(6) Percentage of children in single
parent or no-parent families;
(7) Rates of vacant or substandard
homes, including distressed public and
assisted housing; or
(8) Percentage of the residents living
at or below the Federal poverty
threshold.
Regular high school diploma has the
meaning set out in section 8101(43) of
the ESEA.
Representative of the geographic area
proposed to be served means that
residents of the geographic area
proposed to be served have an active
role in decision-making and that at least
one-third of the applicant’s governing
board or advisory board is made up of—
(a) Residents who live in the
geographic area proposed to be served,
which may include residents who are
representative of the ethnic and racial
composition of the neighborhood’s
residents and the languages they speak;
(b) Residents of the city or county in
which the neighborhood is located but
who live outside the geographic area
proposed to be served, and who earn
less than 80 percent of the area’s median
income as published by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban
Development;
(c) Public officials who serve the
geographic area proposed to be served
(although not more than one-half of the
governing board or advisory board may
be made up of public officials); or
(d) Some combination of individuals
from the three groups listed in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this
definition.
Segmentation analysis means the
process of grouping and analyzing data
from children and families in the
geographic area proposed to be served
according to indicators of need or other
relevant indicators to allow grantees to
differentiate and more effectively target
interventions based on the needs of
different populations in the geographic
area.
Student achievement means—
(a) For tested grades and subjects—
(1) A student’s score on the State’s
assessments under the ESEA; and
(2) As appropriate, other measures of
student learning, such as those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
described in paragraph (b) of this
definition, provided they are rigorous
and comparable across classrooms and
programs; and
(b) For non-tested grades and subjects,
alternative measures of student learning
and performance, such as student scores
on pre-tests and end-of-course tests;
student performance on English
language proficiency assessments; and
other measures of student achievement
that are rigorous and comparable across
classrooms.
Student mobility rate is calculated by
dividing the total number of new
student entries and withdrawals at a
school, from the day after the first
official enrollment number is collected
through the end of the academic year,
by the first official enrollment number
of the academic year.
Proposed Selection Criteria
Background: The Department has
held six PN competitions since 2010.
Our experience with administering
these competitions, including feedback
from peer reviewers, applicants, funded
grantees, and experts, demonstrates the
need to use program-specific selection
criteria to evaluate specific program
elements. We propose to modify two
general Education Department General
Administrative Regulations selection
criteria—Need for Project and Quality of
Project Design—to encourage applicants
to fully address gaps and weaknesses in
the full pipeline of solutions from cradle
through college and a career.
Under Need for Project, the
Department proposes to add a programspecific emphasis on the applicant’s
proposed pipeline of solutions. The
Department recognized in past grant
competitions that applicants were not
connecting the identified gaps and
weaknesses to the full pipeline of
solutions. The Department considers it
important for applicants to address and
align the needs identified with the full
pipeline of solutions.
Also, under Quality of Project Design,
the Department proposes to encourage
applicants to discuss college or career
and technical education training
completion in addition to college and
career readiness. Over the years, the
Department has noticed that many
applicants and funded grantees tend to
end services prior to students in the
community entering college or the
workforce. The Department deems it
important to ensure that services and
supports are offered to program
participants beyond high school
completion.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Proposed Selection Criteria
The Assistant Secretary proposes the
following selection criteria for
evaluating an application under this
program. We may apply one or more of
these criteria in any year in which this
program is in effect.
(a) Need for project. In determining
the need for the proposed project, the
Secretary considers one or more of the
following factors—
(1) The magnitude or severity of the
problems to be addressed by the
proposed project as described by
indicators of need and other relevant
indicators identified in part by the
needs assessment and segmentation
analysis; and
(2) 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—
(i) The nature and magnitude of those
gaps or weaknesses; and
(ii) A pipeline of solutions addressing
the identified gaps and weaknesses,
including solutions targeted to early
childhood, K–12, family and
community supports, and college and
career.
(b) Quality of project design. In
determining the quality of project
design for the proposed project, the
Secretary considers one or more of the
following factors—
(1) The extent to which the applicant
describes a plan to create a complete
pipeline of services, without time and
resource gaps, that is designed to
prepare all children in the
neighborhood to attain a high-quality
education and successfully transition to
college and a career;
(2) The extent to which the project
will significantly increase the
proportion of students in the
neighborhood that are served by the
complete continuum of high-quality
services; and
(3) The extent to which the proposed
family navigation system is high quality
and provides students and their families
sufficient services and supports based
on available services and individual
needs.
Final Priorities, Requirements,
Definitions, and Selection Criteria
We will announce the final priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria in the Federal Register. We will
determine the final priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria after considering responses to
the proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria and
other information available to the
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Department. This document does not
preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria, subject to meeting
applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we
choose to use these priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
13771
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must
be determined whether this regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore,
subject to the requirements of the
Executive order and subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as an action likely to result in
a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities in a material way (also
referred to as an ‘‘economically
significant’’ rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
stated in the Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not
a significant regulatory action subject to
review by OMB under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for
each new regulation that the
Department proposes for notice and
comment or otherwise promulgates that
is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, and that
imposes total costs greater than zero, it
must identify two deregulatory actions.
For FY 2020, any new incremental costs
associated with a new regulation must
be fully offset by the elimination of
existing costs through deregulatory
actions. Because the proposed
regulations are not a significant
regulatory action, the requirements of
Executive Order 13771 do not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed
regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as
user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing the proposed
priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria only on a reasoned
determination that their benefits justify
their costs. In choosing among
alternative regulatory approaches, we
selected those approaches that would
maximize net benefits. The Department
believes that this regulatory action is
consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action would not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive
orders, the Department has assessed the
potential costs and benefits, both
quantitative and qualitative, of this
regulatory action. The potential costs
are those resulting from statutory
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38805
requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for
administering the Department’s
programs and activities. The benefits
include enhancing project design and
quality of services to better prepare
grantees to meet the objectives of the
programs.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the
Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain
Language in Government Writing’’
require each agency to write regulations
that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on
how to make the proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria easier to understand, including
answers to questions such as the
following:
• Are the requirements in the
proposed regulations clearly stated?
• Do the proposed regulations contain
technical terms or other wording that
interferes with their clarity?
• Does the format of the proposed
regulations (grouping and order of
sections, use of headings, paragraphing,
etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
• Would the proposed regulations be
easier to understand if we divided them
into more (but shorter) sections?
• Could the description of the
proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier
to understand? If so, how?
• What else could we do to make the
proposed regulations easier to
understand?
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this
proposed regulatory action would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Small Business Administration
Size Standards define ‘‘small entities’’
as for-profit or nonprofit institutions
with total annual revenue below
$7,000,000 or, if they are institutions
controlled by small governmental
jurisdictions (that are comprised of
cities, counties, towns, townships,
villages, school districts, or special
districts), with a population of less than
50,000.
The small entities that this proposed
regulatory action would affect are State
educational agencies; LEAs, including
charter schools that operate as LEAs
under State law; institutions of higher
education; other public agencies; private
nonprofit organizations; freely
associated States and outlying areas;
Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations;
and for-profit organizations. We believe
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
38806
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 125 / Monday, June 29, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
that the costs imposed on an applicant
by the proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria would be limited to paperwork
burden related to preparing an
application and that the benefits of the
proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria would
outweigh any costs incurred by the
applicant.
Participation in the PN program is
voluntary. For this reason, the proposed
priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria would impose no
burden on small entities unless they
applied for funding under the program.
We expect that in determining whether
to apply for PN program funds, an
applicant would evaluate the
requirements of preparing an
application and any associated costs,
and weigh them against the benefits
likely to be achieved by receiving a PN
program grant. An applicant would
probably apply only if it determines that
the likely benefits exceed the costs of
preparing an application.
We believe that the proposed
priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria would not impose any
additional burden on a small entity
applying for a grant than the entity
would face in the absence of the
proposed action. That is, the length of
the applications those entities would
submit in the absence of the proposed
regulatory action and the time needed to
prepare an application would likely be
the same.
This proposed regulatory action
would not have a significant economic
impact on a small entity once it receives
a grant because it would be able to meet
the costs of compliance using the funds
provided under this program. We invite
comments from small eligible entities as
to whether they believe this proposed
regulatory action would have a
significant economic impact on them
and, if so, request evidence to support
that belief.
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Assessment of Educational Impact
In accordance with section 411 of
General Education Provisions Act, 20
U.S.C. 1221e–4, the Secretary
particularly requests comments on
whether the proposed regulations would
require transmission of information that
any other agency or authority of the
United States gathers or makes
available.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. 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 Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and
Secondary Education.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria contain information collection
requirements that are approved by OMB
under OMB control number 1894–0006;
the proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria do not
affect the currently approved data
collection.
[FR Doc. 2020–13158 Filed 6–26–20; 8:45 am]
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
Mandatory Deposit of Electronic-Only
Books
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:45 Jun 26, 2020
Jkt 250001
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 202
[Docket No. 2016–03]
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The Copyright Office is
issuing a revised proposed rule to make
electronic-only books published in the
United States subject to the Copyright
Act’s mandatory deposit provisions if
they are affirmatively demanded by the
Office. In response to comments
received in response to the Office’s
April 16, 2018 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the revised proposed rule
makes additional clarifying edits to the
definition of an ‘‘electronic-only book’’
and adjusts the requirements related to
employment of technological protection
measures. This document also updates
the public on developments
subsequently announced by the Library
of Congress related to certain questions
raised in public comments with respect
to its digital collection strategy and
information technology security matters.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on July 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office website at https://
www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/
ebookdeposit. If electronic submission
of comments is not feasible due to lack
of access to a computer and/or the
internet, please contact the Office using
the contact information below for
special instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and
Associate Register of Copyrights,
regans@copyright.gov; Kevin R. Amer,
Deputy General Counsel, kamer@
copyright.gov; or Mark T. Gray,
Attorney-Advisor, mgray@
copyright.gov. They can be reached by
telephone at 202–707–3000.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
A. Mandatory Deposit Under the
Copyright Act Generally
Section 407 of title 17 requires that
the owner of the copyright or the
exclusive right of publication in a work
published in the United States, within
three months of publication, deposit
‘‘two complete copies of the best
edition’’ with the Copyright Office ‘‘for
the use or disposition of the Library of
Congress.’’ 1 The ‘‘best edition’’ is
defined as ‘‘the edition, published in the
1 17 U.S.C. 407(a), (b); see generally 37 CFR
202.19.
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 125 (Monday, June 29, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38801-38806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13158]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2020-OESE-0037]
Proposed Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection
Criteria--Promise Neighborhoods (PN) Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education
proposes priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria
under the PN program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
number 84.215N. The Assistant Secretary may use these priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for competitions in
fiscal year (FY) 2020 and later years. We take this action to make
program improvements based on lessons learned over the last decade and
to improve program outcomes.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 29, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit
your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov,
including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting
comments, and viewing the docket is available on the site under ``How
to use Regulations.gov'' in the Help section.
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you mail or
deliver your comments about the proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria, address them to Adrienne Hawkins,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4W220,
Washington, DC 20202.
Privacy Note: The Department of Education's (Department) policy is
to make all comments received from members of the public available for
public viewing in their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adrienne Hawkins, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4W220, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453-5638. 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:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria, we urge you to identify clearly the specific
proposed priority, requirement, definition, or selection criterion that
each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13371 and their
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result
from these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria. Please let us know of any further ways we could
reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving
the effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about these proposed priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria at 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday
through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for the proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The PN program is authorized under the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESEA). The purpose of the PN program is to
significantly improve the academic and developmental outcomes of
children living in the most distressed communities of the United
States, including ensuring school readiness, high school graduation,
and access to a community-based continuum of high-quality services. The
program serves neighborhoods with high concentrations of low-income
individuals; multiple signs of distress, which may include high rates
of poverty, childhood obesity, academic failure, and juvenile
delinquency, adjudication, or incarceration; and schools implementing
comprehensive support and improvement activities or targeted support
and improvement activities under section 1111(d) of the ESEA. All
strategies in the continuum of solutions must be accessible to children
with disabilities and English learners.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7273-7274.
Proposed Priorities
This document contains four proposed priorities.
Background: Beginning in 2010, and in the FY 2017 competition, the
PN program used absolute priorities for rural, Tribal, and non-rural,
non-Tribal applicants to create three different funding slates.
Multiple funding slates created a level playing field for different
applicants by allowing applicants with similar challenges and
circumstances to compete against one another. The three absolute
priorities resulted in a mix of rural, Tribal, and non-rural, non-
Tribal grantees. Over the years, the PN program has awarded 54 grants
to urban communities, 13 grants to rural communities, and 6 grants to
Tribal communities. Without multiple slates there would have been much
fewer rural and Tribal grants. Therefore, in this document the
Department proposes to establish priorities for non-rural, non-Tribal
and for Tribal communities under Proposed Priorities 1 and 2. The
Secretary's Administrative Priorities (85
[[Page 38802]]
FR 13640), which are available for use in the PN program, already
include a priority for rural applicants. In future competitions,
separate slates will be utilized to determine rural, Tribal, and non-
rural, non-Tribal grantees.)
Proposed Priority 1--Non-Rural and Non-Tribal Communities.
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to implement a PN
strategy that serves one or more non-rural or non-Tribal communities.
Proposed Priority 2--Tribal Communities.
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose to implement a PN
strategy that serves one or more Indian Tribes (as defined in this
notice).
Proposed Priority 3--Community-Level Opioid Abuse Prevention
Efforts.
Background: In 2017, in response to the opioid crisis \1\ plaguing
many communities across the country, the Department created a priority
for applicants that proposed to leverage other Federal resources
available to fight opioid addiction. The Department awarded competitive
preference points to applicants that demonstrated receipt of a Drug
Free Communities (DFC) Support Program Grant from the Office of
National Drug Policy to prevent opioid abuse (as one of its areas of
focus) or a partnership with a DFC grantee as demonstrated by a
memorandum of understanding. Of the 80 applications received in the
2017 competition, 40 applicants addressed this priority as a need in
their communities and all applicants who received awards in 2017
addressed this priority. Funded grantees have leveraged these resources
to provide direct support to families devastated by the opioid crisis
through mental health support and drug prevention resources in schools
where children are affected by this epidemic. Through Proposed Priority
3, the Department seeks to continue to address the opioid crisis in PN
communities while also expanding the eligibility pool beyond projects
supported with Federal resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``STATCAST--Week of September 9, 2019.'' STATCAST, 2019,
www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/20190911/20190911.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Priority 3:
To meet this priority, an applicant must: (1) Demonstrate how it
will partner with an organization that conducts high-quality,
community-level activities to prevent opioid abuse, such as an
organization supported by an Office of National Drug Control Policy,
DFC Support Program grant, in PN communities; (2) describe the partner
organization's record of success in approaching opioid abuse prevention
at the community level; and (3) provide, in its application, a
memorandum of understanding between it and the partner organization
responsible for managing the effort. The memorandum of understanding
must indicate a commitment on the part of the applicant to coordinate
implementation and align resources to the greatest extent practicable.
Proposed Priority 4--Evidence-Based Activities to Support Academic
Achievement.
Background: Over the last 10 years, PN grantees attempted to
significantly improve the academic achievement of children served by
providing supports external to classroom instruction. While most
grantees achieved some success in improving the academic achievement of
students in the neighborhoods served, other grantees experienced
challenges due to external factors such as change of school
administration, housing affordability, family mobility, and school or
neighborhood safety issues. Although our grantees attempt to resolve
these issues through partnerships, these issues take time to resolve
individually and collectively. Grantees with success in supporting
students' successful transition to the next grade level, and completion
of postsecondary education attributed the success to providing
evidence-based instructional and comprehensive service strategies.
Proposed Priority 4:
Projects that propose to use evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1(c)) activities, strategies, or interventions that support teaching
practices that will lead to increasing student achievement (as defined
in this notice), graduation rates, and career readiness.
Proposed Priority 5--Community-Based Crime Reduction Efforts.
Background: In 2011, the Department responded to challenges many
neighborhoods were facing with crime-- and specifically its effects on
school safety, chronic absenteeism, and juvenile delinquency--by
establishing a priority for the PN program focused on crime reduction.
Through ongoing collaboration with the Department of Justice (DOJ), the
Department provided supplemental funding to organizations with PN and
Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation grants to further enhance community-
based crime prevention efforts. In 2017, recognizing these efforts
could be expanded to the pool of applicants through the PN competition,
the Department established a competitive preference priority to
encourage ongoing collaboration between education and public safety
efforts. Ultimately, we awarded two new grants to organizations
partnering with a Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation grantee. These
grantees have yielded results that have improved school safety and
chronic absenteeism in their communities. In 2018, the DOJ renamed the
Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation program to the Innovations in
Community-Based Crime Reduction Program. Additionally, DOJ continues to
implement the Formerly Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely
Transitioning Every Person (FIRST STEP) initiative to support the re-
entry of formerly incarcerated individuals into their communities. This
proposed priority would allow us to support the connection of these
important community-based public safety initiatives to PN communities
by aligning education and public safety efforts.
Proposed Priority 5:
To meet this priority, an applicant must: (1) Demonstrate how it
will partner with an organization that conducts high-quality activities
focused on the re-entry of formerly incarcerated individuals or on
community-based crime reduction activities, such as an organization
supported by a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Innovations in
Community-Based Crime Reduction Program grant, a grant authorized under
the Second Chance Act, as reauthorized under the. Formerly Incarcerated
Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person (FIRST
STEP) Act, or DOJ Office of Justice Programs competitive grants related
to juvenile justice and delinquency prevention; (2) describe the
partner organization's record of success with supporting the re-entry
of formerly incarcerated individuals or community-based crime reduction
and how their efforts will be coordinated with the PN activities of
this grant; and (3) provide, in its application, a memorandum of
understanding between it and a partner organization managing the
effort. The memorandum of understanding must indicate a commitment on
the part of the applicant to coordinate implementation and align
resources to the greatest extent practicable.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
[[Page 38803]]
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Proposed Requirements
Background: The Assistant Secretary proposes application
requirements to be used in conjunction with those in section 4624(a) of
the ESEA. In general, the Department believes, based on past
experiences administering this program, that these proposed
requirements are necessary for the proper consideration of applications
and would increase the likelihood of successful projects. Through the
years, the program has pushed the field to embrace data-driven efforts
to improve outcomes from cradle to career at the population level. Key
elements proposed in this document would help us to further target PN
funds on interventions in school, college, and career settings.
In addition, through proposed enhanced application requirements the
program seeks to better support applicants and grantees to report high-
quality site-level data. PN grantees have improved significantly in
this area over the past several years through our technical assistance
efforts, and we believe that the proposed application requirements
would further support the Department's and grantees' ability to make
data-informed decisions. The program seeks to clarify and enhance the
statutory definitions and selection criteria to coincide with
improvements to the overall purpose and structure of the PN program.
The proposed application requirements are intended to: (1) Assist
applicants with clearly demonstrating the need for the project and
proposed solutions (activities, strategies, and interventions) specific
to the neighborhood's need; (2) acknowledge the critical role and
direct, ongoing involvement that local educational agencies (LEAs) and
schools should have in identifying and implementing solutions,
especially those specific to improving academic outcomes; (3) ensure
that an applicant has a preexisting presence, as demonstrated by the
applicant's past history providing programs and services, in the
neighborhood to be served and is representative of that neighborhood;
and (4) ensure that an applicant will design its project to prepare and
empower families to be active in choosing the educational and other
supports that best meet the needs of students in the community. We
believe the proposed requirements would not only improve the
application and review process but also improve program outcomes.
Proposed Application Requirements
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following application
requirements for this program. We may apply one or more of these
requirements in any year in which this program is in effect.
Proposed Application Requirements: To be considered for an award
under this competition, an applicant must provide the following--
(1) In addressing the application requirements in sections
4624(a)(4),(5), and (7) of the ESEA, an applicant must clearly
demonstrate needs, including, a segmentation analysis, gaps in
services, and any available data from within the last 3 years to
demonstrate needs. The applicant should also describe proposed
activities that address these needs and the extent to which these
activities are evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c). The
applicant should also describe their, or partner organizations if
applicable, experience providing these activities including any data
demonstrating effectiveness.
(2) In addressing the requirement in section 4624(a)(6) of the
ESEA, an applicant must provide a description of the process used to
develop the application, which must include the involvement of an
LEA(s) (including but not limited to the LEA's or LEAs' involvement in
the creation and planning of the application and a signed Memorandum of
Understanding) and at least one public elementary or secondary school
that is located within the identified geographic area that the grant
will serve.
(3) An applicant must demonstrate that its proposed project--
(a) Is representative of the geographic area proposed to be served
(as defined in this notice); and
(b) Would provide a majority of the solutions from the applicant's
proposed pipeline services in the geographic area proposed to be
served.
(4) In addressing the requirement in section 4624(a)(9) of the
ESEA, an applicant must describe the process it will use to establish
and maintain a family navigation system (as defined in this notice),
including an explanation of the process the applicant will use to
establish and maintain family and community engagement.
Proposed Definitions
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following definitions for this
program. We may apply one or more of these definitions in any year in
which this program is in effect.
Background: To ensure a common understanding of the proposed
priorities, requirements, and selection criteria, we propose
definitions that are critical to the statutory and policy purposes of
the PN program. We propose these definitions in order to clarify
expectations for applicants for PN program grants and to ensure that
the review process for applications for PN grants remains as
transparent as possible.
Proposed Definitions
Family navigation system means a service delivery model that
includes coordinators who teach, mentor, and collaborate with students
and their families, as well as community members, to choose
interventions, treatments, or solutions provided by the grantee and
that best meet the needs of students and their families. Students and
their families can select services and supports based on available
services and individual needs, as well as advocate for additional
services.
Graduation rate means the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate
or extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rate as defined in section
8101(25) and (23) of the ESEA.
Indian Tribe means an Indian Tribe or Tribal Organization as
defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-determination Act (25 U.S.
450b).
Indicators of need means currently available data that describe--
(a) Education need, which means--
(1) All or a portion of the neighborhood includes or is within the
attendance zone of a low-performing school that is a high school,
especially one in which the graduation rate (as defined in this notice)
is less than 60 percent or a school that can be characterized as low-
performing based on another proxy indicator, such as students' on-time
progression from grade to grade; and
(2) Other indicators, such as significant achievement gaps between
subgroups of students (as identified in section 1111(b)(2)(B)(xi) of
the ESEA), within a school or LEA, high teacher and principal turnover,
or high student absenteeism; and
[[Page 38804]]
(b) Family and community support need, which means--
(1) Percentages of children with preventable chronic health
conditions (e.g., asthma, poor nutrition, dental problems, obesity) or
avoidable developmental delays;
(2) Immunization rates;
(3) Rates of crime, including violent crime;
(4) Student mobility rates;
(5) Teenage birth rates;
(6) Percentage of children in single parent or no-parent families;
(7) Rates of vacant or substandard homes, including distressed
public and assisted housing; or
(8) Percentage of the residents living at or below the Federal
poverty threshold.
Regular high school diploma has the meaning set out in section
8101(43) of the ESEA.
Representative of the geographic area proposed to be served means
that residents of the geographic area proposed to be served have an
active role in decision-making and that at least one-third of the
applicant's governing board or advisory board is made up of--
(a) Residents who live in the geographic area proposed to be
served, which may include residents who are representative of the
ethnic and racial composition of the neighborhood's residents and the
languages they speak;
(b) Residents of the city or county in which the neighborhood is
located but who live outside the geographic area proposed to be served,
and who earn less than 80 percent of the area's median income as
published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development;
(c) Public officials who serve the geographic area proposed to be
served (although not more than one-half of the governing board or
advisory board may be made up of public officials); or
(d) Some combination of individuals from the three groups listed in
paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this definition.
Segmentation analysis means the process of grouping and analyzing
data from children and families in the geographic area proposed to be
served according to indicators of need or other relevant indicators to
allow grantees to differentiate and more effectively target
interventions based on the needs of different populations in the
geographic area.
Student achievement means--
(a) For tested grades and subjects--
(1) A student's score on the State's assessments under the ESEA;
and
(2) As appropriate, other measures of student learning, such as
those described in paragraph (b) of this definition, provided they are
rigorous and comparable across classrooms and programs; and
(b) For non-tested grades and subjects, alternative measures of
student learning and performance, such as student scores on pre-tests
and end-of-course tests; student performance on English language
proficiency assessments; and other measures of student achievement that
are rigorous and comparable across classrooms.
Student mobility rate is calculated by dividing the total number of
new student entries and withdrawals at a school, from the day after the
first official enrollment number is collected through the end of the
academic year, by the first official enrollment number of the academic
year.
Proposed Selection Criteria
Background: The Department has held six PN competitions since 2010.
Our experience with administering these competitions, including
feedback from peer reviewers, applicants, funded grantees, and experts,
demonstrates the need to use program-specific selection criteria to
evaluate specific program elements. We propose to modify two general
Education Department General Administrative Regulations selection
criteria--Need for Project and Quality of Project Design--to encourage
applicants to fully address gaps and weaknesses in the full pipeline of
solutions from cradle through college and a career.
Under Need for Project, the Department proposes to add a program-
specific emphasis on the applicant's proposed pipeline of solutions.
The Department recognized in past grant competitions that applicants
were not connecting the identified gaps and weaknesses to the full
pipeline of solutions. The Department considers it important for
applicants to address and align the needs identified with the full
pipeline of solutions.
Also, under Quality of Project Design, the Department proposes to
encourage applicants to discuss college or career and technical
education training completion in addition to college and career
readiness. Over the years, the Department has noticed that many
applicants and funded grantees tend to end services prior to students
in the community entering college or the workforce. The Department
deems it important to ensure that services and supports are offered to
program participants beyond high school completion.
Proposed Selection Criteria
The Assistant Secretary proposes the following selection criteria
for evaluating an application under this program. We may apply one or
more of these criteria in any year in which this program is in effect.
(a) Need for project. In determining the need for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors--
(1) The magnitude or severity of the problems to be addressed by
the proposed project as described by indicators of need and other
relevant indicators identified in part by the needs assessment and
segmentation analysis; and
(2) 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--
(i) The nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses; and
(ii) A pipeline of solutions addressing the identified gaps and
weaknesses, including solutions targeted to early childhood, K-12,
family and community supports, and college and career.
(b) Quality of project design. In determining the quality of
project design for the proposed project, the Secretary considers one or
more of the following factors--
(1) The extent to which the applicant describes a plan to create a
complete pipeline of services, without time and resource gaps, that is
designed to prepare all children in the neighborhood to attain a high-
quality education and successfully transition to college and a career;
(2) The extent to which the project will significantly increase the
proportion of students in the neighborhood that are served by the
complete continuum of high-quality services; and
(3) The extent to which the proposed family navigation system is
high quality and provides students and their families sufficient
services and supports based on available services and individual needs.
Final Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, and Selection Criteria
We will announce the final priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria in the Federal Register. We will determine the
final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria
after considering responses to the proposed priorities, requirements,
definitions, and selection criteria and other information available to
the
[[Page 38805]]
Department. This document does not preclude us from proposing
additional priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use these priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria, we invite applications through a notice in the
Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to
result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new regulation that the
Department proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates
that is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866,
and that imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two
deregulatory actions. For FY 2020, any new incremental costs associated
with a new regulation must be fully offset by the elimination of
existing costs through deregulatory actions. Because the proposed
regulations are not a significant regulatory action, the requirements
of Executive Order 13771 do not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria only on a reasoned determination that their
benefits justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net
benefits. The Department believes that this regulatory action is
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this regulatory action would not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
The benefits include enhancing project design and quality of services
to better prepare grantees to meet the objectives of the programs.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write
regulations that are easy to understand.
The Secretary invites comments on how to make the proposed
priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria easier to
understand, including answers to questions such as the following:
Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly
stated?
Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or
other wording that interferes with their clarity?
Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and
order of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce
their clarity?
Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if
we divided them into more (but shorter) sections?
Could the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
What else could we do to make the proposed regulations
easier to understand?
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this proposed regulatory action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
``small entities'' as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total
annual revenue below $7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled
by small governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts), with a population of less than 50,000.
The small entities that this proposed regulatory action would
affect are State educational agencies; LEAs, including charter schools
that operate as LEAs under State law; institutions of higher education;
other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely
associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal
organizations; and for-profit organizations. We believe
[[Page 38806]]
that the costs imposed on an applicant by the proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria would be limited to
paperwork burden related to preparing an application and that the
benefits of the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and
selection criteria would outweigh any costs incurred by the applicant.
Participation in the PN program is voluntary. For this reason, the
proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria
would impose no burden on small entities unless they applied for
funding under the program. We expect that in determining whether to
apply for PN program funds, an applicant would evaluate the
requirements of preparing an application and any associated costs, and
weigh them against the benefits likely to be achieved by receiving a PN
program grant. An applicant would probably apply only if it determines
that the likely benefits exceed the costs of preparing an application.
We believe that the proposed priorities, requirements, definitions,
and selection criteria would not impose any additional burden on a
small entity applying for a grant than the entity would face in the
absence of the proposed action. That is, the length of the applications
those entities would submit in the absence of the proposed regulatory
action and the time needed to prepare an application would likely be
the same.
This proposed regulatory action would not have a significant
economic impact on a small entity once it receives a grant because it
would be able to meet the costs of compliance using the funds provided
under this program. We invite comments from small eligible entities as
to whether they believe this proposed regulatory action would have a
significant economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to
support that belief.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria contain information collection requirements that are approved
by OMB under OMB control number 1894-0006; the proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection criteria do not affect the
currently approved data collection.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal
financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Assessment of Educational Impact
In accordance with section 411 of General Education Provisions Act,
20 U.S.C. 1221e-4, the Secretary particularly requests comments on
whether the proposed regulations would require transmission of
information that any other agency or authority of the United States
gathers or makes available.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. 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 Adobe Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Frank T. Brogan,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2020-13158 Filed 6-26-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P