Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals With Disabilities-National Center To Improve Faculty Capacity To Use Educational Technology in Special Education, Early Intervention, and Related Services Personnel Preparation and Leadership Personnel Preparation Programs, 39545-39551 [2020-13862]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 127 (Wednesday, July 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39545-39551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13862]



[[Page 39545]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and 
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities--National Center To Improve 
Faculty Capacity To Use Educational Technology in Special Education, 
Early Intervention, and Related Services Personnel Preparation and 
Leadership Personnel Preparation Programs

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--National Center to Improve Faculty Capacity to Use 
Educational Technology in Special Education, Early Intervention, and 
Related Services Personnel Preparation and Leadership Personnel 
Preparation Programs, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) 
number 84.327F. This center will identify and disseminate types of 
educational technologies that can enhance teaching and learning in 
educator and leader preparation programs in institutions of higher 
education (IHEs); and support learning networks for IHE faculty on 
using educational technologies to enhance teaching and learning in 
educator and leader preparation programs. This notice relates to the 
approved information collection under OMB control number 1820-0028.

DATES: Applications Available: July 1, 2020.
    Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 21, 2020.
    Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than July 6, 2020, 
the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post a pre-
recorded informational webinar designed to provide technical assistance 
to interested applicants. The 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: Celia Rosenquist, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5158, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-7373. 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 (AEM) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Priority: This competition includes one absolute priority. In 
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is 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 Priority: For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which we 
make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this 
competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.
    This priority is:
    National Center to Improve Faculty Capacity to Use Educational 
Technology in Special Education, Early Intervention, and Related 
Services Personnel Preparation and Leadership Personnel Preparation 
Programs.
    Background:
    Educational technology (e.g., adaptive courseware, digital learning 
environments, learning analytics, virtual learning tools, accessibility 
technology, communication technologies) in IHEs can potentially be 
transformative in how it engages, supports, and enables learning and 
increases opportunities and options for diverse learners (U.S. 
Department of Education, 2017). Faculty at IHEs play a critical role in 
promoting knowledge and shaping the teaching methods of future special 
education, early intervention, and related services personnel (referred 
to as ``educators'' hereafter) and leaders (e.g., IHE faculty; school, 
program, district, and State administrators). The knowledge and use of 
educational technology by IHE faculty serve two critical purposes. The 
first purpose is ensuring that future educators and leaders enrolled in 
preparation programs are efficiently and effectively acquiring the 
competencies needed to be successful in their future area of employment 
in special education, early intervention, or related services. The 
second purpose is serving as a model for future educators and leaders 
in how best to use educational technology to support engagement and 
learning in their own teaching and professional activities (Hughes et 
al., 2016).
    Educational technology will undoubtedly play an increasing role in 
the future of IHEs (U.S. Department of Education, 2017), but there are 
variations in how technology is used and specific challenges for IHE 
faculty. For example, IHE faculty members' content expertise, 
experiences in course design, and varied technological knowledge and 
skills for teaching and learning influence their use of educational 
technology (Hughes et al., 2016). Challenges for IHE faculty include 
the time commitment needed to change instructional approaches and lack 
of access to sustained professional development to support the 
continued use of educational technology. The competencies needed by IHE 
faculty to prepare future educators and leaders have only recently been 
proposed and approaches to the acquisition of these competencies need 
to be explored (Foulger et al., 2017). Institutional barriers to 
faculty use of educational technology also exist in that incentives 
(e.g., reduced teaching, financial compensation) are often not offered 
to IHE faculty for improving their knowledge and use of educational 
technology (Kolb et al., 2018). Also, educational technology continues 
to rapidly expand and evolve, which presents challenges for IHE faculty 
to keep up to date on innovative tools and strategies to best prepare 
future educators and leaders (U.S. Department

[[Page 39546]]

of Education, 2017). Finally, the need to build faculty capacity to use 
educational technology is further necessitated when future educators 
and leaders are unable to receive, or provide, instruction in a 
traditional classroom setting. Faculty that have the capacity to 
deliver instruction utilizing distance technology, and prepare future 
educators and leaders to utilize such technology, will be better able 
to handle future disruptions in learning in the event of a natural 
disaster or emergency. Responses to the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 
(COVID-19) pandemic at the IHE, State, and local educational agency 
(LEA) levels demonstrate that faculty need support to maintain 
continuity of operations in the event of such emergencies.
    The Department therefore intends to fund a cooperative agreement to 
establish and operate a national center to support faculty at IHEs by 
improving their knowledge and use of educational technology, and their 
capacity to sustain its use in special education, early intervention, 
and related services personnel preparation and leadership personnel 
preparation programs.
    The project must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent 
with nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution 
and Federal civil rights laws.
    Priority:
    The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to 
establish and operate a national center to improve faculty capacity to 
use educational technology in special education, early intervention, 
and related services personnel preparation and leadership personnel 
preparation programs. To be considered for funding under this priority, 
applicants, at a minimum, must--
    (a) Increase knowledge of faculty at IHEs about the range of 
educational technologies that can be used for educator or leadership 
preparation programs;
    (b) Increase capacity of faculty at IHEs to use a range of 
educational technologies in educator or leadership preparation 
programs; and
    (c) Increase capacity of faculty within and across IHEs to sustain 
professional learning networks related to the use of educational 
technologies in educator and leadership preparation programs.
    In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered 
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application 
and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:
    (a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
    (1) Address faculty needs at IHEs to identify, select, and use 
educational technology and how to integrate it into their special 
education, early intervention, or related services educator and 
leadership preparation programs. To meet this requirement the applicant 
must--
    (i) Present information on the types of educational technology that 
can be used in educator and leadership preparation programs, including 
technologies that support distance learning;
    (ii) Present information on the extent to which educator and 
leadership preparation programs have integrated educational technology 
into their courses and content; and
    (iii) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges to 
integrating educational technology in educator and leadership 
preparation programs.
    (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 technical 
assistance (TA) and information; and
    (ii) Ensure that services and products 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 \2\ 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;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) Use a 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 literature and research on educational 
technology for educator and leadership preparation programs. To meet 
this requirement, the applicant must describe--
    (i) The current research on educational technology, including 
technologies that support distance instruction, for educator and 
leadership preparation programs, the evidence-base related to its 
effectiveness, and the effective use of such technologies;
    (ii) The current literature and research on how to support IHE 
faculty in the use of educational technology to prepare future 
educators and leaders;
    (iii) The current literature and research on factors associated 
with the integration of educational technology, including technologies 
that support distance instruction, into courses and components of 
educator and leadership preparation programs and how to address those 
factors;
    (iv) How the proposed project will incorporate current literature 
and research in the development of a framework for IHE faculty's 
acquisition of competencies to use educational technologies in educator 
and leader preparation programs;
    (v) How the proposed project will identify IHE faculty or programs 
that have promising approaches and practices for integrating 
educational technology in its educator and leadership preparation 
programs and incorporate that information into the development of the 
framework; and
    (vi) How the proposed project will incorporate current literature 
and research in the development of a framework for increasing the 
capacity of IHE faculty within and across IHEs to create and sustain 
professional learning networks related to educational technology and 
its integration into educator and leadership preparation programs;
    (5) Develop products and provide services 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 describe--
    (i) How it proposes to identify or develop the knowledge base 
related to educational technology for educator and leadership 
preparation programs, its effectiveness, and how to use the 
technologies; and

[[Page 39547]]

    (ii) How it proposes to engage stakeholders in the development of a 
framework for--
    (A) IHE faculty to acquire needed competencies for integrating 
educational technology in a current educator and leadership preparation 
program; and
    (B) Increasing capacity of faculty within and across IHEs to create 
and sustain professional learning networks related to educational 
technology and its integration in educator and leadership preparation 
programs;
    (iii) Its proposed approach to dissemination, which must identify 
the intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, 
that will receive the products and services under this approach and 
should include, at a minimum, the following three elements:
    (A) A plan to disseminate the knowledge base on the types, use, and 
effectiveness of educational technologies for educator and leadership 
preparation programs;
    (B) A plan to disseminate the frameworks developed under paragraph 
(b)(5)(ii) of this priority and develop professional learning support 
or activities for faculty at IHEs to enhance their understanding and 
implementation of the frameworks; and
    (C) A plan to identify and disseminate other relevant resources, 
including exemplar faculty and programs that have promising approaches 
and practices for integrating educational technology;
    (iv) Its proposed approach to supporting faculty at IHEs in 
implementing the frameworks for integrating technology in preparation 
programs and professional learning networks and sustaining professional 
learning networks, which must identify--
    (A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of 
recipients, that will receive the products and services under this 
approach; and
    (B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential 
recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their 
current use of educational technology in the delivery of coursework, 
technology resources, and ability to build capacity at the 
institutional level; and
    (6) Develop products and implement services that maximize 
efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
    (i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the 
intended project outcomes;
    (ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the 
intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
    (iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to 
achieve the intended project outcomes.
    (c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of 
the evaluation plan,'' 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 
services have met the goals for reaching its 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) Designate, with the approval of the Office of Special Education 
Programs (OSEP) project officer, a project liaison staff person with 
sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of 
the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Program 
and Project Performance (CIPP \3\), the project director, and the OSEP 
project officer on the following tasks:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and 
oversee the design of formative evaluations for every large 
discretionary investment (i.e., those awarded $500,000 or more per 
year and required to participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP's 
Technical Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel Development; 
Parent Training and Information Centers; and Educational Technology, 
Media, and Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are expected to 
enhance individual project evaluation plans by providing expert and 
unbiased TA in designing the evaluations with due consideration of 
the project's budget. CIPP does not function as a third-party 
evaluator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the application 
to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and 
outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model 
discussed at the kick-off meeting;
    (ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in 
the application consistent with the logic model (e.g., prepare 
evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes; 
develop quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both 
the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, 
as appropriate, and the assessment of project outcomes; and identify 
analytic strategies); and
    (iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the 
application such that it clearly--
    (A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources 
for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic 
strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the 
evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completing the plan;
    (B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the 
second project year for use during the project's evaluation (3+2 
review) for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and 
Fifth Years of the Project; and
    (C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project 
officer, with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify the 
performance measures to be addressed in the project's annual 
performance report.
    (2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks 
described in paragraph (1) of this section; and
    (3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the 
costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
this section and implementing the evaluation plan.
    (d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under 
``Adequacy of resources,'' 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

[[Page 39548]]

appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
    (3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and 
services 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, TA providers, 
researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and 
operation.
    (f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant 
must--
    (1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, 
as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the 
narrative;
    (2) Include, 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) One annual two-day trip to attend Department briefings, 
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by 
OSEP; and
    (iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, 
during the last half of the second year of the project period;
    (3) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate 
design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for 
accessibility;
    (4) Ensure that annual progress toward meeting project goals is 
posted on the project website; and
    (5) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the 
transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the 
continuity of services to States during the transition to this new 
award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.
    Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:
    In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth 
and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 
75.253(a), as well as--
    (a) The recommendation of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts 
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the 
second year of the project period;
    (b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of 
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the 
project; and
    (c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's 
products and services and the extent to which the project's products 
and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to 
result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.
    Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards 
or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive 
carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The 
Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and 
substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue 
funding accordingly.

References

Foulger, T.S., Graziano, K.J., Schmidt-Crawford, D. & Slykhuis, D.A. 
(2017). Teacher Educator Technology Competencies. Journal of 
Technology and Teacher Education, 25(4), 413-448. Society for 
Information Technology & Teacher Education. www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/181966/.
Hughes, J.E., Liu, S. & Lim, M. (2016). Technological modeling: 
Faculty use of technologies in preservice teacher education from 
2004 to 2012. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 
16(2), 184-207. www.citejournal.org/volume-16/issue-2-16/current-practice/technological-modeling-faculty-use-of-technologies-in-preservice-teacher-education-from-2004-to-2012.
Kolb, L., Kashef, F., Roberts, C., Terry, C., & Borthwick, A. (2018, 
March 1-3). Challenges to creating and sustaining effective 
technology integration in teacher education programs [Paper 
presentation]. American Association of Colleges for Teacher 
Education Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD, United States.
U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Office of Educational 
Technology. Reimagining the role of technology in higher education: 
A supplement to the National Education Technology Plan. https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/Higher-Ed-NETP.pdf.

    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 priority 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 IHEs only.

II. Award Information

    Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
    Estimated Available Funds: $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.
    Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,500,000 for 
the 60-month project period.
    Estimated Number of Awards: 1.

    Note:
     The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

    Project Period: Up to 60 months.

III. Eligibility Information

    1. Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies (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

[[Page 39549]]

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 and information 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;
    (ii) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by 
the proposed project;
    (iii) 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;
    (iv) The potential contribution of the proposed project to 
increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues, 
or effective strategies; and
    (v) 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;

[[Page 39550]]

    (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 
is 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 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 SAM. 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

[[Page 39551]]

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 for 
Individuals with Disabilities Program. These measures are--
     Program Performance Measure 1: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged to be of high quality by an outside independent review 
panel of experts in the field that is arranged by OSEP and qualified to 
review the substantial content of the products and services.
     Program Performance Measure 2: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged by an outside independent review panel of experts in 
the field that is arranged by OSEP to be of high relevance to improving 
outcomes for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
     Program Performance Measure 3: The percentage of 
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program products and 
services judged by an outside independent review panel of experts in 
the field that is arranged by OSEP 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 AEM funded by the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials 
Program.
     Program Performance Measure 4.2: The Federal cost per unit 
of AEM from the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Center 
funded by the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials Program.
     Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit 
of video description funded by the Educational Technology, Media, and 
Materials 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).
    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. 2020-13862 Filed 6-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P