Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities and School Safety National Activities Programs-National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, 45399-45409 [2023-15159]
Download as PDF
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
Navy Science and Technology Board
(DoN S&T Board) as a discretionary
Federal advisory committee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim
Freeman, DoD Advisory Committee
Management Officer, 703–692–5952,
james.d.freeman4.civ@mail.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
committee is being established in
accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) and 41 CFR
102–3.50(a). The charter and contact
information for the DoN S&T Board’s
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) are
found at: https://www.facadatabase.gov/
FACA/apex/FACAPublic
AgencyNavigation.
The DoN S&T Board is a discretionary
Federal advisory committee established
to provide independent advice and
recommendations on matters relating to
the Department of the Navy’s (DoN)
scientific, technical, manufacturing,
acquisition, logistics, medicine, and
business management functions. These
matters include, but are not limited to,
the pressing and complex scientific and
technological problems facing the DoD
in such areas as research, engineering,
organizational structure and process,
business and functional concepts, and
manufacturing, and will ensure the
identification of new technologies and
new applications of technology in those
areas to strengthen national security.
The DoN S&T Board shall be
composed of no more than 20 members
who are prominent authorities in one or
more of the following disciplines and
fields: science, technology,
manufacturing, acquisition, logistics,
medicine, climate, and business
management functions, as well as other
matters of special interest to the DoN.
Membership will consist of private and
public leaders, fairly balanced to
provide a diversity of background,
experience, and thought in support of
the DoN S&T Board mission.
Individual members are appointed
according to DoD policy and procedures
and serve a term of service of one-tofour years with annual renewals. One
member will be appointed as Chair of
the DoN S&T Board. No member, unless
approved according to DoD policy and
procedures, may serve more than two
consecutive terms of service on the DoN
S&T Board, or serve on more than two
DoD Federal advisory committees at one
time.
DoN S&T Board members who are not
full-time or permanent part-time Federal
civilian officers or employees are
appointed as experts or consultants,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, to serve as
special government employee members.
DoN S&T Board members who are full-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
time or permanent part-time Federal
civilian officers or employees are
appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102–
3.130(a), to serve as regular government
employee members.
All DoN S&T Board members are
appointed to provide advice based on
their best judgment without
representing any particular point of
view and in a manner that is free from
conflict of interest. Except for
reimbursement of official DoN S&T
Board-related travel and per diem,
members serve without compensation.
The public or interested organizations
may submit written statements about
the DoN S&T Board mission and
functions. Written statements may be
submitted at any time or in response to
the stated agenda of planned meetings
of the DoN S&T Board. All written
statements shall be submitted to the
DoN S&T Board’s DFO, and this
individual will ensure that the written
statements are provided to the
membership for their consideration.
Dated: July 12, 2023.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2023–15089 Filed 7–14–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards;
Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services
and Results for Children With
Disabilities and School Safety National
Activities Programs—National
Technical Assistance Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Education
(Department) is issuing a notice inviting
applications for new awards for fiscal
year (FY) 2023 for a National Technical
Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports,
Assistance Listing Number 84.326S.
This notice relates to the approved
information collection under OMB
control number 1820–0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: July 17, 2023.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: August 31, 2023.
Pre-Application Webinar Information:
No later than July 24, 2023, the Office
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45399
of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services will post pre-recorded
informational webinars designed to
provide technical assistance (TA) to
interested applicants. The webinars may
be found at https://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 December 7, 2022
(87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2022/12/07/2022-26554/commoninstructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs. Please note that these
Common Instructions supersede the
version published on December 27,
2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mohamed Soliman, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 5054B, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202–5067.
Telephone: (202) 245–6335. Email:
Mohamed.Soliman@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and
Results for Children with Disabilities
program is to promote academic
achievement and to improve results for
children with disabilities by providing
TA, supporting model demonstration
projects, disseminating useful
information, and implementing
activities that are supported by
scientifically based research.
The School Safety National Activities
Program provides support to State
educational agencies (SEAs) and local
educational agencies (LEAs) for
activities to improve student safety and
well-being.
Priorities: This competition includes
two absolute priorities. Applicants must
address both priorities, and we will
make one award as a comprehensive
investment designed to enhance local
and State efforts to improve school
climate, conditions for learning, and
access to and engagement in the
instructional environment, with a focus
on students with behavioral challenges,
by implementing comprehensive
positive behavioral interventions and
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
45400
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
supports (PBIS) frameworks.1 Absolute
Priority 1 is established in accordance
with section 437(d)(1) of the General
Education Provisions Act (GEPA) (20
U.S.C. 1232(d)(1)). Absolute Priority 2 is
from the Notice of Final priority and
requirements—Technical Assistance
and Dissemination to Improve Services
and Results for Children with
Disabilities and the School Safety
National Activities—National Technical
Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports
(NFP), published elsewhere in this issue
of the Federal Register.
Background:
Many students need additional
supports to address social, emotional,
and behavioral challenges that impact
their full access to and participation in
learning (Chafouleas, 2020). These
challenges, if not properly addressed,
can lead to student responses that are
inconsistent with school or program
expectations. The COVID–19 global
pandemic exacerbated these challenges,
accelerating the need to provide schoolbased social, emotional, behavioral, and
mental health supports and leverage the
existing evidence base to provide
nurturing educational environments to
meet the needs of our nation’s youth.
MTSS frameworks such as PBIS 2
have been validated by numerous
1 The term ‘‘positive behavioral interventions and
supports’’ was first used in a priority published by
the Department in 1997, and it is currently used in
the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F),
611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and
665) and the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We
do not use PBIS to mean any specific program or
curriculum. Rather, we use the term generically to
reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve
the integration and implementation of social,
emotional, behavioral and mental health practices,
data-driven decision-making systems, professional
development opportunities, school leadership,
supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidencebased instructional strategies. A PBIS framework
helps to organize practices to improve social,
emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic
outcomes by improving school climate, promoting
positive social skills, promoting effective strategies
to support and respond to student needs, and
increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based,
tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary
Prevention; Tier 2: Targeted, Secondary Prevention;
and Tier 3: Intensive and Individualized, Tertiary
Prevention) for supporting students’ behavioral,
academic, social, emotional, and mental health.
2 The term ‘‘positive behavioral interventions and
supports’’ was first used in a priority published by
the Department in 1997, and it is currently used in
the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F),
611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and
665) and the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We
do not use PBIS to mean any specific program or
curriculum. Rather, we use the term generically to
reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve
the integration and implementation of social,
emotional, behavioral and mental health practices,
data-driven decision-making systems, professional
development opportunities, school leadership,
supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidencebased instructional strategies. A PBIS framework
helps to organize practices to improve social,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
randomized control trials (Bradshaw et
al., 2012; Freeman et al., 2017). When
implemented with fidelity, PBIS
outcomes include reductions in
removals of students from instruction;
improved student exposure to and
success in academics (grades and
completion); improved educator
satisfaction and retention; and improved
overall ratings of school safety,
belonging, and climate.
Despite improved outcomes and
knowledge from PBIS implementation
efforts over the last two decades, data
from the Office for Civil Rights’ Civil
Rights Data Collection suggests students
from underserved groups are more
likely to experience exclusionary
discipline (e.g., suspensions,
expulsions) (U.S. Department of
Education, Civil Rights Data Collection
SY17–18, Office for Civil Rights, 2021).
Disaggregated data shows that
disproportionate use of discipline grows
when considering race, sex, and
disability. Id. Research consistently
shows that students of color,
particularly Black students, Native
students, and Black students with
disabilities are significantly more likely
than their non-disabled or White peers
to be subjected to exclusionary
discipline practices, including office
discipline referrals and suspensions
(e.g., Gage et al., 2019; McIntosh et al.,
2018; McIntosh et al., 2021; Civil Rights
Data Collection SY17–18, Office for
Civil Rights, 2021). While
disproportionality with respect to Black
boys has long been acknowledged, more
recent data analysis indicates the
disproportionality also exists for Black
girls as compared to White girls (Hassan
& Carter, 2021). Other studies show
disproportionality based on gender,
historically demonstrating boys receive
suspensions and expulsions at higher
rates than girls (Bradshaw et al., 2010).
Higher rates of punitive discipline
practices also exist for students who
identify as LGBTQ and those with
disabilities (Himmelstein & Bru¨ckner,
2011; Brobbey, 2018). When students
are denied access to instruction and
participation in school opportunities,
they are more likely to experience
negative outcomes in school and later in
life, including poor academic outcomes,
lower graduation rates, incarceration,
emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic
outcomes by improving school climate, promoting
positive social skills, promoting effective strategies
to support and respond to student needs, and
increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based,
tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary
Prevention; Tier 2: Targeted, Secondary Prevention;
and Tier 3: Intensive and Individualized, Tertiary
Prevention) for supporting students’ behavioral,
academic, social, emotional, and mental health.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and employment and relationship
challenges (Hemez et al., 2020; Lansford
et al., 2016).
One of the most significant barriers to
reducing exclusionary and aversive
discipline practices for students,
including students of color and students
with disabilities, is the lack of culturally
and linguistically inclusive pre-service
and in-service training for teachers and
leaders on effective practices for
creating positive, safe learning
environments to teach and support
desired school behaviors and for
responding to and mitigating behaviors
that are inconsistent with school
expectations and interfere with learning.
The PBIS framework has provided an
effective multi-tiered structure through
the implementation and examination of
systems, practices, and data to assist
LEAs and schools in addressing
inequities. When there is fidelity in
implementing evidence-based practices
(EBPs) 3 to prevent, reduce, and mitigate
interfering behaviors within a PBIS
framework, studies have found the
following statistically significant results:
improved perception of school safety;
reductions in overall behaviors that are
inconsistent with classroom or school
expectations and that interfere with
learning; and reduction of bullying
behaviors, office discipline referrals,
chronic absenteeism, and suspensions
(Waasdorp et al., 2012). The PBIS
framework has solidified the importance
of core strategies, including
implementing EBPs, and providing the
systems needed to support those
practices and data-based decisionmaking, to create and sustain positive,
safe, and predictable learning
environments. Fidelity in the
implementation of the core strategies
has also demonstrated the importance of
adult responses, including effectively
supporting and responding to student
behavior (Horner et al., 2020).
Although prior Department
investments have led to successful
implementation of the PBIS framework
and positive outcome data in over
27,000 schools, based on persistent
needs in the field, the Department has
determined that additional and
continued TA is needed to focus on: (1)
students with more intensive social,
emotional, behavioral, and mental
health needs and those most likely to be
excluded from the learning environment
due to behavior that interferes with
3 For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘evidencebased practices’’ (EBPs) means, at a minimum,
demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1) based on high-quality research findings or
positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or
intervention is likely to improve student outcomes
or other relevant outcomes.
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
learning; (2) pre-service and in-service
training on culturally and linguistically
inclusive practices that support students
from underserved groups; (3) improving
implementation fidelity; and (4)
addressing other systemic inequities
such as access to school funding,
experienced educators, and advanced
coursework opportunities. In addition,
the Department has determined that
SEAs and LEAs could benefit from
further TA to develop, expand, and
sustain school-wide frameworks and to
build personnel capacity and expertise
to promote safe, positive, predictable,
and culturally and linguistically
inclusive learning environments where
students feel a sense of belonging. Such
additional TA would be focused on
increasing the use of EBPs to more
effectively support and respond to
student needs, such as teaching school
and classroom expectations, building
classroom cultures of respect and
belonging, and implementing traumainformed practices. Such additional TA
also would be focused on using EBPs to
reduce the use of restraints, seclusion,
and corporal punishment; chronic
absenteeism; incidents of bullying; the
disproportionate application of
disciplinary procedures, such as
suspension and expulsion, for students,
including students of color and those
with disabilities; unnecessary referrals
of students to law enforcement; and
violent and traumatic school incidents.
The Center will support States and
LEAs in implementing EBPs within a
MTSS/PBIS framework that improves
results for children, including those
underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, disability,
LGBTQI+, English learner, or socioeconomic status. While PBIS is one
evidence-based MTSS framework for
addressing social, emotional, behavioral
and mental health needs, the
Department expects that the Center will
stay abreast of developing frameworks
and identify and incorporate a broad
array of EBPs to support and respond to
student needs, and tailor technical
assistance in the settings established in
the priority. This investment is aligned
to the Secretary’s Supplemental
Priorities and Definitions for
Discretionary Grant Programs published
in the Federal Register on December 10,
2021 (86 FR 70612), in the areas of
meeting student social, emotional, and
academic needs, and promoting equity
in student access to educational
resources and opportunities.
References:
Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., & Leaf, P.
(2012). Effects of school-wide positive
behavioral interventions and supports on
child behavior problems. Pediatrics,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
130(5),1136–1145. https://
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/
130/5/e1136.
Bradshaw, C.P., Mitchell, M.M., O’Brennan,
L.M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Multilevel
exploration of factors contributing to the
overrepresentation of Black students in
office disciplinary referrals. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 102, 508–520.
Brobbey, G. (2018). Punishing the vulnerable:
Exploring suspension rates for students
with learning disabilities. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 53, 216–219.
Chafouleas, S. (2020, August). Four questions
to ask now in preparing your child for
school. Psychology Today.
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/
promoting-student-well-being/202008/4questions-ask-now-in-preparing-yourchild-school.
Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., Goodman, S.,
Mitchell, B., George, H.P., SwainBradway, J., Lane, K., Sprague, J., &
Putnam, B. (2017). PBIS technical brief
on systems to support teachers’
implementation of positive classroom
behavior support. PBIS Center.
www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technicalbrief-on-systems-to-support-teachersimplementation-of-positive-classroombehavior-support.
Gage, N.A., Grasley-Boy, N., George, H.P.,
Childs, K., & Kincaid, D. (2019). A quasiexperimental design analysis of the
effects of school-wide positive behavior
interventions and supports on discipline
in Florida. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 21(1), 50–61. https://
doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300718768208.
Hassan, H.H., & Carter, V.B. (2021). Black and
White Female Disproportional Discipline
K–12. Education and Urban Society,
53(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0013124520915571.
Hemez P., Brent J.J., & Mowen T.J. (2020).
Exploring the school-to-prison pipeline:
How school suspensions influence
incarceration during young adulthood.
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice,
18(3), 235–255. doi: 10.1177/
1541204019880945.
Himmelstein, K.E., & Bru¨ckner, H. (2011).
Criminal-justice and school sanctions
against nonheterosexual youth: A
national longitudinal study. Pediatrics,
127(1), 49–57.
Horner, R.H., Sugai, G., & Lewis, T.J. (2020).
Is school-wide positive behavioral
interventions and supports (PBIS) an
evidence-based practice? Center on PBIS,
University of Oregon. www.pbis.org/
resource/is-school-wide-positivebehavior-support-an-evidence-basedpractice.
Lansford, J.E., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., Bates,
J.E. (2016). A Public Health Perspective
on School Dropout and Adult Outcomes:
A Prospective Study of Risk and
Protective Factors From Age 5 to 27
Years. Journal of Adolescent Health,
58(6), 652–658.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., McDaniel, S.C.,
Santiago-Rosario, M.R., St. Joseph, S.,
Fairbanks Falcon, S., Izzard, S., Bastable,
E. (2021). Effects of an equity-focused
PBIS approach to school improvement
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45401
on exclusionary discipline and school
climate. Preventing School Failure:
Alternative Education for Children and
Youth, 65(4), 354–361.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Fairbanks Falcon,
S., McDaniel, S.C., Smolkowski, K.,
Bastable, E., Santiago-Rosario, M.R.,
Izzard, S., Austin, S.C., Nese, R.N.T., &
Baldy, T.S. (2021). An equity-focused
PBIS approach reduces racial inequities
in school discipline: A randomized
controlled trial. School Psychology,
36(6), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1037/
spq0000466.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Horner, R.H.,
Smolkowski, K., & Sugai, G. (2018). A 5point intervention approach for
enhancing equity in school discipline.
OSEP Technical Assistance Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports. www.pbis.org/resource/a-5point-intervention-approach-forenhancing-equity-in-school-discipline.
U.S. Department of Education, Office for
Civil Rights. (2021). 2017–2018 Civil
Rights Data Collection. https://
ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018.
Waasdorp, T.E., Bradshaw, C.P., & Leaf, P.J.
(2012). The impact of schoolwide
positive behavioral interventions and
supports on bullying and peer rejection:
A randomized controlled effectiveness
trial. Archives of Pediatrics and
Adolescent Medicine, 166(2), 149–56.
doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.755.
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition,
these priorities are absolute priorities.
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider
only applications that meet these
priorities.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1—Technical
Assistance and Dissemination to
Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities Program—
National Technical Assistance Center
on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports.
The purpose of this priority is to fund
a cooperative agreement to establish and
operate a National Technical Assistance
Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
(Center). This Center will assist SEAs
and LEAs to enhance their capacity to
develop, implement, scale-up, and
sustain school-wide frameworks for
MTSS/PBIS to improve behavior and
climate and to enable all students,
especially those from culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, and
those with disabilities, to fully
participate in, and benefit from, a highquality learning environment.
The Center must achieve, at a
minimum, the following expected
outcomes:
(a) Improved infrastructure at the
national, regional, State, and district
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
45402
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
levels to support, develop, sustain, and
expand local implementation efforts
(e.g., an increase in the number of
schools) of MTSS/PBIS with fidelity to
demonstrate improved student
outcomes: academic performance,
social-emotional competence, mental
health and well-being, academic
outcomes, reduced bullying behaviors,
reduced student reports of alcohol and
drug use for students with or at risk of
disabilities and those with the most
intensive needs.
(b) Improved capacity for systems
implementation at the SEA and LEA
levels, including new and existing LEAs
and schools, to implement the
components of a MTSS/PBIS framework
(i.e., policies, funding, professional
development, coaching, data collection,
analysis, and use) and develop and
utilize new and existing tools for
selecting and aligning multiple
initiatives within the SEA or LEA with
a special focus on PBIS tiers beyond
universal and the inclusion of EBPs to
address mental health and well-being
for children and youth with or at risk of
disabilities, especially those with
culturally and linguistically diverse
backgrounds and those with the most
intensive needs;
(c) Improved capacity of existing and
new SEA and LEA personnel to enhance
the knowledge and skills of members of
school leadership teams and
individualized education program (IEP)
Teams to implement MTSS/PBIS
policies and practices for students with
or at risk of disabilities and those with
the most intensive needs, including the
development and implementation of
IEPs and behavior intervention plans
that are culturally responsive,
particularly for students with culturally
and linguistically diverse backgrounds,
to support positive school behavior and
respond to behaviors that interfere with
a student’s ability to fully participate in,
and benefit from, a high-quality learning
environment;
(d) Increased use by SEAs and LEAs
of new and updated reliable and valid
tools and processes for evaluating the
fidelity of the implementation of a
MTSS/PBIS framework and for
measuring its outcomes, including
reductions in violence and the illegal
use of drugs, discipline referrals,
suspensions, expulsions, and the use of
restraints and seclusion; and
improvements in school climate, time
spent in instruction, mental health and
well-being, and overall academic
achievement, particularly for students
with culturally and linguistically
diverse backgrounds, and those with or
at risk of disabilities, and those with the
most intensive needs; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
(e) Increased body of knowledge to
enhance implementation of MTSS/PBIS,
particularly for students with culturally
and linguistically diverse backgrounds,
those with or at risk of disabilities, and
for those with the most intensive needs,
in high-poverty schools, low-performing
schools, rural schools, high schools,
alternative public schools, charter
schools, mental health settings, private
schools, and juvenile correction
settings.
Absolute Priority 2: Technical
Assistance—School Safety National
Activities Program—National Technical
Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
The purpose of this priority is to
enhance the capacity of SEAs and LEAs
to implement positive and safe school
environments, and effectively support
and respond to students’ social,
emotional, behavioral, and mental
health needs to improve their learning,
by implementing EBPs 4 within an
MTSS/PBIS framework in the following
settings:
(i) Programs or schools serving high
percentages of students from lowincome families in the following
settings:
(1) Early learning programs.
(2) Elementary schools.
(3) Middle schools.
(4) High schools.
(5) Career and technical education
programs.
(6) Rural schools.
(ii) Alternative schools and programs.
(iii) Juvenile justice system or
correctional facilities.
(iv) Low-performing schools.
(v) Schools with a high student-tomental health provider ratio.
(vi) Schools with high rates of chronic
absenteeism, exclusionary discipline,
referrals to the juvenile justice system,
bullying/harassment, community and
school violence, or substance abuse.
(vii) Schools in which students
recently experienced a natural disaster,
incident of violence, or traumatic event.
(viii) Schools with high percentages of
students with disabilities or English
Learners.
(ix) Federally supported elementary
schools or secondary schools for Indian
students.
To meet this priority, the applicant
must propose to achieve, at a minimum,
one or more of the following expected
outcomes:
(a) Improved systems and resources at
the national, regional, State, and district
4 ‘‘Evidence-based practices’’ (EBPs) means, at a
minimum, demonstrating a rationale (as defined in
34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research
findings or positive evaluation that such activity,
strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student
outcomes or other relevant outcomes.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
levels to support, develop, align, and
sustain local implementation of MTSS/
PBIS efforts to organize EBPs to support
positive school climates and respond to
student social, emotional, behavioral,
and mental health needs to improve
access to and engagement in learning.
(b) Improved capacity of SEA and
LEA personnel to support the
knowledge and skills development of
school personnel, including
administrators and practitioners,
through efforts such as pre-service and
in-service training and coaching, to
implement MTSS/PBIS as a framework
to organize EBPs to support and respond
to student needs, particularly those from
underserved and, culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, and
students whose behaviors may interfere
with a their ability to fully participate
in, and benefit from, a high-quality
learning environment.
(c) Increased use by SEAs, LEAs, and
school-based personnel of reliable and
valid tools and processes for enhancing
and assessing the fidelity of
implementation of an MTSS/PBIS
Framework and for measuring intended
outcomes, including improvements in
school climate; time spent on
instruction; well-being and belonging;
overall academic achievement; and
reductions in absenteeism, discipline
referrals, suspensions, expulsions, the
use of restraints or seclusion, illegal use
of drugs, and referrals to law
enforcement.
(d) Improved implementation of a
MTSS/PBIS framework and EBPs, and
assessment of SEA or LEA recipients of
grant programs that focus on improving
positive school climates and
implementing EBPs to support and
respond to students’ social, emotional,
behavioral, and mental health needs.
(e) Enhanced response and recovery
assistance, as requested by and in
collaboration with the Department, for
violent or traumatic incidents that
impact school communities, including
intensive individualized support to
facilitate recovery of the learning
environment.
(f) Increased body of knowledge and
evidence to enhance implementation of
PBIS and other emerging MTSS
frameworks and EBPs to address the
social, emotional, behavioral, and
mental health needs of underserved
students in the settings established in
the priority.
Common Application Requirements:
To be considered for funding under
these priorities, applicants must meet
the application and administrative
requirements in these priorities, which
are:
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
(a) Demonstrate how the proposed
project will—
(1) Improve SEAs’ and LEAs’
implementation, scaling, and sustaining
of EBPs within a MTSS/PBIS framework
and policies that are designed to
improve school climate and, as needed,
to provide additional behavioral
supports for students whose behavior
impacts their ability to fully participate
in, and benefit from, a high-quality
learning environment, including
students with disabilities and other
underserved students in the settings
established in the priority. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must—
(i) Present applicable State, regional,
or local data demonstrating SEAs’ and
LEAs’ needs related to (A)
implementation of EBPs and policies to
improve school climate, student wellbeing, and belonging; and (B) increasing
students’ ability to fully participate in,
and benefit from, a high-quality learning
environment;
(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current
education issues and policy initiatives
relating to MTSS/PBIS and school
climate practices and policies and EBPs
to effectively support and respond to
student behavior that impacts learning;
and
(iii) Present information about the
current level of implementation of
MTSS/PBIS, EBPs, policies, best
practices, and benefits for all students,
especially underserved students and
those from culturally and linguistically
diverse backgrounds;
(2) [See the Unique Application
Requirements section below for the
separate requirements applicable to
Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute
Priority 2 in paragraph (a)(2).]
(b) Demonstrate 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, disability, LGBTQI+,
English learner, or socio-economic
status. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will—
(i) Identify the TA and information
needs of the intended recipients; and
(ii) Ensure that services and products
meet the needs of the intended
recipients of the TA;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and
intended outcomes. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
provide—
(i) Measurable intended project
outcomes; and
(ii) The logic model 5 (by which the
proposed project will achieve its
5 As defined in 34 CFR 77.1, ‘‘logic model’’ (also
referred to as a theory of action) means a framework
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
intended outcomes that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs,
and intended outcomes of the proposed
project;
(3) Use a conceptual framework 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: https://
osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/
files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_
Updated.pdf and
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resourcesgrantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tadproject-logic-model-and-conceptualframework.
(4) Be based on current research and
make use of EBPs. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) The current research on the
assessment of the implementation of
MTSS/PBIS frameworks and related
EBPs;
(ii) The current research about adult
learning principles and implementation
science that will inform the proposed
TA; and
(iii) How the proposed project will
incorporate current and emerging
research and practices in the
development and delivery of its
products and services;
(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 of MTSS/
PBIS:
(ii) Its proposed approach to
universal, general TA,6 which must
identify the intended recipients,
including the type and number of
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.
6 ‘‘Universal, general TA’’ means TA and
information provided to independent users through
their own initiative, resulting in minimal
interaction with Center staff and including onetime, invited or offered conference presentations by
Center staff. This category of TA also includes
information or products, such as newsletters,
guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded
from the Center’s website by independent users.
Brief communications by Center staff with
recipients, either by telephone or email, are also
considered universal, general TA.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45403
recipients, that will receive the products
and services, a description of the
products and services that the Center
proposes to make available, and the
expected impact of those products and
services under this approach;
(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted,
specialized TA,7 which must identify—
(A) The intended recipients,
including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products
and services, a description of the
products and services that the Center
proposes to make available, and the
expected impact of those products and
services under this approach; and
(B) Its proposed approach to measure
the readiness of potential TA recipients
to work with the project, assessing, at a
minimum, their current systems,
available resources, and ability to build
capacity at the local level; and
(iv) Its proposed approach to
intensive, sustained TA,8 which must
identify—
(A) The intended recipients,
including the type and number of
recipients from a variety of settings and
geographic distribution, that will
receive the products and services
designed to improve school climate and;
(B) Its proposed approach to measure
the readiness of the State- and locallevel personnel to work with the project,
including their commitment to the
initiative, alignment of the initiative to
their needs, current systems, available
resources, and ability to build capacity
at the local level;
(C) Its proposed plan for assisting
SEAs, LEAs, local Part C agencies,
charter management organizations, and
private school organizations to build or
enhance training systems that include
professional development based on
adult learning principles and coaching;
and
(D) Its proposed plan for working with
appropriate levels of the education
7 ‘‘Targeted, specialized TA’’ means TA services
based on needs common to multiple recipients and
not extensively individualized. A relationship is
established between the TA recipient and one or
more Center staff. This category of TA includes onetime, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating
strategic planning or hosting regional or national
conferences. It can also include episodic, less laborintensive events that extend over a period of time,
such as facilitating a series of conference calls on
single or multiple topics that are designed around
the needs of the recipients. Facilitating
communities of practice can also be considered
targeted, specialized TA.
8 ‘‘Intensive, sustained TA’’ means TA services
often provided on-site and requiring a stable,
ongoing relationship between the Center staff and
the TA recipient. ‘‘TA services’’ are defined as
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a
valued outcome. This category of TA should result
in changes to policy, program, practice, or
operations that support increased recipient capacity
or improved outcomes at one or more systems
levels.
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
45404
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA
providers, LEAs, schools, families,
community providers) to ensure that
there is communication between each
level and that there are systems in place
to support the use of MTSS/PBIS;
(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, including families,
community providers, other federal
investments as appropriate, and the
intended outcomes of this collaboration;
and
(iii) How the proposed project will
use non-project resources to achieve the
intended project outcomes; and
(7) Develop a dissemination plan that
describes how the applicant will
systematically distribute information,
products, and services to varied
intended audiences, using a variety of
dissemination strategies, to promote
awareness and use of the Center’s
products and services.
(c) 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 in consultation
with Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education (OESE) staff, a
project liaison 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),9 the project
9 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
director, and the OSEP project officer on
the following tasks:
(i) Revise the logic model submitted
in the application, as appropriate, 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, as appropriate, to be
consistent with the revised logic model
and using the most rigorous design
suitable (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 the evaluation plan
submitted in the application such that it
clearly—
(A) Specifies the evaluation questions,
measures, and associated instruments or
sources for data appropriate to answer
these questions, suggests analytic
strategies for those data, provides a
timeline for conducting the evaluation,
and includes staff assignments for
completing the evaluation activities;
(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) by OSEP 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 in
consultation with OESE staff, with the
assistance of CIPP, as needed, to specify
the project performance measures to be
addressed in the project’s annual
performance report;
(2) Dedicate sufficient staff time and
other resources during the first 6
months of the project to collaborate with
CIPP staff, including regular meetings
(e.g., weekly, biweekly, or monthly)
with CIPP and the OSEP project officer,
in order to accomplish the tasks
described in paragraph (c)(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 (C)(1) and (2) of this section
and revising and implementing the
evaluation plan. Please note in your
budget narrative the funds dedicated for
this activity.
designing the evaluations with due consideration of
the project’s budget. CIPP does not function as a
third-party evaluator.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(d) Demonstrate 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, disability,
LGBTQI+, English learner, or socioeconomic status, 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 how—
(1) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the project’s intended
outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for
key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for
accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any
consultants and subcontractors will be
allocated and how these allocations are
appropriate and adequate to achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the products and
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
policymakers, among others, in its
development and operation.
(f) Address the following application
requirements. The applicant must—
(1) Include 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, OESE
representative, 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;
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
(ii) A two- and one-half day project
directors’ conference in Washington,
DC, during each year of the project
period;
(iii) Three annual two-day trips to
attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and
other meetings, as requested by OSEP or
OESE; and
(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review
meeting in Washington, DC, during the
second year of the project period;
(3) Include, in the budget, a line item
for an annual set-aside of 5 percent of
the grant amount to support emerging
needs that are consistent with the
proposed project’s intended outcomes,
as those needs are identified in
consultation with, and approved by, the
OSEP project officer in consultation
with OESE staff as appropriate. With
approval from the OSEP project officer,
the project must reallocate any
remaining funds from this annual setaside no later than the end of the third
quarter of each budget period; and
(4) Maintain a high-quality website,
with an easy-to-navigate design, that
meets government or industryrecognized standards for accessibility;
(5) Ensure that annual project
progress toward meeting project goals is
posted on the project website; and
(6) Include 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 a new award 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),
including—
(a) The recommendations of a 3+2
review team consisting of experts and
recipients of services who have
experience and knowledge in MTSS/
PBIS. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
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.
Requirements Unique to Absolute
Priority 1:
Within Absolute Priority 1, we
establish the following unique
application requirements. In addition to
the Common Application Requirements,
in order to be considered for funding
under Absolute Priority 1, applicants
must, in their response to Application
Requirement (a), demonstrate how the
proposed project will:
(1) Under paragraph (a)(i)(B), present
applicable State, regional, or local data
demonstrating SEAs’ and LEAs’ needs
related to increasing students’ ability to
fully participate in, and benefit from, a
high-quality learning environment,
particularly for students with the most
significant behavioral challenges; and
(2) Under paragraph (a)(ii),
demonstrate knowledge of current
educational issues and policy initiatives
relating to MTSS/PBIS and school
climate practices and policies for
students whose behavioral challenges
interfere with their ability to fully
participate in, and benefit from, a highquality learning environment, including
students with disabilities; and
(3) Under paragraph (a)(2),
demonstrate how the proposed project
will improve outcomes for students
with behavioral challenges that interfere
with their ability or the ability of their
peers to fully participate in, and benefit
from, a high-quality learning
environment through the
implementation of MTSS/PBIS
frameworks, and indicate the likely
magnitude or importance of the
improvements.
Requirements Unique to Absolute
Priority 2:
The following unique requirement,
drawn from the NFP, applies to
Absolute Priority 2. In addition to the
Common Application Requirements, in
order to be considered for funding
under Absolute Priority 2, applicants
must, in their response to Application
Requirement (a)(2), demonstrate how
the proposed project will improve the
implementation of EBPs within a
MTSS/PBIS framework to effectively
support and respond to student
behaviors that impact access to and
participation in learning.
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45405
however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to
Absolute Priority 1 in this notice.
Program Authority: Sections 663 and
681(d) of the IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1463 and
1481); and section 4631(a)(1)(B) of the
ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7281).
Note: Projects must be awarded and
operated in a manner consistent with
the nondiscrimination requirements
contained in Federal civil rights laws.
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. (d)
the NFP.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part
79 apply to all applicants except
federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part
86 apply to institutions of higher
education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative
agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: For
Absolute Priority 1: $1,850,000 from the
Technical Assistance and Dissemination
to Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities Program.
For Absolute Priority 2: $2,500,000
from the School Safety National
Activities Program.
Note: We will make one award
comprised of separate funding under
each of the two absolute priorities.
Therefore, applicants must submit a
separate ED 524 Form (Section A—
Budget Summary and Section C—
Budget Narrative) for each absolute
priority. The Secretary may reject any
application that does not separately
address the requirements specified in
Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute
Priority 2 and include a separate budget
summary and budget narrative for each
of those priorities.
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in FY
2024 from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will not make
an award exceeding $1,850,000 for
Absolute Priority 1 for a single budget
period of 12 months. We will not make
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
45406
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
an award exceeding $2,500,000 for
Absolute Priority 2 for a single budget
period of 12 months.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State
lead agencies under Part C of IDEA;
LEAs, including public charter schools
that are considered 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. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
competition does not require cost
sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This
program uses an unrestricted indirect
cost rate. For more information
regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a
negotiated indirect cost rate, please see
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/
ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation:
This program does not include any
program-specific limitation on
administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be
reasonable and necessary and conform
to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR
part 200 subpart E of the Uniform
Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR
75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this
competition may award subgrants—to
directly carry out project activities
described in its application—to the
following types of entities: IHEs,
nonprofit organizations, and other
public agencies. The grantee may award
subgrants to entities it has identified in
an approved application or that it
selects through a competition under
procedures established by the grantee,
consistent with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2).
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) Applicants for, and recipients of,
funding must, with respect to the
aspects of their proposed project
relating to the Absolute Priority 1
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
Applicants to Department of Education
Discretionary Grant Programs,
published in the Federal Register on
December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and
available at www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/
common-instructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs, which contain
requirements and information on how to
submit an application. Please note that
these Common Instructions supersede
the version published on December 27,
2021.
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 an award by the
end of FY 2023.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference
regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The
application narrative 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 70 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 the cover sheet; the budget
section, including the narrative budget
justification; 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 listed below:
(a) Significance (10 points).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(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 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.
(ii) The importance or magnitude of
the results or outcomes likely to be
attained by the proposed project.
(b) Quality of project services (35
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 goals,
objectives, and outcomes to be achieved
by the proposed project are clearly
specified and measurable.
(ii) The extent to which there is a
conceptual framework underlying the
proposed research or demonstration
activities and the quality of that
framework.
(iii) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
reflect up-to-date knowledge from
research and effective practice.
(iv) 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.
(v) The extent to which the TA
services to be provided by the proposed
project involve the use of efficient
strategies, including the use of
technology, as appropriate, and the
leveraging of non-project resources.
(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
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.
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
(ii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation provide for examining the
effectiveness of project implementation
strategies.
(iii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation will provide performance
feedback and permit periodic
assessment of progress toward achieving
intended outcomes.
(iv) 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.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality
of project personnel (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
adequacy of resources for the proposed
project and the quality of the personnel
who will carry out the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of
project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the
applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are
members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of the
project director or principal
investigator.
(ii) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of key
project personnel.
(iii) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of
project consultants or subcontractors.
(iv) The qualifications, including
relevant training, experience, and
independence, of the evaluator.
(v) The adequacy of support,
including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the
applicant organization or the lead
applicant organization.
(vi) The relevance and demonstrated
commitment of each partner in the
proposed project to the implementation
and success of the project.
(vii) The extent to which the budget
is adequate to support the proposed
project.
(viii) 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
(20 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
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.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45407
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
200.206, before awarding grants under
this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by
applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the
Secretary may impose specific
conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, 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 200.206(a)(2) we must make a
judgment about your integrity, business
ethics, and record of performance under
Federal awards—that is, the risk posed
by you as an applicant—before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider
any information about you that is in the
integrity and performance system
(currently referred to as the Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS)),
accessible through the System for
Award Management. You may review
and comment on any information about
yourself that a Federal agency
previously entered and that is currently
in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of
your currently active grants, cooperative
agreements, and procurement contracts
from the Federal Government exceeds
$10,000,000, the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII,
require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually.
Please review the requirements in 2 CFR
part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant
plus all the other Federal funds you
receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the
Office of Management and Budget’s
guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all
applicable Federal laws, and relevant
Executive guidance, the Department
will review and consider applications
for funding pursuant to this notice
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
45408
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
inviting applications in accordance
with—
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to
be successful in delivering results based
on the program objectives through an
objective process of evaluating Federal
award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain
telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in
alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of
2019 (Pub. L. 115–232) (2 CFR 200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the
extent permitted by law, to maximize
use of goods, products, and materials
produced in the United States (2 CFR
200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole
or in part to the greatest extent
authorized by law if an award no longer
effectuates the program goals or agency
priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
after your application has been
reviewed and selected for funding. For
additional information on the open
licensing requirements please refer to 2
CFR 3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a
grant under this competition, you must
ensure that you have in place the
necessary processes and systems to
comply with the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive
funding under the competition. This
does not apply if you have an exception
under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period,
you must submit a final performance
report, including financial information,
as directed by the Secretary. If you
receive a multiyear award, you must
submit an annual performance report
that provides the most current
performance and financial expenditure
information as directed by the Secretary
under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary
may also require more frequent
performance reports under 34 CFR
75.720(c). For specific requirements on
reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/
fund/grant/apply/appforms/
appforms.html.
5. Performance Measures: For the
purposes of Department reporting under
34 CFR 75.110, we have 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
Technical Assistance and Dissemination
to Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities and School
Safety National Activities Programs—
National Technical Assistance Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports.
These performance measures will
apply to grant activities under both
absolute priorities. These measures are:
• Program Performance Measure #1:
The percentage of Technical Assistance
and Dissemination products and
services deemed to be of high quality by
an independent review panel of experts
qualified to review the substantive
content of the products and services.
• Program Performance Measure #2:
The percentage of Technical Assistance
and Dissemination products and
services deemed by an independent
review panel of qualified experts to be
of high relevance to educational and
early intervention policy or practice.
• Program Performance Measure #3:
The percentage of all Technical
Assistance and Dissemination products
and services deemed by an independent
review panel of qualified experts to be
useful in improving educational or early
intervention policy or practice.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Program Performance Measure #4:
The cost efficiency of the Technical
Assistance and Dissemination Program
includes the percentage of milestones
achieved in the current annual
performance report period and the
percentage of funds spent during the
current fiscal year.
• Long-term Program Performance
Measure: The percentage of States
receiving Technical Assistance and
Dissemination services regarding
scientifically or evidence-based
practices for children, and youth that
successfully promote the
implementation of those practices in
school districts and service agencies.
The measures apply to projects
funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on
these measures as directed by OSEP/
OESE. Grantees will be required to
report information on their project’s
performance in annual and final
performance reports to the Department
(34 CFR 75.590). The Department will
also closely monitor the extent to which
the products and services provided by
the Center meet needs identified by
stakeholders and may require the Center
to report on such alignment in their
annual and final performance reports.
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: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document and a copy of the
application package in an accessible
format. The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or other accessible format.
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 135 / Monday, July 17, 2023 / Notices
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.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
James F. Lane,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Delegated the Authority to Perform the
Functions and Duties of Assistant Secretary
for the Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education.
[FR Doc. 2023–15159 Filed 7–13–23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Agency Information Collection
Extension
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Submission for Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) review;
comment request.
AGENCY:
The Department of Energy has
submitted an information collection
request to the OMB for extension under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. The information
collection requests a three-year
extension of its Clean Cities Vehicle
Programs Information Collection, OMB
Control Number 1910–5171.
DATES: Comments regarding this
proposed information collection must
be received on or before August 16,
2023. If you anticipate difficulty in
submitting comments within that
period, contact the person(s) listed
below as soon as possible. The Desk
Officer may be telephoned at (202) 881–
8585.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 Jul 14, 2023
Jkt 259001
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Mark Smith, at telephone: (202) email:
Mark.Smith@ee.doe.gov. Please put
‘‘2023 DOE Agency Information
Collection Renewal-Clean Cities Vehicle
Programs’’ in the subject line when
sending an email.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is
proposing to extend an information
collection pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. The approved
collection is presently being used for
three Clean Cities programmatic efforts.
The first initiative is the collection of
information for a voluntary plug-in
electric vehicle (PEV) questionnaire that
assists communities and DOE Clean
Cities coalitions in assessing the level of
readiness of their communities for
PEVs. The second effort is intended to
develop information that enables DOE
to review the progress of DOE’s National
Clean Fleets Partnership (Partnership).
The third effort is referred to as ‘‘Ride
and Drive Surveys’’. DOE is not
proposing to expand the scope of these
information collection efforts.
Previously DOE proposed to include a
new information collection instrument
to address active and effective Clean
Cities Coalition self-assessments to
ensure its coalitions can remain in good
standing for designation purposes,
however, DOE has determined that a
specific information collection will not
be needed for this work. For this reason,
DOE is no longer proposing this specific
effort. The net result is that DOE is not
proposing to expand the scope of the
existing ICR.
Comments are invited on: (a) whether
the extended collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of DOE, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
DOE’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
This information collection request
contains: (1) OMB No.: 1910–5171; (2)
Information Collection Request Title:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45409
Clean Cities Vehicle Programs; (3) Type
of Review: Extension; (4) Purpose:
DOE’s Clean Cities initiative has
developed three voluntary mechanisms
by which communities, certain fleets,
and the purchasing public can get a
better understanding of their readiness
for plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), and
to help DOE’s Clean Cities coalitions
prepare for the adoption of these
vehicles review their progress in doing
so. The voluntary PEV Scorecard is
intended to assist communities and the
coalitions in assessing the level of
readiness of their communities for
PEVs. The principal objectives of the
questionnaire are to provide
respondents with an objective
assessment and estimate of their
respective community’s readiness for
PEVs as well as understand the
respective community’s goals related to
integrating these vehicles, and allow
communities to assess the magnitude of
gaps in their readiness to achieve their
goals. DOE intends the questionnaire to
be completed by a city/county/regional
sustainability or energy coordinator. As
the intended respondent may not be
aware of every aspect of local or
regional PEV readiness, coordination
among local stakeholders to gather
appropriate information may be
necessary.
DOE expects a total respondent
population of approximately 1,250
respondents. Selecting the multiplechoice answers in completing a
questionnaire is expected to take under
30 minutes, although additional time of
no more than 20 hours may be needed
to assemble information necessary to be
able to answer the questions, leading to
a total burden of approximately 25,625
hours. Assembling information to
update questionnaire answers in the
future on a voluntary basis would be
expected to take less time, on the order
of 10 hours, as much of any necessary
time and effort needed to research
information would have been completed
previously.
For the Clean Fleets Partnership
information collection, the Partnership
is targeted at large, private-sector fleets
that own or have contractual control
over at least 50 percent of their vehicles
and have vehicles operating in multiple
States. DOE expects approximately 50
fleets to participate in the Partnership
and, as a result, DOE expects a total
respondent population of approximately
50 respondents. Providing initial
baseline information for each
participating fleet, which occurs only
once, is expected to take 60 minutes.
Follow-up questions and clarifications
for the purpose of ensuring accurate
analyses are expected to take up to 90
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 135 (Monday, July 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45399-45409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15159]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance and
Dissemination To Improve Services and Results for Children With
Disabilities and School Safety National Activities Programs--National
Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Office
of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2023 for a
National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports, Assistance Listing Number 84.326S. This
notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control
number 1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: July 17, 2023.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 31, 2023.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than July 24, 2023,
the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will post
pre-recorded informational webinars designed to provide technical
assistance (TA) to interested applicants. The webinars may be found at
https://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 December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs. Please note that these Common Instructions supersede
the version published on December 27, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mohamed Soliman, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5054B, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5067. Telephone: (202) 245-6335. Email:
[email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities program is to promote academic achievement and to improve
results for children with disabilities by providing TA, supporting
model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and
implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based
research.
The School Safety National Activities Program provides support to
State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs)
for activities to improve student safety and well-being.
Priorities: This competition includes two absolute priorities.
Applicants must address both priorities, and we will make one award as
a comprehensive investment designed to enhance local and State efforts
to improve school climate, conditions for learning, and access to and
engagement in the instructional environment, with a focus on students
with behavioral challenges, by implementing comprehensive positive
behavioral interventions and
[[Page 45400]]
supports (PBIS) frameworks.\1\ Absolute Priority 1 is established in
accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions
Act (GEPA) (20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1)). Absolute Priority 2 is from the
Notice of Final priority and requirements--Technical Assistance and
Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with
Disabilities and the School Safety National Activities--National
Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (NFP), published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The term ``positive behavioral interventions and supports''
was first used in a priority published by the Department in 1997,
and it is currently used in the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F),
611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and 665) and
the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We do not use PBIS to mean
any specific program or curriculum. Rather, we use the term
generically to reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve
the integration and implementation of social, emotional, behavioral
and mental health practices, data-driven decision-making systems,
professional development opportunities, school leadership,
supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidence-based instructional
strategies. A PBIS framework helps to organize practices to improve
social, emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic outcomes
by improving school climate, promoting positive social skills,
promoting effective strategies to support and respond to student
needs, and increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based,
tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary Prevention; Tier 2:
Targeted, Secondary Prevention; and Tier 3: Intensive and
Individualized, Tertiary Prevention) for supporting students'
behavioral, academic, social, emotional, and mental health.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background:
Many students need additional supports to address social,
emotional, and behavioral challenges that impact their full access to
and participation in learning (Chafouleas, 2020). These challenges, if
not properly addressed, can lead to student responses that are
inconsistent with school or program expectations. The COVID-19 global
pandemic exacerbated these challenges, accelerating the need to provide
school-based social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health supports
and leverage the existing evidence base to provide nurturing
educational environments to meet the needs of our nation's youth.
MTSS frameworks such as PBIS \2\ have been validated by numerous
randomized control trials (Bradshaw et al., 2012; Freeman et al.,
2017). When implemented with fidelity, PBIS outcomes include reductions
in removals of students from instruction; improved student exposure to
and success in academics (grades and completion); improved educator
satisfaction and retention; and improved overall ratings of school
safety, belonging, and climate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The term ``positive behavioral interventions and supports''
was first used in a priority published by the Department in 1997,
and it is currently used in the IDEA (e.g., sections 601(c)(5)(F),
611(e)(2)(C)(iii), 614(d)(3)(B)(i), 662(b)(2)(A)(v), and 665) and
the ESEA (e.g., section 4631(a)(1)(B)). We do not use PBIS to mean
any specific program or curriculum. Rather, we use the term
generically to reference a multi-tiered framework used to improve
the integration and implementation of social, emotional, behavioral
and mental health practices, data-driven decision-making systems,
professional development opportunities, school leadership,
supportive SEA and LEA policies, and evidence-based instructional
strategies. A PBIS framework helps to organize practices to improve
social, emotional, behavioral, mental health and academic outcomes
by improving school climate, promoting positive social skills,
promoting effective strategies to support and respond to student
needs, and increasing learning time. PBIS is an evidence-based,
tiered framework (Tier 1: Universal, Primary Prevention; Tier 2:
Targeted, Secondary Prevention; and Tier 3: Intensive and
Individualized, Tertiary Prevention) for supporting students'
behavioral, academic, social, emotional, and mental health.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite improved outcomes and knowledge from PBIS implementation
efforts over the last two decades, data from the Office for Civil
Rights' Civil Rights Data Collection suggests students from underserved
groups are more likely to experience exclusionary discipline (e.g.,
suspensions, expulsions) (U.S. Department of Education, Civil Rights
Data Collection SY17-18, Office for Civil Rights, 2021). Disaggregated
data shows that disproportionate use of discipline grows when
considering race, sex, and disability. Id. Research consistently shows
that students of color, particularly Black students, Native students,
and Black students with disabilities are significantly more likely than
their non-disabled or White peers to be subjected to exclusionary
discipline practices, including office discipline referrals and
suspensions (e.g., Gage et al., 2019; McIntosh et al., 2018; McIntosh
et al., 2021; Civil Rights Data Collection SY17-18, Office for Civil
Rights, 2021). While disproportionality with respect to Black boys has
long been acknowledged, more recent data analysis indicates the
disproportionality also exists for Black girls as compared to White
girls (Hassan & Carter, 2021). Other studies show disproportionality
based on gender, historically demonstrating boys receive suspensions
and expulsions at higher rates than girls (Bradshaw et al., 2010).
Higher rates of punitive discipline practices also exist for students
who identify as LGBTQ and those with disabilities (Himmelstein &
Br[uuml]ckner, 2011; Brobbey, 2018). When students are denied access to
instruction and participation in school opportunities, they are more
likely to experience negative outcomes in school and later in life,
including poor academic outcomes, lower graduation rates,
incarceration, and employment and relationship challenges (Hemez et
al., 2020; Lansford et al., 2016).
One of the most significant barriers to reducing exclusionary and
aversive discipline practices for students, including students of color
and students with disabilities, is the lack of culturally and
linguistically inclusive pre-service and in-service training for
teachers and leaders on effective practices for creating positive, safe
learning environments to teach and support desired school behaviors and
for responding to and mitigating behaviors that are inconsistent with
school expectations and interfere with learning. The PBIS framework has
provided an effective multi-tiered structure through the implementation
and examination of systems, practices, and data to assist LEAs and
schools in addressing inequities. When there is fidelity in
implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) \3\ to prevent, reduce,
and mitigate interfering behaviors within a PBIS framework, studies
have found the following statistically significant results: improved
perception of school safety; reductions in overall behaviors that are
inconsistent with classroom or school expectations and that interfere
with learning; and reduction of bullying behaviors, office discipline
referrals, chronic absenteeism, and suspensions (Waasdorp et al.,
2012). The PBIS framework has solidified the importance of core
strategies, including implementing EBPs, and providing the systems
needed to support those practices and data-based decision-making, to
create and sustain positive, safe, and predictable learning
environments. Fidelity in the implementation of the core strategies has
also demonstrated the importance of adult responses, including
effectively supporting and responding to student behavior (Horner et
al., 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the purposes of this priority, ``evidence-based
practices'' (EBPs) means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale
(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-quality research findings
or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention
is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although prior Department investments have led to successful
implementation of the PBIS framework and positive outcome data in over
27,000 schools, based on persistent needs in the field, the Department
has determined that additional and continued TA is needed to focus on:
(1) students with more intensive social, emotional, behavioral, and
mental health needs and those most likely to be excluded from the
learning environment due to behavior that interferes with
[[Page 45401]]
learning; (2) pre-service and in-service training on culturally and
linguistically inclusive practices that support students from
underserved groups; (3) improving implementation fidelity; and (4)
addressing other systemic inequities such as access to school funding,
experienced educators, and advanced coursework opportunities. In
addition, the Department has determined that SEAs and LEAs could
benefit from further TA to develop, expand, and sustain school-wide
frameworks and to build personnel capacity and expertise to promote
safe, positive, predictable, and culturally and linguistically
inclusive learning environments where students feel a sense of
belonging. Such additional TA would be focused on increasing the use of
EBPs to more effectively support and respond to student needs, such as
teaching school and classroom expectations, building classroom cultures
of respect and belonging, and implementing trauma-informed practices.
Such additional TA also would be focused on using EBPs to reduce the
use of restraints, seclusion, and corporal punishment; chronic
absenteeism; incidents of bullying; the disproportionate application of
disciplinary procedures, such as suspension and expulsion, for
students, including students of color and those with disabilities;
unnecessary referrals of students to law enforcement; and violent and
traumatic school incidents.
The Center will support States and LEAs in implementing EBPs within
a MTSS/PBIS framework that improves results for children, including
those underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender,
age, disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-economic status.
While PBIS is one evidence-based MTSS framework for addressing social,
emotional, behavioral and mental health needs, the Department expects
that the Center will stay abreast of developing frameworks and identify
and incorporate a broad array of EBPs to support and respond to student
needs, and tailor technical assistance in the settings established in
the priority. This investment is aligned to the Secretary's
Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant
Programs published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2021 (86 FR
70612), in the areas of meeting student social, emotional, and academic
needs, and promoting equity in student access to educational resources
and opportunities.
References:
Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., & Leaf, P. (2012). Effects of school-
wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child
behavior problems. Pediatrics, 130(5),1136-1145. https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/5/e1136.
Bradshaw, C.P., Mitchell, M.M., O'Brennan, L.M., & Leaf, P. J.
(2010). Multilevel exploration of factors contributing to the
overrepresentation of Black students in office disciplinary
referrals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 508-520.
Brobbey, G. (2018). Punishing the vulnerable: Exploring suspension
rates for students with learning disabilities. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 53, 216-219.
Chafouleas, S. (2020, August). Four questions to ask now in
preparing your child for school. Psychology Today.
www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/promoting-student-well-being/202008/4-questions-ask-now-in-preparing-your-child-school.
Freeman, J., Simonsen, B., Goodman, S., Mitchell, B., George, H.P.,
Swain-Bradway, J., Lane, K., Sprague, J., & Putnam, B. (2017). PBIS
technical brief on systems to support teachers' implementation of
positive classroom behavior support. PBIS Center. www.pbis.org/resource/pbis-technical-brief-on-systems-to-support-teachers-implementation-of-positive-classroom-behavior-support.
Gage, N.A., Grasley-Boy, N., George, H.P., Childs, K., & Kincaid, D.
(2019). A quasi-experimental design analysis of the effects of
school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on
discipline in Florida. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions,
21(1), 50-61. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1098300718768208.
Hassan, H.H., & Carter, V.B. (2021). Black and White Female
Disproportional Discipline K-12. Education and Urban Society, 53(1),
23-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124520915571.
Hemez P., Brent J.J., & Mowen T.J. (2020). Exploring the school-to-
prison pipeline: How school suspensions influence incarceration
during young adulthood. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 18(3),
235-255. doi: 10.1177/1541204019880945.
Himmelstein, K.E., & Br[uuml]ckner, H. (2011). Criminal-justice and
school sanctions against nonheterosexual youth: A national
longitudinal study. Pediatrics, 127(1), 49-57.
Horner, R.H., Sugai, G., & Lewis, T.J. (2020). Is school-wide
positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) an evidence-
based practice? Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. www.pbis.org/resource/is-school-wide-positive-behavior-support-an-evidence-based-practice.
Lansford, J.E., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., Bates, J.E. (2016). A
Public Health Perspective on School Dropout and Adult Outcomes: A
Prospective Study of Risk and Protective Factors From Age 5 to 27
Years. Journal of Adolescent Health, 58(6), 652-658.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., McDaniel, S.C., Santiago-Rosario, M.R.,
St. Joseph, S., Fairbanks Falcon, S., Izzard, S., Bastable, E.
(2021). Effects of an equity-focused PBIS approach to school
improvement on exclusionary discipline and school climate.
Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and
Youth, 65(4), 354-361.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Fairbanks Falcon, S., McDaniel, S.C.,
Smolkowski, K., Bastable, E., Santiago-Rosario, M.R., Izzard, S.,
Austin, S.C., Nese, R.N.T., & Baldy, T.S. (2021). An equity-focused
PBIS approach reduces racial inequities in school discipline: A
randomized controlled trial. School Psychology, 36(6), 433-444.
https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000466.
McIntosh, K., Girvan, E.J., Horner, R.H., Smolkowski, K., & Sugai,
G. (2018). A 5-point intervention approach for enhancing equity in
school discipline. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports. www.pbis.org/resource/a-5-point-intervention-approach-for-enhancing-equity-in-school-discipline.
U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2021). 2017-
2018 Civil Rights Data Collection. https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018.
Waasdorp, T.E., Bradshaw, C.P., & Leaf, P.J. (2012). The impact of
schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on
bullying and peer rejection: A randomized controlled effectiveness
trial. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 166(2), 149-
56. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.755.
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2023 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet these priorities.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Technical Assistance and Dissemination to
Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities Program--
National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports.
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to
establish and operate a National Technical Assistance Center on
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) (Center). This
Center will assist SEAs and LEAs to enhance their capacity to develop,
implement, scale-up, and sustain school-wide frameworks for MTSS/PBIS
to improve behavior and climate and to enable all students, especially
those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and those
with disabilities, to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-
quality learning environment.
The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected
outcomes:
(a) Improved infrastructure at the national, regional, State, and
district
[[Page 45402]]
levels to support, develop, sustain, and expand local implementation
efforts (e.g., an increase in the number of schools) of MTSS/PBIS with
fidelity to demonstrate improved student outcomes: academic
performance, social-emotional competence, mental health and well-being,
academic outcomes, reduced bullying behaviors, reduced student reports
of alcohol and drug use for students with or at risk of disabilities
and those with the most intensive needs.
(b) Improved capacity for systems implementation at the SEA and LEA
levels, including new and existing LEAs and schools, to implement the
components of a MTSS/PBIS framework (i.e., policies, funding,
professional development, coaching, data collection, analysis, and use)
and develop and utilize new and existing tools for selecting and
aligning multiple initiatives within the SEA or LEA with a special
focus on PBIS tiers beyond universal and the inclusion of EBPs to
address mental health and well-being for children and youth with or at
risk of disabilities, especially those with culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds and those with the most intensive
needs;
(c) Improved capacity of existing and new SEA and LEA personnel to
enhance the knowledge and skills of members of school leadership teams
and individualized education program (IEP) Teams to implement MTSS/PBIS
policies and practices for students with or at risk of disabilities and
those with the most intensive needs, including the development and
implementation of IEPs and behavior intervention plans that are
culturally responsive, particularly for students with culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, to support positive school behavior
and respond to behaviors that interfere with a student's ability to
fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning
environment;
(d) Increased use by SEAs and LEAs of new and updated reliable and
valid tools and processes for evaluating the fidelity of the
implementation of a MTSS/PBIS framework and for measuring its outcomes,
including reductions in violence and the illegal use of drugs,
discipline referrals, suspensions, expulsions, and the use of
restraints and seclusion; and improvements in school climate, time
spent in instruction, mental health and well-being, and overall
academic achievement, particularly for students with culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds, and those with or at risk of
disabilities, and those with the most intensive needs; and
(e) Increased body of knowledge to enhance implementation of MTSS/
PBIS, particularly for students with culturally and linguistically
diverse backgrounds, those with or at risk of disabilities, and for
those with the most intensive needs, in high-poverty schools, low-
performing schools, rural schools, high schools, alternative public
schools, charter schools, mental health settings, private schools, and
juvenile correction settings.
Absolute Priority 2: Technical Assistance--School Safety National
Activities Program--National Technical Assistance Center on Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
The purpose of this priority is to enhance the capacity of SEAs and
LEAs to implement positive and safe school environments, and
effectively support and respond to students' social, emotional,
behavioral, and mental health needs to improve their learning, by
implementing EBPs \4\ within an MTSS/PBIS framework in the following
settings:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Evidence-based practices'' (EBPs) means, at a minimum,
demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) based on high-
quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity,
strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or
other relevant outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Programs or schools serving high percentages of students from
low-income families in the following settings:
(1) Early learning programs.
(2) Elementary schools.
(3) Middle schools.
(4) High schools.
(5) Career and technical education programs.
(6) Rural schools.
(ii) Alternative schools and programs.
(iii) Juvenile justice system or correctional facilities.
(iv) Low-performing schools.
(v) Schools with a high student-to-mental health provider ratio.
(vi) Schools with high rates of chronic absenteeism, exclusionary
discipline, referrals to the juvenile justice system, bullying/
harassment, community and school violence, or substance abuse.
(vii) Schools in which students recently experienced a natural
disaster, incident of violence, or traumatic event.
(viii) Schools with high percentages of students with disabilities
or English Learners.
(ix) Federally supported elementary schools or secondary schools
for Indian students.
To meet this priority, the applicant must propose to achieve, at a
minimum, one or more of the following expected outcomes:
(a) Improved systems and resources at the national, regional,
State, and district levels to support, develop, align, and sustain
local implementation of MTSS/PBIS efforts to organize EBPs to support
positive school climates and respond to student social, emotional,
behavioral, and mental health needs to improve access to and engagement
in learning.
(b) Improved capacity of SEA and LEA personnel to support the
knowledge and skills development of school personnel, including
administrators and practitioners, through efforts such as pre-service
and in-service training and coaching, to implement MTSS/PBIS as a
framework to organize EBPs to support and respond to student needs,
particularly those from underserved and, culturally and linguistically
diverse backgrounds, and students whose behaviors may interfere with a
their ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality
learning environment.
(c) Increased use by SEAs, LEAs, and school-based personnel of
reliable and valid tools and processes for enhancing and assessing the
fidelity of implementation of an MTSS/PBIS Framework and for measuring
intended outcomes, including improvements in school climate; time spent
on instruction; well-being and belonging; overall academic achievement;
and reductions in absenteeism, discipline referrals, suspensions,
expulsions, the use of restraints or seclusion, illegal use of drugs,
and referrals to law enforcement.
(d) Improved implementation of a MTSS/PBIS framework and EBPs, and
assessment of SEA or LEA recipients of grant programs that focus on
improving positive school climates and implementing EBPs to support and
respond to students' social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health
needs.
(e) Enhanced response and recovery assistance, as requested by and
in collaboration with the Department, for violent or traumatic
incidents that impact school communities, including intensive
individualized support to facilitate recovery of the learning
environment.
(f) Increased body of knowledge and evidence to enhance
implementation of PBIS and other emerging MTSS frameworks and EBPs to
address the social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs of
underserved students in the settings established in the priority.
Common Application Requirements:
To be considered for funding under these priorities, applicants
must meet the application and administrative requirements in these
priorities, which are:
[[Page 45403]]
(a) Demonstrate how the proposed project will--
(1) Improve SEAs' and LEAs' implementation, scaling, and sustaining
of EBPs within a MTSS/PBIS framework and policies that are designed to
improve school climate and, as needed, to provide additional behavioral
supports for students whose behavior impacts their ability to fully
participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment,
including students with disabilities and other underserved students in
the settings established in the priority. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Present applicable State, regional, or local data demonstrating
SEAs' and LEAs' needs related to (A) implementation of EBPs and
policies to improve school climate, student well-being, and belonging;
and (B) increasing students' ability to fully participate in, and
benefit from, a high-quality learning environment;
(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current education issues and policy
initiatives relating to MTSS/PBIS and school climate practices and
policies and EBPs to effectively support and respond to student
behavior that impacts learning; and
(iii) Present information about the current level of implementation
of MTSS/PBIS, EBPs, policies, best practices, and benefits for all
students, especially underserved students and those from culturally and
linguistically diverse backgrounds;
(2) [See the Unique Application Requirements section below for the
separate requirements applicable to Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute
Priority 2 in paragraph (a)(2).]
(b) Demonstrate 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, disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-
economic status. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe
how it will--
(i) Identify the TA and information needs of the intended
recipients; and
(ii) Ensure that services and products meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the TA;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) The logic model \5\ (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;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ As defined in 34 CFR 77.1, ``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 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: https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf and
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research and make use of EBPs. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) The current research on the assessment of the implementation of
MTSS/PBIS frameworks and related EBPs;
(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and
implementation science that will inform the proposed TA; and
(iii) How the proposed project will incorporate current and
emerging research and practices in the development and delivery of its
products and services;
(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 of
MTSS/PBIS:
(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\6\ which must
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under
this approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Universal, general TA'' means TA and information provided
to independent users through their own initiative, resulting in
minimal interaction with Center staff and including one-time,
invited or offered conference presentations by Center staff. This
category of TA also includes information or products, such as
newsletters, guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the
Center's website by independent users. Brief communications by
Center staff with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also
considered universal, general TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\7\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Targeted, specialized TA'' means TA services based on
needs common to multiple recipients and not extensively
individualized. A relationship is established between the TA
recipient and one or more Center staff. This category of TA includes
one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating strategic
planning or hosting regional or national conferences. It can also
include episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend over a
period of time, such as facilitating a series of conference calls on
single or multiple topics that are designed around the needs of the
recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can also be
considered targeted, specialized TA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under
this approach; and
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of potential TA
recipients to work with the project, assessing, at a minimum, their
current systems, available resources, and ability to build capacity at
the local level; and
(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\8\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Intensive, sustained TA'' means TA services often provided
on-site and requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the
Center staff and the TA recipient. ``TA services'' are defined as
negotiated series of activities designed to reach a valued outcome.
This category of TA should result in changes to policy, program,
practice, or operations that support increased recipient capacity or
improved outcomes at one or more systems levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients from a variety of settings and geographic distribution, that
will receive the products and services designed to improve school
climate and;
(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of the State-
and local-level personnel to work with the project, including their
commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their
needs, current systems, available resources, and ability to build
capacity at the local level;
(C) Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs, LEAs, local Part C
agencies, charter management organizations, and private school
organizations to build or enhance training systems that include
professional development based on adult learning principles and
coaching; and
(D) Its proposed plan for working with appropriate levels of the
education
[[Page 45404]]
system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA providers, LEAs, schools, families,
community providers) to ensure that there is communication between each
level and that there are systems in place to support the use of MTSS/
PBIS;
(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, including
families, community providers, other federal investments as
appropriate, and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to
achieve the intended project outcomes; and
(7) Develop a dissemination plan that describes how the applicant
will systematically distribute information, products, and services to
varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies,
to promote awareness and use of the Center's products and services.
(c) 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 in consultation with Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE) staff, a project liaison 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),\9\ the project director, and the OSEP
project officer on the following tasks:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 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 the logic model submitted in the application, as
appropriate, 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, as appropriate, to be consistent with the revised
logic model and using the most rigorous design suitable (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 the evaluation plan submitted in the application such
that it clearly--
(A) Specifies the evaluation questions, measures, and associated
instruments or sources for data appropriate to answer these questions,
suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for
conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for
completing the evaluation activities;
(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) by OSEP 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 in consultation with OESE staff, with the assistance of CIPP,
as needed, to specify the project performance measures to be addressed
in the project's annual performance report;
(2) Dedicate sufficient staff time and other resources during the
first 6 months of the project to collaborate with CIPP staff, including
regular meetings (e.g., weekly, biweekly, or monthly) with CIPP and the
OSEP project officer, in order to accomplish the tasks described in
paragraph (c)(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 (C)(1) and (2)
of this section and revising and implementing the evaluation plan.
Please note in your budget narrative the funds dedicated for this
activity.
(d) Demonstrate 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,
disability, LGBTQI+, English learner, or socio-economic status, 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 how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
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 policymakers, among others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must--
(1) Include 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, OESE representative, 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;
[[Page 45405]]
(ii) A two- and one-half day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;
(iii) Three annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP or OESE; and
(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC,
during the second year of the project period;
(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of
5 percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are
consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those
needs are identified in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP
project officer in consultation with OESE staff as appropriate. With
approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any
remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the
third quarter of each budget period; and
(4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate
design, that meets government or industry- recognized standards for
accessibility;
(5) Ensure that annual project progress toward meeting project
goals is posted on the project website; and
(6) Include 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 a new award 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), including--
(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts
and recipients of services who have experience and knowledge in MTSS/
PBIS. 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.
Requirements Unique to Absolute Priority 1:
Within Absolute Priority 1, we establish the following unique
application requirements. In addition to the Common Application
Requirements, in order to be considered for funding under Absolute
Priority 1, applicants must, in their response to Application
Requirement (a), demonstrate how the proposed project will:
(1) Under paragraph (a)(i)(B), present applicable State, regional,
or local data demonstrating SEAs' and LEAs' needs related to increasing
students' ability to fully participate in, and benefit from, a high-
quality learning environment, particularly for students with the most
significant behavioral challenges; and
(2) Under paragraph (a)(ii), demonstrate knowledge of current
educational issues and policy initiatives relating to MTSS/PBIS and
school climate practices and policies for students whose behavioral
challenges interfere with their ability to fully participate in, and
benefit from, a high-quality learning environment, including students
with disabilities; and
(3) Under paragraph (a)(2), demonstrate how the proposed project
will improve outcomes for students with behavioral challenges that
interfere with their ability or the ability of their peers to fully
participate in, and benefit from, a high-quality learning environment
through the implementation of MTSS/PBIS frameworks, and indicate the
likely magnitude or importance of the improvements.
Requirements Unique to Absolute Priority 2:
The following unique requirement, drawn from the NFP, applies to
Absolute Priority 2. In addition to the Common Application
Requirements, in order to be considered for funding under Absolute
Priority 2, applicants must, in their response to Application
Requirement (a)(2), demonstrate how the proposed project will improve
the implementation of EBPs within a MTSS/PBIS framework to effectively
support and respond to student behaviors that impact access to and
participation in learning.
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 Absolute Priority 1 in this notice.
Program Authority: Sections 663 and 681(d) of the IDEA (20 U.S.C.
1463 and 1481); and section 4631(a)(1)(B) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 7281).
Note: Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent
with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil
rights laws.
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. (d) the NFP.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: For Absolute Priority 1: $1,850,000 from
the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and
Results for Children with Disabilities Program.
For Absolute Priority 2: $2,500,000 from the School Safety National
Activities Program.
Note: We will make one award comprised of separate funding under
each of the two absolute priorities. Therefore, applicants must submit
a separate ED 524 Form (Section A--Budget Summary and Section C--Budget
Narrative) for each absolute priority. The Secretary may reject any
application that does not separately address the requirements specified
in Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2 and include a separate
budget summary and budget narrative for each of those priorities.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2024 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $1,850,000 for
Absolute Priority 1 for a single budget period of 12 months. We will
not make
[[Page 45406]]
an award exceeding $2,500,000 for Absolute Priority 2 for a single
budget period of 12 months.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State lead agencies under Part C of
IDEA; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered 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. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require
cost sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform
Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under
this competition may award subgrants--to directly carry out project
activities described in its application--to the following types of
entities: IHEs, nonprofit organizations, and other public agencies. The
grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an
approved application or that it selects through a competition under
procedures established by the grantee, consistent with 34 CFR
75.708(b)(2).
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) Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect
to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the Absolute
Priority 1 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 December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to
submit an application. Please note that these Common Instructions
supersede the version published on December 27, 2021.
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 an award by the end of FY 2023.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative 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 70 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 the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; 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 listed below:
(a) Significance (10 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 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.
(ii) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project.
(b) Quality of project services (35 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 goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(ii) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying
the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of
that framework.
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and
effective practice.
(iv) 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.
(v) The extent to which the TA services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the
use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project
resources.
(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 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.
[[Page 45407]]
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
(iv) 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.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (15
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of the project director or principal investigator.
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of key project personnel.
(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
(iv) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience,
and independence, of the evaluator.
(v) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization.
(vi) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(vii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project.
(viii) 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 (20 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.
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
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, 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 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice
[[Page 45408]]
inviting applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This
dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, we have 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 Technical
Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities and School Safety National Activities
Programs--National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral
Interventions and Supports.
These performance measures will apply to grant activities under
both absolute priorities. These measures are:
Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of
Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed to
be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified
to review the substantive content of the products and services.
Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of
Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by
an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of high
relevance to educational and early intervention policy or practice.
Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of all
Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by
an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful in
improving educational or early intervention policy or practice.
Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the
Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program includes the percentage
of milestones achieved in the current annual performance report period
and the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal year.
Long-term Program Performance Measure: The percentage of
States receiving Technical Assistance and Dissemination services
regarding scientifically or evidence-based practices for children, and
youth that successfully promote the implementation of those practices
in school districts and service agencies.
The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by
OSEP/OESE. Grantees will be required to report information on their
project's performance in annual and final performance reports to the
Department (34 CFR 75.590). The Department will also closely monitor
the extent to which the products and services provided by the Center
meet needs identified by stakeholders and may require the Center to
report on such alignment in their annual and final performance reports.
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: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an
accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text
format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.
[[Page 45409]]
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.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
James F. Lane,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Delegated the Authority to
Perform the Functions and Duties of Assistant Secretary for the Office
of Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2023-15159 Filed 7-13-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P