National Resource Centers Program and Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships Program, 13516-13545 [2024-03149]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 36 (Thursday, February 22, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13516-13545]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-03149]



[[Page 13515]]

Vol. 89

Thursday,

No. 36

February 22, 2024

Part III





 Department of Education





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





34 CFR Parts 655, 656, and 657





National Resource Centers Program and Foreign Language and Area Studies 
Fellowships Program; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 36 / Thursday, February 22, 2024 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 13516]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Parts 655, 656, and 657

RIN 1840-AD94
[Docket ID ED-2024-OPE-0017]


National Resource Centers Program and Foreign Language and Area 
Studies Fellowships Program

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes to amend the regulations that govern 
the National Resource Centers (NRC) Program, Assistance Listing Number 
84.015A, and the Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) Fellowships 
Program, Assistance Listing Number 84.015B. The proposed regulations 
would clarify interpretations of statutory language, redesign the 
selection criteria, and make necessary updates based upon program 
management experience. These proposed changes would remove ambiguity 
and redundancy in the selection criteria and definitions of key terms, 
improve the application process, and align the administration of these 
programs with developments in modern foreign language and area studies 
education. A brief summary of the proposed rule is available on 
Regulations.gov in the docket for the rulemaking.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 25, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking 
Portal at Regulations.gov. However, if you require an accommodation or 
cannot otherwise submit your comments via Regulations.gov, please 
contact the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT. The Department will not accept comments after the comment 
period closes. To ensure that the Department does not receive duplicate 
copies, please submit your comments only once. Additionally, please 
include the Docket ID at the top of your comments.
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to submit 
your comments electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, 
including instructions for accessing agency documents, submitting 
comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site under 
``FAQ.''
    Note: The Department's policy is generally to make comments 
received from members of the public available for public viewing on the 
Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 
commenters should be careful to include in their comments only 
information that they wish to make publicly available. Commenters 
should not include in their comments any information that identifies 
other individuals or that permits readers to identify other 
individuals. The Department will not make comments that contain 
personally identifiable information about someone other than the 
commenter publicly available on www.regulations.gov for privacy 
reasons. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include in their 
comments only information that they wish to make publicly available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Duvall, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Ave. SW, Room 5C105, Washington, DC 20202. 
Telephone: (202) 987-0383. 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: 

Executive Summary

    Purpose of this Regulatory Action: The regulations for the NRC and 
FLAS programs were last revised in 2009 (74 FR 35070) and were impacted 
by subsequent technical corrections made to 34 CFR part 655, 
International Education Programs--General Provisions, adopted in 2014 
(79 FR 75867). Because these regulations provide the foundation for the 
administration of these programs, we have reviewed them, evaluated them 
for provisions that, over time, have become outdated, unnecessary, or 
inconsistent with other Department regulations as well as with 
established practices for administering these programs in the 
Department, and identified ways in which they can be updated, 
streamlined, and otherwise improved. Specifically, we propose to amend 
parts 655, 656, and 657 of title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 
These changes are detailed in the Summary of Major Provisions of this 
Regulatory Action.
    Summary of Major Provisions of this Regulatory Action: As discussed 
in greater detail in the Summary of Proposed Regulations section of 
this document, the proposed regulations would:
     Make technical updates to refer to up-to-date statutory 
authorities, remove outdated terminology, use consistent references, 
and eliminate obsolete cross-references.
     Clarify and streamline the selection criteria the 
Secretary may use to make discretionary awards under parts 656 and 657.
     Add new selection criteria the Secretary may use to make 
discretionary grants for special purposes under part 656.
     Add definitions for ambiguous terms related to program 
administration, including ``areas of national need'' and ``diverse 
perspectives.''
     Add a requirement for a geographical area of focus for 
discretionary grants made under parts 656 and 657.
     Clarify the differences between comprehensive and 
undergraduate National Resource Centers for Foreign Language and Area 
Studies.
     Add a student eligibility requirement for fellowships 
awarded under part 657 based upon a student's educational program.
     Simplify the administration of allocations of fellowships 
made under part 657 by eliminating the institutional payment as a 
component of fellowships and allowing fellows to receive a single 
stipend payment.
    Costs and Benefits: The Department believes that the benefits of 
this regulatory action would outweigh any associated costs to States, 
local educational agencies (LEAs), colleges and universities, and other 
Department applicants and grantees. The proposed regulations would, in 
part, update terminology to align with applicable statutes and 
regulations. Many of the adjustments would support the Department, its 
grantees, or both, in selecting high-quality grantees and to support 
those grantees in ensuring the effectiveness and improvement of their 
projects. These changes include, for example, altering selection 
criteria to allow for a more efficient and effective peer review 
process, as announced in a notice inviting applications (NIA), and 
adding and clarifying definitions that apply to the programs affected 
so that peer reviewers and applicants have a better sense of how 
application reviews are conducted. Please refer to the Regulatory 
Impact Analysis section of this document for a more detailed discussion 
of costs and benefits.
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
the proposed regulations. To ensure that your comments have maximum 
effect in developing the final regulations, we urge you to clearly 
identify the specific section of the proposed regulations that each of 
your comments addresses and to arrange your comments in the same order 
as the proposed regulations.

[[Page 13517]]

    We also invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094 and their 
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result 
from the proposed regulations. Please let us know of any further ways 
we could reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while 
preserving the effective and efficient administration of the 
Department's programs and activities. The Department also welcomes 
comments on any alternative approaches to the subjects addressed in the 
proposed regulations.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect public 
comments about the proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov.
    Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the 
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate 
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who 
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the 
public rulemaking record for the proposed regulations. To schedule an 
appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 
contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Background

    Programs authorized under title VI of the Higher Education Act of 
1965, as amended (HEA), build institutional capacity for training and 
research in modern foreign languages and area studies; promote access 
to international and foreign language knowledge; respond to the ongoing 
national need for individuals with expertise and competence in world 
languages and area studies; advance national security by developing a 
pipeline of highly trained experts in critical world regions who are 
proficient in a large number of diverse modern foreign languages, 
especially but not limited to less commonly taught languages; and 
contribute to developing a globally competent multilingual and 
multicultural workforce able to engage with people in the United States 
and around the world.
    The NRC Program and the FLAS Fellowships Program are the two 
largest programs funded under title VI of the HEA. The NRC Program 
provides grants to institutions of higher education (IHE) and consortia 
of IHEs to establish, strengthen, and operate comprehensive and 
undergraduate foreign language and area studies centers. These centers 
serve as centers of excellence for training and teaching in any modern 
foreign language, research, and instruction in fields needed to provide 
full understanding of areas, regions, or countries where the languages 
are commonly used. See 34 CFR part 656; 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1). The FLAS 
Fellowships Program awards allocations of fellowships, through IHEs or 
consortia of IHEs, to meritorious students enrolled in programs that 
offer performance-based instruction in world languages in combination 
with area studies, international studies, or the international aspects 
of professional studies. See 34 CFR part 657; 20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(1). 
Both programs share a common focus on modern foreign language and area 
studies education.
    The regulations for these programs were last revised in 2009 (74 FR 
35070) and were impacted by subsequent technical corrections made to 34 
CFR part 655, International Education Programs--General Provisions, 
adopted in 2014 (79 FR 75867). We propose to amend the regulations that 
govern the NRC Program and the FLAS Fellowships Program, and to make 
related amendments and technical corrections to 34 CFR part 655. The 
proposed changes would clarify interpretations of statutory language, 
redesign the selection criteria, and make necessary updates based upon 
program management experience. The proposed regulations would remove 
ambiguity and redundancy in the selection criteria and definitions of 
key terms, improve the application process, and align the 
administration of these programs with developments in modern foreign 
language and area studies education.
    Selection Criteria and Application Process. Over many grant cycles, 
administering the NRC and FLAS grant competitions using the current 
selection criteria has been unwieldy and burdensome for both applicants 
and peer reviewers. The Secretary proposes changes to the selection 
criteria that would clarify selection criteria, eliminate redundant 
criteria, reduce the burden on applicants and peer reviewers, and 
improve alignment with the statute, particularly with regard to 
comprehensive and undergraduate Centers. The Secretary proposes 
reducing the comprehensive NRC selection criteria from 10 criteria with 
27 sub-criteria to six criteria with 24 sub-criteria; the undergraduate 
NRC selection criteria from 10 criteria with 26 sub-criteria to six 
criteria with 24 sub-criteria; and the FLAS selection criteria from 
nine criteria with 22 sub-criteria to six criteria with 22 sub-
criteria. The proposed criteria include some new criteria for the NRC 
Program, including a ``quality of existing academic programs'' 
criterion, and also for FLAS, including ``project design and 
rationale'' and ``project planning and budget'' criteria.
    Definitions. The Secretary proposes, to remain current with 
standards in the fields of language and area studies, to add and remove 
definitions in 34 CFR part 655, including defining ``areas of national 
need'' and ``consultation on areas of national need'' to better align 
the programs with the statute. The Secretary also proposes adding, 
among others, definitions of (a) ``educational program abroad'' and 
``diverse perspectives'' to part 655, and (b) add a definition of 
``stipend'' to the FLAS regulations in part 657. These proposed 
definitions would clarify concepts that have proven to be opaque or 
absent during the application and administration phases of these 
grants.
    Alignment with the statute. The Secretary proposes to amend the 
regulations to align them more closely with the statute and with 
accepted grant administrative practices. The NRC Program is intended to 
operate as a national network of centers to advance foreign language 
and area studies knowledge and expertise. NRCs work together and 
separately toward a common national goal of providing resources for 
teaching, training, and research relating to foreign languages and area 
studies. The proposed changes would highlight this common national goal 
and renew emphasis on the importance of less commonly taught languages 
to the NRC Program. The proposed changes would also clarify the 
expectation that all centers should have a geographically defined 
focus, which helps centers align their activities with areas of 
national need identified by the Secretary and the statute's mandated 
consultation on national need for foreign language and area studies 
knowledge and expertise. The proposed changes would draw a clear 
distinction between undergraduate and comprehensive NRCs and clarify 
the role that each type of center plays in the NRC network. Finally, 
the proposed changes, among other things, would clarify student 
eligibility, include a student's educational program as a relevant 
criterion for determining FLAS fellowship eligibility, and define 
``distance education.''

Summary of Proposed Regulations

    We discuss substantive issues under the sections of the proposed 
regulations to which they pertain. Generally, we do not address 
proposed regulatory provisions that are technical or otherwise minor in 
effect.

[[Page 13518]]

Part 655

Section 655.4 What definitions apply to the International Education 
Programs?
    Statute: Sections 601 through 613 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1121-1130b) 
provide authority for defining terms necessary for the implementation 
of the International Education Programs.
    Current Regulations: Section 655.4 sets forth definitions for the 
International Education Programs, including the NRC Program and FLAS 
Fellowships Program.
    Proposed Regulation: The definitions in Sec.  655.4 apply to all 
International Education Programs, including but not limited to NRC 
Program and FLAS Fellowships Program. Proposed Sec.  655.4 would add 
new definitions, consolidate current definitions that apply to multiple 
International Education Programs, and remove one term. Specifically, 
the Department proposes to add a definition of ``consultation on areas 
of national need,'' based on the process outlined in the statute, as 
well as a definition of ``areas of national need.'' We also propose a 
definition of ``diverse perspectives.'' Additional proposed changes 
would relocate and centralize definitions such as ``area studies'' and 
``intensive language instruction'' that were previously defined in the 
context of the NRC Program. The proposed changes would incorporate 
definitions for ``educational program abroad'' from section 631 of the 
HEA. The proposed changes incorporate definitions for ``academic 
engagement,'' ``clock hour,'' ``correspondence course,'' ``credit 
hour,'' ``distance education,'' ``educational program,'' ``enrolled,'' 
full-time student,'' ``graduate or professional student,'' ``half-time 
student,'' ``National level,'' ``regular student,'' and ``undergraduate 
student'' from Sec. Sec.  600.2 and 668.2. Finally, the proposed 
changes would remove the definition of ``critical languages'' from 
Sec.  655.4.
    Reasons: The Department proposes to remove the definition of 
``critical languages'' in current Sec.  655.4, which was based on a 
separate statute (the Education for Economic Security Act). The 
proposed definitions of ``areas of national need'' and ``consultation 
on areas of national need are tied more closely to the language and 
goals of the program statute. The Department believes application of 
these definitions would, as a practical matter, acknowledge the 
statutorily required consultation process is sufficient to identify 
languages that could be identified as ``areas of national need.'' A 
list of languages created through this process would be substantially 
the same as or identical to the updated list of ``critical languages'' 
required by current Sec.  655.4, eliminating the need for development 
of a separate list of critical languages under current Sec.  655.4.
    The new definitions generally would acknowledge the Secretary's 
ability to identify relevant national needs and emphasize the 
importance of the consultation process, as well as establishing a 
single common term (``consultation on areas of national need'') to be 
used in the implementation of the International Education Programs. 
This would reduce the potential for confusion and improve the 
efficiency of program implementation. The proposed definition of 
``consultation on areas of national need'' also would assist and 
provide additional clarity to NRC Program and FLAS Fellowship Program 
applicants when completing their required assurances related to 
national needs, which would assist the Secretary in identifying the 
relevant ``areas of national need.'' As noted above, because 
``consultation on areas of national need'' is statutorily required for 
the grant programs funded under title VI of the HEA, which include the 
NRC Program and the FLAS Fellowship program, see HEA Sec.  601(c), 
adopting and applying that term would be more directly tailored to the 
activities of the grant programs authorized under title VI than is the 
current concept of ``critical languages,'' which is based on a 
different statute (the Education for Economic Security Act (Pub. L. 98-
377) and also is used in HEA programs outside title VI.
    The Department proposes a definition of ``diverse perspectives'' to 
clarify the statutory requirement in section 602 of the HEA that 
``activities funded by the grant will reflect diverse perspectives[,]'' 
emphasizing the relevance of a variety of viewpoints in understanding 
world regions. The proposed change would reduce ambiguity by 
introducing a standard interpretation and improve the efficiency of 
program implementation.
    The relocation of definitions for the terms ``area studies,'' 
``intensive language instruction,'' and ``educational program abroad'' 
would provide standard definitions applicable to all International 
Education Programs. The proposed changes would standardize the use of 
terms that apply to postsecondary education generally, by adding 
references to other parts of title 34 that are also authorized by the 
HEA. Specifically, the incorporation of terms defined in Sec. Sec.  
600.2 and 668.2 would provide a shared set of terms that would more 
closely align implementation of the International Education Programs 
with implementation of the HEA.
Section 655.31 What general selection criteria does the Secretary use?
    Statute: Sections 601 through 607 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1121-1127) 
provide authority for establishing general selection criteria necessary 
for the implementation of the International Education Programs.
    Current Regulations: Section 655.31(e)(2)(i) sets forth the factors 
the Secretary considers as part of the ``adequacy of resources'' 
selection criterion, specifically whether the facilities the applicant 
plans to use in carrying out its proposed project, ``other than 
library,'' are adequate.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  655.31(e)(2)(i) would expand 
the types of facilities that may be considered when evaluating this 
selection criterion to include libraries.
    Reasons: The proposed change would not specifically exclude any 
type of facility when assessing the adequacy of an applicant's 
resources, so an applicant would be able to address the adequacy of 
library facilities if these facilities were relevant to the proposed 
project. The proposed wording would recognize that libraries 
increasingly fulfill a diverse set of functions at IHEs in support of 
teaching, research, and engagement. In addition to housing various 
collections and information professionals, libraries frequently are the 
sites where specialized information technology, media production 
facilities, and other resources are located.

Part 656

    Statute: 20 U.S.C. 1122.
    Current Regulations: Part 656 contains the regulations for the NRC 
Program, titled ``National Resource Centers Program for Foreign 
Language and Area Studies or Foreign Language and International 
Studies.''
    Proposed Regulation: The Department proposes to replace part 656 in 
its entirety due to the number of necessary changes and the 
accompanying need to reorganize this part to improve readability. We 
propose to combine sections that address similar topics, and to 
eliminate duplicative or contradictory paragraphs. We propose to rename 
part 656 as ``National Resource Centers Program for Foreign Language 
and Area Studies'' to align more closely with the headings in 20 U.S.C. 
1122 and 1122(a), which do not include ``international studies.''
    Reasons: As described in more detail in each of the following 
sections related to part 656, these changes would allow the Department 
to substantially revise

[[Page 13519]]

the selection criteria and application processes for the NRC Program, 
introduce new definitions, revise or eliminate existing definitions, 
align the regulations with the statute, and reduce the burden 
associated with the NRC Program.
Section 656.1 What is the purpose of the National Resource Centers 
Program?
    Statute: Section 602(a)(1)(B) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(B)) 
provides that centers and programs awarded grants are national 
resources for teaching modern foreign languages as well as for related 
research and instruction in other academic fields. Sections 601(a)(4) 
and (b)(1)(C) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1121(a)(4) and (b)(1)(C)) 
specifically mention the importance of less commonly taught languages 
for programs authorized under title VI of the HEA. These sections also 
highlight the importance of enhancing the capacity of IHEs in the 
United States to train experts in modern foreign language and area 
studies and produce research based upon such expertise.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.1 describes the purpose of the NRC 
Program.
    Proposed Regulation: We propose to expand the introductory language 
to Sec.  656.1 to require Centers to act cooperatively as national 
resources to carry out program purposes. We also propose to expand the 
portion of the program description regarding resources for teaching to 
emphasize less commonly taught languages.
    Reasons: The Nation's security, stability, and economic vitality 
depend upon the existence of experts in the United States who enable 
robust research and training at IHEs. The NRC Program exists to ensure 
that institutional capacity at IHEs in the United States meets or 
exceeds this threshold. Emphasizing less commonly taught languages 
would signal that the NRC Program supports the development and 
maintenance of such capacity for all world areas, all modern foreign 
languages, and all academic disciplines at all times. Given the 
unpredictability of world events, this broad-based support ensures that 
a pool of experts and knowledgeable individuals are prepared to face 
any threats and take advantage of any opportunities that require 
knowledge of modern foreign languages and area studies topics and 
approaches.
    The proposed changes also would add that the NRC Program 
anticipates that grantees will act cooperatively as a network of IHEs 
that jointly serve as national resources for teaching, training, and 
research related to modern foreign languages and area studies. The 
proposed wording would emphasize the core identity and sense of purpose 
that NRCs share. The proposed change would not alter eligibility 
criteria for the NRC Program.
    Despite the competitive nature of discretionary grants, the NRC 
Program is intended to build institutional capacity that broadly 
benefits the United States after the end of a single grant period. This 
effect is magnified when NRCs engage in joint activities, form 
partnerships, and build linkages to one another and to other 
postsecondary institutions in the United States. This approach ensures 
that a wide range of IHEs can contribute to meeting national needs 
related to modern foreign language and area studies identified by 
Federal agencies and other needs in the education, business, and 
nonprofit sectors.
Section 656.2 What entities are eligible to receive a grant?
    Statute: Section 602(a)(1)(A) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(A)) 
authorizes the Secretary to make grants to institutions of higher 
education or consortia of such institutions. Section 602(a)(3)-(4) of 
the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4)) authorizes the Secretary to make 
additional grants to centers for specific purposes, such as maintaining 
important library collections.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.2 states that an IHE or a 
consortium of IHEs is eligible to receive a grant under the NRC 
Program, but this section does not specifically address the eligibility 
for additional grants authorized by 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4).
    Proposed Regulation: We propose to amend the eligibility criteria 
in Sec.  656.2 to clarify that only an IHE or a consortium of IHEs that 
has received a grant under part 656 as either a comprehensive Center or 
undergraduate Center is eligible to receive a grant for the purposes 
described in 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4).
    Reasons: The current regulation does not address the eligibility 
criteria for additional grants authorized by 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4), 
which are for maintaining library collections, and for conducting 
outreach and summer institutes, respectively. This creates ambiguity 
regarding the appropriate recipients of these grants. The proposed 
regulation would clarify that eligibility for these additional grants 
is limited to National Resource Centers, which accurately reflects the 
statute's characterization of these grants as additional or special 
purpose grants for Centers, to carry out specific activities in 
addition to those already part of the Center's funded project.
Section 656.3 What defines a comprehensive or undergraduate National 
Resource Center?
    Statute: Section 631(a)(2) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2)) 
defines ``comprehensive foreign language and area or international 
studies center.'' Section 631(a)(10) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(10)) 
defines ``undergraduate foreign language and area or international 
studies center.'' Under 20 U.S.C. 1127(b), the Secretary must set 
specific selection criteria to attain the objectives of the two types 
of centers, including the degree to which the activities of centers and 
programs address the national needs built into these definitions.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.7 contains definitions for 
comprehensive and undergraduate Centers based on most, but not all, of 
the comparable definitions in 20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2) and (a)(10). Section 
656.7 states that Centers provide training at the undergraduate level 
and that comprehensive Centers provide graduate and professional 
training in addition to undergraduate training. Section 656.3 lists 
specific activities that define all National Resource Centers based on 
the allowable activities for all centers in 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(2).
    Proposed Regulation: The Department proposes to consolidate 
multiple current sections into proposed Sec.  656.3, require all 
centers to adopt a geographically defined area of focus, and more 
completely define comprehensive and undergraduate Centers based on 20 
U.S.C. 1132(a).
    Reasons: The proposed approach would more clearly highlight the 
distinct purposes of the two Center types and more closely align with 
the statutory language. The definitional requirements for the two types 
of centers would address similar topics in a parallel format, while 
aligning with the distinct purpose of each type of Center and the 
different capacities of the IHEs likely to host these centers. Both 
types of Centers would still be required to engage in activities 
associated with the selection criteria described in 20 U.S.C. 1127(b). 
These activities include, among others, the generation and 
dissemination of information to the public, which is more commonly 
described as outreach.
    The current approach accurately highlights many similarities 
between the two types of Centers but omits certain statutory 
differences and does not adequately distinguish the distinct purposes 
of these types of Centers. For

[[Page 13520]]

example, current Sec.  656.3(f) states that both comprehensive and 
undergraduate Centers must employ faculty who engage in training and 
research relevant to the center's focus. The statutory definition of 
``comprehensive Centers'' in 20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2) is more precise, 
however, requiring comprehensive Centers to employ a critical mass of 
scholars related to a geographic concentration. Similarly, current 
Sec.  656.3(e) prescribes that comprehensive and undergraduate Centers 
both have important library collections. However, the statute imposes 
this requirement only on comprehensive Centers (20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2)), 
while requiring in section 1132(a)(10) that an undergraduate Center 
maintain library collections sufficient to support undergraduate 
education.
    Current Sec. Sec.  656.3 and 656.4 also omit certain statutory 
requirements that further clarify the respective roles of comprehensive 
and undergraduate Centers. For example, these sections do not clearly 
identify undergraduate Centers' contribution to the national interest 
by serving as a source of graduates who matriculate into advanced 
language and area studies programs. See 20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(10). These 
sections also do not mention that, pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2), 
comprehensive Centers contribute to the national interest through 
advanced research and scholarship.
    The current regulation allows international studies centers to 
declare a thematic focus with no geographically defined referent. The 
proposed regulation would require all Centers to have a geographically 
defined focus. This change in policy would better support the program 
purpose. Although 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(A) authorizes the Secretary to 
make grants to area studies or international studies and programs, 20 
U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(B)(i)-(iv) states that all centers are expected to 
serve as resources for both area and international studies. We do not 
interpret the phrase ``area or international studies'' as a binary 
choice in the proposed regulations. Instead, we proposed to interpret 
the statute as describing the importance that a Center places on area 
studies relative to international studies such that neither approach 
could be completely absent from a center.
    Area studies and international studies are not mutually exclusive 
and should be interpreted as mutually reinforcing academic approaches 
that should be represented to some degree within each Center. According 
to 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(B), Centers are expected to be national 
resources for teaching of any modern foreign language; instruction in 
fields needed to provide full understanding of areas, regions, or 
countries in which such language is commonly used; research and 
training in international studies, and the international and foreign 
language aspects of professional and other fields of study; and 
instruction and research on issues in world affairs that concern one or 
more countries. This portion of the statute suggests that focus on the 
study of a geographically defined area and international studies are 
complementary aspects of all centers. In addition, 20 U.S.C. 
1122(a)(1)(B)(i)-(ii) clearly articulates the interconnectedness of 
these characteristics, including a specific relationship between modern 
foreign languages and the specific places in which those languages are 
used.
    Area studies, as defined in section 1132(a), is a broad concept 
based on the comprehensive study of specific societies that does not 
exclude any discipline or approach. The inclusion of societies in this 
definition complements the program's interest in modern foreign 
languages and specific places, as articulated in 20 U.S.C. 
1122(a)(1)(B)(i)-(ii). International studies approaches complement the 
specificity of area studies by drawing attention to patterns, trends, 
and phenomena relevant to understanding the larger context in which 
societies exist. It is now commonplace for Centers to emphasize 
interregional and global flows of people, concepts, and objects in 
their activities, so this proposed change would only emphasize how area 
studies and international studies offer complementary approaches to 
instruction, research, and training. This proposed interpretation also 
aligns with the larger program goals of section 1122(a)(1)(B). That is, 
even with a geographical focus, Centers would still be required to 
engage in all these activities to meet the program's purpose, including 
support for international studies. Centering a geographic world area 
also would help centers align their activities to the recommendations 
provided by the ``consultation on areas of national need'' for 
expertise in foreign languages and world regions required by 20 U.S.C. 
1121(c)(1). A geographically defined focus also would support the 
Secretary's efforts to distribute funds in a manner that supports the 
consultation, which necessarily generates recommendations related to 
specific language and geographically defined world areas rather than 
themes or topics in international studies.
    The importance of a geographically defined focus for Centers also 
is evident in other portions of the statute. Under 20 U.S.C. 
1132(a)(2), a comprehensive Center must employ scholars related to a 
``geographic concentration'' and offer intensive language training in 
its ``area of specialization.'' Section 1132(a)(10) expresses an 
expectation that undergraduate Centers will produce graduates who 
matriculate into advanced language and area studies programs. 
Accordingly, requiring a geographically defined area of focus for both 
comprehensive and undergraduate Centers is not incompatible with the 
overall purpose of the program. Under the proposed regulations, centers 
would retain the flexibility to define their geographic area of focus, 
which may be a traditionally recognized world region, a single country, 
or another configuration of space that draws attention to world issues, 
peoples, and any related languages outside the United States.
Section 656.4 For what special purposes may a Center receive an 
additional grant under this part?
    Statute: Section 602(a)(3)-(4) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-
(4)) authorizes the Secretary to make additional grants to centers for 
specific purposes, such as maintaining important library collections, 
conducting outreach, and hosting summer institutes.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.5(b) allows the Secretary to make 
additional grants to support linkages, outreach, partnerships, and 
summer institutes related to the program's purpose, in the context of 
addressing activities authorized by the statute.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  656.4 would be a standalone 
section addressing the additional grants to centers authorized by 20 
U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4) and, consistent with the statute, would include 
the maintenance of important library collections among the list of 
permissible purposes for such grants.
    Reasons: We believe the creation of a standalone section that 
addresses additional grants and mirrors the language in 20 U.S.C. 
1122(a)(3)-(4) would allow for more efficient administration of the NRC 
program. The proposed regulation would clarify that these additional 
grants are for existing centers and any such additional grants also 
could be used for maintaining appropriate library collections.
Section 656.6 What definitions apply to this program?
    Statute: Section 602 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122) authorizes the 
Secretary to

[[Page 13521]]

define terms necessary to make grants under the NRC Program.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.7 defines several terms relevant to 
the NRC Program and several terms that relate to multiple programs 
authorized by title VI of the HEA.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  656.6 would define ``critical 
mass of scholars'' and clarify the definition of ``Center'' for 
purposes of the NRC Program. The proposed regulation also would remove 
the definitions of ``area studies,'' ``comprehensive Center,'' 
``intensive language instruction,'' and ``undergraduate Center'' all of 
which would be relocated to part 655.
    Reasons: Reducing the number of definitions in proposed Sec.  
656.6, and clarifying those that remain, would improve the efficiency 
of NRC Program administration and reduce the burden on applicants and 
grantees. Defining the statutory term ``critical mass of scholars'' 
would provide guidance to applicants and reduce ambiguity in the 
regulations. It would also provide substantial flexibility in the 
describing qualifications, density, and overall significance of 
scholars.
    Proposed Sec.  656.6 also would clarify that a ``Center'' refers to 
a grantee under the NRC Program, regardless of its title or 
organizational form on campus. Grantees (or ``centers'' for purposes of 
the NRC Program) are distinct administrative subunits within an IHE.
    Finally, terms related to the administration of multiple 
International Education Programs authorized by title VI of the HEA 
would be relocated to part 655, which applies to all International 
Education Programs.
Section 656.7 Severability
    Statute: 20 U.S.C. 1122 authorizes the Secretary to define terms 
necessary to make grants under the NRC Program.
    Current Regulations: The current regulations do not address 
severability.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation would add a 
severability provision.
    Reasons: The Department seeks to clarify its intent that, with 
regard to severability, each of the regulations in 34 CFR part 656 and 
its subparts serves one or more important, related, but distinct, 
purposes. To best serve these purposes, we included this administrative 
provision in the regulations to make clear that the regulations are 
designed to operate independently of each other and to convey the 
Department's intent that the potential invalidity of one provision or 
any of its subparts should not affect the remainder of the provisions.
Application and Selection Processes (Sec. Sec.  656.10, 656.11, and 
656.20)
    Statute: Section 602(e) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(e)) requires 
institutions seeking a grant under this program to follow an 
application process designed by the Secretary.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.10 allows an applicant to submit a 
combined application for the NRC and FLAS programs. Section 656.20 
describes which selection criteria are used and how the Department 
communicates the point values for the selection criteria.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation would update the 
application and selection process to provide more accurate guidance 
based on current program management practices. The proposed change 
would eliminate the possibility of submitting to both the NRC and FLAS 
Fellowships Program simultaneously (though applicants still could 
continue to submit separate applications under each program). Proposed 
Sec.  656.10 would affirm that the NRC Program follows the Department's 
standard procedures for grant applications, by directing potential 
applicants to the application notice in the Federal Register for 
guidance. Proposed Sec.  656.11 would clarify the assurances and 
materials required in every application for the NRC Program. Proposed 
Sec.  656.20 would add additional information about the selection 
process, including a description of the peer review and ranking 
process, and the process that would apply to the grants authorized 
under 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)- (4).
    Reasons: The NRC and FLAS Fellowships Programs have long been 
identified by separate Assistance Listing Numbers, and applications for 
these programs have been evaluated using program-specific selection 
criteria. The Department began using Grants.gov to receive applications 
for these two programs for the fiscal year 2022 competition. In 
addition to the substantive differences between the programs and the 
selection criteria, Grants.gov cannot accept one application for two 
programs with individual Assistance Listing Numbers. Given these 
substantive differences and technical limitations, removing the option 
for simultaneous submission would improve the efficiency of program 
administration.
    The additional information on assurances and required application 
materials in proposed Sec.  656.11 would clarify statutory requirements 
and improve the efficiency of program administration. Section 602(e) of 
the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(e)) requires an explanation of how grant funded 
activities reflect diverse perspectives, as defined in proposed Sec.  
655.4, and how applicants will encourage government service in areas of 
national need, as well as in areas of need in the education, business, 
and non-profit sectors. The Department already has required applicants 
for the NRC Program to submit these assurances for multiple 
competitions. The proposed regulation would emphasize the importance of 
this requirement.
    Proposed Sec.  656.20 would promote transparency and support 
efficient program management by adding a more detailed description of 
the selection process. The proposed change also would clarify that 
applications for grants to centers for special purposes authorized in 
20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4) would be evaluated using a newly developed set 
of selection criteria specifically designed for this purpose.
    Under proposed Sec.  656.20, experts in relevant fields would 
review applications for comprehensive Centers, undergraduate Centers, 
and special purpose grants to determine excellence based on the 
appropriate selection criteria. Applications with similar areas of 
geographic focus would be grouped together. Peer reviewers would score 
each application separately, and then applications from each group 
would be selected for funding in rank order within each group based on 
the peer reviewers' scores. If a lack of funds prevented funding all 
highly ranked applications in each group, the proposed regulation would 
permit the Department to consider the degree to which applications were 
likely to serve any competition priorities published in the application 
notice that were derived from the ``consultation on areas of national 
need'' or that were related to specific countries, world areas, or 
languages.
    Variations on the proposed peer review process have been included 
in the application notice for several grant cycles. This proposed 
change would increase transparency and benefit new applicants that may 
be unfamiliar with the selection process. It would also affirm the 
importance of supporting the study of world areas or languages 
identified through the consultation process or priorities established 
by the Secretary.
Selection Criteria and Program Priorities (Sec. Sec.  656.21, 656.22, 
656.23, 656.24)
    Statute: Section 602(a)(1)(B) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(1)(B)) 
describes centers and programs awarded grants under this section as 
national resources

[[Page 13522]]

for teaching modern foreign languages and providing related research 
and instruction in other academic fields. Section 602(a)(3)-(4) of the 
HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4)) authorizes the Secretary to make 
additional grants to these centers for specific purposes, such as 
maintaining important library collections. Section 607(a) of the HEA 
(20 U.S.C. 1127(a)) requires separate grant selection criteria for 
comprehensive Centers and for undergraduate Centers. Section 607(b) of 
the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1127(b)) requires the Secretary to set selection 
criteria that will enable reviewers to determine excellence relative to 
the program's objectives. This section also requires the Secretary to 
consider specific selection criteria, such as the degree to which 
activities of centers and programs address national needs.
    Current Regulation: Section 656.21 describes the selection criteria 
for comprehensive Centers. Section 656.22 describes the selection 
criteria for undergraduate Centers. Existing regulations do not 
describe selection criteria for additional grants made to centers for 
specific purposes mentioned in the statute. Section 656.23 describes 
the possible funding priorities for the NRC Program.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed changes to the selection criteria 
would add clarity, eliminate redundancy, and reduce the burden on 
applicants while improving alignment with the authorizing statute. The 
current selection criteria for comprehensive Centers are comprised of 
ten criteria and 27 specific sub-criteria, excluding competitive 
preference priorities. The current selection criteria for undergraduate 
Centers are comprised of ten criteria and 26 specific sub-criteria, 
excluding competitive preference priorities. The proposed changes would 
reduce the number of criteria for both comprehensive and undergraduate 
Centers to six and reduce the number of sub-criteria to 24. The 
proposed changes also would add a new set of selection criteria for the 
additional grants made to Centers for specific purposes authorized 
under 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(3)-(4).
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)-(c) and 656.22(a)-(c) would require 
applicants to describe the current state of administrative operations, 
academic programs, educational resources, outreach and engagement 
initiatives, and other relevant activities. Proposed Sec. Sec.  
656.21(d)-(g) and 656.22(d)-(g) would ask applicants to describe their 
goals and plans for the grant period. Proposed Sec.  656.23 would add 
selection criteria for additional special purpose grants authorized by 
the statute.
    Proposed Sec.  656.24 would rephrase the current list of priorities 
in Sec.  656.23, add new priorities related to the teaching of specific 
modern foreign languages, the ``consultation on areas of national 
need,'' and the type of center, and it would remove a priority related 
to the types of center activities.
    Reasons: The proposed revisions to the selection criteria are 
designed to provide greater alignment with the NRC Program statute. As 
described further below, focusing proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)-(c) and 
656.22(a)-(c) on an applicant's current state of operations would help 
us select grantees that are most likely to meet the minimum 
characteristics of comprehensive and undergraduate Centers as defined 
in the statute and these proposed regulations. Proposed Sec. Sec.  
656.21(d)-(f) and 656.22(d)-(f) would require applicants to address 
plans to enhance their institutional capacity and conduct other project 
activities during the grant's performance period. The proposed 
arrangement of selection criteria would streamline the structure of the 
application narrative.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a) and 656.22(a) would add a criterion 
for ``Center scope, personnel and operations.'' This proposed criterion 
would combine and streamline elements of the selection criteria found 
in the current Sec. Sec.  656.21(b) and 656.21(d) for comprehensive 
Centers and Sec. Sec.  656.22(b) and 656.22(d) for undergraduate 
Centers. The proposed sections would continue to address the core 
operations of the proposed center, including staffing arrangement, 
governance, nondiscriminatory employment practices, and institutional 
commitment. Grouping sub-criteria related to these topics into a single 
category and clarifying that these sub-criteria refer specifically to 
the administrative unit seeking a designation as a National Resource 
Center under this program would reduce the confusion among applicants 
regarding the appropriate scope for this category. For example, a 
discussion of non-discriminatory employment practices should address 
practices specific to the proposed center rather than only providing 
general statements about practices at the institution as a whole, 
except to provide necessary context for the proposed Center's 
operations. The proposed category also would address topics that the 
current selection criteria do not address, such as the quality of 
existing academic programs and the impact of existing activities and 
resources.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a) and 656.22(a) would require 
applicants to explain how the focus of a proposed comprehensive Center 
or undergraduate Center, respectively, aligns with a geographic world 
area and existing opportunities for training, research, and instruction 
at the applicant institution. This approach would benefit applicants 
because we recognize that applicants may propose novel or distinctive 
approaches grounded in research, so they would be able to clearly 
explain the proposed center's area of focus to reviewers and describe 
the rationale for it.
    As noted above, proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a) and 656.22(a) also 
would combine elements of the selection criteria found in the current 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(b) and 656.21(d) for comprehensive Centers and 
656.22(b) and 656.22(d) for undergraduate Centers, respectively. The 
proposed criteria would continue to address staff qualifications and 
professional development, nondiscriminatory employment practices, 
oversight arrangements, and institutional commitment.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)(2) and 656.22(a)(2) would limit 
consideration of personnel qualifications to the position of project 
director and the proposed Center's staff, and focus on administrative 
capacity, without extending consideration to teaching faculty and other 
staff as under current Sec. Sec.  656.21(b)(1) and 656.22(b)(1). 
Applicants typically have large numbers of teaching faculty, most of 
whom are not directly involved in the administration of a proposed 
Center. Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(b)(3)-(4) and 656.22(b)(3)-(4) would 
require applicants to describe the qualifications of teaching faculty 
to demonstrate the quality of academic programs, which more closely 
aligns with the major responsibilities of most teaching faculty. 
Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)(3) and 656.22(a)(3) would specifically 
require consortia applicants to provide a rationale for the formation 
of a consortium, which would allow reviewers to evaluate the 
administrative impact of the consortium agreement.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)(4) and 656.22(a)(4) would require 
applicants to describe financial, administrative, and other support 
specifically for the proposed Center rather than for the entire 
relevant subject area as under current Sec. Sec.  656.21(d) and 
656.22(d). Reported amounts of financial support are subject to wide 
variation for reasons unrelated to an institution's actual level of 
commitment. Labor and other costs vary substantially by geographic 
location within the United States. Financial support for students may 
reflect an IHE's tuition rates, which vary widely across institutions. 
For example,

[[Page 13523]]

an institution that charges very modest tuition and routinely waives 
all tuition and mandatory fees for students in an area studies program 
may report a lower level of total financial support for students under 
the current selection criteria than an institution that charges much 
higher tuition and only waives a small portion of tuition for a similar 
population of students. The proposed change would allow reviewers to 
evaluate institutional support that is directly relevant to the 
administration of the applicant's proposed project and the resources 
that will support the applicant to conduct project activities. The 
other proposed selection criteria provide alternative opportunities to 
demonstrate the effects of an institution's financial support for the 
proposed Center's area of focus in terms of the availability and 
quality of various educational resources, such as teaching staff, 
library resources, linkages with institutions abroad, outreach 
activities, and student support.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(b) and 656.22(b) would add a criterion 
for ``Quality of existing academic programs.'' This proposed criterion 
would combine elements of the selection criteria found in the current 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(f)-(h) and 656.22(f)-(h) for the comprehensive 
Centers and undergraduate Centers, respectively. The proposed criteria 
would continue to address elements of curriculum design, language 
instruction, non-language area studies instruction, but the proposed 
category would allow applicants to address these elements in a more 
integrated manner, emphasizing how these elements of academic 
excellence are closely interconnected. Overall, the proposed changes 
would explicitly require applicants to describe distinctive strengths 
in instruction and curriculum design, so applicants would be able to 
highlight features of national significance. Proposed Sec. Sec.  
656.21(b)(1) and 656.22(b)(1) would continue to emphasize the degree to 
which intentionally interdisciplinary approaches to instruction, 
training, and research are indicators of excellence for the NRC 
Program. Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(b)(3) and 656.22(b)(3) would 
require applicants to describe whether applicants integrate performance 
goals into language instruction and how applicants determine whether 
those goals are being met. This sub-criterion would acknowledge that 
the design, implementation, and ongoing improvement of language 
instruction is an indicator of excellence.
    The proposed changes in Sec. Sec.  656.21(b) and 656.22(b) also use 
the definitional characteristics that appear in the statute as the 
basis for distinguishing more clearly between the complementary 
purposes of the academic programs associated with comprehensive Centers 
and the academic programs of undergraduate Centers. Proposed Sec.  
656.21(b)(1) would require applicants for a comprehensive Center to 
demonstrate that the applicant's institution or consortium of 
institutions serve undergraduate, graduate, and professional students 
through relevant educational programs. Proposed Sec.  656.22(b)(1) 
would require applicants for an undergraduate Center to demonstrate 
that the institution or consortium of institutions primarily serves 
undergraduate students through educational programs as an outgrowth of 
the institution's mission and identity as an institution focused 
predominantly or even exclusively on undergraduate education. In this 
context, an institution ``predominantly'' serves undergraduate students 
when baccalaureate or higher degrees represent at least 50 percent of 
all degrees but where fewer than 50 master's degrees or 20 doctoral 
degrees were awarded in the most recent year preceding the application 
deadline for which data is available. These proposed criteria would 
improve the selection of all Centers described in 20 U.S.C. 
1122(a)(1)(A), including a diverse network of undergraduate Centers 
that are distinct from the comprehensive Centers. These proposed 
criteria would not require the existence of any specific educational 
programs at applicant institutions.
    The differences between comprehensive Centers and undergraduate 
Centers also would appear in other criteria. Proposed Sec.  
656.21(b)(2) would require comprehensive Centers to demonstrate the 
existence of intensive language instruction, which is a characteristic 
of a comprehensive Center mentioned in the proposed Sec.  656.21(b)(4). 
Proposed Sec.  656.22(b)(4) would address the relevant faculty, 
scholars, instructors, and other academic personnel that support 
educational programs at the applicant institution, but Sec.  
656.21(b)(4) would require comprehensive Center applicants to 
demonstrate the existence of a critical mass of expertise relevant to 
the proposed Center's area of focus. In addition to addressing 
definitional characteristics from the statute, this criterion would 
also allow applicants to demonstrate that faculty have the capacity to 
support graduate and professional programs rather than only 
undergraduate programs.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(c) and 656.22(c) would add a criterion 
for ``Impact of existing activities and resources.'' This proposed 
criterion would combine elements of the selection criteria found in the 
current Sec. Sec.  656.21(c), 656.21(e), and 656.21(i) for 
comprehensive Centers, and Sec. Sec.  656.22(c), 656.22(e), and 
656.22(i) for undergraduate Centers. The proposed criterion would 
require applicants to describe how the applicants' educational 
resources, efforts to engage various audiences, and educational 
programs demonstrate that proposed centers make distinctive 
contributions at the national level. Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(c)(3) 
and 656.22(c)(3) would continue to affirm that effective outreach and 
engagement involving a wide range of audiences and partners are crucial 
elements of the NRC. The proposed wording both streamlines the 
discussion of outreach efforts and allows applicants to describe other 
audiences. The proposed change would also emphasize that the existence 
of outreach and engagement programs alone does not speak to their 
efficacy. Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(c)(4) and 656.22(c)(4) would 
closely resemble the current Sec. Sec.  656.21(c)(3)-(4) and 
656.22(c)(3)-(4) by requiring applicants to respond to a criterion 
mandated by the statute that addresses how applicants currently address 
national needs for language and area studies expertise and knowledge 
identified by Federal agencies, as well as other needs identified in 
other sectors, including the education, business, and non-profit 
sectors.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(c)(1)-(2) would further clarify that 
comprehensive Centers and affiliated individuals are expected to make 
significant contributions to research and the provision of access to 
educational resources that enable different types of research. As 
employed in proposed Sec.  656.21(c)(1), we would interpret the 
``national interest'' as broadly as possible to reflect the statute's 
interest in supporting the security, stability, and economic vitality 
of the United States, which includes the recognition that the 
production of advanced research about world regions is critical for 
ensuring that IHEs remain globally competitive within the global 
landscape of higher education.
    Consistent with 20 U.S.C. 1132(a)(2), proposed Sec.  656.21(c)(2) 
would require comprehensive Centers to maintain ``important'' library 
collections that would support the comprehensive Center's activities. 
The proposed sub-criterion would specify that important library 
collections include distinctive holdings that do not duplicate 
materials widely available at other libraries, especially in light of 
the increasing importance of digital access to scholarly monographs and 
journals. Including the concept of ``access'' would make clear

[[Page 13524]]

that important collections are collections that are used by 
researchers, including those not based at institutions of higher 
education. Whether through the digitization of special collections or 
access policies, applicants would be required to describe the degree to 
which they make their collections available to others through various 
means. Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.22(c)(1)-(2) would adapt these sub-
criteria to the distinct purpose of undergraduate Centers. This 
proposed sub-criterion would remove the explicit consideration of 
financial support for acquisition and library staff in current 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(e)(1) and 656.22(e)(1), as well as direct 
consideration of cooperative arrangements and databases in current 
656.21(e)(2) and 656.22(e)(2). Although financial support is critical 
for the long-term viability of academic libraries, such support is less 
directly relevant for reviewers to determine the resources and 
expertise that will be available during the grant's performance period. 
The proposed sub-criteria would directly address library staffing 
rather than financial support for staffing. Online databases and other 
electronic materials are now commonplace in library collections, so 
they do not need to be singled out as resources apart from a library's 
normal collections. Moreover, the concept of an ``important'' library 
collection is sufficiently broad that applicants for comprehensive 
Centers may include any or all of these considerations in their 
response to the proposed sub-criterion.
    In contrast to proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(a)-(c) and 656.22(a)-(c) 
that would focus on the applicants' current operations, proposed 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(d)-(g) and 656.22(d)-(g) would require applicants to 
describe their goals and plans for the grant period. Proposed 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(d) and 656.22(d) would add a criterion for ``Project 
design and rationale.'' This criterion would require applicants to 
explain the overall vision for their projects and how their projects 
are intended to meet the purposes of the NRC Program. This proposed 
addition would complement the criteria proposed in Sec. Sec.  656.21(e) 
and 656.22(e), which would address plans for activities and budgets, 
and the criteria in proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(f) and 656.22(f), which 
would address plans for project evaluation. Proposed Sec. Sec.  
656.21(e)-(f) and 656.22(e)-(f) would emphasize that applicants must 
select activities, allocate funds, and determine whether intended 
project outcomes are attained in an intentional manner that is 
responsive to institutional contexts and aligned with project goals. 
The changes also would emphasize in this context that evaluation plans 
must be simple, cost-effective, and focused on high level outcomes 
rather than on tracking expenses or the implementation of individual 
activities.
    These three interrelated criteria would require applicants to 
explain the intended outcomes for their projects, specific activities 
and how they would align with the intended outcomes, and the evaluative 
process that would help determine whether those intended outcomes were 
being realized during the grant period. These criteria would enable 
peer reviewers to determine the excellence of the proposed project in 
relation to the current state described in proposed Sec. Sec.  
656.21(a)-(c) and 656.22(a)-(c).
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(d)(4) and 656.22(d)(4) would require 
applicants to explain how diverse perspectives and a wide range of 
views required by the statute would be represented in the project. This 
sub-criterion would allow expert peer reviewers to evaluate how 
effectively the proposed project would address a statutory mandate that 
project activities reflect diverse perspectives and a wide range of 
views on world regions and international affairs and generate debate on 
world regions and international affairs. This approach would complement 
the current requirement for applicants to submit an assurance on this 
topic by allowing applicants to receive expert feedback, which they 
currently do not. The proposed sub-criterion also would provide 
additional guidance to applicants that the discussion of diverse 
perspectives should be directly relevant to the proposed project rather 
than a general statement about institutional practices. This approach 
would ensure that high scoring applicants would be likely to meet the 
statutory expectation at the time of application and throughout the 
grant's performance period.
    The proposed selection criteria would also eliminate certain 
elements of the current selection criteria not addressed above. Current 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(h)(3) and 656.22(h)(3) specifically include the 
extent to which the institution facilitates student access to other 
institutions' study abroad and summer language programs. The proposed 
selection criteria would not include identical provisions. Because 
proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(b)and 656.22(b) require applicants to 
address the extent to which an institution makes high-quality training 
in modern foreign language and area or international studies available, 
however, the proposed regulations would not preclude discussing student 
access to other institutions' study abroad and summer language programs 
in this context. The proposed regulations would eliminate current 
Sec. Sec.  656.21(j) and 656.22(j), ``Degree to which priorities are 
served,'' as the Secretary may award points for competitive preference 
priorities without including such a category in the selection criteria. 
See generally 34 CFR 75.105(c). Although the Department has never 
interpreted the regulations to allow it, moreover, removing priorities 
from the selection criteria also avoids the appearance of allowing 
applicants to receive points twice for responding to the same 
competitive preference priority (once through the selection criteria, 
and once for responding to the priority). This proposed change would 
not alter the current approach to competitive preference priorities. 
Current Sec. Sec.  656.21(c)(2) and 656.22(c)(2) require that an 
applicant's evaluation plan produce quantifiable, outcome-measure-
oriented data. The proposed regulations would eliminate this explicit 
requirement. Instead, proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(f) and 656.22(f) would 
require applicants to describe a more holistic approach to evaluation, 
including the qualifications of the evaluator(s) and an evaluation plan 
that is appropriate for the grant project. Although many performance-
related data are quantifiable, not all data collected for evaluation 
purposes are quantifiable. Qualitative data may be a component of an 
evaluation plan. The proposed regulations also would include a 
requirement to describe plans to obtain performance feedback and 
periodic assessment of progress toward meeting intended outcomes, so 
the proposed approach incorporates an interest in project outcomes. The 
proposed regulations would provide greater flexibility to applicants 
when designing an evaluation plan.
    By separating the award of special project grants from the award of 
center grants, the addition of proposed Sec.  656.23 would streamline 
the Department's implementation of the statute. Proposed Sec.  656.23 
would be very similar to proposed Sec. Sec.  656.21(d)-(f) and 
656.22(d)-(f), which focus on the purpose and activities related to an 
applicants' project, but because only Centers selected for funding 
under the NRC Program would be eligible for these additional grants, 
applicants would not be required to submit duplicative information 
about the current state of the applicant institution. Proposed Sec.  
656.23 would make clear that additional special purpose grants are 
intended to allow applicants to achieve a significant outcome in 
addition to the

[[Page 13525]]

funding typically provided under the NRC Program and cannot be used to 
supplant funding for other project activities.
    Proposed Sec.  656.24 would rephrase the current list of priorities 
in Sec.  656.23, add three new priorities, and drop a priority. The 
rephrasing of priorities in current Sec.  656.23 would enhance clarity 
by removing redundant or unnecessary words. Given the importance of the 
instruction of modern foreign languages, especially less commonly 
taught languages in the program statute, adding a priority related to 
the teaching of specific modern foreign languages would improve the 
Secretary's ability to meet the program purpose by prioritizing 
instruction in certain languages, if the need arises. The new priority 
related to the ``consultation on national need'' would allow the 
Secretary to select a priority that explicitly reflects the results of 
the consultation with Federal agencies. While such consultation is 
required by the statute, this proposed change would enable the 
Secretary to easily identify a priority for a specific language or 
world region as aligned with the national needs recognized by Federal 
agencies, which would better integrate the required consultation and 
the NRC Program. The proposed regulation would drop a priority related 
to the specific focus of a center but would add a similar priority that 
addresses both the geographically defined focus and topical focus of a 
center. This priority would align with the requirement that all centers 
declare a geographic area of focus incorporated into these proposed 
regulations. The combination of geographic focus and topical focus 
would ensure the Secretary is able to appropriately prioritize awards, 
if needed.
Section 656.30 What activities and costs are allowable?
    Statute: Section 602(a)(2) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(2)) states 
that grants made under this section may pay all or part of the cost of 
establishing or operating a relevant center or program.
    Current Regulation: Sections 656.3, 656.5, and 656.30 explain 
allowable costs and activities for the NRC Program.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  656.30 would combine current 
Sec.  656.30 with current Sec. Sec.  656.3 and 656.5 to make one 
comprehensive allowable costs and activities section. Proposed Sec.  
656.30 would reorder the list of examples of allowable activities 
included in the current regulation and would add several new 
limitations on costs, including a prohibition on compensation for 
project directors and a limitation on personnel costs for individuals 
who are not directly engaged in the instruction of less commonly taught 
languages. The proposed regulation would also add an explicit pre-
approval requirement for costs associated with international travel. 
The proposed regulation would preserve the current requirement that 
grant funds may not supplant funds normally used by applicants to 
support the same activities.
    Reasons: Proposed Sec.  656.30 would reduce repetition and 
streamline the description of allowable costs and activities by 
combining three sections into one comprehensive section. In keeping 
with the statutory direction in 20 U.S.C. 1122(a)(2), NRC Program 
grants may pay all or part of the cost associated with establishing or 
operating a center, so the NRC Program's primary limitations on 
allowable activities would remain the scope of funded applications and 
whether individual activities serve the purpose of establishing or 
operating a center. The listed activities and their associated costs 
would continue to serve as examples of activities and costs typically 
deemed allowed for the NRC Program. The list would highlight activities 
that are closely aligned with the program purpose.
    The proposed changes would revise and reorder the combined list of 
activities to enhance clarity by highlighting activities that directly 
serve the program purpose. In addition, the proposed regulation would 
add to the list of allowable activities support for instructors of the 
less commonly taught languages, opportunities for the study of the less 
commonly taught languages, dissemination of information about the 
Center's area of focus to various audiences through domestic outreach 
activities, efforts to increase language proficiency for students in 
STEM fields, establishing and maintaining linkages with overseas 
institutions of higher education, and conducting projects that 
encourage and prepare students to seek employment relevant to the 
Center's area of focus in areas of national need. The proposed 
regulation would also expand the scope of listed activities related to 
libraries to include the maintenance of library collection and efforts 
to enhance access to library collections. Centers frequently engage in 
many of these activities.
    The proposed regulation would preserve the current requirement that 
grant funds may not supplant funds normally used by applicants to 
support the same activities, to ensure that grant funds are a catalyst 
for institutional investment in a critical area of the national 
postsecondary education infrastructure. The proposed regulation also 
would add several new limitations on costs to limit or prohibit costs 
that would be unlikely to serve the purposes of the NRC Program, based 
upon substantial experience in administering the program. These 
limitations would include a prohibition on compensation for project 
directors and a limitation on personnel costs for individuals who are 
not directly engaged in the instruction of less commonly taught 
languages. The proposed regulation would also add an explicit pre-
approval requirement for costs associated with international travel. 
Experience with administration of the NRC Program has demonstrated that 
these limitations and the pre-approval requirement are prudent and 
necessary to ensure that grant funds are being spent effectively in 
service of the program's purpose. These limitations also follow 
longstanding guidance and technical assistance to the grantee 
community.

Part 657

    Statute: 20 U.S.C. 1122.
    Current Regulations: Part 657 contains the regulations for the FLAS 
Fellowships Program.
    Proposed Regulation: The Department proposes to replace part 657 in 
its entirety due to the number of necessary changes and the 
accompanying need to reorganize these parts to improve readability. 
Sections that address similar topics would be combined, and duplicative 
or contradictory paragraphs would be eliminated.
    Reasons: These changes would allow the Department to substantially 
revise the selection criteria and application processes for the FLAS 
Fellowships Program, introduce new definitions, revise or eliminate 
existing definitions, align the regulations with the statute, and 
reduce the burden associated with the FLAS Fellowships Program.
Section 657.1 What is the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships 
Program?
    Statute: Section 602(b)(1) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(1)) 
authorizes the Secretary to make grants to institutions of higher 
education or consortia of such institutions for the purpose of paying 
stipends to individuals undergoing advanced training in centers or 
programs approved by the Secretary.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.1 describes the FLAS Fellowships 
Program as a program that provides IHEs with allocations of fellowships 
that are awarded to eligible students.

[[Page 13526]]

    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.1 would clarify that the 
FLAS Fellowships Program is an institutional program that enables 
eligible IHEs to compete for an allocation of fellowships that are 
distributed to eligible students on a competitive basis.
    Reasons: The proposed change would reduce confusion by eliminating 
details about student eligibility criteria from this section, because 
these eligibility criteria would be addressed at greater length 
elsewhere. The proposed change would also highlight the advanced nature 
of the interdisciplinary training that the statute envisions for the 
fellows, to satisfy the statutory purpose of creating a pool of trained 
personnel and experts in foreign language and area studies to meet 
national needs identified by Federal agencies, as well as other needs 
identified in other sectors, including the education, business, and 
nonprofit sectors. See, e.g., 20 U.S.C. 1121(b)(1)(B). The ongoing and 
sustained cultivation of expertise through training provided by IHEs 
across the full range of world areas and modern foreign languages helps 
ensure the security, stability, and economic vitality of the United 
States. The fellowships also provide invaluable support for instruction 
and training in area studies and foreign language at the IHEs that 
receive allocations of fellowships.
Institutional Eligibility and the Requirements for an Allocation of 
Fellowships (Sec. Sec.  657.2 and 657.3)
    Statute: Section 602(b)(1) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(1)) 
authorizes the Secretary to make grants to institutions of higher 
education or consortia of such institutions for the purpose of paying 
stipends to individuals undergoing advanced training in any center or 
program approved by the Secretary.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.2 describes the eligibility 
criteria for IHEs.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.2 would clarify that only 
IHEs or a consortium of IHEs are eligible for an allocation of 
fellowships under the FLAS program. Proposed Sec.  657.3 would address 
all additional instructional and administrative requirements for 
grantees under this program.
    Reasons: The proposed regulation would align the institutional 
eligibility determination in proposed Sec.  657.2 with the statute by 
clearly stating that all IHEs are eligible to apply for an allocation 
of fellowships. Proposed Sec.  657.3 would provide a more concise list 
of instructional and administrative requirements for institutional 
grantees under the FLAS Fellowships Program than the current Sec.  
657.2. Proposed Sec.  657.3(b) would also improve transparency by 
clearly linking the administration of the allocation of fellowships 
with the applicants' application materials. As in the current 
regulations, proposed Sec.  657.3 specifies that applicants would not 
need to be grantees under the NRC Program to be eligible to receive an 
allocation of fellowships under the FLAS Fellowships Program, even 
though the programs are complementary.
Section 657.4 Who is eligible to receive a fellowship?
    Statute: Section 602(b)(2) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(2)) 
describes the FLAS Fellowships Program eligibility criteria.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.3 describes the fellowship 
eligibility criteria for students who are enrolled or have been 
accepted for enrollment at an IHE that receives an allocation of 
fellowships. Section 657.30 describes limitations on the award of 
fellowships, including with respect to student eligibility.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.4 would retain existing 
requirements for citizenship and residency, enrollment status, academic 
merit, and modern foreign language study in a program using or 
developing performance goals. The proposed regulation would add 
descriptions of the training that three distinct populations of 
students must be able to receive during the fellowship period to be 
eligible to receive fellowships. The proposed changes would clarify 
that a student's educational program is a relevant criterion for 
determining a student's eligibility for a FLAS Fellowship.
    Reasons: The proposed regulation would reduce ambiguity and the 
potential for contradictory interpretations of student eligibility 
criteria. Adding descriptions of allowable types of training also would 
emphasize that student eligibility is tied to the availability of 
appropriate opportunities for instruction and training.
    The proposed changes would tie fellowship eligibility to a 
student's educational program to better align the program design with 
the program's statutory purpose of promoting expertise in foreign 
language and area studies. In this context, a student's educational 
program refers to their degree program, inclusive of major 
requirements, minor requirements, general education requirements, 
certificate requirements, and other curricular requirements. The 
holistic emphasis on educational programs rather than solely focusing 
on individual courses during a specific academic term would ensure that 
fellowships are supporting the structured and intentional training of 
experts within appropriate curricular frameworks.
    The proposed changes would allow a grantee to identify any 
educational program as eligible if the educational program combines the 
study of modern foreign languages with area studies or the study of 
other fields from an international perspective. The diversity of 
curricular options at grantee IHEs would ensure the cultivation of 
relevant expertise in a wide variety of fields. The proposed regulation 
would recognize that well-designed curricula leading to recognized 
educational credentials are the most appropriate means for cultivating 
the types of expertise in modern foreign languages and area studies 
contemplated by the statute. We believe that the proposed regulation 
would encourage IHEs to innovate and establish appropriate 
interdisciplinary curricular options for students to study modern 
foreign languages and area studies in all fields of study, including 
STEM and professional fields. Formal curricular options discourage ad 
hoc arrangements that benefit one or only a small number of students. 
Making educational programs a fellowship eligibility criterion also 
would mitigate risk to the Department because it would require IHEs to 
demonstrate commitment to provide relevant courses, faculty, and 
educational resources for fellows at the grantee institution throughout 
the performance period.
Section 657.5 What is the amount of a fellowship?
    Statute: Section 602(b)(1) (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(1)) authorizes the 
Secretary to makes grants to IHEs or consortia of such institutions for 
the purpose of paying stipends to eligible students.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.31 describes the amount and 
components of a fellowship.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed changes would relocate the 
description of the fellowship amount to subpart A to improve the 
organization of the program regulations. Proposed Sec.  657.5 would 
combine the current subsistence payment for the fellow (stipend) with 
the institutional payment for tuition and fees into a single stipend 
amount that would go to the fellow. This change would make a single 
stipend payment the major component of fellowships awarded under the 
FLAS Fellowships Program. Following current practice, the stipend 
amount for the academic year

[[Page 13527]]

and summer as well as graduate and undergraduate fellowships authorized 
under this program would be announced in the Federal Register.
    Reasons: Given the program's longstanding prohibition on 
administrative costs, the elimination of the institutional payment 
would eliminate the substantial burden for grantees associated with 
tracking and processing institutional payments as distinct from the 
stipend payments. The proposed change also acknowledges that 
institutional definitions of mandatory fees vary greatly, which 
complicates the Department's ability to set an appropriate 
institutional payment amount. The proposed change would also establish 
predictable unit costs for fellowships, which would promote the 
efficient allocation and administration of fellowships. The proposed 
change would improve the ability of grantees to increase the number of 
meritorious students who apply for a fellowship because of the 
potential for larger stipend payments, which would enhance the 
program's ability to meet its statutory purpose. The Department 
anticipates that grantees already contributing to costs above the 
institutional payment amount, to match commitments made to similar 
students at the same IHE, will continue to do so.
    The proposed change would not alter the Department's expectation 
that payments cover fellows' living expenses and the costs of advanced 
training in modern foreign languages and area studies. The proposed 
change would not affect the requirement that fellows remain in good 
academic standing and make satisfactory progress during the fellowship 
period or face potential termination of the fellowship. The proposed 
change would make additional funds available directly to the fellow and 
discourage IHEs from artificially increasing the institutional payment 
by setting tuition and fee amounts greater than actual costs. 
Increasing the amount of funds directly available to the fellow would 
allow the fellow to defray costs for specialized materials and 
experiences that support advanced training in modern foreign languages 
and area studies that would fall outside the definition of tuition, 
fees, or living expenses. The increased flexibility resulting from the 
proposed change would make the FLAS Fellowships Program more comparable 
to other Federal programs with similar goals, such as Boren 
Scholarships and Boren Fellowships, which cover recipient expenses for 
books, research materials, and other expenses apart from living 
expenses, tuition, and fees.
Section 657.7 What definitions apply to this program?
    Statute: Section 602 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122) authorizes the 
Secretary to define terms necessary to make grants under the FLAS 
Fellowships Program.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.5 defines terms that apply to the 
FLAS Fellowships Program.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.7 would add the definition 
of ``stipend'' for the FLAS Fellowships Program. The proposed 
regulation would adjust the terminology used in part 657 by replacing 
the terms ``Center'' and ``program'' with the terms ``approved 
Centers'' and ``approved programs.''
    Reasons: The proposed changes would reduce ambiguity in part 657. 
The proposed definition of ``stipend'' would reflect that the FLAS 
fellowships typically would consist of a single payment to a fellow 
rather than the current combination of a subsistence allowance paid to 
the student (stipend) and a separate institutional payment intended to 
cover the costs of tuition and fees. Adding this definition would 
standardize the use of the term, eliminate redundant terminology, and 
therefore improve the efficiency of program implementation. The 
introduction of the terms ``approved Center'' and ``approved program'' 
would clearly distinguish centers and programs approved under the NRC 
or FLAS Fellowships Programs from other centers and programs at IHEs.
Section 657.8 Severability
    Statute: Section 602 of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122) authorizes the 
Secretary to define terms necessary to make grants under the NRC 
Program.
    Current Regulations: The current regulations do not address 
severability.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulation would add a 
severability provision.
    Reasons: The Department seeks to clarify its intent that, with 
regard to severability, each of the regulations in part 657 and its 
subparts serves one or more important, related, but distinct, purposes. 
To best serve these purposes, we included this administrative provision 
in the regulations to make clear that the regulations are designed to 
operate independently of each other and to convey the Department's 
intent that the potential invalidity of one provision or any of its 
subparts should not affect the remainder of the provisions.
Application and Selection Processes (Sec. Sec.  657.10, 657.11, 657.12, 
and 657.20)
    Statute: Section 602(e) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(e)) requires 
institutions seeking a grant under this program to follow an 
application process designed by the Secretary.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.10 allows an applicant to submit a 
combined application for the NRC and FLAS programs. Section 657.20 
describes which selection criteria are used and how the Department 
communicates the point values for the selection criteria.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed regulations would update the 
application and selection processes. The proposed change would 
eliminate the possibility of submitting to both the NRC and FLAS 
Fellowships Program simultaneously (though applicants still could 
continue to submit separate applications under each program). Proposed 
Sec.  657.10 would affirm that the FLAS Fellowships Program follows the 
Department's standard procedures for grant applications by directing 
potential applicants to the application notice in the Federal Register 
for guidance. Proposed Sec.  657.11 would clarify the assurances and 
materials required in every application for the FLAS Fellowships 
Program. Proposed Sec.  657.12 would reaffirm that individual students 
apply for individual fellowships through IHEs that have received an 
allocation of fellowships. Proposed Sec.  657.20 would add additional 
information about the selection process.
    Reasons: The proposed regulations would provide more accurate 
guidance based on current program management practices. The NRC Program 
and FLAS Fellowships Program have long been identified by separate 
Assistance Listing Numbers, and applications for these programs have 
been evaluated using program-specific selection criteria. The 
Department began using Grants.gov to receive applications for these two 
programs for the fiscal year 2022 competition. In addition to the 
substantive differences between the programs and the selection 
criteria, Grants.gov cannot accept one application for two programs 
with individual Assistance Listing Numbers. Given these substantive 
differences and technical limitations, removing the option for 
simultaneous submission would improve the efficiency of program 
administration. Proposed Sec.  657.10 affirms that the FLAS Fellowships 
Program follows the Department's standard procedures for grant 
applications by directing potential applicants to the application 
notice in the Federal Register for guidance.
    The additional information on assurances and required application 
materials in proposed Sec.  657.11 would clarify statutory requirements 
and

[[Page 13528]]

improve the efficiency of program administration. Section 602(e) of the 
HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(e)) requires the explanation of how grant funded 
activities reflect diverse perspectives, as defined in the proposed 
regulations, and how applicants will encourage government service in 
areas of national need, as well as in areas of need in the education, 
business, and non-profit sectors. The Department already has required 
institutional applicants for the FLAS Fellowships Program to submit 
these assurances for multiple competitions. The proposed regulation 
would emphasize the importance of this requirement.
    Proposed Sec.  657.12 makes minor adjustments to the description of 
the student application process to make clear that individual students 
must apply for a fellowship through institutional grantees under part 
657. The proposed change would codify longstanding practices that 
institutional grantees control the application and selection processes 
for individual fellowships.
    Proposed Sec.  657.20 would promote transparency and support 
efficient program management by adding a more detailed description of 
the selection process. Under proposed Sec.  657.20, experts in relevant 
fields would review applications for an allocation of fellowships to 
determine excellence based on the appropriate selection criteria. 
Applications with similar areas of geographic focus would be grouped 
together. Peer reviewers would score each application separately, and 
then applications from each group would be selected for funding in rank 
order within each group based on the peer reviewers' scores. If a lack 
of funds prevented funding all highly ranked applications in each 
group, the proposed regulation would permit the Department to consider 
the degree to which applications were likely to serve any competition 
priorities published in the application notice that were derived from 
the ``consultation on areas of national need'' or that were related to 
specific countries, world areas, or languages.
    Variations on the peer review process described in the proposed 
regulation have been included in the application notice for several 
grant cycles, so the proposed regulation would reflect longstanding 
practices. This added transparency also would benefit new applicants 
that may be unfamiliar with the selection process and would affirm the 
importance of supporting the study of world areas or languages 
identified through the consultation process or priorities established 
by the Secretary.
Selection Criteria and Program Priorities (Sec. Sec.  657.21 and 
657.22)
    Statute: Section 607(b) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1127(b)) requires the 
Secretary to set selection criteria that will enable reviewers to make 
a determination of excellence relative to the program's objectives. 
This section also requires the Secretary to consider specific selection 
criteria, such as the degree to which fellowships at IHEs address 
national needs and generate information for and disseminate information 
to the public.
    Current Regulation: Section 657.21 describes the selection criteria 
for comprehensive Centers. Section 656.22 describes the possible 
funding priorities for the FLAS Fellowships program.
    Proposed Regulation: The proposed changes to the selection criteria 
would add clarity, eliminate redundancy, and reduce the burden on 
applicants while improving alignment with the authorizing statute. The 
current selection criteria are comprised of nine criteria and 22 
specific sub-criteria, excluding specific sub-criteria describing the 
competitive preference priorities for a specific competition. The 
proposed changes would reduce the number of criteria to six without 
modifying the total number of sub-criteria.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(a)-(c) would require applicants to describe 
the current state of administrative operations, academic programs, 
educational resources, and other relevant activities. Proposed 
Sec. Sec.  657.21(d)-(f) would require applicants to describe their 
goals and plans for the grant period.
    Proposed Sec.  657.22 would rephrase the current list of priorities 
in Sec.  657.22, add a new priority related to the use of stated 
performance goals in language instruction, add a new priority related 
to the ``consultation on areas of national need,'' add a priority 
related to academic terms, and drop a priority related to specific 
countries.
    Reasons: The proposed revisions to the selection criteria are 
designed to provide greater alignment with the FLAS Fellowships Program 
statute. As described further below, the focus of proposed Sec.  
657.21(a)-(c) on an applicant's current state of operations would help 
us to select grantees that are most likely to meet the minimum 
instructional and administrative requirements included in the statute 
and these proposed regulations. Proposed Sec.  657.21(d)-(f) would 
require applicants to address plans for the grant's performance period. 
The proposed arrangement of selection criteria would streamline the 
structure of the application narrative.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(a) would add a criterion for ``Scope, 
personnel and operations.'' This proposed criterion would require 
applicants to explain how the applicant meets the instructional and 
administrative requirements detailed in proposed Sec.  657.3(a), 
including, but not limited to, how the proposed allocation of 
fellowships would be used to support area studies and language training 
and instruction aligned with a geographically defined world area and 
specific languages associated with that world area. This approach would 
benefit applicants because we recognize that applicants may propose 
novel or distinctive approaches grounded in research, so they would be 
able to clearly explain the proposed allocation of fellowships to 
reviewers and describe the rationale for it.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(a) also would combine elements of the 
selection criteria found in the current Sec.  657.21(b) and 657.21(d). 
The proposed criterion would continue to address oversight arrangements 
and institutional commitment. Proposed Sec. Sec.  657.21(a)(3) would 
specifically require consortia applicants to provide a rationale for 
the formation of a consortium which would allow reviewers to evaluate 
the administrative impact of the consortium agreement.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(a)(4) would require applicants to describe 
financial, administrative, and other support specifically to support 
administration of the allocation of FLAS fellowships rather than for 
the entire relevant subject area as under current Sec.  657.21(d). 
Reported amounts of financial support are subject to wide variation for 
reasons unrelated to an institution's actual level of commitment. For 
example, labor and other costs vary substantially by geographic 
location within the United States. Financial support for students may 
reflect an IHE's tuition rates, which vary widely across institutions. 
For example, an institution that charges relatively modest tuition and 
routinely waives all tuition and mandatory fees for students in an area 
studies program may report a lower level of total financial support for 
students under the current selection criteria than an institution that 
charges high tuition and only waives a portion of tuition for a similar 
population of students. The proposed change would allow reviewers to 
evaluate institutional contributions that are directly relevant to the 
administration of applicant's allocation of fellowships. The other 
proposed selection criteria provide

[[Page 13529]]

alternative opportunities to demonstrate the effects of an 
institution's financial support relevant to administration of the 
proposed allocation of fellowships in terms of the availability and 
quality of various educational resources, such as teaching staff, 
library resources, linkages with institutions abroad, and student 
support.
    Grouping sub-criteria related to these topics into a single 
category and clarifying that these sub-criteria refer specifically to 
the administrative unit seeking an allocation of fellowships would help 
ensure that the allocation of fellowships aligns with the program 
purpose and that grantees have the necessary administrative capacity.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(b) would add a criterion for ``Quality of 
curriculum and instruction'' that would combine elements of the 
selection criteria found in current Sec. Sec.  657.21(f)-(h). The 
proposed criteria would continue to address elements of curriculum 
design, language instruction, and non-language area studies 
instruction, but the proposed category would allow applicants to 
address these elements in a more integrated manner, emphasizing how 
these elements of academic excellence are closely interconnected.
    Overall, the proposed changes would explicitly require applicants 
to describe distinctive strengths in instruction and curriculum design, 
so applicants would be able to highlight features of national 
significance. Proposed Sec.  657.21(b)(1) would continue to emphasize 
the degree to which intentionally interdisciplinary curriculum options 
for students are indicators of excellence for the FLAS Fellowships 
Program. Proposed Sec.  656.22(b)(3) would require applicants to 
describe whether applicants integrate performance goals into language 
instruction and the degree to which such goals, if they exist, are met 
or are likely to be met by students. This sub-criterion resembles 
current Sec.  657.21(g)(4) and responds more directly to the statutory 
requirement that fellows enroll in instructional programs with stated 
performance goals or in programs that are developing such performance 
goals (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(2)(A)). This proposed sub-criterion also 
acknowledges that the design, implementation, and ongoing improvement 
of language instruction is an indicator of excellence. The proposed 
sub-criteria also would eliminate the extent to which students enroll 
in the study of language from explicit consideration as an indicator of 
quality for an applicant's program of language instruction, which is 
included in current Sec.  657.21(g)(1), and instead require applicants 
to explain in proposed Sec.  657.21(b)(2) the frequency with which 
relevant language courses at various level are offered. The proposed 
focus on frequency will allow reviewers to more directly evaluate an 
institution's capacity to offer relevant language instruction and 
training.
    Proposed Sec. Sec.  657.21(c) and 657.22(c) would add a criterion 
for ``Quality of faculty and academic resources.'' This proposed 
criterion would combine elements of the selection criteria found in the 
current Sec. Sec.  657.21(c), 657.21(e), and 657.21(h). The proposed 
criterion would require applicants to describe how the applicants' 
educational resources and educational programs demonstrate that the 
proposed allocation of fellowships would support high quality and 
distinctive training opportunities for fellows. Proposed Sec. Sec.  
657.21(c)(1)-(2) would further emphasize the need to employ highly 
qualified faculty at IHEs receiving an allocation of fellowships. 
Proposed Sec.  657.21(c)(2) would emphasize that IHEs receiving an 
allocation of fellowships must be deeply committed to a fellow's future 
success as demonstrated by the intentional provision of academic and 
career advising specifically tailored to the strengths and experiences 
of FLAS fellows. Such opportunities would potentially benefit all 
students with international experiences and expertise.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(c)(3) would remind applicants that fellows 
undergoing advanced training in modern foreign languages and area 
studies must have access to appropriate educational resources, 
especially suitable library collections and other research collections. 
This proposed sub-criterion would remove the explicit consideration of 
financial support for acquisition and library staff in current Sec.  
657.21(e)(1), as well as direct consideration of cooperative 
arrangements and databases in current Sec.  657.21(e)(2). Instead, 
proposed Sec.  657.21(c)(3) requires applicants to describe library 
staffing arrangements relevant to the proposed allocation of 
fellowships. Although financial support is critical for the long-term 
viability of academic libraries, such support is less directly relevant 
for reviewers to determine the resources that will be available to 
fellows during the grant's performance period. Online databases and 
other electronic materials are now commonplace in library collections, 
so they do not need to be singled out as resources apart from a 
library's normal collections.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(c)(4) would emphasize the importance of 
access to relevant research and study abroad opportunities for FLAS 
fellows and require applicants to discuss the actual use of such 
arrangements, which would indicate not only breadth of offerings but 
also their ease of use and the institution's responsiveness to student 
interests.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(d) would add a criterion for ``Project design 
and rationale.'' This criterion would allow applicants to explain the 
overall vision for their projects and how their projects are intended 
to meet the purposes of the FLAS Fellowships Program. Current sub-
criteria addressing national needs and placement would be merged with 
this criterion. Proposed Sec.  657.21(d)(1) would require applicants to 
discuss how a proposed allocation of fellowships would fit with the 
applicants' educational programs and resources. This sub-criterion 
would encourage applicants to identify specific educational programs 
and languages that are likely to be supported by the proposed 
allocation of fellowships.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(d)(4) would require applicants to explain how 
diverse perspectives and a wide range of views required by the statute 
would be represented in the project. This sub-criterion would allow 
expert reviewers to evaluate how effectively the proposed project would 
address the statutory mandate that project activities reflect diverse 
perspectives and a wide range of views and generate debate on world 
regions and international affairs. This approach would complement the 
current requirement for applicants to submit an assurance on this topic 
by allowing applicants to receive expert feedback, which they currently 
do not. The proposed sub-criterion also would provide additional 
guidance to applicants that the discussion of diverse perspectives 
should be directly relevant to the proposed project rather than a 
general statement about institutional practices. This approach would 
ensure that high scoring applicants would be likely to meet the 
statutory expectation at the time of application and throughout the 
grant's performance period.
    Proposed Sec.  657.21(e) would add a ``Project planning and 
budget'' criterion that would replace current Sec.  657.21(a). This new 
criterion would enhance transparency and facilitate the efficient 
allocation of funding by inviting applicants to justify the amount of 
the requested allocation of fellowships. This criterion complements 
proposed Sec.  657.21(f), which would address plans for project 
evaluation. These interrelated criteria would require applicants to 
explain the intended outcomes for their projects, the anticipated 
distribution of fellowships

[[Page 13530]]

and how they would align with the intended outcomes, and the evaluative 
process that would help determine whether those intended outcomes were 
being realized during the grant period. These criteria would allow 
reviewers to determine the excellence of the proposed project in 
relation to the current operations described in proposed Sec.  
657.21(a)-(c).
    The proposed selection criteria would also eliminate certain 
elements of the current selection criteria not already addressed above. 
Current Sec.  657.21(h)(3) specifically includes the extent to which 
the institution facilitates student access to other institutions' study 
abroad and summer language programs. The proposed selection criteria 
would not include identical provisions. Proposed Sec.  657.21(b)(4) 
would, however, require applicants to describe formal arrangements for 
study to conduct research or study abroad relevant to the proposed 
allocation of fellowships, and would not preclude discussing student 
access to other institutions' study abroad and summer language programs 
in this context. The proposed regulations would eliminate current Sec.  
657.21(i), ``Degree to which priorities are served,'' as the Secretary 
may award points for competitive preference priorities without 
including such a category in the selection criteria. See generally 34 
CFR 75.105(c). Although the Department has never interpreted the 
regulations to allow it, moreover, removing priorities from the 
selection criteria also avoids the appearance of allowing applicants to 
receive points twice for responding to the same competitive preference 
priority (once through the selection criteria, and once for responding 
to the priority). This proposed change would not alter the current 
approach to competitive preference priorities. Current Sec.  
657.21(c)(2) requires that an applicant's evaluation plan produce 
quantifiable, outcome-measure-oriented data. The proposed regulations 
would eliminate this explicit requirement. Instead, proposed Sec.  
657.21(f) would require applicants to describe a more holistic approach 
to evaluation, including the qualifications of the evaluator(s) and an 
evaluation plan that is appropriate for the grant project. Although 
many performance-related data are quantifiable, not all data collected 
for evaluation purposes are quantifiable. Qualitative data may be a 
component of an evaluation plan. The proposed regulations also would 
include a requirement to describe plans to obtain performance feedback 
and periodic assessment of progress toward meeting intended outcomes, 
so the proposed approach incorporates an interest in project outcomes. 
The proposed regulations would provide greater flexibility to 
applicants when designing an evaluation plan.
    Proposed Sec.  657.22 would rephrase the list of priorities in 
current Sec.  657.22, add three priorities, and drop a priority. The 
new priority related to stated performance goals in language 
instruction would reflect the statutory requirements for fellowships 
and would allow the Secretary to more directly implement this provision 
when awarding allocations of fellowships. The new priority related to 
academic terms would allow the Secretary to prioritize academic year or 
summer fellowships. As described in proposed Sec.  657.30(b), the 
duration of a fellowship would be related to the types of study, 
training, or research that are allowable for a fellow. The proposed 
priority would allow the Secretary to, for example, prioritize 
intensive language training during a summer term if the Secretary 
recognized a specific national need for intensive language instruction. 
The new priority related to the ``consultation on areas of national 
need'' would allow the Secretary to select a priority that explicitly 
reflects the results of the consultation with Federal agencies. While 
such consultation is required by the statute, this proposed change 
would enable the Secretary to easily identify a priority for a specific 
language or world region as aligned with the national needs recognized 
by Federal agencies, which would better integrate the required 
consultation and the FLAS Fellowships Program. The proposed regulation 
would drop a priority related to specific countries because the other 
priorities would provide a sufficient degree of specificity to select 
specific world regions in conjunction with specific languages and 
specific topics of study.
Section 657.30 What are the limitations on fellowships and the use of 
fellowship funds?
    Statute: Section 602(b)-(d) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)-(d)) 
describe limitations on the use of fellowship funds and authorize the 
Secretary to set relevant policies.
    Current Regulation: Sections 657.30 and 657.33 describe limitations 
on the use of fellowship funds.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.30 would consolidate two 
current sections that discuss limitations on the use of fellowship 
funds and clarify how funds may be used in frequently encountered 
situations not currently addressed in part 657.
    Reasons: The proposed changes would align the program with 
developments in postsecondary education. The proposed changes would 
address distance education in light of the increasing use of this 
instruction modality and would emphasize that distance education may be 
appropriate for satisfying the fellowship's course requirements. The 
Secretary would have flexibility to approve distance education on a 
case-by-case basis, which would allow consideration of various factors, 
especially the extent to which the modality would benefit the fellow by 
enhancing access to advanced training opportunities.
    The proposed changes would rephrase and explain in detail the 
duration of fellowships as well as providing more detail regarding 
eligibility for the different types of fellowships. In particular, the 
proposed changes would set forth requirements with regard to 
dissertation research and dissertation writing fellowships, which were 
left unstated in the current regulations. The proposed regulations 
would clearly explain what is required for a student to receive one of 
these fellowships, which would align the regulations with accepted 
program management practices.
    The proposed changes also introduce a provision regarding 
internships. FLAS fellows sometimes find that it is useful to undertake 
an internship in the course of their study. The proposed regulation 
enables internships at the discretion of the Secretary. Also, the 
proposed changes make explicit that FLAS grantees must follow the 
procedures set forth in their applications when they select FLAS 
fellows. Other accepted practices in the management of these grants are 
also clearly stated in the proposed changes, including specific 
requirements that apply to study outside the U.S., the conditions that 
apply to acceptance of concurrent awards from other Federal agencies, 
the conditions that apply to a transfer of FLAS funds to another 
institution, and when FLAS funds may be used for undergraduate travel. 
Finally, the proposed regulations clarify the policy regarding 
fellowship vacancies. The proposed changes also would reinforce 
longstanding program guidance that program administration costs cannot 
be charged to grants providing an allocation of fellowships under the 
FLAS Fellowships Program. Grantee IHEs are the beneficiaries of the 
revenue generated by fellows' payments for tuition and fees, and the 
selection process is intended to identify IHEs with sufficient 
administrative capacity to administer an allocation of fellowships. 
Additional payments for

[[Page 13531]]

administrative costs would reduce the funds available for fellowships 
and run counter to the program purpose.
Section 657.33 What are the reporting requirements for grantee 
institutions and for individual fellows who receive funds under this 
program?
    Statute: Section 602(b)(1) of the HEA (20 U.S.C. 1122(b)(1)) 
authorizes the Secretary to makes grants to IHEs for the purpose of 
paying stipends to eligible students. Additionally, 20 U.S.C. 1132-3 
authorizes the Secretary to ``assess and ensure compliance with all the 
conditions and terms of grants'' provided under title VI of the HEA.
    Current Regulation: Current regulations do not address reporting 
requirements.
    Proposed Regulation: Proposed Sec.  657.33 would affirm that all 
IHEs that receive an allocation of fellowships under this part and all 
fellows who receive a fellowship under this part are required to abide 
by all reporting requirements established for the FLAS Fellowships 
Program.
    Reasons: The current regulations do not address the issue of 
reporting. The proposed changes would address grantee concerns by 
providing sufficient authority for IHEs to require fellows to submit 
all reports in a timely manner. This change would enable the Department 
to improve the efficiency of program administration by promoting the 
collection of complete and accurate records about fellows during the 
fellowship period.

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and 
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as 
amended by Executive Order 14094, defines a ``significant regulatory 
action'' as an action likely to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $200 million or more 
(as of 2023 but adjusted every 3 years by the Administrator of OIRA for 
changes in gross domestic product); or adversely affect in a material 
way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, 
territorial, or Tribal governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise legal or policy issues for which centralized review would 
meaningfully further the President's priorities, or the principles 
stated in the Executive order, as specifically authorized in a timely 
manner by the Administrator of OIRA in each case.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
    We have also reviewed the proposed regulations under Executive 
Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in 
Executive Order 12866 (as amended by Executive Order 14094). To the 
extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an 
agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' OMB's OIRA has 
emphasized that these techniques may include ``identifying changing 
future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation 
or anticipated behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing the proposed regulations only on a reasoned 
determination that their benefits justify any associated costs. Based 
on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that the proposed 
regulations are consistent with the principles in Executive Order 
13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action does not unduly 
interfere with State, local, territorial, or Tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with these Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs associated 
with this regulatory action are those resulting from statutory 
requirements and those we have determined as necessary for 
administering the Department's programs and activities.

Discussion of Costs and Benefits

    The potential costs to applicants, grant recipients, and the 
Department associated with the proposed regulatory change would be 
minimal, while there would be greater potential benefits to applicants, 
grant recipients, and the Department.
    We anticipate a minimal increase in NRC Program and FLAS 
Fellowships Program applications as a result of revising the selection 
criteria, so we foresee minimal impact on the Department's time and 
cost of reviewing these applications.
    Over the last four years, the amount of funding for the NRC Program 
has ranged from approximately $23.7 to $29.3 million per year with 155 
eligible grant applications received and reviewed in the most recent 
competition. Of these applicants, 98 received grant awards in fiscal 
year 2022, and an additional 15 of these applicants ultimately received 
grant awards through funding down the slate in fiscal year 2023. Over 
the same period, the amount of funding for the FLAS Fellowships Program 
has remained stable at approximately $31.2 million per year, with 160 
eligible grant applications received and reviewed in the most recent 
competition. We awarded grants to 112 of these applications in fiscal 
year 2022.
    The number of applications for both programs has remained 
relatively steady across recent competitions, but the number of grant 
awards for the NRC Program has increased slightly after funding down 
the slate. The Department expects the number of applications and grant 
rewards to remain similar in future years.

[[Page 13532]]

    The proposed changes to the selection criteria would require the 
Department to develop new technical review forms. The proposed 
regulations also would require the Department to update program 
guidance and technical assistance materials for applicants, peer 
reviewers, and grant recipients. The Department anticipates the costs 
associated with these activities to be minimal, because we already 
engage in an ongoing process to revise, update, and improve these 
materials for each competition for these programs.
    Similarly, any revisions to the selection criteria would have no 
effect on current grant recipients under both programs. The Department 
also believes the proposed revisions would have little net effect on 
applicants. Applicants already develop new applications for each 
competition in response to a Notice Inviting Applications that may 
contain new competitive preference priorities or a new allocation of 
points for the existing selection criteria. The proposed selection 
criteria refer to similar types of data as the current selection 
criteria. The Department foresees that the costs for applicants and 
grant recipients that result from the proposed changes to the selection 
criteria would be minimal.
    The Department foresees that current grant recipients under the 
FLAS Fellowships Program may incur minor costs associated with program 
administration due to the revised program regulations. Although the 
regulations would not make any major changes to the FLAS Fellowships 
Program, the regulations would be expanded to address new issues by 
codifying current guidance from the Department. As a result, grant 
recipients would need to familiarize themselves with the new 
regulations and update any references to the regulations that appear in 
their documents developed to assist program administration, especially 
in documents distributed to students and current and prospective 
fellows.
    The benefits of amending these regulations include (1) clarifying 
statutory language, (2) redesigning the selection criteria to reduce 
redundancy to improve the application process, and (3) updating the 
current regulations to reflect current practices in program 
administration and relevant fields of education. We anticipate that the 
clarifications, reductions to the number of selection criteria, and 
adjustments to administration will reduce the burden on applicants and 
grant recipients for both the NRC Program and FLAS Fellowships Program.

Alternatives Considered

    The Department reviewed and assessed various alternatives to the 
proposed regulations. The Department considered maintaining current 
regulations and developing additional technical assistance and guidance 
to address emerging topics in modern foreign language and area studies 
education, especially distance education. The Department also 
considered developing extensive new technical assistance and guidance 
to explain the differences that exist among similar sections of the 
regulations for both programs. The Department determined that revising 
the regulations was the most efficient option to decrease 
administrative burden and ensure that the programs fulfill their 
statutory purposes.
    Elsewhere in this section under Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we 
identify and explain burdens specifically associated with information 
collection requirements.

Clarity of the Regulation

    Executive Order 12866 and the Presidential memorandum ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing'' require each agency to write 
regulations that are easy to understand. The Secretary invites comments 
on how to make the proposed regulation easier to understand, including 
answers to questions such as the following:
    (a) Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly 
stated?
    (b) Do the proposed regulations contain technical terms or other 
wording that interferes with their clarity?
    (c) Do the format of the proposed regulations (use of headings, 
paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their clarity?
    (d) Would the proposed regulations be easier to understand if we 
divided them into more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' is 
preceded by the symbol ``Sec.  '' and a numbered heading; for example, 
Sec.  106.9 Dissemination of policy.)
    (e) Could the description of the proposed regulations in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble be more helpful in 
making the proposed regulations easier to understand? If so, how?
    (f) What else could we do to make the proposed regulations easier 
to understand?
    To send any comments that concern how the Department could make 
these proposed regulations easier to understand, see the instructions 
in the ADDRESSES section.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    The Secretary certifies that the proposed regulations would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    The small entities that would be affected by the proposed 
regulations are IHEs that would submit applications to the Department 
under this program.
    The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines ``small 
institution'' using data on revenue, market dominance, tax filing 
status, governing body, and population. The majority of entities to 
which the Office of Postsecondary Education's (OPE) regulations apply 
are postsecondary institutions, however, which do not report such data 
to the Department. As a result, for purposes of these proposed 
regulations, the Department continues to define ``small entities'' by 
reference to enrollment, to allow meaningful comparison of regulatory 
impact across all types of higher education institutions. The 
enrollment standard for small less-than-two-year institutions (below 
associate degrees) is less than 750 full-time-equivalent (FTE) students 
and for small institutions of at least two but less-than-4-years, and 
4-year institutions, less than 1,000 FTE students.\1\ As a result of 
discussions with the Small Business Administration, this is an update 
from the standard used in some prior rules. Those prior rules applied 
an enrollment standard for a small two-year institution of less than 
500 full-time-equivalent (FTE) students and for a small 4-year 
institution, less than 1,000 FTE students.\2\ The Department consulted 
with the Office of Advocacy for the SBA and the Office of Advocacy has 
approved the revised alternative standard. The Department continues to

[[Page 13533]]

believe this approach most accurately reflects a common basis for 
determining size categories that is linked to the provision of 
educational services and that it captures a similar universe of small 
entities as the SBA's revenue standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In regulations prior to 2016, the Department categorized 
small businesses based on tax status. Those regulations defined 
``nonprofit organizations'' as ``small organizations'' if they were 
independently owned and operated and not dominant in their field of 
operation, or as ``small entities'' if they were institutions 
controlled by governmental entities with populations below 50,000. 
Those definitions resulted in the categorization of all private 
nonprofit organizations as small and no public institutions as 
small. Under the previous definition, proprietary institutions were 
considered small if they are independently owned and operated and 
not dominant in their field of operation with total annual revenue 
below $7,000,000. Using FY 2017 IPEDs finance data for proprietary 
institutions, 50 percent of 4-year and 90 percent of 2-year or less 
proprietary institutions would be considered small. By contrast, an 
enrollment-based definition applies the same metric to all types of 
institutions, allowing consistent comparison across all types.
    \2\ In those prior rules, at least two but less-than-four-years 
institutions were considered in the broader two-year category. In 
this iteration, after consulting with the Office of Advocacy for the 
SBA, we separate this group into its own category.

                          Table 1--Small Institutions Under Enrollment-Based Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Level                            Type                 Small           Total          Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-year................................  Public..................             328           1,182           27.75
2-year................................  Private.................             182             199           91.46
2-year................................  Proprietary.............           1,777           1,952           91.03
4-year................................  Public..................              56             747            7.50
4-year................................  Private.................             789           1,602           49.25
4-year................................  Proprietary.............             249             331           75.23
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.............................  ........................           3,381           6,013           56.23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: 2018-19 data reported to the Department.

    As the table indicates, these proposed regulations would affect 
institutions of higher education that meet the definition of small 
entities. They would not have a significant economic impact on these 
entities, however, because they would not impose excessive regulatory 
burdens or require unnecessary Federal supervision. The proposed 
regulations would impose minimal requirements to ensure the proper 
expenditure of program funds. We invite the public to comment on our 
certification that these regulations would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, the Department provides the general public and Federal agencies 
with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections 
of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps ensure that the public 
understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can 
provide the requested data in the desired format, reporting burden 
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are 
clearly understood, and the Department can properly assess the impact 
of collection requirements on respondents.
    Sections 656.21, 656.22, 656.23, and 657.21 of the proposed 
regulations contain information collection requirements. Under the PRA, 
the Department has submitted a copy of these sections to OMB for its 
review.
    A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of 
information unless OMB approves the collection under the PRA and the 
corresponding information collection instrument displays a currently 
valid OMB control number. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
no person is required to comply with, or is subject to penalty for 
failure to comply with, a collection of information if the collection 
instrument does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
    In the final regulations, we will display the control number 
assigned by OMB to any information collection requirements proposed in 
this NPRM and adopted in the final regulations.
    The information collection that would be impacted by these proposed 
regulatory changes is the current Application for the NRC and FLAS 
Fellowships Programs (1840-0807). This information collection includes 
application instructions and forms for the NRC Program (ALN Number 
84.015A) and the FLAS Fellowships Program (ALN Number 84.015B), 
authorized under title VI of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as 
amended (20 U.S.C. 1122).
    The NRC Program provides grants to IHEs or consortia of IHEs to 
establish, strengthen, and operate comprehensive and undergraduate 
foreign language and area or international studies centers. These 
centers serve as centers of excellence for world language training and 
teaching, research, and instruction in fields needed to provide full 
understanding of areas, regions, or countries where the languages are 
commonly used.
    The FLAS Fellowships Program awards allocations of fellowships, 
through institutions of higher education or consortia of institutions 
of higher education, to meritorious students enrolled in programs that 
offer performance-based instruction in world languages in combination 
with area studies, international studies, or the international aspects 
of professional studies.
    Together, these programs respond to the ongoing national need for 
individuals with expertise and competence in world languages and area 
or international studies; advance national security by developing a 
pipeline of highly proficient linguists and experts in critical world 
regions; and contribute to developing a globally competent workforce 
able to engage with a multilingual/multicultural clientele at home and 
abroad.
    Eligible institutions of higher education use the information 
collection to submit applications to the Department of Education (ED) 
to request funding in response to the competition announcement. After 
grant applications are submitted, the Department determines the budget 
and staff resources it needs to conduct the peer review of applications 
and post award activities. External review panels use the information 
to evaluate grant applications and to identify high-quality 
applications. When developing funding slates, ED program officials 
consider the evaluations from the expert review panels, in conjunction 
with the NRC and FLAS legislative purposes and any Administration 
priorities. ED program officials also use the collection to inform 
strategic planning; to establish goals, performance measures and 
objectives; to develop monitoring plans; or to align program assessment 
standards with Department performance goals and initiatives.
    Over many grant cycles, administering the NRC and FLAS grant 
competitions using the current selection criteria has been unwieldy and 
burdensome for both applicants and peer reviewers. The Secretary 
proposes changes to the selection criteria to clarify selection 
criteria, eliminate redundant criteria, reduce the burden on applicants 
and peer reviewers, and improve alignment with the statute, 
particularly with regard to comprehensive and undergraduate Centers. 
The Secretary proposes reducing the comprehensive NRC selection 
criteria from 10 criteria with 27 sub-criteria to six criteria with 24 
sub-criteria; the undergraduate NRC

[[Page 13534]]

selection criteria from 10 criteria with 26 sub-criteria to six 
criteria with 24 sub-criteria; and the FLAS selection criteria from 
nine criteria with 22 sub-criteria to six criteria with 22 sub-
criteria. The proposed criteria include some new criteria for the NRC 
Program, including a ``quality of existing academic programs'' 
criterion, and also for FLAS, including ``project design and 
rationale'' and ``project planning and budget'' criteria.
    ED's Office of Postsecondary Education, International and Foreign 
Language Education (OPE-IFLE) has used the information received for the 
current collection to develop technical assistance materials for 
grantees, such as program administration manuals and technical 
assistance Webinars, to inform the performance reporting requirements 
for these programs, and to demonstrate the impact of these programs.
    Competitions for these grants occur once every four years. The data 
in the table is an estimate of the time it takes for respondents to 
complete official forms, develop the application narrative and budget, 
and submit completed applications through the Grants.gov system.
    The NRC application (1840-0807) would be affected by the proposed 
changes to the NRC selection criteria (Sec. Sec.  656.21, 656.22, and 
656.23), which require changes on the application package and technical 
review forms. This information collection would no longer address 
aspects of the FLAS program. The proposed changes to the NRC selection 
criteria would clarify interpretations of statutory language and 
redesign the selection criteria. The proposed regulations would remove 
ambiguity and redundancy in the selection criteria and definitions of 
key terms, improve the application process, and align the 
administration of the programs with the developments in modern foreign 
languages and area studies education.
    The FLAS application (1840-NEW) would be affected by the proposed 
changes to the FLAS selection criteria (Sec. Sec.  657.21), which 
require changes on the application package and technical review forms. 
This new information collection would reflect the separation of the 
applications for the NRC and FLAS programs. The proposed changes to the 
FLAS selection criteria would clarify interpretations of statutory 
language and redesign the selection criteria. The proposed regulations 
would remove ambiguity and redundancy in the selection criteria and 
definitions of key terms, improve the application process, and align 
the administration of the programs with the developments in modern 
foreign languages and area studies education.
    Previously, both applications were combined into one information 
collection for the Application for the NRC and FLAS Fellowships 
Programs (1840-0807). The proposed regulations would necessitate fully 
separating the information collection into two distinct information 
collections. Accordingly, the burdens associated with these information 
collections are derived from the burden associated with the current 
version of the Application for the NRC and FLAS Fellowships Programs 
(1840-0807). Taken together, proposed selection criteria would reduce 
the hour burden per response by one hour, from 27 to 26. When 
multiplied by 165 respondents, this change would result in a decrease 
in Total Annual Burden hours from 4,455 to 4,290. The Total Annual 
Costs would decrease from $334,125 to $321,750.
    The NRC and FLAS programs compete only once every four years. The 
application packages are cleared with OMB once every three years. For 
every three-year clearance period, the competitions are run once. 
Because of the separation of the two information collections, the Total 
Annual Burden Hours and Total Annual Costs are halved, as demonstrated 
in the tables below. For both the NRC Program and the FLAS Fellowships 
Program, 26 hours to complete both applications is reduced to 13 hours 
each. When multiplied by 165 respondents this yields Total Annual 
Burden Hours of 2,145 and Total Annual Costs of $160,875. Averaged over 
three years, the Total Annual Burden Hours are reduced to 715 and the 
Total Annual Costs are reduced to $52,301 for each program.

                                                                 NRC Program (1840-0807)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                 Estimated
                                                                      Number of     Number of      Average      respondent    Total annual  Total annual
                           Affected type                             respondents    responses   burden hours  average hourly  burden hours      costs
                                                                                                per response       wage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutions, private or non-profit...............................          165           165            13             $75         2,145      $160,875
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                           FLAS Fellowships Program (1840-NEW)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                 Estimated
                                                                      Number of     Number of      Average      respondent    Total annual  Total annual
                           Affected type                             respondents    responses   burden hours  average hourly  burden hours      costs
                                                                                                per response       wage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Institutions, private or non-profit...............................          165           165            13             $75         2,145      $160,875
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC application (1840-0807) would be affected by the proposed 
changes to the NRC selection criteria (Sec. Sec.  656.21, 656.22, and 
656.23), which would require changes on the application package and 
technical review forms.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Information       OMB control No. and
     Regulatory section            collection         estimated burden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  Sec.   656.21, 656.22,  These proposed        1840-0807. The
 656.23, and 657.21.           regulatory            number of
                               provisions would      respondents would
                               require changing      remain constant at
                               the application       165 and the number
                               package and           of total burden
                               technical review      hours for the
                               forms to reflect      application would
                               the modified          be reduced to 2,145
                               selection criteria    when averaged over
                               for this program.     three years. The
                                                     averaged total cost
                                                     would be reduced to
                                                     $160,875.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 13535]]

    The FLAS application (1840-NEW) would be affected by the proposed 
changes to the FLAS selection criteria (Sec.  657.21), which would 
require changes on the application package and technical review forms.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Information       OMB control No. and
     Regulatory section            collection         estimated burden
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   657.21...............  These proposed        1840-NEW. The number
                               regulatory            of respondents
                               provisions would      would remain
                               require changing      constant at 165 and
                               the application       the number of total
                               package and           burden hours for
                               technical review      the application
                               forms to reflect      would be reduced to
                               the modified          2,145 when averaged
                               selection criteria    over three years.
                               for this program.     The averaged total
                                                     cost would be
                                                     reduced to
                                                     $160,875.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have prepared Information Collection Requests for these 
information collection requirements. If you wish to review and comment 
on the Information Collection Requests, please follow the instructions 
in the ADDRESSES section of this notification.
    Note: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in OMB and 
the Department review all comments posted at www.regulations.gov.
    Note: The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in OMB and 
the Department review all comments posted at www.regulations.gov.
    We consider your comments on this proposed collection of 
information in--
     Deciding whether the proposed collection is necessary for 
the proper performance of our functions, including whether the 
information will have practical use;
     Evaluating the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of 
the proposed collection, including the validity of our methodology and 
assumptions;
     Enhancing the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the 
information we collect; and
     Minimizing the burden on those who must respond. This 
includes exploring the use of appropriate automated, electronic, 
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.
    OMB must make a decision concerning the collection of information 
contained in these proposed regulations between 30 and 60 days after 
publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, to 
ensure that OMB gives your comments full consideration, it is important 
that OMB receives your comments by March 25, 2024. This does not affect 
the deadline for your comments to us on the proposed regulations. If 
your comments relate to the Information Collection Requests for these 
proposed regulations, please specify the Docket ID number and indicate 
``Information Collection Comments'' on the top of your comments.

Intergovernmental Review

    The proposed regulations are not subject to Executive Order 12372 
and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.

Assessment of Educational Impact

    In accordance with section 411 of the General Education Provisions 
Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1221e-4, the Secretary particularly requests 
comments on whether the proposed regulations would require transmission 
of information that any other agency or authority of the United States 
gathers or makes available.

Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 requires us to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local elected officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have federalism implications. ``Federalism 
implications'' means substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. The proposed regulations do not have federalism 
implications.
    Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed 
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities 
can obtain this document 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.
    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 PDF. To use PDF you must have Adobe 
Acrobat Reader, which is available at no cost to the user 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.

List of Subjects

34 CFR Part 655

    Colleges and universities, Cultural exchange programs, Educational 
research, Educational study programs, Grant programs--education, 
Scholarships and fellowships.

34 CFR Part 656

    Colleges and universities, Cultural exchange programs, Educational 
research, Educational study programs, Grant programs--education, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

34 CFR Part 657

    Colleges and universities, Cultural exchange programs, Educational 
study programs, Grant programs--education, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Scholarships and fellowships.

Miguel A. Cardona,
Secretary of Education.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Secretary of 
Education proposes to amend parts 655, 656, and 657 of title 34 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 655--INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 655 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  20 U.S.C. 1121-1130b and 1132-1132-7, unless 
otherwise noted.

0
2. Amend Sec.  655.1 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  655.1  Which programs do these regulations govern?

* * * * *
    (a) The National Resource Centers Program for Foreign Language and 
Area Studies and the Foreign Language and

[[Page 13536]]

Area Studies Fellowships Program (section 602 of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965, as amended);
* * * * *


Sec.  655.3  [Amended]

0
3. Amend Sec.  655.3 by:
0
a. Removing paragraphs (a) and (d).
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (b) through (c) as paragraphs (a) through 
(b).
0
4. Revise Sec.  655.4 to read as follows:


Sec.  655.4  What definitions apply to the International Education 
Programs?

    (a) The following terms used in this part and 34 CFR parts 656, 
657, 658, 660, 661, and 669 are defined in 2 CFR part 200, subpart A, 
34 CFR 77.1, 34 CFR 600.2, or 34 CFR 668.2:

Academic engagement
Acquisition
Applicant
Application
Award
Budget
Clock hour
Contract
Correspondence course
Credit hour
Distance education
Educational program
EDGAR
Enrolled
Equipment
Facilities
Fiscal year
Full-time student
Graduate or professional student
Grant
Grantee
Grant period
Half-time student
Local educational agency
National level
Nonprofit
Project
Project period
Private
Public
Regular student
Secretary
State educational agency
Supplies
Undergraduate student

    (b) The following definitions apply to International Education 
Programs:
    Area studies means a program of comprehensive study of the aspects 
of a world area's society or societies, including study of history, 
culture, economy, politics, international relations, and languages.
    Areas of national need means the various needs in the government, 
education, business, and nonprofit sectors for expertise in foreign 
language, area, and international studies identified by the Secretary 
as significant for maintaining or improving the security, stability, 
and economic vitality of the United States.
    Consortium of institutions of higher education means a group of 
institutions of higher education that have entered into a cooperative 
arrangement for the purpose of carrying out a common objective, or a 
public or private nonprofit agency, organization, or institution 
designated or created by a group of institutions of higher education 
for the purpose of carrying out a common objective on their behalf.
    Consultation on areas of national need means the process that 
allows the head officials of a wide range of Federal agencies to 
consult with the Secretary and provide recommendations regarding 
national needs for expertise in foreign languages and world areas that 
the Secretary may take into account when identifying areas of national 
need.
    Diverse perspectives means a variety of viewpoints relevant to 
understanding global or international issues in context, especially 
those derived from scholarly research or sustained professional 
activities and community engagement abroad, and relevant to building 
multi-faceted knowledge and expertise in area studies, international 
studies, and the international aspects of professional studies, 
including issues related to world regions, foreign languages, and 
international affairs, among stakeholders.
    Educational program abroad means a program of study, internship, or 
service learning outside the United States that is part of a foreign 
language or other international curriculum at the undergraduate or 
graduate education level.
    Institution of higher education means an institution that meets the 
definition in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as 
amended, as well as an institution that meets the requirements of 
section 101(a) except that--
    (1) It is not located in the United States; and
    (2) It applies for assistance under title VI of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965, as amended, in consortia with institutions that 
meet the definition in section 101(a).
    Intensive language instruction means instruction of at least five 
contact hours per week during the academic year or the equivalent of a 
full academic year of language instruction during the summer.
0
5. Revise Sec.  655.30 to read as follows:


Sec.  655.30  How does the Secretary evaluate an application?

    The Secretary evaluates applications for International Education 
Programs using the criteria described in one or more of the following:
    (a) The general criteria in Sec.  655.31.
    (b) The specific criteria, as applicable, in subpart C of 34 CFR 
parts 656 and 657, or subpart D of 34 CFR parts 658, 660, 661, and 669.
0
6. Amend Sec.  655.31 by revising paragraph (e)(2)(i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  655.31  What general selection criteria does the Secretary use?

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Facilities (including but not limited to language laboratory, 
museums, or library) that the applicant plans to use are adequate; and
* * * * *

PART 656--NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN LANGUAGE 
AND AREA STUDIES OR FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

0
7. Revise part 656 to read as follows:

PART 656--NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTERS PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN LANGUAGE 
AND AREA STUDIES

Subpart A--General
Sec.
656.1 What is the purpose of the National Resource Centers Program?
656.2 What entities are eligible to receive a grant?
656.3 What defines a comprehensive or undergraduate National 
Resource Center?
656.4 For what special purposes may a Center receive an additional 
grant under this part?
656.5 What regulations apply to this program?
656.6 What definitions apply to this program?
656.7 Severability.
Subpart B--How does an eligible institution apply for a grant?
656.10 How does an institution submit a grant application?
656.11 What assurances and other information must an applicant 
include in an application?
Subpart C--How does the Secretary make a grant?
656.20 How does the Secretary select applications for funding?
656.21 What selection criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an 
application for a comprehensive Center?
656.22 What selection criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an 
application for an undergraduate Center?

[[Page 13537]]

656.23 What selection criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an 
application for an additional special purpose grant to a Center?
656.24 What priorities may the Secretary establish?
Subpart D--What conditions must be met by a grantee?
656.30 What activities and costs are allowable?

    Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1121, 1122, 1127, and 1132 unless otherwise 
noted.

Subpart A--General


Sec.  656.1  What is the purpose of the National Resource Centers 
Program?

    Under the National Resource Centers Program for Foreign Language 
and Areas Studies (National Resource Centers Program), the Secretary 
awards grants to institutions of higher education and consortia of 
institutions to establish, strengthen, and operate comprehensive and 
undergraduate Centers that act cooperatively as national resources 
for--
    (a) Teaching of modern foreign languages, especially less commonly 
taught languages;
    (b) Instruction in fields of study needed to provide full 
understanding of areas, regions, or countries in which such languages 
are commonly used;
    (c) Research and training in international studies and the 
international and foreign language aspects of professional and other 
fields of study; and
    (d) Instruction and research on issues in world affairs that 
concern one or more countries.


Sec.  656.2  What entities are eligible to receive a grant?

    (a) An institution of higher education or a consortium of 
institutions of higher education is eligible to receive a grant under 
this part as either a comprehensive Center or undergraduate Center.
    (b) An institution of higher education or a consortium of 
institutions of higher education that has received a grant under this 
part as either a comprehensive Center or undergraduate Center is 
eligible to receive an additional grant under this part for special 
purposes related to library collections, outreach, and summer 
institutes, as described in Sec.  656.4.


Sec.  656.3  What defines a comprehensive or undergraduate National 
Resource Center?

    (a) A Center's area of focus must be aligned with all of the 
following:
    (1) A geographic world area that serves as the focus of research, 
teaching, training, and instruction.
    (2) Opportunities available at the institution for teaching, 
training, research, and instruction in specific languages, countries, 
regions, societies, or other units of analysis relevant to the chosen 
geographic world area.
    (b) A comprehensive Center is an administrative unit of an eligible 
institution of higher education that independently or through 
collaboration with other administrative units--
    (1) Provides intensive modern foreign language training, especially 
for less commonly taught languages, in the Center's area of focus;
    (2) Contributes significantly to the national interest in advanced 
research and scholarship in the Center's area of focus;
    (3) Employs a critical mass of scholars in diverse disciplines 
related to the Center's area of focus;
    (4) Maintains important library collections related to the Center's 
area of focus;
    (5) Makes training available in language and area studies in the 
Center's area of focus, to graduate, postgraduate, and undergraduate 
students;
    (6) Addresses national needs for modern foreign language and area 
studies expertise and knowledge, including through, but not limited to, 
the placement of students into postgraduate employment, education, or 
training in areas of need; and
    (7) Disseminates information about the Center's area of focus to 
audiences in the United States.
    (c) An undergraduate Center independently or through collaboration 
with other administrative units--
    (1) Teaches modern foreign languages, especially less commonly 
taught languages, related to the Center's area of focus;
    (2) Prepares undergraduate students to matriculate into advanced 
modern foreign language and area studies programs and professional 
school programs;
    (3) Incorporates substantial content related to the Center's area 
of focus into baccalaureate degree programs;
    (4) Engages in research and curriculum development designed to 
broaden knowledge and expertise related to the Center's area of focus;
    (5) Employs faculty with strong language, area, and international 
studies credentials related to the Center's area of focus;
    (6) Maintains library holdings sufficient to support high-quality 
training and instruction in the Center's area of focus for 
undergraduate students;
    (7) Makes training available predominantly to undergraduate 
students in support of the objectives of an undergraduate institution;
    (8) Addresses national needs for language and area studies 
expertise and knowledge, including through, but not limited to, the 
placement of undergraduate students into postgraduate employment, 
education, or training in areas of need; and
    (9) Disseminates information about the Center's area of focus to 
audiences in the United States.


Sec.  656.4  For what special purposes may a Center receive an 
additional grant under this part?

    The Secretary may make additional grants to Centers for one or more 
of the following purposes:
    (a) Linkage or outreach between foreign language, area studies, and 
other international fields and professional schools and colleges.
    (b) Linkage or outreach with 2- and 4-year colleges and 
universities.
    (c) Linkage or outreach between or among--
    (1) Postsecondary programs or departments in foreign language, area 
studies, or other international fields; and
    (2) State educational agencies or local educational agencies.
    (d) Partnerships or programs of linkage and outreach with 
departments or agencies of Federal and State governments, including 
Federal or State scholarship programs for students in related areas.
    (e) Linkage or outreach with the news media, business, 
professional, or trade associations.
    (f) Summer institutes in area studies, foreign language, or other 
international fields designed to carry out the activities in paragraphs 
(a), (b), (d), and (e) of this section.
    (g) Maintenance of important library collections.


Sec.  656.5  What regulations apply to this program?

    The following regulations apply to this program:
    (a) The regulations in 34 CFR part 655.
    (b) The regulations in this part 656.


Sec.  656.6  What definitions apply to this program?

    The following definitions apply to this part:
    (a) The definitions in 34 CFR part 655.
    (b) The following definitions, unless otherwise specified:
    Critical mass of scholars means a concentration of modern foreign 
language and area studies faculty, researchers, and other similar 
personnel associated with a Center who collectively make significant 
contributions in a field of area studies

[[Page 13538]]

because of their expertise and are distinguished by their training in 
many different academic disciplines in addition to their active 
engagement in interdisciplinary initiatives related to the Center's 
area of focus. The following are examples of other factors that may be 
considered in determining whether there is a critical mass of scholars:
    (i) Whether instruction in many foreign languages is offered.
    (ii) Whether specialized area studies or language instruction is 
regularly offered.
    (iii) The number of graduate student research projects 
(dissertations, theses, or equivalents) supervised.
    (iv) The degree of collaboration with international partners.
    (v) Participation in professional activities or consultations with 
partners outside academia.
    (vi) Professional awards and honors.
    (vii) Roles in professional associations.
    (viii) Activities funded by external grants.
    (ix) The number of scholars relative to all similarly qualified 
individuals in the United States.
    Institution means an institution of higher education, as defined in 
34 CFR part 655. References to an institution include all institutions 
of higher education that operate as a consortium under this part.
    National Resource Center (Center) means an administrative unit 
within an institution of higher education that is a grantee under this 
part that coordinates educational initiatives related to an area of 
focus as described in Sec.  656.3(a) at that institution or for a 
consortium of institutions through direct access to faculty, staff, 
administrators, students, library collections and other research 
collections, and other educational resources that support research, 
training, and instruction in various academic disciplines, professional 
fields, and languages.


Sec.  656.7  Severability.

    If any provision of this part or its application to any person, 
act, or practice is held invalid, the remainder of the part or the 
application of its provisions to any other person, act, or practice 
will not be affected thereby.

Subpart B--How does an eligible institution apply for a grant?


Sec.  656.10  How does an institution submit a grant application?

    The application notice published in the Federal Register explains 
how to apply for a new grant under this part.


Sec.  656.11  What assurances and other information must an applicant 
include in an application?

    (a) Each institution of higher education, including each member of 
a consortium, applying for a grant under this part must provide all of 
the following:
    (1) An explanation of how the activities funded by the grant will 
reflect diverse perspectives, as defined in part 655, and a wide range 
of views and generate debate on world regions and international 
affairs.
    (2) A description of how the applicant will encourage government 
service in areas of national need, as identified by the Secretary, as 
well as in areas of need in the education, business, and nonprofit 
sectors.
    (b) An applicant must submit an Applicant Profile Form, as 
described in the application package.
    (c) Each consortium applying for an award under this part must 
submit a group agreement (consortium agreement) that addresses the 
required elements of 34 CFR 75.128 and describes a rationale for the 
formation of the consortium.

Subpart C--How does the Secretary make a grant?


Sec.  656.20  How does the Secretary select applications for funding?

    (a) The Secretary evaluates an application for a comprehensive 
Center under the criteria contained in Sec.  656.21, and for an 
undergraduate Center under the criteria contained in Sec.  656.22. The 
Secretary evaluates applications for additional special purpose grants 
to Centers under the criteria contained in Sec.  656.23.
    (b) The Secretary informs applicants of the maximum possible score 
for each criterion in the application package or in a notice published 
in the Federal Register.
    (c) The Secretary makes grant awards using a peer review process. 
Applications that share the same or similar area of focus, as declared 
by each applicant under Sec.  656.3(a), are grouped together for 
purposes of review. Each application is reviewed for excellence based 
on the applicable criteria referenced in paragraph (a) of this section. 
Applications are then ranked within each area of focus.
    (d) The Secretary may determine a minimum total score required to 
demonstrate a sufficient degree of excellence to qualify for a grant 
under this part.
    (e) If insufficient money is available to fund all applications 
demonstrating a sufficient degree of excellence as determined under 
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section, the Secretary considers 
the degree to which priorities derived from the consultation on areas 
of national need or established under the provisions of Sec.  656.24 
and relating to specific countries, world areas, or languages are 
served when selecting applications for funding and determining the 
amount of a grant.


Sec.  656.21  What selection criteria does the Secretary use to 
evaluate an application for a comprehensive Center?

    The Secretary evaluates an application for a comprehensive Center 
on the basis of the criteria in this section.
    (a) Center scope, personnel, and operations. The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed Center's area of focus meets 
the requirements in Sec.  656.3(a).
    (2) The extent to which the Project Director and other staff are 
qualified to administer the proposed Center, including the degree to 
which they engage in ongoing professional development activities 
relevant to their roles at the proposed Center.
    (3) The adequacy of governance and oversight arrangements for the 
proposed Center, including the extent to which faculty from a variety 
of academic units participate in administration and oversee outreach 
activities, and, for a consortium, the extent to which the consortium 
agreement demonstrates commitment to a common objective.
    (4) The extent to which the institution provides or will provide 
financial, administrative, and other support to the operation of the 
proposed Center at a level sufficient to enable the administration of 
the proposed project and coordination of educational initiatives in the 
proposed Center's area of focus.
    (5) The extent to which the proposed Center, as part of its 
nondiscriminatory employment practices for Center staff, encourages 
applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that 
have been traditionally underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age or disability.
    (b) Quality of existing academic programs. The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the institution makes high-quality 
training, especially integrated interdisciplinary training in modern 
foreign languages and area studies, appropriate to the applicant's area 
of focus, available in the curricula for graduate, professional, and

[[Page 13539]]

undergraduate students in a wide variety of educational programs.
    (2) The extent to which the institution routinely provides language 
instruction, including intensive language instruction, relevant to the 
applicant's area of focus at multiple levels, as well as the degree to 
which these offerings represent distinctive commitments to depth or 
breadth.
    (3) The extent to which qualified experts at the institution 
provide modern foreign language instruction in the applicant's area of 
focus, as well as the degree to which this instruction utilizes stated 
performance goals for functional foreign language use and the degree to 
which stated performance goals are met or are likely to be met by 
students.
    (4) The extent to which the institution employs a critical mass of 
scholars in the applicant's area of focus, including the degree to 
which the institution employs enough qualified tenured and tenure-track 
faculty with teaching and advising responsibilities to enable the 
applicant to carry out interdisciplinary instructional and training 
programs supported by sufficient depth and breadth of course offerings 
in the applicant's area of focus.
    (c) Impact of existing activities and resources. The Secretary 
reviews each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the applicant, affiliated faculty, and 
institutional partners contribute significantly to the national 
interest in advanced research and scholarship related to the 
applicant's area of focus.
    (2) The extent to which the institution's library holdings (print 
and non-print, physical and digital, English and foreign language) and 
other research collections are important library collections in the 
applicant's area of focus that support advanced training and research, 
including the degree to which holdings are made available to 
researchers throughout the United States, the degree to which 
collections include unique or rare resources, and the degree to which 
the collections are supported by experts in the applicant's area of 
focus.
    (3) The extent to which the applicant, including affiliated faculty 
and institutional partners, generates information about the applicant's 
area of focus, disseminates this information to various audiences in 
the United States, and effectively engages those audiences through 
sustained outreach activities at the regional and national levels that 
respond to the diverse needs of, for example, elementary and secondary 
schools, State educational agencies, postsecondary institutions, 
nonprofit organizations, businesses, the media, and Federal agencies.
    (4) The extent to which the applicant's activities address national 
needs related to language and area studies expertise and knowledge, 
including, but not limited to, the applicant's record in placing 
students into post-graduate employment, education, or training in areas 
of national need related to language and area studies knowledge.
    (d) Project design and rationale. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the outcomes of the proposed project are 
clearly specified, possible to achieve within the project period, and 
address specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or 
opportunities related to the Center's area of focus, the purpose of the 
National Resource Centers Program described in Sec.  656.1, and the 
comprehensive type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(b).
    (2) The extent to which the project is likely to contribute to 
meeting national needs related to language and area studies expertise 
and knowledge, including, but not limited to, by outcomes and other 
stated efforts related to increasing the number of students that go 
into post-graduate employment, education, or training in areas of 
national need.
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
institutional capacity in the Center's area of focus and sustain 
results beyond the project period.
    (4) The extent to which the proposed project will reflect diverse 
perspectives, as defined in part 655, and a wide range of views and 
generate debate on world regions and international affairs.
    (e) Project planning and budget. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which all proposed activities are adequately 
described relative to their contribution to project outcomes.
    (2) The extent to which all proposed activities are of high 
quality, including the degree to which they align with the purpose of 
the National Resource Centers program described in Sec.  656.1, the 
comprehensive type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(b), and the 
proposed project's outcomes.
    (3) The extent to which the proposed timeline of activities and 
other application materials, such as letters of support, demonstrate 
the feasibility of completing proposed activities during the project 
period.
    (4) The extent to which all costs are itemized in the budget 
narrative and the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, 
design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
    (f) Quality of project evaluation. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the proposed project.
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (3) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator(s).


Sec.  656.22  What selection criteria does the Secretary use to 
evaluate an application for an undergraduate Center?

    The Secretary evaluates an application for an undergraduate Center 
on the basis of the criteria in this section.
    (a) Center scope, personnel, and operations. The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed Center's area of focus meets 
the requirements in Sec.  656.3(a).
    (2) The extent to which the Project Director and other staff are 
qualified to administer the proposed Center, including the degree to 
which they engage in ongoing professional development activities 
relevant to their roles at the proposed Center.
    (3) The adequacy of governance and oversight arrangements for the 
proposed Center, including the extent to which faculty from a variety 
of academic units participate in administration and oversee outreach 
activities, and, for a consortium, the extent to which the consortium 
agreement demonstrates commitment to a common objective.
    (4) The extent to which the institution provides or will provide 
financial, administrative, and other support to the operation of the 
proposed Center at a level sufficient to enable the administration of 
the proposed project and coordination of educational initiatives in the 
proposed Center's area of focus.
    (5) The extent to which the proposed Center, as part of its 
nondiscriminatory employment practices for Center staff, encourages 
applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that 
have been traditionally underrepresented based on race, color, national 
origin, gender, age or disability.
    (b) Quality of existing academic programs. The Secretary reviews 
each

[[Page 13540]]

application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the institution makes high-quality 
training, especially integrated interdisciplinary training in modern 
foreign language and area or international studies, appropriate to the 
applicant's area of focus, available in educational programs 
predominantly for undergraduate students in support of the objectives 
of the undergraduate institution.
    (2) The extent to which the institution routinely provides language 
instruction relevant to the applicant's area of focus, as well as the 
degree to which these offerings represent distinctive commitments to 
depth or breadth of coverage.
    (3) The extent to which qualified experts at the institution 
provide modern foreign language instruction in the applicant's area of 
focus, as well as the degree to which this instruction utilizes stated 
performance goals for functional foreign language use and the degree to 
which stated performance goals are met or are likely to be met by 
students.
    (4) The extent to which the institution employs faculty with strong 
language, area, and international studies credentials related to the 
applicant's area of focus, including the degree to which the 
institution employs enough qualified tenured and tenure-track faculty 
with teaching and advising responsibilities, to enable the applicant to 
carry out instructional and training programs supported by sufficient 
depth and breadth of course offerings predominantly for undergraduate 
students in the applicant's area of focus.
    (c) Impact of existing activities and resources. The Secretary 
reviews each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the applicant predominantly prepares 
undergraduate students to matriculate into advanced language and area 
studies programs and professional school programs, especially through 
curriculum design, requirements for student research or study abroad 
opportunities, support for relevant internship or other co-curricular 
opportunities, or specialized advising.
    (2) The extent to which the institution's library holdings (print 
and non-print, physical and digital, English and foreign language), 
other research collections, and staffing predominantly support 
undergraduate training in the applicant's area of focus through the 
provision of basic reference works, journals, and works in translation.
    (3) The extent to which the applicant, including affiliated faculty 
and institutional partners, generate information about the applicant's 
area of focus, disseminate this information to various audiences in the 
United States, and effectively engage those audiences through sustained 
outreach activities at the regional and national levels that respond to 
the diverse needs of, for example, elementary and secondary schools, 
State educational agencies, postsecondary institutions, nonprofit 
organizations, businesses, the media, and Federal agencies.
    (4) The extent to which the applicant's activities address national 
needs related to language and area studies expertise and knowledge, 
including, but not limited to, the applicant's record in placing 
undergraduate students into post-graduate employment, education, or 
training in areas of national need related to language and area studies 
knowledge.
    (d) Project design and rationale. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the outcomes of the proposed project are 
clearly specified, possible to achieve within the project period, and 
address specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or 
opportunities related to the Center's area of focus, the purpose of the 
National Resource Centers program described in Sec.  656.1, and the 
undergraduate type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(c).
    (2) The extent to which the project is likely to contribute to 
meeting national needs related to language and area studies expertise 
and knowledge, including, but not limited to, by outcomes and other 
stated efforts related to increasing the number of undergraduate 
students that go into post-graduate employment, education, or training 
in areas of national need.
    (3) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
institutional capacity in the Center's area of focus and sustain 
results beyond the project period.
    (4) The extent to which the proposed project will reflect diverse 
perspectives, as defined in part 655, and a wide range of views and 
generate debate on world regions and international affairs.
    (e) Project planning and budget. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which all proposed activities are adequately 
described relative to their contribution to project outcomes.
    (2) The extent to which all proposed activities are of high 
quality, including the degree to which they align with the purpose of 
the National Resource Centers program as described in Sec.  656.1, the 
undergraduate type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(c), and the 
proposed project's outcomes.
    (3) The extent to which the proposed timeline of activities and 
other application materials, such as letters of support, demonstrate 
the feasibility of completing proposed activities during the project 
period.
    (4) The extent to which all costs are itemized in the budget 
narrative and the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, 
design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
    (f) Quality of project evaluation. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the proposed project.
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (3) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator(s).


Sec.  656.23  What selection criteria does the Secretary use to 
evaluate an application for an additional special purpose grant to a 
Center?

    The Secretary evaluates an application for a special purpose grant 
on the basis of one or more of the criteria in this section.
    (a) Project design and rationale. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the project aligns with the Center's 
approved area of focus under Sec.  656.3(a) and proposes at least one 
type of activity contained in Sec.  656.4(a)-(g).
    (2) The extent to which the outcomes of the proposed project are 
clearly specified, possible to achieve within the project period, and 
address specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or 
opportunities related the Center's area of focus, the purpose of the 
National Resource Centers program described in Sec.  656.1, and the 
appropriate type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(b)-(c).
    (3) The extent to which the project is likely to contribute to 
meeting national needs related to language and area studies knowledge 
or expertise.
    (4) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
institutional capacity and sustain results beyond the project period.
    (b) Project planning and budget. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which all proposed activities are adequately 
described

[[Page 13541]]

relative to their contribution to project outcomes.
    (2) The extent to which all proposed activities are of high 
quality, including the degree to which they align with the purpose of 
the National Resource Centers program as described in Sec.  656.1, the 
appropriate type of Center described in Sec.  656.3(b)-(c), and the 
proposed project's intended outcomes.
    (3) The extent to which the proposed timeline of activities and 
other application materials, such as letters of support, demonstrate 
the feasibility of completing proposed activities during the project 
period.
    (4) The extent to which all costs are itemized in the budget 
narrative and the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, 
design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
    (c) Key personnel and project operations. The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which project personnel are qualified to oversee 
and carry out the proposed project.
    (2) The adequacy of staffing, governance, and oversight 
arrangements, and, for a consortium, the extent to which the consortium 
agreement demonstrates commitment to a common objective.
    (d) Quality of project evaluation. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the proposed project.
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (3) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator(s).


Sec.  656.24  What priorities may the Secretary establish?

    (a) The Secretary may select one or more of the following funding 
priorities:
    (1) Specific world areas, countries, or societies.
    (2) Instruction of specific modern foreign languages.
    (3) Modern foreign language instruction at a specific level or 
degree of intensity, such as intermediate or advanced language 
instruction, or instruction at an intensity of 10 contact hours or more 
per week.
    (4) Specific areas of national need for expertise in foreign 
languages and world areas derived from the consultation with Federal 
agencies on areas of national need.
    (5) Specific area of focus, such as a world area or a portion of a 
world area, e.g., a single country or society, in addition to a 
specific topic, e.g., economic cooperation, cybersecurity, energy, 
climate change, translation, genocide prevention, or migration.
    (b) The Secretary may select one or more of the activities listed 
in Sec.  656.4 or Sec.  656.30(a) as a funding priority.
    (c) The Secretary announces any priorities in the application 
notice published in the Federal Register.

Subpart D--What conditions must be met by a grantee?


Sec.  656.30  What activities and costs are allowable?

    (a) Allowable activities and costs. Except as provided under 
paragraph (b) of this section, a grant awarded under this part may be 
used to pay all or part of the cost of establishing, strengthening, or 
operating a comprehensive or undergraduate Center including, but not 
limited to, the cost of the following:
    (1) Supporting instructors of the less commonly taught languages.
    (2) Creating, expanding, or improving opportunities for the formal 
study of the less commonly taught languages related to the Center's 
area of focus.
    (3) Creating or operating summer institutes in the United States or 
abroad designed to provide modern foreign language and area training in 
the Center's area of focus.
    (4) Cooperating with other Centers to conduct projects that address 
issues of world, regional, cross-regional, international, or global 
importance.
    (5) Bringing visiting scholars and faculty to the Center to teach, 
conduct research, or participate in conferences or workshops.
    (6) Disseminating information about the Center's area of focus to 
various audiences in the United States through domestic outreach 
activities involving, for example, elementary and secondary schools, 
postsecondary institutions, businesses, and the media.
    (7) Funding library acquisitions, the maintenance of library 
collections, or efforts to enhance access to library collections.
    (8) Establishing and maintaining linkages with overseas 
institutions of higher education and other organizations that may 
contribute to the teaching and research of the Center's area of focus.
    (9) Creating, obtaining, modifying, or improving access to teaching 
and research materials.
    (10) Creating, expanding, or improving activities or teaching 
materials that are intended to increase modern foreign language 
proficiency among students in the science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics fields.
    (11) Conducting projects that encourage and prepare students to 
seek employment relevant to the Center's area of focus in areas of 
national need.
    (12) Planning or developing curriculum.
    (13) Engaging in professional development of the Center's faculty 
and staff.
    (14) Funding salaries and travel for faculty and staff.
    (b) Limitations. The following are limitations on allowable 
activities and costs:
    (1) Equipment costs exceeding 10 percent of the grant are not 
allowable.
    (2) Undergraduate student travel is only allowable if the costs are 
pre-approved by the Secretary and the travel is made in conjunction 
with a formal program of supervised study in the Center's area of 
focus.
    (3) Grant funds may not be used to supplant funds normally used by 
grantees for purposes of this part.
    (4) Personnel and related costs associated with compensation for 
the Project Director are not allowable.
    (5) Personnel costs and other costs related to the compensation of 
individuals exceeding 50 percent of a full time equivalent for any 
individual not directly engaged in the instruction of a less commonly 
taught language are not allowable.
    (6) Costs for international travel are only allowable if a Center 
has obtained pre-approval from the Secretary.
    (7) Activities must be relevant to the Center's area of focus and 
the type of Center.

PART 657--FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND AREA STUDIES FELLOWSHIPS PROGRAM

0
8. Revise part 657 to read as follows:

PART 657--FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND AREA STUDIES FELLOWSHIPS PROGRAM

Subpart A--General
Sec.
657.1 What is the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships 
Program?
657.2 What entities are eligible to receive an allocation of 
fellowships?
657.3 What are the instructional and administrative requirements for 
an allocation of fellowships?
657.4 Who is eligible to receive a fellowship?
657.5 What is the amount of a fellowship?
657.6 What regulations apply to this program?
657.7 What definitions apply to this program?

[[Page 13542]]

657.8 Severability.
Subpart B--How does an eligible institution or student apply?
657.10 How does an institution submit a grant application?
657.11 What assurances and other information must an applicant 
institution include in an application?
657.12 How does a student apply for a fellowship?
Subpart C--How does the secretary make a grant?
657.20 How does the Secretary select institutional applications for 
funding?
657.21 What selection criteria does the Secretary use to evaluate an 
institutional application for an allocation of fellowships?
657.22 What priorities may the Secretary establish?
Subpart D--What conditions must be met by institutional grantees and 
fellows?
657.30 What are the limitations on fellowships and the use of 
fellowship funds?
657.31 What is the payment procedure for fellowships?
657.32 Under what circumstances must an institution terminate a 
fellowship?
657.33 What are the reporting requirements for grantee institutions 
and for individual fellows who receive funds under this program?

    Authority:  20 U.S.C. 1122 and 1132-3, unless otherwise noted.

Subpart A--General


Sec.  657.1  What is the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships 
Program?

    Under the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowships Program, 
the Secretary provides allocations of fellowships to Centers and other 
administrative units at eligible institutions of higher education that 
award the fellowships on a competitive basis to undergraduate or 
graduate students who are undergoing advanced training in modern 
foreign languages and area studies.


Sec.  657.2  What entities are eligible to receive an allocation of 
fellowships?

    The Secretary awards an allocation of fellowships (grant) to an 
institution of higher education or to a consortium of institutions of 
higher education.


Sec.  657.3  What are the instructional and administrative requirements 
for an allocation of fellowships?

    (a) An allocation of fellowships must support area studies and 
language instruction that aligns with--
    (1) A geographic world area that serves as the focus of training 
and instruction;
    (2) Languages specific to the world area of focus; and
    (3) Existing programs or proposed instructional programs that will 
be developed and implemented during the grant period.
    (b) An allocation of fellowships must be administered according to 
the institution's written plan for distributing fellowships and 
allowances to eligible fellows for training and instruction during the 
academic year or summer, provided that--
    (1) The fellowship types are described in the budget narrative of 
an application selected for funding under this part; or
    (2) The Secretary has approved any proposed changes to an approved 
Center or Program's plan.


Sec.  657.4  Who is eligible to receive a fellowship?

    A student must satisfy all of the following criteria during the 
fellowship period to be eligible to receive a fellowship from an 
approved Center or Program:
    (a) The student is a--
    (1) Citizen or national of the United States; or
    (2) Permanent resident of the United States.
    (b) The student is accepted for enrollment, is enrolled, or will 
continue to be enrolled in the institution receiving an allocation of 
fellowships.
    (c) The student is pursuing an educational program that--
    (1) Includes instruction or a demonstration of proficiency in a 
modern foreign language related to the allocation of fellowships; and
    (2) Includes instruction or, for graduate students, supervised 
research related to the allocation of fellowships in--
    (i) Area studies; or
    (ii) The international aspects of professional fields and other 
fields of study, including but not limited to science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics fields.
    (d) The student demonstrates--
    (1) Commitment to the study of a world area relevant to the 
allocation of fellowships; and
    (2) Potential for high academic achievement based on such indices 
as grade point average, class ranking, or similar measures that the 
institution may determine.
    (e) The student is engaged in modern foreign language training or 
instruction in a language--
    (1) That is relevant to the student's educational program, as 
described in paragraph (c) of this section, as well as the allocation 
of fellowships; and
    (2) For which the institution or program has developed or is 
developing performance goals for foreign language use, and in the case 
of summer programs has received approval from the Secretary.
    (f) The student must engage in the type of training appropriate to 
their degree status:
    (1) Undergraduate students must engage in the study of a less 
commonly taught language at the intermediate or advanced level.
    (2) Non-dissertation or predissertation level graduate students 
must--
    (i) Engage in the study of a modern foreign language at the 
intermediate or advanced level; or
    (ii) Engage in the study of a modern foreign language at the 
beginning level, provided they demonstrate advanced proficiency in 
another modern foreign language relevant to their field of study or 
obtain the permission of the Secretary.
    (3) Dissertation level graduate students must--
    (i) Engage in dissertation research abroad or dissertation writing 
in the United States;
    (ii) Demonstrate advanced proficiency in a modern foreign language 
relevant to the dissertation project and the allocation of fellowships; 
and
    (iii) Use modern foreign language(s) relevant to the allocation of 
fellowships in their dissertation research or writing.


Sec.  657.5  What is the amount of a fellowship?

    (a) Each fellowship consists of a stipend and any additional 
allowances permitted under this part, as determined by the Secretary 
and as allocated by an approved Center or Program.
    (b) The Secretary announces the following in a notice published in 
the Federal Register:
    (1) The amounts of the stipend for an academic year.
    (2) The amounts of the stipend for a summer session.
    (3) Whether travel allowances will be permitted.
    (4) Whether dependents' allowances will be permitted.
    (5) The amounts of any permitted allowances.


Sec.  657.6  What regulations apply to this program?

    The following regulations apply to this program:
    (a) The regulations in 34 CFR part 655.
    (b) The regulations in this part 657.


Sec.  657.7  What definitions apply to this program?

    The following definitions apply to this part:
    (a) The definitions in 34 CFR 655.4.
    (b) The following definitions, unless otherwise specified:

[[Page 13543]]

    Approved center means an administrative unit of an institution of 
higher education that has both received an allocation of fellowships 
under this part and a grant to operate a Center under 34 CFR part 656.
    Approved program means a concentration of educational resources and 
activities in modern foreign language training and area studies with 
the administrative capacity to administer an allocation of fellowships 
under this part.
    Fellow means a person who receives a fellowship under this part.
    Fellowship means the payment a fellow receives under this part.
    Stipend means the portion of the fellowship paid by the grantee to 
a fellow in support of living expenses and the costs associated with 
advanced training in a modern foreign language and area studies.


Sec.  657.8  Severability.

    If any provision of this part or its application to any person, 
act, or practice is held invalid, the remainder of the part or the 
application of its provisions to any other person, act, or practice 
will not be affected thereby.

Subpart B--How does an eligible institution or student apply?


Sec.  657.10  How does an institution submit a grant application?

    The application notice published in the Federal Register explains 
how to apply for a new grant under this part.


Sec.  657.11  What assurances and other information must an applicant 
institution include in an application?

    (a) Each eligible institution of higher education, including each 
member of a consortium of institutions of higher education, applying 
for an allocation of fellowships under this part must provide all of 
the following:
    (1) An explanation of how the activities funded by the grant will 
reflect diverse perspectives, as defined in part 655, and a wide range 
of views and generate debate on world regions and international 
affairs.
    (2) A description of how the applicant will encourage government 
service in areas of national need, as identified by the Secretary, as 
well as in areas of need in the education, business, and nonprofit 
sectors.
    (3) An estimated number of the students at the applicant 
institution who currently meet the fellowship eligibility requirements.
    (b) Each applicant institution must submit the Applicant Profile 
Form provided in the FLAS Fellowships Program application package.
    (c) Each consortium of institutions of higher education applying 
for an award under this part must submit a group agreement (consortium 
agreement) that addresses the required elements in 34 CFR 75.128 and 
describes a rationale for the formation of the consortium.


Sec.  657.12  How does a student apply for a fellowship?

    (a) A student must apply for a fellowship directly to an approved 
Center or Program at an institution of higher education that has 
received an allocation of fellowships according to the application 
procedures established by that approved Center or Program.
    (b) Individual applicants must provide sufficient information to 
enable the approved Center or Program at the institution to determine 
the applicant's eligibility to receive a fellowship and whether the 
student should be selected according to the selection process 
established by the approved Center or Program.

Subpart C--How does the Secretary make a grant?


Sec.  657.20  How does the Secretary select institutional applications 
for funding?

    (a) The Secretary evaluates an institutional application for an 
allocation of fellowships on the basis of the quality of the 
applicant's Center or program in modern foreign language and area 
studies training. The applicant's Center or program is evaluated and 
approved under the criteria in Sec.  657.21.
    (b) The Secretary informs applicants of the maximum possible score 
for each criterion in the application package or in a notice published 
in the Federal Register.
    (c) The Secretary makes grant awards using a peer review process. 
Applications that share the same or similar area of focus, as declared 
by each applicant under Sec.  657.3(a), are grouped together for 
purposes of review. Each application is reviewed for excellence based 
on the applicable criteria referenced in paragraph (a) of this section. 
Applications are then ranked within each area of focus.
    (d) The Secretary may determine a minimum total score required to 
demonstrate a sufficient degree of excellence to qualify for a grant 
under this part.
    (e) If insufficient money is available to fund all applications 
demonstrating a sufficient degree of excellence as determined under 
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) of this section, the Secretary considers 
the degree to which priorities derived from the consultation on areas 
of national need or established under the provisions of Sec.  657.22 
and relating to specific countries, world areas, or languages are 
served when selecting applications for funding and determining the 
amount of a grant.


Sec.  657.21  What selection criteria does the Secretary use to 
evaluate an institutional application for an allocation of fellowships?

    The Secretary evaluates an institutional application for an 
allocation of fellowships on the basis of the criteria in this section.
    (a) Scope, personnel, and operations. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed allocation of fellowships 
meets the requirements in Sec.  657.3(a).
    (2) The extent to which the Project Director and other staff are 
qualified to administer the proposed allocation of fellowships, 
including the degree to which they engage in ongoing professional 
development activities relevant to their roles.
    (3) The adequacy of governance and oversight arrangements for the 
proposed allocation of fellowships, and, for a consortium, the extent 
to which the consortium agreement demonstrates commitment to a common 
objective.
    (4) The extent to which the institution provides or will provide 
financial, administrative, and other support to the administration of 
the proposed allocation of fellowships.
    (b) Quality of curriculum and instruction. The Secretary reviews 
each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the applicant's curriculum provides 
training options for students from a variety of disciplines and 
professional fields, and the extent to which the curriculum and 
associated requirements (including language requirements) are 
appropriate for the applicant's area of focus and result in educational 
programs of high quality for students who will be served by the 
proposed allocation of fellowships.
    (2) The levels of instruction offered for the modern foreign 
languages relevant to the proposed allocation of fellowships, including 
intensive language instruction, and the frequency with which the 
courses are offered.
    (3) The extent to which the institution's instruction in modern 
foreign languages relevant to the proposed allocation of fellowships is 
using or developing stated performance goals for functional foreign 
language use, as well as the degree to which

[[Page 13544]]

stated performance goals are met or are likely to be met by students.
    (4) The extent to which instruction in modern foreign languages is 
integrated with area studies courses, for example, area studies courses 
taught in modern foreign languages.
    (c) Quality of faculty and academic resources. The Secretary 
reviews each application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the institution employs faculty with strong 
language, area, and international studies credentials related to the 
proposed allocation of fellowships, including enough qualified tenured 
and tenure-track faculty with teaching and advising responsibilities to 
enable the applicant to carry out the instructional and training 
programs in the applicant's area of focus.
    (2) The extent to which the applicant provides or will provide 
students who will be served by the proposed allocation of fellowships 
with substantive academic and career advising services that address the 
potential uses of their foreign language and area studies knowledge and 
training.
    (3) The extent to which the institution's library holdings (print 
and non-print, physical and digital, English and foreign language), 
other research collections, and relevant staff support those who will 
be served by the proposed allocation of fellowships.
    (4) The extent to which the applicant has established formal 
arrangements for students to conduct research or study abroad relevant 
to the proposed allocation of fellowships and the extent to which these 
arrangements are used.
    (d) Project design and rationale. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the proposed allocation of fellowships 
aligns with the applicant's educational programs, instructional 
resources, and language and area studies course offerings; and the ease 
of access to relevant instruction and training opportunities, including 
training from external providers.
    (2) The applicant's record of placing students into post-graduate 
employment, education, or training in areas of national need and the 
applicant's efforts to increase the number of such students that go 
into such placement.
    (3) The extent to which the allocation of fellowships will 
contribute to meeting national needs related to language and area 
studies expertise and support the generation of information for and 
dissemination of information to the public.
    (4) The extent to which the proposed project will reflect diverse 
perspectives, as defined in part 655, and a wide range of views and 
generate debate on world regions and international affairs.
    (e) Project planning and budget. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the process for selecting fellows is 
thoroughly described and of high quality, including the institution-
wide fellowship recruitment and advertisement process, the student 
application process, the FLAS Fellowships Program selection criteria 
and priorities, any supplemental institutional requirements consistent 
with the FLAS Fellowships Program requirements, the composition of the 
institution's selection committee, and the timeline for selecting and 
notifying students.
    (2) The extent to which the institution requesting an allocation of 
fellowships identifies barriers, if any, to equitable access to and 
participation in the FLAS Fellowships Program and how the institution 
proposes to address these barriers.
    (3) The extent to which the requested amount and proposed 
distribution of the allocation of fellowships is reasonable relative to 
the potential pool of eligible students with a demonstrated interest in 
relevant modern foreign language and area studies training and 
instruction.
    (f) Quality of project evaluation. The Secretary reviews each 
application to determine one or more of the following:
    (1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
feasible, and appropriate to the proposed project.
    (2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
achieving intended outcomes.
    (3) The qualifications, including relevant training, experience, 
and independence, of the evaluator(s).


Sec.  657.22  What priorities may the Secretary establish?

    (a) The Secretary may establish one or more of the following 
priorities for the allocation of fellowships:
    (1) Instruction, training, or research in specific languages or all 
languages related to specific world areas.
    (2) Programs of language instruction with stated performance goals 
for functional foreign language use or that are developing such 
performance goals.
    (3) Instruction, training, or research related to specific world 
areas.
    (4) Academic terms, such as academic year or summer.
    (5) Levels of language offerings.
    (6) Academic disciplines, such as linguistics or sociology.
    (7) Professional studies, such as business, law, or education.
    (8) Instruction, training, or research in particular subjects, such 
as population growth and planning or international trade and business.
    (9) Specific areas of national need for expertise in foreign 
languages and world areas derived from the consultation with Federal 
agencies on areas of national need.
    (10) A combination of any of these categories.
    (b) The Secretary announces any priorities in the application 
notice published in the Federal Register.

Subpart D--What conditions must be met by institutional grantees 
and fellows?


Sec.  657.30  What are the limitations on fellowships and the use of 
fellowship funds?

    (a) Distance or online education. Fellows may satisfy course 
requirements through instruction offered in person or, with the 
Secretary's prior approval, via distance education or hybrid formats. 
Correspondence courses do not satisfy program course requirements.
    (b) Duration and purpose. An approved Center or Program may award a 
fellowship for any of the following combinations of duration and 
purpose:
    (1) One academic year, provided that the fellow enrolls in one 
language course per term and at least two area studies courses per 
year.
    (2) One academic year for dissertation research abroad, provided 
that the fellow is a doctoral candidate, uses advanced training in at 
least one modern foreign language in the research, and has a work plan 
approved by the Secretary.
    (3) One academic year for dissertation writing, provided that the 
fellow is a doctoral candidate, uses advanced training in at least one 
modern foreign language for the dissertation, and has a work plan 
approved by the Secretary.
    (4) One summer session if the summer session provides the fellow 
with the equivalent of one academic year of instruction in a modern 
foreign language.
    (5) Other durations approved by the Secretary to accommodate 
exceptional circumstances that would enable a fellow to complete an 
appropriate amount of coursework, dissertation writing, or dissertation 
research.
    (c) Internships. The Secretary may approve the use of a fellowship 
to support an internship for an eligible fellow.
    (d) Program administration costs. This program does not allow 
administrative expenses.

[[Page 13545]]

    (e) Selection of fellowship recipients. Approved Centers or 
Programs must select students to receive fellowships using the 
selection process described in the grant application submitted to the 
Department, or using any subsequent modifications to the selection 
process that have been approved by the Secretary.
    (f) Study outside the United States. Before awarding a fellowship 
for use outside the United States, an institution must obtain the 
approval of the Secretary. The Secretary may approve the use of a 
fellowship outside the United States if the student is--
    (1) Enrolled in an educational program abroad, approved by the 
institution at which the student is enrolled in the United States, for 
study of a foreign language at an intermediate or advanced level or at 
the beginning level if appropriate equivalent instruction is not 
available in the United States; or
    (2) Engaged during the academic year in research that cannot be 
done effectively in the United States and is affiliated with an 
institution of higher education or other appropriate organization in 
the host country.
    (g) Support from other Federal agencies. Recipients of fellowships 
under this part may accept concurrent awards from other Federal 
agencies such as Boren Fellowships and Critical Language Scholarships, 
provided that the other Federal awards are not used to pay for the same 
activity or cost allocated to the recipient's fellowship.
    (h) Transfer of funds. Institutions may not transfer funds from 
their allocation of fellowships to any outside entity, including other 
approved Centers or Programs, unless the funds are transferred directly 
to an instructional program provider to cover the costs for the 
institution's own fellows to attend training programs carried out by 
the instructional program provider during the academic year or a summer 
session. The transfer of funds to any instructional program providers 
located outside the United Stated must be pre-approved by the 
Secretary.
    (i) Undergraduate travel. No funds may be expended under this part 
for undergraduate travel except in accordance with rules prescribed by 
the Secretary setting forth policies and procedures to assure that 
Federal funds made available for such travel are expended as part of a 
formal program of supervised study.
    (j) Vacancies. If a fellow vacates a fellowship before the end of 
an award period, the institution receiving the allocation of 
fellowships may award the balance of the fellowship to another student 
if--
    (1) The student meets the eligibility requirements in Sec.  657.4 
and was selected in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section;
    (2) The remaining fellowship period comprises at least one full 
academic quarter, semester, trimester, or summer session; and
    (3) The amount of available funds is sufficient to award a full 
fellowship for the duration described in paragraph (j)(2) of this 
section.


Sec.  657.31  What is the payment procedure for fellowships?

    (a) An institution must award a stipend to fellowship recipients.
    (b) An institution must pay the stipend and any other allowances to 
the fellow in installments during the term of the academic year 
fellowship.
    (c) An institution may make a payment only to a fellow who is in 
good standing and is making satisfactory progress.
    (d) The institution must make appropriate adjustments of any 
overpayment or underpayment to a fellow.
    (e) Any payments made for less than the full duration of a 
fellowship must be prorated to reflect the actual duration of the 
fellowship.


Sec.  657.32  Under what circumstances must an institution terminate a 
fellowship?

    An institution must terminate a fellowship if--
    (a) The fellow is not making satisfactory progress, is no longer 
enrolled, or is no longer in good standing at the institution; or
    (b) The fellow fails to follow the course of study in modern 
foreign language and area studies, for which the fellow applied, unless 
a revised course of study is otherwise approved under this part.


Sec.  657.33  What are the reporting requirements for grantee 
institutions and for individual fellows who receive funds under this 
program?

    Each institution of higher education, each member in a consortium 
of institutions of higher education, and each individual fellowship 
recipient under this program must submit performance reports, in such 
form and at such time as required by the Secretary.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1132-3)


[FR Doc. 2024-03149 Filed 2-21-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P