Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program-Stepping-Up Technology Implementation, 15187-15195 [2024-04316]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/
fund/grant/apply/appforms/
appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the
Secretary may provide a grantee with
additional funding for data collection
analysis and reporting. In this case the
Secretary establishes a data collection
period.
5. Performance Measures: The
Department has established the
following performance measures for
Department reporting under 34 CFR
75.110 for the Mental Health Service
Professional Demonstration Grant
Program:
(a) The unduplicated, cumulative
number of school-based mental health
services providers trained by the grantee
under the project to provide schoolbased mental health services in highneed LEAs.
(b) The unduplicated, cumulative
number of school-based mental health
services providers placed in a practicum
or internship by the grantee in highneed LEAs to provide school-based
mental health services.
(c) The unduplicated, cumulative
number of school-based mental health
services providers hired by high-need
LEAs to provide school-based mental
health services.
(d) For grantees that addressed
Competitive Preference Priority 1, the
number of such grantees that met their
goal of increasing the diversity of
school-based mental health services
providers.
These measures constitute the
Department’s indicators of success for
this program. Consequently, we advise
an applicant for a grant under this
program to give careful consideration to
these measures in conceptualizing the
approach and evaluation for its
proposed project. Each grantee will be
required to provide, in its annual
performance and final reports, data
about its progress in meeting these
measures. This data will be considered
by the Department in making potential
continuation awards.
Consistent with 34 CFR 75.591,
grantees funded under this program
shall cooperate in any evaluation of the
program conducted by the Department
or an evaluator selected by the
Department.
Performance measure targets: The
applicant must propose annual targets
for the measures listed above in their
application. Applications must also
provide the following information as
directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b) and (c):
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(1) An explanation of how each
proposed performance target is
ambitious (as defined in this notice) yet
achievable compared to the baseline (as
defined in this notice) for the
performance measure.
(2) An explanation of the data
collection and reporting methods the
applicant would use and why those
methods are likely to yield reliable,
valid, and meaningful performance data;
and
(3) An explanation of the applicant’s
capacity to collect and report reliable,
valid, and meaningful performance data,
as evidenced by high-quality data
collection, analysis, and reporting in
other projects or research.
Note: If the applicant does not have
experience with the collection and
reporting of performance data through
other projects or research, the applicant
should provide other evidence of
capacity to successfully carry out data
collection and reporting for its proposed
project.
The reviewers of each application will
score related selection criteria on the
basis of how well an applicant has
considered these measures in
conceptualizing the approach and
evaluation of the project.
All grantees must submit an annual
performance report and final
performance report with information
that is responsive to these performance
measures.
6. Continuation Awards: In making a
continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among
other things, whether a grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the goals and objectives of the project;
whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its
approved application and budget; and,
if the Secretary has established
performance measurement
requirements, whether the grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the performance targets in the grantee’s
approved application.
In making a continuation award, the
Secretary also considers whether the
grantee is operating in compliance with
the assurances in its approved
application, including those applicable
to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance
from the Department (34 CFR 100.4,
104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15187
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 Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF, you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Adam Schott,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
Programs, Delegated the Authority to Perform
the Functions and Duties of the Assistant
Secretary, Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2024–04356 Filed 2–29–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards;
Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals With
Disabilities Program—Stepping-Up
Technology Implementation
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice.
The Department of Education
(Department) is issuing a notice inviting
applications for new awards for fiscal
year (FY) 2024 for Stepping-up
Technology Implementation, Assistance
Listing Number 84.327S. This notice
relates to the approved information
collection under OMB control number
1820–0028.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
15188
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
DATES:
Priorities: This competition includes
one absolute priority and one
competitive preference priority. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v),
the absolute priority is from allowable
activities specified in sections 674(b)(2)
and 681(d) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20
U.S.C. 1474(b)(2) and 1481(d). The
competitive preference priority is from
the Secretary’s Administrative Priorities
for Discretionary Grant Programs
published in the Federal Register on
March 9, 2020 (85 FR 13640)
(Administrative Priorities).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2024 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition, this
priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only
applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) 2 to
Meet Individual Needs of Students with
Disabilities Through Learning and
Assessment.
Applications Available: March 1,
2024.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: April 30, 2024.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: July 1, 2024.
Pre-Application Webinar Information:
No later than March 6, 2024, the Office
of Special Education Programs and
Rehabilitative Services will post details
on pre-recorded informational webinars
designed to provide technical assistance
to interested applicants. Links to the
webinars may be found at https://
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/
new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for
obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common
Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary
Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on December 7, 2022
(87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2022/12/07/2022-26554/commoninstructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anita Vermeer, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 4A10, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 987–0155. Email:
anita.vermeer@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals with
Disabilities Program (ETechM2
Program) is to improve results for
children with disabilities by (1)
promoting the development,
demonstration, and use of technology;
(2) supporting educational activities
designed to be of educational value in
the classroom for children with
disabilities; (3) providing support for
captioning and video description that is
appropriate for use in the classroom;
and (4) providing accessible educational
materials to children with disabilities in
a timely manner.1
1 Applicants should note that other laws,
including the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may
require that State educational agencies (SEAs) and
local educational agencies (LEAs) provide
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
Background
The evolution and recent
developments in educational technology
tools integrating AI have generated
increased interest in the potential of AI
to transform and support innovations in
learning across educational settings for
all learners, including learners with
disabilities. As part of the
Administration’s comprehensive
strategy related to responsible
innovation afforded by AI, the
Department (2023) released a report that
summarizes the opportunities and risks
for AI in teaching and learning. Such
opportunities for using AI in
educational technologies include
promising innovations to improve
student-educator interactions, address
individual learner needs and leverage
learner strengths, refine feedback loops
that improve learner outcomes, and
support educators by reducing
administrative task burden and
improving practices.
captioning, video description, and other accessible
educational materials to students with disabilities
when these materials are necessary to provide
equally integrated and equally effective access to
the benefits of the educational program or activity,
or as part of a ‘‘free appropriate public education’’
as defined in 34 CFR 104.33.
2 The term ‘‘artificial intelligence’’ or ‘‘AI’’ has the
meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3): a machinebased system that can, for a given set of humandefined objectives, make predictions,
recommendations, or decisions influencing real or
virtual environments. Artificial intelligence systems
use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive
real and virtual environments; abstract such
perceptions into models through analysis in an
automated manner; and use model inference to
formulate options for information or action.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Opportunities to leverage educational
technology tools integrating AI to
improve learning outcomes and advance
equity have been noted for all learners
(e.g., Chen et al., 2022; Huang et al.,
2021; Zafari et al., 2022; U.S.
Department of Education, 2023).
Research indicates that these
technologies hold promise in supporting
individualized instruction and
intervention and improving access in
multiple areas, including
communication, social, literacy, and
mathematical skills (e.g., Barua et al.,
2022; U.S. Department of Education,
2023). Therefore, it is critical that
children with disabilities are provided
appropriate levels of support in using
existing and developing educational
technologies integrating AI (e.g., Barua
et al., 2022; Marino et al., 2023) to
enhance learner outcomes.
As educational technology tools that
integrate AI continue to be developed
and made available, factors that support
their successful implementation in
educational settings need to be
considered. For example, evidencebased intelligent tutoring systems have
demonstrated positive outcomes for
learners, but additional research is
needed on how to effectively implement
such systems in different settings (e.g.,
Phillips et al., 2020), including how best
to support children with disabilities.
The role of the educator in
implementing these technologies to
complement ongoing instruction and
intervention is critical in supporting
children with disabilities (e.g., U.S.
Department of Education, 2023). Several
key factors that facilitate or limit
successful implementation of
educational technology tools in
educational settings have been noted,
including buy-in by and sustainability
with users, alignment with existing
priorities, development of materials to
support fidelity of implementation, how
the data are used, technology
infrastructure, and data security (e.g.,
Evmenova et al., 2023; U.S. Department
of Education, 2023).
Priority
The purpose of this priority is to fund
four cooperative agreements to establish
and operate projects that achieve, at a
minimum, the following expected
outcomes:
(a) Improved student outcomes using
an evidence-based technology-based
tool or approach 3 that integrates AI;
3 For the purposes of this priority, projects must
meet at least the definition of ‘‘promising
evidence,’’ which means that there is evidence of
the effectiveness of a key project component in
improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant
finding from one of the following: (a) a practice
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
(b) Improved educator 4 use and
knowledge of an evidence-based
technology-based tool or approach using
AI to deliver effective instruction to
students with disabilities;
(c) Improved educator collaboration
and professional learning opportunities
focusing on improving outcomes for
student with disabilities using an
evidence-based technology-based tool or
approach using AI;
(d) Improved educator and family
engagement regarding the use of an
evidence-based technology-based tool or
approach using AI to support student
learning; and
(e) Sustained use of the evidencebased technology-based tool or
approach using AI by aligning its use
with existing instructional priorities and
initiatives.
To be considered for funding under
this priority, in the application,
applicants must describe the—
(a) Evidence-based technology-based
tool or approach that is ready to use at
the time of the application submission.
If the AI component is not yet
completed, describe how this will be
integrated within the first year and how
it will enhance the current developed
technology-based tool or approach;
(b) Outcomes of students with
disabilities that will be improved by
implementing the technology-based tool
or approach using AI;
(c) Approach to increase educators’
use and knowledge of the technologybased tool or approach using AI to
improve the outcomes of students with
disabilities in an instructional setting; 5
and
guide prepared by the What Works Clearinghouse
(WWC) reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ or
‘‘moderate evidence base’’ for the corresponding
practice recommendation; (b) an intervention report
prepared by the WWC reporting a ‘‘positive effect’’
or ‘‘potentially positive effect’’ on a relevant
outcome with no reporting of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or
‘‘potentially negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome;
or (c) a single study assessed by the Department, as
appropriate, that is an experimental study, a quasiexperimental design study, or a well-designed and
well-implemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study
using regression methods to account for differences
between a treatment group and a comparison
group); and includes at least one statistically
significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a
relevant outcome. See 34 CFR 77.1 for definitions
of ‘‘project component,’’ ‘‘promising evidence,’’
‘‘experimental study,’’ ‘‘moderate evidence,’’
‘‘quasi-experimental design study,’’ ‘‘relevant
outcome,’’ and ‘‘strong evidence.’’
4 For the purpose of this priority, ‘‘educators’’
include teachers, early childhood providers,
administrators, paraprofessionals, and other
providers.
5 For the purposes of this priority, an
instructional setting can be an environment that is
regulated by the public school or an ‘‘early
childhood education program,’’ as defined under
the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended,
within the local educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(d) Fully accessible products and
resources that will help educators and
families to effectively use and
implement the technology-based tool or
approach using AI (See for example,
NIST AI Risk Management
Framework—https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/
nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.100-1.pdf-for
information on managing risks across
the AI lifecycle).
Note: Grantees may, but are not
required to, use up to the first 12
months of the performance period and
up to $200,000 of funds awarded in the
first budget period for project
development activities, including
technology enhancement, prior to
implementing the tool or approach in
instructional settings. If an applicant
proposes to use the first year for project
development activities, then the
applicant must provide sufficient
justification, including the goals,
objectives, and intended outcomes at
the end of year one.
In addition to these programmatic
requirements and application
requirements, to be considered for
funding under this priority, applicants
must also meet the following
application and administrative
requirements:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed
project will address the need for a
technology-based tool or approach that
integrates AI. To meet this requirement
applicants must—
(1) Verify that the developed
technology-based tool or approach and
core components of the intervention are
based on at least promising evidence;
(2) Describe how AI will be used with
the identified technology-based tool or
approach and describe the potential to
improve student outcomes;
(3) Describe the current impact and
reach of the technology-based tool or
approach that is currently developed
and include the population of users and,
if the applicant has received any Federal
funding within the last three years
related to this technology-based tool or
approach, describe how the funding
impacted the reach and current use;
(4) Identify how the technology-based
tool or approach using AI will improve
educators’ pedagogy and their capacity
to deliver effective instruction for
students with disabilities in PK–12
instructional settings;
(5) Identify how the technology-based
tool or approach using AI will improve
parent/family engagement/partnership
to support student learning;
110–315, title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122
Stat. 3398).
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15189
(6) Present applicable national, State,
regional, or local data demonstrating the
need for the identified technology-based
tool or approach using AI to enhance
the outcomes for students with
disabilities;
(7) Identify how the proposed
technology-based tool or approach using
AI aligns with current policies,
procedures, and practices used by
educators to enhance the outcomes for
students with disabilities; and
(8) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or
challenges, including challenges to
using the identified technology-based
tool or approach using AI.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the
proposed project will—
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment
for members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must
describe how it will—
(i) Identify the target population,
including students with disabilities and
their educators, that the applicant will
service, the need that population has for
the technology-based tool or approach,
and the intended recipients for ongoing
professional learning and coaching
support; and
(ii) Ensure that the products and
resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of this grant;
(2) Utilize a design process for the
implementation approach that promotes
sustainability of the technology-based
tool or approach using AI beyond the
life of the project;
(3) Achieve its goals, objectives, and
intended outcomes. To meet this
requirement, the applicant must provide
measurable intended project outcomes;
(4) Be based on current research. To
meet this requirement, the applicant
must—
(i) Describe how the proposed project
will align with current research,
policies, and practices related to the
benefits, services, or opportunities that
are available using the technology-based
tool or approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project
will incorporate current and evidencebased research and practices, including
research and practices relating to
accessibility and usability, to guide the
development and delivery of its
products and resources; and
(iii) Document that the technologybased tool or approach to be used by the
proposed project is developed, has been
tested and shown to have promising
evidence, and addresses, at a minimum,
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15190
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
the following principles of universal
design for learning:
(A) Multiple means of representation
so that information can be delivered in
more than one way (e.g., specialized
software and websites, customizing
display for visual or physical
modalities);
(B) Multiple means of expression that
allow knowledge to be exhibited
through options (e.g., writing, online
concept mapping, or speech-to-text
programs, where appropriate); and
(C) Multiple means of engagement to
stimulate interest in and motivation for
learning (e.g., individual or group
learning experiences or activities,
learner choice); and
(5) Develop and implement products
and resources that are of high quality
and sufficient intensity and duration to
achieve the intended outcomes of the
proposed project. To address this
requirement, the applicant must—
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and
selecting sites from a variety of
instructional settings that include the
targeted population including students
with disabilities, which must include
the following:
(A) Two product and resource
development sites.6 Applicants must
describe at least two proposed product
and resource development sites, where
the project would conduct iterative
development of the products and
resources intended to support the
implementation of the technology-based
tool or approach and produce, by the
end of year two, preliminary feasibility
and useability data. Applicants must
include a letter in Appendix A from at
least one site that indicates agreement to
serve as a product and resource
development site, at a minimum, in year
one of the project.
(B) Three pilot sites. Pilot sites are the
sites in which ongoing refinement of the
developed products and resources, and
the continued collection of feasibility
and usability data, will occur.
Applicants must describe how they
would work with a minimum of three
pilot sites no later than year three of the
project, where the project would
continue to refine the developed
products and resources; collect
feasibility and usability data; and
demonstrate that the educational
technology-based tool or approach using
AI is producing the intended outcome(s)
for students with disabilities.
(C) Five dissemination sites.
Applicants must describe how they
6 A ‘‘site’’ is a public school building or an ‘‘early
childhood education program,’’ as defined under
the Higher Education Act, within the local
educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110–315, title
VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3398).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
would work with a minimum of five
dissemination sites, where the project
would complete its activities, by year
four of the project period, to (1) refine
the products for use by educators and
students, and (2) evaluate the
performance of the technology-based
tool or approach using AI on educators’
pedagogy and students’ outcomes.
Dissemination sites would receive less
implementation support from the
project than development and pilot
sites.
Note: A site may not serve in more
than one category (i.e., development,
pilot, dissemination);
(ii) Describe how the project will
incorporate components from
implementation science 7 to select sites
for continued use of the technologybased tool or approach using AI and
support and sustain such continued use
at the selected site;
(iii) Provide a plan to systematically
disseminate information about the
technology-based tool or approach using
AI to varied audiences throughout the
project period. To address this
requirement the applicant must
describe—
(A) The variety of dissemination
strategies the project will use
throughout the five years of the project
to promote awareness and use of its
technology-based tool or approach using
AI;
(B) How the project will tailor
dissemination strategies across all years
of technology refinements and to ensure
that, by the end of year two, the
technology-based tool or approach can
be accessed by, is reaching, and is used
by intended recipients;
(C) Dissemination efforts that will go
beyond conference presentations and
articles and reach intended audiences to
support implementation and scale up
and increase the use of the technologybased tool or approach using AI by
intended users;
(D) How the project’s dissemination
plan is connected to the proposed
outcomes of the project; and
(E) How the project will ensure that
all digital products and all external
communications are routinely evaluated
for and, if necessary, remediated to meet
or exceed government or industryrecognized standards for accessibility;
and
(iv) Provide assurances that all
products or tools developed with project
7 The
following website provides more
information about implementation research: https://
nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementationresearch-network.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
funds will be open educational
resources.8
(c) In the narrative section of the
application under ‘‘Quality of the
project evaluation,’’ include an
evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs.
In designing the evaluation plan, the
applicant must—
(1) Provide a logic model (as defined
in 34 CFR 77.1) or conceptual
framework that depicts, at a minimum,
the goals, activities, project evaluation,
methods, performance measures,
outputs, and intended outcomes of the
proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan, linked to the
proposed project’s logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative
evaluation of the proposed project’s
activities. The plan must describe how
the formative evaluation will use clear
performance objectives to ensure
continuous improvement in the
operation of the proposed project,
including objective measures of progress
in implementing the project and
ensuring the quality of products and
resources;
(3) Describe a plan or method for
assessing—
(i) The development and pilot sites’
educator training use and needs and the
knowledge and availability of dedicated
on-site technology training personnel;
(ii) The readiness of pilot sites to pilot
or try-out the technology-based tool or
approach using AI, including, at a
minimum, their current infrastructure,
technology or instructional alignment,
available resources, and ability to build
capacity;
(iii) Whether the technology-based
tool or approach using AI has achieved
its intended outcomes; and
(iv) The ongoing professional learning
needs of educators to implement with
fidelity;
(4) Describe a plan to collect
formative and summative data from the
professional learning to refine and
evaluate the products and resources;
(5) Describe a plan or method for
assessing whether dissemination efforts
are increasing the knowledge and use by
the intended users of the technologybased tool or approach using AI and the
developed products and resources;
(6) Describe a plan to collect
summative data to report on the quality,
relevance, usefulness, and efficacy of
the technology-based tool or approach
using AI and its products and resources;
and
8 For additional information on the open
licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20 and this resource https://oese.ed.gov/files/
2022/06/Open-Licensing-Requirement-QuickGuide.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
(7) Provide an assurance that, by the
end of the project period, the project
will provide—
(i) Information supported by the
project evaluation on the products and
resources, including accessibility
features, that will enable other sites to
implement and sustain implementation
of the technology-based tool or
approach using AI;
(ii) Information in the project’s final
performance report, including
implementation data, on how intended
users (e.g., educators, families, and
students) utilized the technology-based
tool or approach using AI; how the
technology-based tool or approach was
implemented with fidelity; and the
effectiveness of the technology-based
tool or approach using AI in improving
outcomes for students with disabilities;
(iii) Data on how the technologybased tool or approach using AI
changed educators’ practices; and
(iv) A plan for continuing to
disseminate or scale up the technologybased tool or approach using AI and
accompanying products beyond the
sites directly involved in the project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of
project personnel,’’ how the—
(1) Proposed project will encourage
applications for employment and
project activity opportunities from
persons who are members of groups that
have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) Proposed key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors have
the qualifications and experience to
carry out the proposed activities and
achieve the project’s intended outcomes
and how the proposed project team will
include qualified experts on topics such
as technology, education theory,
practice, research methods, and scale-up
or commercialization to support
sustainability and dissemination;
(3) Applicant and any key partners
have adequate resources to carry out the
proposed activities; and
(4) Proposed costs are reasonable in
relation to the anticipated results and
benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative
section of the application under
‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’
how—
(1) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the project’s intended
outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget. To address this
requirement, the applicant must
describe—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for
key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for
accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any
consultants and subcontractors will be
allocated and how these allocations are
appropriate and adequate to achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan
will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality,
relevant, and useful to recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit
from a diversity of perspectives,
including those of families, educators,
researchers, and policy makers, among
others, in its development and
operation.
(f) Address the following application
requirements. The applicant must
include—
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading
charts and timelines, as applicable, to
illustrate the management plan
described in the narrative;
(2) In Appendix A, the logic model or
conceptual framework by which the
proposed project will develop project
plans and activities and achieve its
intended outcomes. The logic model or
conceptual framework must include a
description of any underlying concepts,
assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or
theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these
variables, and any empirical support for
this framework and depict, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs,
and intended outcomes of the proposed
project; and
Note: The following websites provide
more information on logic models and
conceptual frameworks: https://osep
ideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/
2021-12/ConceptualFramework_
Updated.pdf;www.osepideasthatwork.
org/resources-grantees/program-areas/
ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-andconceptual-framework; https://
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/
discretionary/2023-non-regulatoryguidance-evidence.pdf; and https://
ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.
asp?pubid=REL2015057.
(3) In the budget, attendance at the
following:
(i) A one-day kick-off meeting in
Washington, DC, after receipt of the
award, and an annual planning meeting
in Washington, DC, with the Office of
Special Education Programs (OSEP)
project officer and other relevant staff
during each subsequent year of the
project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the
award, a post-award teleconference
must be held between the OSEP project
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15191
officer and the grantee’s project director
or other authorized representative.
(ii) A three-day project directors’
conference in Washington, DC, during
each year of the project period.
(iii) One annual trip, to attend
Department briefings, Departmentsponsored conferences, and other
meetings, as requested by OSEP.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officers will provide
coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this
priority must—
(a) Participate in monthly conferencecall discussions to collaborate on
implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide annual information to
OSEP using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection
and the processes for implementation
and use of the technology-based tool or
approach.
Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary
may reduce continuation awards or
discontinue awards in any year of the
project period for excessive carryover
balances or a failure to make substantial
progress. The Department intends to
closely monitor unobligated balances
and substantial progress under this
program and may reduce or discontinue
funding accordingly.
Competitive Preference Priority: For
FY 2024, this priority is a competitive
preference priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional
three points to an application that meets
the competitive preference priority.
Applicants should indicate in the
abstract if the competitive preference
priority is addressed and must address
the competitive preference priority in
the narrative section.
This priority is:
Applications from New Potential
Grantees (0 or 3 points).
(a) Under this priority, an applicant
must demonstrate that the applicant has
not had an active discretionary grant
under the 84.327S program from which
it seeks funds, including through
membership in a group application
submitted in accordance with 34 CFR
75.127–75.129, in the five years before
the deadline date for submission of
applications under the program.
(b) For the purpose of this priority, a
grant or contract is active until the end
of the grant’s or contract’s project or
funding period, including any
extensions of those periods that extend
the grantee’s or contractor’s authority to
obligate funds.
References
Barua, P. D., Vicnesh, J., Gururajan, R., Oh,
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
15192
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
S. L., Palmer, E., Azizan, M. M., Kadri,
N. A., & Acharya, U. R. (2022). Artificial
intelligence enabled personalised
assistive tools to enhance education of
children with neurodevelopmental
disorders—A review. International
Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 19(3), 1192–1217. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031192.
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu,
C. (2022). Two decades of artificial
intelligence in education: Contributors,
collaborations, research topics,
challenges, and future directions.
Educational Technology & Society, 25(1),
28–47. www.jstor.org/stable/48647028.
Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K. S., Schladant, M.,
Hall, T. E., Buzhardt, J., Erickson, K. A.,
Ai, J., Sudduth, C., & Jackson, T. (2023).
Stepping-up technology
implementation—How does it happen?
Journal of Special Education
Technology, 38(1), 61–74. https://
doi.org/10.1177/01626434221074357.
Huang, J., Salah, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). A
review on artificial intelligence in
education. Academic Journal of
Interdisciplinary Studies, 10(3), 206–217.
https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0077.
Marino, M. T., Vasquez, E., Dieker, L.,
Basham, J., & Blackorby, J. (2023). The
future of artificial intelligence in special
education technology. Journal of Special
Education Technology, 38(3), 404–416.
https://doi.org/10.1177/
01626434231165977.
Phillips, A., Pane, J. F., Reumann-Moore, R.,
& Shenbanjo, O. (2020). Implementing an
adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an
instructional supplement. Educational
Technology Research and Development,
68, 1409–1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11423-020-09745-w.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of
Educational Technology. (2023).
Artificial intelligence and future of
teaching and learning: Insights and
recommendations. https://tech.ed.gov/aifuture-of-teaching-and-learning.
Zafari, M., Bazargani, J. S., Sadeghi-Niaraki,
A. & Choi, S. M. (2022). Artificial
intelligence applications in K–12
education: A systematic literature
review. IEEE Access, 10, 61905–61921.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.
2022.3179356.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking:
Under the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department
generally offers interested parties the
opportunity to comment on proposed
priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA,
however, makes the public comment
requirements of the APA inapplicable to
the absolute priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474
and 1481.
Note: Projects will be awarded and
must be operated in a manner consistent
with nondiscrimination requirements
contained in Federal civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The
Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98,
and 99. (b) The Office of Management
and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on
Governmentwide Debarment and
Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR
part 180, as adopted and amended as
regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3485. (c) The Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for
Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as
adopted and amended as regulations of
the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d)
The Administrative Priorities.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part
79 apply to all applicants except
federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part
86 apply to institutions of higher
education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative
agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: The
Administration has requested
$41,433,000 for the ETechM2 Program
for FY 2024, of which we intend to use
an estimated $1,500,000 for this
competition. The actual level of
funding, if any, depends on final
congressional action. However, we are
inviting applications to allow enough
time to complete the grant process if
Congress appropriates funds for this
program.
Contingent upon the availability of
funds and the quality of applications,
we may make additional awards in FY
2025 from the list of unfunded
applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $350,000
to $375,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards:
$375,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make
an award exceeding $375,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 4.
Note: The Department is not bound by
any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs,
including public charter schools that
operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs;
other public agencies; private nonprofit
organizations; freely associated States
and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or
Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This
program does not require cost sharing or
matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This
program uses an unrestricted indirect
cost rate. For more information
regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
negotiated indirect cost rate, please see
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/
intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation:
This program does not include any
program-specific limitation on
administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be
reasonable and necessary and conform
to the Cost Principles described in 2
CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform
Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR
75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this
competition may award subgrants—to
directly carry out project activities
described in its application—to the
following types of entities: IHEs,
nonprofit organizations suitable to carry
out the activities proposed in the
application, and other public agencies.
The grantee may award subgrants to
entities it has identified in an approved
application or that it selects through a
competition under procedures
established by the grantee, consistent
with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2).
4. Other General Requirements:
a. Recipients of funding under this
competition must make positive efforts
to employ and advance in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities
(see section 606 of IDEA).
b. Applicants for, and recipients of,
funding must, with respect to the
aspects of their proposed project
relating to the absolute priority, involve
individuals with disabilities, or parents
of individuals with disabilities ages
birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the
project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission
Information
1. Application Submission
Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education
Discretionary Grant Programs,
published in the Federal Register on
December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and
available at www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/
common-instructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs, which contain
requirements and information on how to
submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This
competition is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34
CFR part 79. Information about
Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs under Executive Order 12372
is in the application package for this
competition.
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference
regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The
application narrative is where you, the
applicant, address the selection criteria
that reviewers use to evaluate your
application. We recommend that you (1)
limit the application narrative to no
more than 50 pages and (2) use the
following standards:
• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side
only, with 1’’ margins at the top,
bottom, and both sides.
• Double-space (no more than three
lines per vertical inch) all text in the
application narrative, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations,
reference citations, and captions, as well
as all text in charts, tables, figures,
graphs, and screen shots.
• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
• Use one of the following fonts:
Times New Roman, Courier, Courier
New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not
apply to the cover sheet; the budget
section, including the narrative budget
justification; the assurances and
certifications; or the abstract (follow the
guidance provided in the application
package for completing the abstract), the
table of contents, the list of priority
requirements, the resumes, the reference
list, the letters of support, or the
appendices. However, the
recommended page limit does apply to
all of the application narrative,
including all text in charts, tables,
figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection
criteria for this competition are from 34
CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
significance of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the significance of
the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or
issue to be addressed by the proposed
project;
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps
or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have
been identified and will be addressed by
the proposed project, including the
nature and magnitude of those gaps or
weaknesses;
(iii) The potential contribution of the
proposed project to increased
knowledge or understanding of
educational problems, issues, or
effective strategies; and
(iv) The potential replicability of the
proposed project or strategies,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
including, as appropriate, the potential
for implementation in a variety of
settings.
(b) Quality of project services (30
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
services to be provided by the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the
quality and sufficiency of strategies for
ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are
members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to
be provided by the proposed project
reflect up-to-date knowledge from
research and effective practice;
(ii) The extent to which the training
or professional development services to
be provided by the proposed project are
of sufficient quality, intensity, and
duration to lead to improvements in
practice among the recipients of those
services;
(iii) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
involve the collaboration of appropriate
partners for maximizing the
effectiveness of project services;
(iv) The extent to which the services
to be provided by the proposed project
are appropriate to the needs of the
intended recipients or beneficiaries of
those services; and
(v) The likely impact of the services
to be provided by the proposed project
on the intended recipients of those
services.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation
(20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
evaluation, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and
appropriate to the goals, objectives, and
outcomes of the proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation include the use of
objective performance measures that are
clearly related to the intended outcomes
of the project and will produce
quantitative and qualitative data to the
extent possible;
(iii) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation provide for examining the
effectiveness of project implementation
strategies;
(iv) The extent to which the methods
of evaluation will provide performance
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15193
feedback and permit periodic
assessment of progress toward achieving
intended outcomes; and
(v) The extent to which the evaluation
plan clearly articulates the key project
components, mediators, and outcomes,
as well as a measurable threshold for
acceptable implementation.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality
of project personnel (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
adequacy of resources for the proposed
project and the quality of the personnel
who will carry out the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of
project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the
applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are
members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented
based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of key
project personnel;
(ii) The qualifications, including
relevant training and experience, of
project consultants or subcontractors;
(iii) The adequacy of support,
including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the
applicant organization or the lead
applicant organization;
(iv) The relevance and demonstrated
commitment of each partner in the
proposed project to the implementation
and success of the project; and
(v) The extent to which the costs are
reasonable in relation to the objectives,
design, and potential significance of the
proposed project.
(e) Quality of the management plan
(15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the management plan for the
proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the
management plan for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management
plan to achieve the objectives of the
proposed project on time and within
budget, including clearly defined
responsibilities, timelines, and
milestones for accomplishing project
tasks;
(ii) The extent to which the time
commitments of the project director and
principal investigator and other key
project personnel are appropriate and
adequate to meet the objectives of the
proposed project;
(iii) How the applicant will ensure
that a diversity of perspectives are
brought to bear in the operation of the
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15194
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
proposed project, including those of
parents, teachers, the business
community, a variety of disciplinary
and professional fields, recipients or
beneficiaries of services, or others, as
appropriate; and
(iv) The adequacy of procedures for
ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the
proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We
remind potential applicants that in
reviewing applications in any
discretionary grant competition, the
Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR
75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the
applicant in carrying out a previous
award, such as the applicant’s use of
funds, achievement of project
objectives, and compliance with grant
conditions. The Secretary may also
consider whether the applicant failed to
submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable
quality.
In addition, in making a competitive
grant award, the Secretary requires
various assurances, including those
applicable to Federal civil rights laws
that prohibit discrimination in programs
or activities receiving Federal financial
assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection
Process Factors: In the past, the
Department has had difficulty finding
peer reviewers for certain competitions
because so many individuals who are
eligible to serve as peer reviewers have
conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of
IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of
reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some
discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two
or more groups and ranked and selected
for funding within specific groups. This
procedure will make it easier for the
Department to find peer reviewers by
ensuring that greater numbers of
individuals who are eligible to serve as
reviewers for any particular group of
applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality,
independence, and fairness of the
review process, while permitting panel
members to review applications under
discretionary grant competitions for
which they also have submitted
applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific
Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under
this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by
applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the
Secretary may impose specific
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk
conditions on a grant if the applicant or
grantee is not financially stable; has a
history of unsatisfactory performance;
has a financial or other management
system that does not meet the standards
in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant;
or is otherwise not responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System:
If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that
over the course of the project period
may exceed the simplified acquisition
threshold (currently $250,000), under 2
CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a
judgment about your integrity, business
ethics, and record of performance under
Federal awards—that is, the risk posed
by you as an applicant—before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider
any information about you that is in the
integrity and performance system
(currently referred to as the Federal
Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS)),
accessible through the System for
Award Management. You may review
and comment on any information about
yourself that a Federal agency
previously entered and that is currently
in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of
your currently active grants, cooperative
agreements, and procurement contracts
from the Federal Government exceeds
$10,000,000, the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII,
require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually.
Please review the requirements in 2 CFR
part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant
plus all the other Federal funds you
receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the
Office of Management and Budget’s
guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all
applicable Federal laws, and relevant
Executive guidance, the Department
will review and consider applications
for funding pursuant to this notice
inviting applications in accordance
with—
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to
be successful in delivering results based
on the program objectives through an
objective process of evaluating Federal
award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain
telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in
alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of
2019 (Pub. L. 115–232) (2 CFR 200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the
extent permitted by law, to maximize
use of goods, products, and materials
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
produced in the United States (2 CFR
200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole
or in part to the greatest extent
authorized by law if an award no longer
effectuates the program goals or agency
priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application
is successful, we notify your U.S.
Representative and U.S. Senators and
send you a Grant Award Notification
(GAN); or we may send you an email
containing a link to access an electronic
version of your GAN. We may notify
you informally, also.
If your application is not evaluated or
not selected for funding, we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy
Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy
requirements in the application package
and reference these and other
requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining
the terms and conditions of an award in
the Applicable Regulations section of
this notice and include these and other
specific conditions in the GAN. The
GAN also incorporates your approved
application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements:
Unless an exception applies, if you are
awarded a grant under this competition,
you will be required to openly license
to the public grant deliverables created
in whole, or in part, with Department
grant funds. When the deliverable
consists of modifications to pre-existing
works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately
identified and only to the extent that
open licensing is permitted under the
terms of any licenses or other legal
restrictions on the use of pre-existing
works. Additionally, a grantee that is
awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public
grant deliverables. For additional
information on the open licensing
requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a
grant under this competition, you must
ensure that you have in place the
necessary processes and systems to
comply with the reporting requirements
in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive
funding under the competition. This
does not apply if you have an exception
under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period,
you must submit a final performance
report, including financial information,
as directed by the Secretary. If you
receive a multiyear award, you must
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices
submit an annual performance report
that provides the most current
performance and financial expenditure
information as directed by the Secretary
under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary
may also require more frequent
performance reports under 34 CFR
75.720(c). For specific requirements on
reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/
fund/grant/apply/appforms/
appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the
Secretary may provide a grantee with
additional funding for data collection
analysis and reporting. In this case the
Secretary establishes a data collection
period.
5. Performance Measures: For the
purposes of Department reporting under
34 CFR 75.110, we have established a
set of performance measures, including
long-term measures, that are designed to
yield information on various aspects of
the effectiveness and quality of the
ETechM2 Program. These measures are:
• Program Performance Measure 1:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be of
high quality by an independent review
panel of experts qualified to review the
substantial content of the products and
services.
• Program Performance Measure 2:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be of
high relevance to improving outcomes
for infants, toddlers, children, and
youth with disabilities.
• Program Performance Measure 3:
The percentage of ETechM2 Program
products and services judged to be
useful in improving results for infants,
toddlers, children, and youth with
disabilities.
• Program Performance Measure 4.1:
The Federal cost per unit of accessible
educational materials funded by the
ETechM2 Program.
• Program Performance Measure 4.2:
The Federal cost per unit of accessible
educational materials from the National
Instructional Materials Access Center
funded by the ETechM2 Program.
• Program Performance Measure 4.3:
The Federal cost per unit of video
description funded by the ETechM2
Program.
Program Performance Measures 1, 2,
and 3 apply to projects funded under
this competition, and grantees are
required to submit data on Program
Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 as
directed by OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report
information on their project’s
performance in annual performance
reports and additional performance data
to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and
75.591).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:28 Feb 29, 2024
Jkt 262001
6. Continuation Awards: In making a
continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among
other things: whether a grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the goals and objectives of the project;
whether the grantee has expended funds
in a manner that is consistent with its
approved application and budget; and,
if the Secretary has established
performance measurement
requirements, whether the grantee has
made substantial progress in achieving
the performance targets in the grantee’s
approved application.
In making a continuation award, the
Secretary also considers whether the
grantee is operating in compliance with
the assurances in its approved
application, including those applicable
to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance
from the Department (34 CFR 100.4,
104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document and a copy of the
application package in an accessible
format. The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can
view this document, as well as all other
documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF, you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2024–04316 Filed 2–29–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15195
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Agency Information Collection
Extension
Department of Energy.
Notice of request for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Energy
(DOE) invites public comment on a
proposed collection of information that
DOE is developing for submission to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Comments regarding this
proposed information collection must
be received on or before April 1, 2024.
If you anticipate that you will be
submitting comments but find it
difficult to do so within the period of
time allowed by this notice, please
advise the DOE Desk Officer at OMB of
your intention to make a submission as
soon as possible. The Desk Officer may
be telephoned at 202–395–4718.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain. Find this information
collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under
30-day Review—Open for Public
Comments’’ or by using the search
function.
SUMMARY:
Ira
Birnbaum, Ira.Birnbaum@hq.doe.gov,
202–304–4940.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments
are invited on: (a) Whether the extended
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
This information collection request
contains:
(1) OMB No.: 1910–NEW;
(2) Information Collection Request
Title: DOE Qualified List of Energy
Service Companies;
(3) Type of Request: New;
(4) Purpose: The ESPC statute (42
U.S.C. 8287(b)(2)(A)–(B)) requires the
Secretary of Energy to establish and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\01MRN1.SGM
01MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 42 (Friday, March 1, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15187-15195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04316]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Educational Technology, Media, and
Materials for Individuals With Disabilities Program--Stepping-Up
Technology Implementation
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2024 for
Stepping-up Technology Implementation, Assistance Listing Number
84.327S. This notice relates to the approved information collection
under OMB control number 1820-0028.
[[Page 15188]]
DATES:
Applications Available: March 1, 2024.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 30, 2024.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 1, 2024.
Pre-Application Webinar Information: No later than March 6, 2024,
the Office of Special Education Programs and Rehabilitative Services
will post details on pre-recorded informational webinars designed to
provide technical assistance to interested applicants. Links to the
webinars may be found at https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anita Vermeer, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4A10, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 987-0155. Email: [email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability and
wish to access telecommunications relay services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Educational Technology,
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program (ETechM2
Program) is to improve results for children with disabilities by (1)
promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2)
supporting educational activities designed to be of educational value
in the classroom for children with disabilities; (3) providing support
for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the
classroom; and (4) providing accessible educational materials to
children with disabilities in a timely manner.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Applicants should note that other laws, including the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28
CFR part 35) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may require that State
educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational agencies (LEAs)
provide captioning, video description, and other accessible
educational materials to students with disabilities when these
materials are necessary to provide equally integrated and equally
effective access to the benefits of the educational program or
activity, or as part of a ``free appropriate public education'' as
defined in 34 CFR 104.33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priorities: This competition includes one absolute priority and one
competitive preference priority. In accordance with 34 CFR
75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute priority is from allowable activities
specified in sections 674(b)(2) and 681(d) of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1474(b)(2) and 1481(d).
The competitive preference priority is from the Secretary's
Administrative Priorities for Discretionary Grant Programs published in
the Federal Register on March 9, 2020 (85 FR 13640) (Administrative
Priorities).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) \2\ to Meet Individual Needs of
Students with Disabilities Through Learning and Assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The term ``artificial intelligence'' or ``AI'' has the
meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3): a machine-based system that
can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions,
recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual
environments. Artificial intelligence systems use machine- and
human-based inputs to perceive real and virtual environments;
abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an
automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for
information or action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
The evolution and recent developments in educational technology
tools integrating AI have generated increased interest in the potential
of AI to transform and support innovations in learning across
educational settings for all learners, including learners with
disabilities. As part of the Administration's comprehensive strategy
related to responsible innovation afforded by AI, the Department (2023)
released a report that summarizes the opportunities and risks for AI in
teaching and learning. Such opportunities for using AI in educational
technologies include promising innovations to improve student-educator
interactions, address individual learner needs and leverage learner
strengths, refine feedback loops that improve learner outcomes, and
support educators by reducing administrative task burden and improving
practices.
Opportunities to leverage educational technology tools integrating
AI to improve learning outcomes and advance equity have been noted for
all learners (e.g., Chen et al., 2022; Huang et al., 2021; Zafari et
al., 2022; U.S. Department of Education, 2023). Research indicates that
these technologies hold promise in supporting individualized
instruction and intervention and improving access in multiple areas,
including communication, social, literacy, and mathematical skills
(e.g., Barua et al., 2022; U.S. Department of Education, 2023).
Therefore, it is critical that children with disabilities are provided
appropriate levels of support in using existing and developing
educational technologies integrating AI (e.g., Barua et al., 2022;
Marino et al., 2023) to enhance learner outcomes.
As educational technology tools that integrate AI continue to be
developed and made available, factors that support their successful
implementation in educational settings need to be considered. For
example, evidence-based intelligent tutoring systems have demonstrated
positive outcomes for learners, but additional research is needed on
how to effectively implement such systems in different settings (e.g.,
Phillips et al., 2020), including how best to support children with
disabilities.
The role of the educator in implementing these technologies to
complement ongoing instruction and intervention is critical in
supporting children with disabilities (e.g., U.S. Department of
Education, 2023). Several key factors that facilitate or limit
successful implementation of educational technology tools in
educational settings have been noted, including buy-in by and
sustainability with users, alignment with existing priorities,
development of materials to support fidelity of implementation, how the
data are used, technology infrastructure, and data security (e.g.,
Evmenova et al., 2023; U.S. Department of Education, 2023).
Priority
The purpose of this priority is to fund four cooperative agreements
to establish and operate projects that achieve, at a minimum, the
following expected outcomes:
(a) Improved student outcomes using an evidence-based technology-
based tool or approach \3\ that integrates AI;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For the purposes of this priority, projects must meet at
least the definition of ``promising evidence,'' which means that
there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in
improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one
of the following: (a) a practice guide prepared by the What Works
Clearinghouse (WWC) reporting a ``strong evidence base'' or
``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding practice
recommendation; (b) an intervention report prepared by the WWC
reporting a ``positive effect'' or ``potentially positive effect''
on a relevant outcome with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or
``potentially negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or (c) a
single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that is an
experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-
designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical
controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression methods
to account for differences between a treatment group and a
comparison group); and includes at least one statistically
significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant
outcome. See 34 CFR 77.1 for definitions of ``project component,''
``promising evidence,'' ``experimental study,'' ``moderate
evidence,'' ``quasi-experimental design study,'' ``relevant
outcome,'' and ``strong evidence.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 15189]]
(b) Improved educator \4\ use and knowledge of an evidence-based
technology-based tool or approach using AI to deliver effective
instruction to students with disabilities;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For the purpose of this priority, ``educators'' include
teachers, early childhood providers, administrators,
paraprofessionals, and other providers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) Improved educator collaboration and professional learning
opportunities focusing on improving outcomes for student with
disabilities using an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach
using AI;
(d) Improved educator and family engagement regarding the use of an
evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI to support
student learning; and
(e) Sustained use of the evidence-based technology-based tool or
approach using AI by aligning its use with existing instructional
priorities and initiatives.
To be considered for funding under this priority, in the
application, applicants must describe the--
(a) Evidence-based technology-based tool or approach that is ready
to use at the time of the application submission. If the AI component
is not yet completed, describe how this will be integrated within the
first year and how it will enhance the current developed technology-
based tool or approach;
(b) Outcomes of students with disabilities that will be improved by
implementing the technology-based tool or approach using AI;
(c) Approach to increase educators' use and knowledge of the
technology-based tool or approach using AI to improve the outcomes of
students with disabilities in an instructional setting; \5\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For the purposes of this priority, an instructional setting
can be an environment that is regulated by the public school or an
``early childhood education program,'' as defined under the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended, within the local educational
agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110-315, title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14,
2008, 122 Stat. 3398).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) Fully accessible products and resources that will help
educators and families to effectively use and implement the technology-
based tool or approach using AI (See for example, NIST AI Risk
Management Framework--https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.100-1.pdf-for information on managing risks across the AI lifecycle).
Note: Grantees may, but are not required to, use up to the first 12
months of the performance period and up to $200,000 of funds awarded in
the first budget period for project development activities, including
technology enhancement, prior to implementing the tool or approach in
instructional settings. If an applicant proposes to use the first year
for project development activities, then the applicant must provide
sufficient justification, including the goals, objectives, and intended
outcomes at the end of year one.
In addition to these programmatic requirements and application
requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority,
applicants must also meet the following application and administrative
requirements:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will address the need for a
technology-based tool or approach that integrates AI. To meet this
requirement applicants must--
(1) Verify that the developed technology-based tool or approach and
core components of the intervention are based on at least promising
evidence;
(2) Describe how AI will be used with the identified technology-
based tool or approach and describe the potential to improve student
outcomes;
(3) Describe the current impact and reach of the technology-based
tool or approach that is currently developed and include the population
of users and, if the applicant has received any Federal funding within
the last three years related to this technology-based tool or approach,
describe how the funding impacted the reach and current use;
(4) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach using AI
will improve educators' pedagogy and their capacity to deliver
effective instruction for students with disabilities in PK-12
instructional settings;
(5) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach using AI
will improve parent/family engagement/partnership to support student
learning;
(6) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data
demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or
approach using AI to enhance the outcomes for students with
disabilities;
(7) Identify how the proposed technology-based tool or approach
using AI aligns with current policies, procedures, and practices used
by educators to enhance the outcomes for students with disabilities;
and
(8) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including
challenges to using the identified technology-based tool or approach
using AI.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the target population, including students with
disabilities and their educators, that the applicant will service, the
need that population has for the technology-based tool or approach, and
the intended recipients for ongoing professional learning and coaching
support; and
(ii) Ensure that the products and resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of this grant;
(2) Utilize a design process for the implementation approach that
promotes sustainability of the technology-based tool or approach using
AI beyond the life of the project;
(3) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide measurable intended
project outcomes;
(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Describe how the proposed project will align with current
research, policies, and practices related to the benefits, services, or
opportunities that are available using the technology-based tool or
approach;
(ii) Describe how the proposed project will incorporate current and
evidence-based research and practices, including research and practices
relating to accessibility and usability, to guide the development and
delivery of its products and resources; and
(iii) Document that the technology-based tool or approach to be
used by the proposed project is developed, has been tested and shown to
have promising evidence, and addresses, at a minimum,
[[Page 15190]]
the following principles of universal design for learning:
(A) Multiple means of representation so that information can be
delivered in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and
websites, customizing display for visual or physical modalities);
(B) Multiple means of expression that allow knowledge to be
exhibited through options (e.g., writing, online concept mapping, or
speech-to-text programs, where appropriate); and
(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and
motivation for learning (e.g., individual or group learning experiences
or activities, learner choice); and
(5) Develop and implement products and resources that are of high
quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended
outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and selecting sites from a
variety of instructional settings that include the targeted population
including students with disabilities, which must include the following:
(A) Two product and resource development sites.\6\ Applicants must
describe at least two proposed product and resource development sites,
where the project would conduct iterative development of the products
and resources intended to support the implementation of the technology-
based tool or approach and produce, by the end of year two, preliminary
feasibility and useability data. Applicants must include a letter in
Appendix A from at least one site that indicates agreement to serve as
a product and resource development site, at a minimum, in year one of
the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ A ``site'' is a public school building or an ``early
childhood education program,'' as defined under the Higher Education
Act, within the local educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110-315,
title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3398).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Three pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which ongoing
refinement of the developed products and resources, and the continued
collection of feasibility and usability data, will occur. Applicants
must describe how they would work with a minimum of three pilot sites
no later than year three of the project, where the project would
continue to refine the developed products and resources; collect
feasibility and usability data; and demonstrate that the educational
technology-based tool or approach using AI is producing the intended
outcome(s) for students with disabilities.
(C) Five dissemination sites. Applicants must describe how they
would work with a minimum of five dissemination sites, where the
project would complete its activities, by year four of the project
period, to (1) refine the products for use by educators and students,
and (2) evaluate the performance of the technology-based tool or
approach using AI on educators' pedagogy and students' outcomes.
Dissemination sites would receive less implementation support from the
project than development and pilot sites.
Note: A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e.,
development, pilot, dissemination);
(ii) Describe how the project will incorporate components from
implementation science \7\ to select sites for continued use of the
technology-based tool or approach using AI and support and sustain such
continued use at the selected site;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Provide a plan to systematically disseminate information
about the technology-based tool or approach using AI to varied
audiences throughout the project period. To address this requirement
the applicant must describe--
(A) The variety of dissemination strategies the project will use
throughout the five years of the project to promote awareness and use
of its technology-based tool or approach using AI;
(B) How the project will tailor dissemination strategies across all
years of technology refinements and to ensure that, by the end of year
two, the technology-based tool or approach can be accessed by, is
reaching, and is used by intended recipients;
(C) Dissemination efforts that will go beyond conference
presentations and articles and reach intended audiences to support
implementation and scale up and increase the use of the technology-
based tool or approach using AI by intended users;
(D) How the project's dissemination plan is connected to the
proposed outcomes of the project; and
(E) How the project will ensure that all digital products and all
external communications are routinely evaluated for and, if necessary,
remediated to meet or exceed government or industry-recognized
standards for accessibility; and
(iv) Provide assurances that all products or tools developed with
project funds will be open educational resources.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For additional information on the open licensing
requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20 and this resource https://oese.ed.gov/files/2022/06/Open-Licensing-Requirement-Quick-Guide.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation,'' include an evaluation plan for the project as
described in the following paragraphs. In designing the evaluation
plan, the applicant must--
(1) Provide a logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) or conceptual
framework that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, project
evaluation, methods, performance measures, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan, linked to the proposed project's logic model or
conceptual framework, for a formative evaluation of the proposed
project's activities. The plan must describe how the formative
evaluation will use clear performance objectives to ensure continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project, including
objective measures of progress in implementing the project and ensuring
the quality of products and resources;
(3) Describe a plan or method for assessing--
(i) The development and pilot sites' educator training use and
needs and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site
technology training personnel;
(ii) The readiness of pilot sites to pilot or try-out the
technology-based tool or approach using AI, including, at a minimum,
their current infrastructure, technology or instructional alignment,
available resources, and ability to build capacity;
(iii) Whether the technology-based tool or approach using AI has
achieved its intended outcomes; and
(iv) The ongoing professional learning needs of educators to
implement with fidelity;
(4) Describe a plan to collect formative and summative data from
the professional learning to refine and evaluate the products and
resources;
(5) Describe a plan or method for assessing whether dissemination
efforts are increasing the knowledge and use by the intended users of
the technology-based tool or approach using AI and the developed
products and resources;
(6) Describe a plan to collect summative data to report on the
quality, relevance, usefulness, and efficacy of the technology-based
tool or approach using AI and its products and resources; and
[[Page 15191]]
(7) Provide an assurance that, by the end of the project period,
the project will provide--
(i) Information supported by the project evaluation on the products
and resources, including accessibility features, that will enable other
sites to implement and sustain implementation of the technology-based
tool or approach using AI;
(ii) Information in the project's final performance report,
including implementation data, on how intended users (e.g., educators,
families, and students) utilized the technology-based tool or approach
using AI; how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented
with fidelity; and the effectiveness of the technology-based tool or
approach using AI in improving outcomes for students with disabilities;
(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach using AI
changed educators' practices; and
(iv) A plan for continuing to disseminate or scale up the
technology-based tool or approach using AI and accompanying products
beyond the sites directly involved in the project.
(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel,'' how the--
(1) Proposed project will encourage applications for employment and
project activity opportunities from persons who are members of groups
that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;
(2) Proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors
have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed
activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes and how the
proposed project team will include qualified experts on topics such as
technology, education theory, practice, research methods, and scale-up
or commercialization to support sustainability and dissemination;
(3) Applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry
out the proposed activities; and
(4) Proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated
results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
resources provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients; and
(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of
perspectives, including those of families, educators, researchers, and
policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must include--
(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as
applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the
narrative;
(2) In Appendix A, the logic model or conceptual framework by which
the proposed project will develop project plans and activities and
achieve its intended outcomes. The logic model or conceptual framework
must include a description of any underlying concepts, assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical
support for this framework and depict, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project; and
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf;www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework; https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/discretionary/2023-non-regulatory-guidance-evidence.pdf; and https://ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=REL2015057.
(3) In the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one-day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of
the award, and an annual planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer and other
relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative.
(ii) A three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period.
(iii) One annual trip, to attend Department briefings, Department-
sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officers will provide coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to
collaborate on implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide annual information to OSEP using a template that
captures descriptive data on project site selection and the processes
for implementation and use of the technology-based tool or approach.
Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary may reduce continuation awards
or discontinue awards in any year of the project period for excessive
carryover balances or a failure to make substantial progress. The
Department intends to closely monitor unobligated balances and
substantial progress under this program and may reduce or discontinue
funding accordingly.
Competitive Preference Priority: For FY 2024, this priority is a
competitive preference priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award
an additional three points to an application that meets the competitive
preference priority. Applicants should indicate in the abstract if the
competitive preference priority is addressed and must address the
competitive preference priority in the narrative section.
This priority is:
Applications from New Potential Grantees (0 or 3 points).
(a) Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that the
applicant has not had an active discretionary grant under the 84.327S
program from which it seeks funds, including through membership in a
group application submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127-75.129, in
the five years before the deadline date for submission of applications
under the program.
(b) For the purpose of this priority, a grant or contract is active
until the end of the grant's or contract's project or funding period,
including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee's or
contractor's authority to obligate funds.
References
Barua, P. D., Vicnesh, J., Gururajan, R., Oh,
[[Page 15192]]
S. L., Palmer, E., Azizan, M. M., Kadri, N. A., & Acharya, U. R.
(2022). Artificial intelligence enabled personalised assistive tools
to enhance education of children with neurodevelopmental disorders--
A review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 19(3), 1192-1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031192.
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two decades
of artificial intelligence in education: Contributors,
collaborations, research topics, challenges, and future directions.
Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28-47. www.jstor.org/stable/48647028.
Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K. S., Schladant, M., Hall, T. E., Buzhardt,
J., Erickson, K. A., Ai, J., Sudduth, C., & Jackson, T. (2023).
Stepping-up technology implementation--How does it happen? Journal
of Special Education Technology, 38(1), 61-74. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434221074357.
Huang, J., Salah, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). A review on artificial
intelligence in education. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary
Studies, 10(3), 206-217. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0077.
Marino, M. T., Vasquez, E., Dieker, L., Basham, J., & Blackorby, J.
(2023). The future of artificial intelligence in special education
technology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 38(3), 404-416.
https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434231165977.
Phillips, A., Pane, J. F., Reumann-Moore, R., & Shenbanjo, O.
(2020). Implementing an adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an
instructional supplement. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 68, 1409-1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09745-w.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology.
(2023). Artificial intelligence and future of teaching and learning:
Insights and recommendations. https://tech.ed.gov/ai-future-of-teaching-and-learning.
Zafari, M., Bazargani, J. S., Sadeghi-Niaraki, A. & Choi, S. M.
(2022). Artificial intelligence applications in K-12 education: A
systematic literature review. IEEE Access, 10, 61905-61921. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3179356.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section
681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the
APA inapplicable to the absolute priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner
consistent with nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal
civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474. (d) The Administrative Priorities.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
$41,433,000 for the ETechM2 Program for FY 2024, of which we intend to
use an estimated $1,500,000 for this competition. The actual level of
funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are
inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant
process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2025 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $350,000 to $375,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $375,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $375,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter
schools that operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public
agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and
outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit
organizations.
2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c. Administrative Cost Limitation: This program does not include
any program-specific limitation on administrative expenses. All
administrative expenses must be reasonable and necessary and conform to
the Cost Principles described in 2 CFR part 200 subpart E of the
Uniform Guidance.
3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under
this competition may award subgrants--to directly carry out project
activities described in its application--to the following types of
entities: IHEs, nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the
activities proposed in the application, and other public agencies. The
grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an
approved application or that it selects through a competition under
procedures established by the grantee, consistent with 34 CFR
75.708(b)(2).
4. Other General Requirements:
a. Recipients of funding under this competition must make positive
efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).
b. Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to
the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute
priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs, which contain requirements and information on how to
submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under
Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this
competition.
[[Page 15193]]
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you,
the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to
evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the
application narrative to no more than 50 pages and (2) use the
following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the
budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the
assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance
provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the
table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the
reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the
recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative,
including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen
shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the
proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses;
(iii) The potential contribution of the proposed project to
increased knowledge or understanding of educational problems, issues,
or effective strategies; and
(iv) The potential replicability of the proposed project or
strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation
in a variety of settings.
(b) Quality of project services (30 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be
provided by the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective
practice;
(ii) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services;
(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for
maximizing the effectiveness of project services;
(iv) The extent to which the services to be provided by the
proposed project are appropriate to the needs of the intended
recipients or beneficiaries of those services; and
(v) The likely impact of the services to be provided by the
proposed project on the intended recipients of those services.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation (20 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be
conducted of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project;
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible;
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies;
(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes; and
(v) The extent to which the evaluation plan clearly articulates the
key project components, mediators, and outcomes, as well as a
measurable threshold for acceptable implementation.
(d) Adequacy of resources and quality of project personnel (20
points).
(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the
proposed project and the quality of the personnel who will carry out
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of key project personnel;
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors;
(iii) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization;
(iv) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project;
and
(v) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(e) Quality of the management plan (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks;
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project;
(iii) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of
perspectives are brought to bear in the operation of the
[[Page 15194]]
proposed project, including those of parents, teachers, the business
community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields,
recipients or beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate; and
(iv) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and
continuous improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make
it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that
greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers
for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of
interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness
of the review process, while permitting panel members to review
applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also
have submitted applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.206, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
200.208, the Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant
if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may
review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal
agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently active
grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the
Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity
information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2
CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal
funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the Office of Management and
Budget's guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all applicable Federal
laws, and relevant Executive guidance, the Department will review and
consider applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with--
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering
results based on the program objectives through an objective process of
evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video
surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the
National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR
200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to
maximize use of goods, products, and materials produced in the United
States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest
extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program
goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. For
additional information on the open licensing requirements please refer
to 2 CFR 3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must
[[Page 15195]]
submit an annual performance report that provides the most current
performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the
Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more
frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific
requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes of Department reporting
under 34 CFR 75.110, we have established a set of performance measures,
including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on
various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the ETechM2
Program. These measures are:
Program Performance Measure 1: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be of high quality by an
independent review panel of experts qualified to review the substantial
content of the products and services.
Program Performance Measure 2: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be of high relevance to
improving outcomes for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with
disabilities.
Program Performance Measure 3: The percentage of ETechM2
Program products and services judged to be useful in improving results
for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
Program Performance Measure 4.1: The Federal cost per unit
of accessible educational materials funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measure 4.2: The Federal cost per unit
of accessible educational materials from the National Instructional
Materials Access Center funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit
of video description funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 apply to projects funded
under this competition, and grantees are required to submit data on
Program Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 as directed by OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual performance reports and additional performance
data to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 75.591).
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, whether
the grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the performance
targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an
accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text
format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of this Department published
in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2024-04316 Filed 2-29-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
