[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 123 (Thursday, June 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38122-38132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13737]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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) 2020 for
Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with
Disabilities--Stepping-up Technology Implementation, Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.327S. This notice relates to the
approved information collection under OMB control number 1820-0028.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 25, 2020.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 14, 2020.
Date of 84.327S Pre-Application Meeting: OSERS will conduct a pre-
application meeting specific to these competitions via webinar on July
6, 2020, at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. In addition, no later than June
30, 2020, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) will post a
pre-recorded informational webinar designed to provide technical
assistance to interested applicants. Information about the
teleconference and the pre-recorded webinar may be found at
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html.
ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an
application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to
Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Federal Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5128, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6039. Email:
[email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Educational Technology,
Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program are to
(1) improve results for children with disabilities by promoting the
development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) support
educational activities designed to be of educational value in the
classroom for children with disabilities; (3) provide support for
captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the
classroom; and (4) provide accessible educational materials 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 two absolute priorities. In
accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), these priorities are from
allowable activities specified in sections 674(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C.
1474(c)(1)(D) and 1481(d).
Absolute Priorities: For FY 2020 and any subsequent year in which
we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition, these priorities are absolute priorities. Under 34 CFR
75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet either Absolute
Priority 1 or Absolute Priority 2. Applicants may apply under both
absolute priorities but must submit separate applications.
These priorities are:
Absolute Priority 1--Providing Technology-Based Professional
Development to Trainers of Special Education Teachers to Support
Children With Disabilities.
Background:
Technology has enhanced professional development learning
opportunities for teachers by expanding
[[Page 38123]]
access to information and resources that support their content
expertise and pedagogy and promote their professional growth. As an
alternative to face-to-face professional development that can be
expensive or impracticable (e.g., during an emergency), professional
development facilitated by technology has the potential to more
efficiently shape and impact teaching practices. Some examples of the
technologies that can be used to support teacher learning include
virtual coaching, in which a coach interacts electronically with
teachers to improve teaching skills; learning management systems (LMS)
that allow sharing of documents and data in one central location; and
gamification, which involves bringing elements associated with video
games into the learning environment to increase engagement and making
tasks challenging.
McAleavy et al. (2018) noted that using technology to support
teachers' professional learning can promote collaboration through
professional learning communities and communities of practice. In
addition, technology that can be used to build the skills of teachers
and related services personnel in rural or remote areas may be more
cost-effective than face-to-face trainings and will offer flexibility
that allows teachers to train at a time and place that suits them.
However, regardless of the delivery, effective professional
development must go beyond learning new materials and skills; it must
also support teachers and related services personnel in improving
classroom instruction and student learning (Gess-Newsome et al., 2003).
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) indicated that effective professional
development should have the following features: (1) Be content focused,
(2) incorporate active learning utilizing adult learning principles,
(3) support collaboration, (4) use models and modeling of effective
practices, (5) provide coaching and expert support, (6) offer
opportunities for feedback and reflection, and (7) be of sustained
duration.
The Department therefore intends to fund three cooperative
agreements to (a) identify strategies needed to implement and integrate
an existing technology-based tool or approach, based on at least
promising evidence,\2\ into the provision of teacher in-service
training; and (b) provide ongoing technology-based professional
development and coaching for in-service trainers in the use of
technology to, and understanding of how the technology may, support
teachers to improve classroom and remote learning environment
instruction and learning outcomes for children with disabilities in
pre-kindergarten through grade 12 (PK-12) settings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Section 8002 of Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as
amended (ESEA) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a
minimum, must--
(a) Build partnerships with LEAs, at least one of which is in a
rural location and that includes public and nonpublic schools, to
support teacher in-service trainers in the understanding, use, and
delivery of a technology-based tool or approach that will support
teacher in-service training for instruction of children with
disabilities in PK-12 instructional settings, including classrooms and
remote learning environments;
(b) Increase the capacity of teacher in-service trainers to
effectively use and implement a technology-based tool or approach that
supports teacher classroom and remote learning environment instruction
and professional growth;
(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources
that will help teacher in-service trainers to use a technology-based
tool or approach; and
(d) Evaluate the effectiveness of the in-service training conducted
using the technology-based tool or approach.
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following
application and administrative requirements in this priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address the need for a technology-based tool or approach and
identify specific gaps and weaknesses, infrastructure, or opportunities
to support teacher in-service training. To meet this requirement the
applicant must--
(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach
that is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will
improve teacher in-service training and the capacity of teachers to
deliver instruction or services for PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data
demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or
approach in teacher in-service training to support children with
disabilities;
(iv) Identify current policies, procedures, and practices used by
teacher in-service trainers that incorporate technology-based tools or
approaches to meet their training needs;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including
challenges using the identified technology-based tools or approaches in
providing teacher in-service training; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-
based tool or approach on teacher in-service trainers, teachers,
families and children with disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing
coaching and supports;
(ii) Identify potential strategies to provide recipients of the in-
service training with the flexibility to personalize their own learning
and coaching supports; and
(iii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model \3\ or conceptual framework by
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to
be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project
components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy
in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any
underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations,
[[Page 38124]]
beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to 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
research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its
products and resources, including accessibility and usability; and
(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is
fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses,
at a minimum, the following principles of universal design for learning
(UDL):
(A) Multiple means of presentation so that information can be
delivered in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and
websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech,
changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression that allow knowledge to be
exhibited through options such as writing, online concept mapping, or
speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and
motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning
activities or content for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new 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 a wide range of
settings where children with disabilities are served, which must
include the following:
(A) Three development sites. Development sites are the sites in
which iterative development of the products and resources intended to
support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project
must start implementing the technology tool with one development site
in year one of the project period and two additional development sites
in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out,
formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will
occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years
three and four of the project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites. Dissemination/scale-up sites will be
selected if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination/
scale-up sites will be used to (a) refine the products for use by
educators, and (b) evaluate the performance of the technology tool.
Dissemination/scale-up sites will receive less technical assistance
(TA) from the project than development and pilot sites. Also,
dissemination/scale-up sites will extend the benefits of the technology
tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination/scale-up
site, eligible sites must commit to working with the project to
implement the technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e.,
development, pilot, dissemination/scale-up).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites
must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and
secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of
four of the 10 dissemination/scale-up sites must be in settings other
than traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at
least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites,
including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether
the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted
support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii),
(c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)-(D) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA));
(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute information, products, and
services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination
strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project's products and
resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project
activities after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help
sites effectively implement technology tools will be both open
educational resources (OER) and licensed through an open access
licensing authority.
(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. The evaluation plan must
describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria
for determining the extent to which the project's products and
resources have met the goals for reaching the project's target
population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's
activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the
goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic
model, have been met. The applicant must provide an assurance that, in
designing the evaluation plan, it will--
(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at
a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods,
performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the activities described in this
priority;
(3) 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;
(4) Describe a plan or method for assessing--
(i) The development and pilot sites' current teacher in-service
training uses and needs, any current in-service technology investments,
and the knowledge and availability of dedicated on-site in-service
training personnel;
(ii) The readiness of development and pilot sites to pilot or try-
out the technology-based teacher in-service training, including at a
minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability
to build capacity;
(iii) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved
its intended outcomes for teacher in-service trainers and PK-12
teachers; and
(iv) Ongoing training needs of in-service trainers to implement
with fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative data from the in-service
training to refine and evaluate the products;
[[Page 38125]]
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year--
(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites, one of which must be rural, in year five; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project's
products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-
based tool or approach in teacher in-service training sites; and
(7) By the end of the project period, provide--
(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the
project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will
enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the
technology-based tool or approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including
data on how in-service trainers used the technology-based tool or
approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was implemented
with fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed in-
service trainers' practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based
tool or approach 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--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are 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; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, or
virtually 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 two and one-half-day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, or a virtual conference during each year of the project
period.
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review meeting during the last half
of the second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and
collaborate on implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide information annually using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection and the processes for
installation and use of the technology-based tool or approach (i.e.,
the implementation process).
Note: The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48
months to work with dissemination/scale-up sites if the grantee is
achieving the intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data
gathered as part of the project evaluation) and making a positive
contribution to the implementation of a technology-based tool or
approach based on at least promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month period. In deciding whether to
continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will
consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP
project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This
review will be held during the last half of the second year of the
project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The degree to which the project's activities have changed
practices and improved outcomes for PK-12 children with disabilities.
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective
Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev.
Gess-Newsome, J., Blocher, J.M., Clark, J., Menasco, J., & Willis,
E.M. (2003). Technology infused professional development: A
framework for development and analysis. Contemporary Issues in
Technology and Teacher Education, 3(3). https://citejournal.org/volume-3/issue-3-03/general/technology-infused-professional-development-a-framework-for-development-and-analysis.
McAleavy, T., Hall-Chen, A., Horrocks, S., & Riggall, A. (2018).
Technology-supported professional development for teachers: Lessons
from developing countries. Education Development Trust. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593386.
Absolute Priority 2--Improving Social Skill Development for
Students with Disabilities Through the Use of Socially Assistive
Robotics (SAR).
[[Page 38126]]
Background:
For students with disabilities, interpersonal skills, such as
active listening, effective communication, and recognizing and
understanding the points of view of others, are important to the
development of healthy relationships and successful placement into the
least restrictive environment. The lack of appropriate social skills
can negatively impact student learning, can result in poor peer social
interactions, and may lead to suspension, expulsion, and dropping out
of school (Murry, 2018). Programs that support social skill development
in school settings are important to ensure children do not learn in
isolation, promote positive relationships, facilitate improved learning
outcomes, and provide crucial skill sets that allow children to work
alone and with others in the school setting (Connolly et al., 2016).
Implementing social skill development in a systematic, school-wide
approach is more beneficial than fragmented approaches, as it allows
students' social skills to be cultivated along with academic skills and
creates a common climate and culture throughout the school (DePaoli et
al., 2017).
Making technology and SAR part of learning and social skill
development for children with disabilities has become more prevalent
over the years. Technology-based interventions, such as humanoid robots
controlled by a human trainer and robotic therapeutic interventions
that target repetitive behaviors and affective states in children with
autism spectrum disorder (ASD), have been found to be beneficial for
improving a wide range of skills and behaviors, including social and
emotional skills, communication skills, academic skills, and
challenging behaviors. Recent advancements in SAR have created an
alternative educational approach to providing social skills supports
for students with ASD. With machine learning, robots can predict a
child's engagement based on their eye contact, dialogue, and other
behavioral cues and then react and reengage them to help lengthen the
time the child stays engaged in the therapeutic activity (Jain et al.,
2020; Hao, 2020). SAR can help to provide an affordable, accessible,
and personalized intervention and reduce the need for human
interventions for students with ASD (Jain et al., 2020). Furthermore,
SAR provide opportunities for students to learn through non-
threatening, three-dimensional inanimate objects, while also providing
opportunities to learn through imitation and interactions that
encourage autonomous social behavior (Tennyson et al., 2016).
The Department therefore intends to fund two cooperative agreements
to identify strategies needed to implement and integrate SAR to (a)
help improve the social skills of children with disabilities; and (b)
provide ongoing professional development and coaching for educators,
students, or families in the use and understanding of how the
technology can improve social skills and learning outcomes for children
with disabilities in PK-12 settings.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For the purposes of this priority, ``settings'' include
general education classrooms; special education classrooms; charter
schools; high-quality early childhood programs; private schools,
including parochial schools; home education; after school programs;
juvenile justice facilities; remote learning environments and any
other settings in which students may receive services under IDEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and
Federal civil rights laws.
Priority:
To be considered for funding under this priority, applicants, at a
minimum, must--
(a) Increase the capacity of educators, students, and families to
effectively understand and implement SAR (referred to as a technology-
based tool or approach in the remainder of the priority) to instruct
and support social skills development for children with disabilities;
(b) Improve the social skill interactions of students with
disabilities as a result of using a technology-based tool or approach;
(c) Develop an implementation package of products and resources
that will help educators and school sites to understand and use a
technology-based tool or approach;
(d) Evaluate the impact of a technology-based tool or approach on
achieving the intended outcomes; and
(e) Ensure that a technology-based tool or approach meets the
accessibility \5\ and usability needs of the intended users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Technology should meet current industry standards and
guidelines for accessibility (e.g., Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 AA and section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act).
For additional information on WCAG 2.0 please refer to www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the following
application and administrative requirements in this priority:
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address the need for the technology-based tool or approach and
identify specific gaps and weaknesses or opportunities to support
teachers in the instructional setting, including classroom and remote
learning environments. To meet this requirement the applicant must--
(i) Identify a fully developed technology-based tool or approach
that is based on at least promising evidence;
(ii) Identify how the technology-based tool or approach will
improve the social skills of PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iii) Present applicable national, State, regional, or local data
demonstrating the need for the identified technology-based tool or
approach in classrooms and remote learning environments to support the
development of social skills in PK-12 children with disabilities;
(iv) Document that the technology-based tool or approach used by
the project is fully developed and based on at least promising evidence
and how the technology-based tool or approach will better enable
teachers to deliver instruction or services across subject areas for
PK-12 children with disabilities;
(v) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or challenges, including
challenges with the use of the identified technology-based tool or
approach, faced by schools and teachers; and
(vi) Describe the potential impact of the identified technology-
based tool or approach on schools, teachers, families, and children
with disabilities.
(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of project services,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that
have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must describe how it will--
(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for ongoing
coaching and professional development supports; and
(ii) Ensure that products and resources meet the needs of the
intended recipients of the grant;
(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model \6\ or conceptual framework by
which the
[[Page 38127]]
proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a
minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the
proposed project;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Logic model (also referred to as a theory of action) means a
framework that identifies key project components of the proposed
project (i.e., the active ``ingredients'' that are hypothesized to
be critical to achieving the relevant outcomes) and describes the
theoretical and operational relationships among the key project
components and relevant outcomes. See 34 CFR 77.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Use a logic model or conceptual framework (and provide a copy
in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities describing any
underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories,
as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these
variables, and any empirical support for this framework;
Note: The following websites provide more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.
(4) Be based on current research. To meet this requirement, the
applicant must--
(i) Describe how the proposed project will align to 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
research and practices to guide the development and delivery of its
products and resources, including accessibility and usability; and
(iii) Document that the technology tool used by the project is
fully developed, based on at least promising evidence, and addresses,
at a minimum, the following principles of UDL:
(A) Multiple means of presentation so that students can approach
information in more than one way (e.g., specialized software and
websites, screen readers that include features such as text-to-speech,
changeable color contrast, alterable text size, or selection of
different reading levels).
(B) Multiple means of expression so that all students can
demonstrate knowledge through options such as writing, online concept
mapping, or speech-to-text programs, where appropriate.
(C) Multiple means of engagement to stimulate interest in and
motivation for learning (e.g., options among several different learning
activities or content for a particular competency or skill and
providing opportunities for increased collaboration consistent with UDL
principles).
(5) Develop new 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 a wide range of
settings where children with disabilities are served and that must
include the following:
(A) Three development sites. Development sites are the sites in
which iterative development of the products and resources intended to
support the implementation of technology tools will occur. The project
must start implementing the technology tool with one development site
in year one of the project period and two additional development sites
in year two.
(B) Four pilot sites. Pilot sites are the sites in which try-out,
formative evaluation, and refinement of the products and resources will
occur. The project must work with the four pilot sites during years
three and four of the project period.
(C) Ten dissemination sites. Dissemination sites will be selected
if the project is extended for a fifth year. Dissemination sites will
be used to (a) refine the products for use by educators, and (b)
evaluate the performance of the technology tool. Dissemination sites
will receive less TA from the project than development or pilot sites.
Also, dissemination sites will extend the benefits of the technology
tool to additional students. To be selected as a dissemination site,
eligible sites must commit to working with the project to implement the
technology tool.
(D) A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e.,
development, pilot, dissemination).
(E) A minimum of three of the seven development and pilot sites
must be in settings other than traditional public elementary and
secondary schools and include at least one rural site. A minimum of
four of the 10 dissemination sites must be in settings other than
traditional public elementary and secondary schools and include at
least one rural site. These non-traditional and rural sites must
otherwise meet the requirements of each category listed above.
(ii) Provide information on the development and pilot sites,
including student demographics and other pertinent data (e.g., whether
the settings are schools identified for comprehensive or targeted
support and improvement in accordance with section 1111(c)(4)(C)(iii),
(c)(4)(D), or (d)(2)(C)-(D) of the ESEA);
(iii) Provide its plan for dissemination, which must address how
the project will systematically distribute information, products, and
services to varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination
strategies, to promote awareness and use of the project's products and
resources;
(iv) Provide its plan for how the project will sustain project
activities after funding ends; and
(v) Provide assurances that the final products disseminated to help
sites effectively implement technology tools will be both OER and
licensed through an open access licensing authority.
(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. The evaluation plan must
describe measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria
for determining the extent to which the project's products and
resources have met the goals for reaching the project's target
population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's
activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the
goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic
model, have been met.
The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the
evaluation plan, it will--
(1) Provide a logic model or conceptual framework that depicts, at
a minimum, the goals, activities, project evaluation, methods,
performance measures, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) Provide a plan to implement the project activities described in
this priority;
(3) 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;
(4) Identify and develop resources and products that create
accessible learning opportunities for all children, including children
with disabilities and children with high needs, and make possible the
sustained implementation of the selected technology tool. Development
of the products must be an iterative process beginning in a single
development school and continuing through repeated cycles of
development and refinement in the other development sites, followed by
a formative evaluation and refinement in the pilot sites. The products
and
[[Page 38128]]
resources must, at a minimum, include--
(i) An instrument or method for assessing--
(A) The site staff's current technology uses and needs, current
technology investments, firewall issues, and the knowledge and
availability of dedicated on-site technology personnel;
(B) The readiness of development and pilot school sites to pilot or
try-out the technology-based tool or approach, including at a minimum,
their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build
capacity;
(C) Whether the technology-based tool or approach has achieved its
intended outcomes for the end-user(s); and
(D) Ongoing training needs of teachers, students, or families to
implement the technology-based tool or approach with fidelity;
(5) Collect formative and summative data to refine and evaluate the
products;
(6) If the project is extended to a fifth year--
(i) Provide the implementation package of products and resources
developed for the technology-based tool or approach to no fewer than 10
additional school sites; and
(ii) Collect summative data about the success of the project's
products and resources in supporting implementation of the technology-
based tool or approach; and
(7) By the end of the project period, provide--
(i) Information on the products and resources, as supported by the
project evaluation, including any accessibility features, that will
enable other sites to implement and sustain implementation of the
technology-based tool or approach;
(ii) Information in the Technology Implementation Report, including
data on how teachers, students, and families used the technology-based
tool or approach, and how the technology-based tool or approach was
implemented with fidelity;
(iii) Data on how the technology-based tool or approach changed
teacher practices; and
(iv) A plan for disseminating or scaling up the technology-based
tool or approach 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--
(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment
from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been
underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability, as appropriate;
(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and
subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the
proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the
anticipated results and benefits.
(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the management plan,'' how--
(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's
intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To
address this requirement, the applicant must describe--
(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel,
consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and
(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;
(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors
will be allocated and how these allocations are 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; and
(2) In the budget, attendance at the following:
(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC,
after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting in
Washington, DC, with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff
during each subsequent year of the project period.
Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award
teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the
grantee's project director or other authorized representative.
(ii) A two and one-half-day project directors' conference in
Washington, DC, during each year of the project period.
(iii) Two annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP.
(iv) A one-day intensive OSEP review meeting during the last half
of the second year of the project period.
Cohort Collaboration and Support
OSEP project officer(s) will provide coordination support among the
projects. Each project funded under this priority must--
(a) Participate in monthly conference-call discussions to share and
collaborate on implementation and project issues; and
(b) Provide information annually using a template that captures
descriptive data on project site selection, and the processes for
installation and use of the technology-based tool or approach (i.e.,
the implementation process).
Note: The following website provides more information about
implementation research: https://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementation-research-network.
Fifth Year of Project
The Secretary may extend a project one year beyond the initial 48
months to work with dissemination/scale-up sites if the grantee is
achieving the intended outcomes of the project (as demonstrated by data
gathered as part of the project evaluation) and making a positive
contribution to the implementation of a technology-based tool or
approach based on at least promising evidence with fidelity in the
development and pilot sites. Each applicant must include in its
application a plan for the full 60-month period. In deciding whether to
continue funding the project for the fifth year, the Secretary will
consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of the OSEP
project officer and other experts selected by the Secretary. This
review will be held during the last half of the second year of the
project period;
(b) The success and timeliness with which the requirements of the
negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
project; and
(c) The degree to which the project's activities have changed
practices and improved outcomes for PK-12 children with disabilities.
References
Connolly, P., Miller, S., Mooney, J., Sloan, S., & Hanratty, J.
(2016). Universal school-based programmes for improving social and
emotional outcomes in children aged 3-11 years: A systematic review
[[Page 38129]]
and meta-analysis. The Campbell Collaboration.
www.campbellcollaboration.org/media/k2/attachments/Connolly_Universal_Schoolbased_Programmes_Title.pdf.
DePaoli, J. L., Atwell, M.N., & Bridgeland, J. (2017). Ready to
lead: A national principal survey on how social and emotional
learning can prepare children and transform schools. www.casel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/ReadyToLead_FINAL.pdf.
Hao, K. (2020, February 26). Robots that teach autistic kids social
skills could help them develop. MIT Technology Review.
www.technologyreview.com/s/615288/ai-robots-teach-autistic-kids-social-skills-development/.
Jain, S., Thiagarajan, B., Shi, Z., Clabaugh, C., & Matari[cacute],
M.J. (2020). Modeling engagement in long-term, in-home socially
assistive robot interventions for children with autism spectrum
disorders. Science Robotics, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aaz3791.
Murry, F. (2018). Using assistive technology to generate social
skills use for students with emotional behavior disorders. Rural
Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870518801367.
Tennyson, M. F., Kuester, D. A., Casteel, J., & Nikolopoulos, C.
(2016). Accessible robots for improving social skills of individuals
with autism. Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing
Research, 6(4), 267-277. https://doi.org/10.1515/jaiscr-2016-0020.
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 priorities in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86,
97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to
Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in
2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department
in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part
200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR
part 3474.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: $2,500,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2021 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $450,000 to $500,000 per year.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $475,000 per year.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,500,000 for
the 60-month project period.
Estimated Number of Awards: 5.
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. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this competition may not award
subgrants to entities to directly carry out project activities
described in its application. Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may
contract for supplies, equipment, and other services in accordance with
2 CFR part 200.
4. Other General Requirements: (a) Recipients of funding under this
competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
IDEA).
(b) Each applicant for, and recipient of, funding must, with
respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the
absolute priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of
individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning,
implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of
IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants are required to
follow the Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of
Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal
Register on February 13, 2019 (84 FR 3768), and available at
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-02-13/pdf/2019-02206.pdf, which
contain requirements andinformation on how to submit an application.
2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However,
under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to
make awards by the end of FY 2020.
3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of
the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend
that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 50 pages
and (2) use the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as
all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier,
Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover
sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the
abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for
completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority
requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support,
or the appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to
all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables,
figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a) Significance (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed
project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the
proposed project;
[[Page 38130]]
(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 the project director or principal investigator;
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of key project personnel;
(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors;
(iv) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization;
(v) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project;
and
(vi) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed
project.
(e) Quality of the management plan (15 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks;
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project;
(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products
and services from the proposed project;
(iv) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate; and
(v) The adequacy of procedures for ensuring feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the proposed project.
2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants
that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition,
the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past
performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and
compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider
whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or
submitted a report of unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary
requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal
civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or
activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department
(34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past,
the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain
competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as
peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel
requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional
constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department
has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions,
applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and
selected
[[Page 38131]]
for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier
for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater
numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any
particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It
also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the
review process, while permitting panel members to review applications
under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have
submitted applications.
4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR
200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department
conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR
3474.10, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, in
appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the
applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of
unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system
that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not
fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this
competition to receive an award that over the course of the project
period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently
$250,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your
integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal
awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant--before we make
an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that
is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as
the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System
(FAPIIS)), accessible through 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.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to
access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally,
also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you
are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to
openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in
part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of
modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those
modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent
that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or
other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must
have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This
dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your
application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional
information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR
3474.20.
4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition,
you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and
systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170
should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply
if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final
performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34
CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance
reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting,
please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee
with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In
this case the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance Results
Modernization Act of 2010, the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials (ETechM2)
for Individuals with Disabilities 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 Accessibility Center funded by the ETechM2 Program.
Program Performance Measure 4.3: The Federal cost per unit
of video description funded by the ETechM2 Program.
These measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and
grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by
OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on their project's
performance in annual performance reports and additional performance
data to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 75.591).
[[Page 38132]]
6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR
75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: whether a grantee
has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of
the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is
consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the
Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the
performance targets in the grantee's approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers
whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in
its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil
rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities
receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR
100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to
the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of this Department published
in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at
the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration. Delegated the
authority to perform the functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2020-13737 Filed 6-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P