Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Notices 55447 

Affected Public: Not-for-profit 

institutions. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: 

Responses: 76. 

Burden Hours: 76. 

Abstract: This request is for OMB 

approval of a new data collection 

necessary for the Charter School 

Program (CSP). ED will coordinate this 

new data collection with the Education 

Data Exchange Network (EDEN) to 

reduce respondent burden and fully 

utilize available data. Specifically, ED 

will collect CSP grant award 

information from grantees (state 

agencies and some schools) to create a 

new database of current CSP-funded 

charter schools and award amounts. 

Once complete, ED will merge student 

demographic and performance 

information extracted from the EDEN 

database onto the database of CSPfunded charter schools. Together, these 

data will allow ED to monitor CSP grant 

performance and analyze data related to 

accountability for academic 

performance, financial integrity, and 

program effectiveness. 

Requests for copies of the information 

collection submission for OMB review 

may be accessed from http:// 

edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and 

by clicking on link number 3009. When 

you access the information collection, 

click on ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to 

view. Written requests for information 

should be addressed to U.S. Department 

of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, 

Washington, DC 20202–4700. Requests 

may also be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202–

245–6623. Please specify the complete 

title of the information collection when 

making your request. 

Comments regarding burden and/or 

the collection activity requirements 

should be electronically mailed to 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–

800–877–8339. 

[FR Doc. 06–8017 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Upward Bound Program 

AGENCY: Office of Postsecondary 

Education, Department of Education. 

ACTION: Notice of final priority. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Postsecondary Education announces a 

priority under the Upward Bound (UB) 

Program. This priority will help focus 

Federal resources on students most in 

need of academic assistance and 

increase the effectiveness of the UB 

Program. 

DATES: This priority is effective October 

23, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Geraldine Smith or Gaby Watts, U.S. 

Department of Education, 1990 K Street, 

NW., room 7020, Washington, DC 

20006–8512, or via Internet: 

TRIO@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 

the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–

800–877–8339. 

Individuals with disabilities may 

obtain this document in an alternative 

format (e.g., Braille, large print, 

audiotape, or computer diskette) on 

request to the contact person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We 

published a notice of proposed priority 

(NPP) in the Federal Register on July 3, 

2006 (71 FR 37926). We discussed our 

proposals for this program in the NPP 

on pages 37926–37928. 

This notice of final priority contains 

three changes from the NPP. We fully 

explain these changes in the Analysis of 

Comments and Changes section that 

follows. 

Analysis of Comments and Changes 

In response to our invitation in the 

NPP, 110 parties submitted comments. 

An analysis of the comments and of any 

changes in the priority follows. We 

group major issues according to subject. 

Generally, we do not address technical 

and other minor changes and suggested 

changes we are not authorized to make 

under the applicable statutory authority. 

Authority to Implement a Priority in the 

UB Program 

Comment: A number of commenters 

expressed concern that the Department 

had overstepped its legislative and 

regulatory authority in proposing this 

priority. They believe the Department 

does not have the legal authority to 

impose a priority not specified in statute 

and that the proposed priority 

substitutes an administrative priority for 

a congressional priority, and 

circumvents legislation and regulations 

regarding selection of program 

participants based on grade level and 

need for academic support. 

Discussion: The Secretary does not 

agree with these commenters. The 

Department’s authority to establish 

priorities for the TRIO programs and 

other discretionary grant programs is 

well established. The Department’s 

regulations clearly reflect this authority 

in 34 CFR 74.11 and 75.105. Section 

402C of the Higher Education Act of 

1965, as amended (HEA), which 

authorizes the UB program, does not 

prohibit or limit the Secretary’s 

authority to establish funding priorities 

to achieve the UB program’s purposes. 

In fact, the Secretary has previously 

established priorities for the UB 

Program without challenge or questions. 

See the notice of proposed priority, 68 

FR 37469 (June 24, 2003) and the notice 

of final priority, 68 FR 50958 (August 

22, 2003), and the notice of proposed 

priority, 65 FR 35238 (June 1, 2000) and 

the notice of final priority, 65 FR 45698 

(July 24, 2000). 

The priority proposed by the 

Secretary is consistent with the 

requirements for funding included in 

section 402C(d)(3) and (4) of the HEA. 

Those provisions stipulate that each UB 

program participant must have a need 

for academic support and must have 

completed eight years of elementary 

school education. Change: None. 

Selection of First-Time UB Participants 

From Otherwise Eligible Students Who 

Have Completed the 8th Grade But Not 

the 9th Grade in Secondary School 

Comment: Numerous commenters 

expressed concerns about the proposal 

to limit the selection of new UB 

participants to students who have 

completed the 8th grade but not the 9th 

grade in secondary school. These 

commenters stated that the focus on 

these students would not contribute to 

the effectiveness of the UB Program 

because of the lack of maturity of 

younger students; higher drop-out rates 

among younger students; the high 

mobility rates of UB participants; and 

increased costs for those projects that 

currently recruit from high schools that 

begin with the 10th grade. In addition, 

some commenters argued that selecting 

students in the 10th grade allows 

students to participate in the UB 

program for 36 months and those 

students have similar success rates as 

students selected during the 9th grade. 

Discussion: A 2004 report of a study 

conducted for the Department titled, 

The Impacts of Regular Upward Bound: 

Results from the Third Follow-Up Data 

Collection (the Study) concluded that, 

for students who participated in the UB 

program for less than two years, an 

additional year of participation in the 

program could raise the postsecondary 

enrollment rate by as much as nine 

percentage points. Among UB program 

participants who did not complete the 

program, the Study found that UB 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
55448 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Notices 

program completion could raise 

postsecondary enrollment by as much as 

17 percentage points. 

We agree with the commenters that 

students entering the UB program in the 

10th grade would have an opportunity 

to receive UB services for 36 months. 

We believe that for students without a 

high academic risk for failure, 

participation in the UB program for 36 

months would increase the 

postsecondary enrollment rate 

especially among students who remain 

in the program until high school 

graduation. Students that have a high 

academic risk for failure, on the other 

hand, require more intensive services 

and will likely receive a greater benefit 

by having access to the UB program for 

four complete years. In addition, a 

recent evaluation of high school reform 

models by MDRC (a nonprofit, 

nonpartisan social policy research 

organization) suggests that focusing on 

the critical transition year of ninth grade 

can make a real difference for students 

who enter high school with poor 

academic skills. Quint, Janet, Meeting 

Five Critical Challenges of High School 

Reform (May, 2006). Accordingly, we 

will allow UB projects to select from 

otherwise eligible students, those 

students who have completed the 8th 

grade but not the 10th grade in 

secondary school, except for the 30 

percent of new students who must have 

a high academic risk for failure. 

However, expanding the selection of UB 

program participants to include those 

students who have completed the 9th 

grade but not the 10th grade, creates an 

opportunity for students not selected to 

participate in the UB program prior to 

the students’ completion of the 9th 

grade to reapply for UB program 

participation the following year. To 

avoid having the same students 

included as participants in both the 

control group and the UB program, we 

have made a change to prohibit such 

dual participation. 

Change: We have modified the 

priority to allow UB projects to select 

otherwise eligible students who have 

completed the 8th grade but not the 

10th grade in secondary school, except 

for the 30 percent of new students who 

must have a high academic risk for 

failure. The 30 percent of new students 

who must have a high academic risk for 

failure must be selected from otherwise 

eligible students who have completed 

the 8th grade but not the 9th grade in 

secondary school. The remaining new 

students may or may not have a high 

academic risk for failure and may or 

may not have completed the 9th grade 

in secondary school. 

We have also modified the priority to 

provide that students selected to 

participate in the control group may not 

be subsequently selected to participate 

in the UB program. 

Comment: Some commenters argued 

that it would be counter-productive and 

unfair to students if UB projects were 

not allowed to accept transfer students 

who participated in the UB program at 

a previous school because the students 

have completed the 9th grade. 

Discussion: The Secretary agrees with 

the commenters. 

Change: We have changed the priority 

to provide that a student who has 

previously participated in a regular UB 

project may be selected to continue to 

participate in the same or different UB 

project notwithstanding the student’s 

grade level. 

Select Not Less Than 30 Percent of New 

Participants From Students Who Have a 

High Academic Risk for Failure 

Comment: Some commenters 

applauded the proposal to focus UB 

services on students with the most need. 

Others objected to what they view as 

changes that will turn the UB program 

into a dropout prevention program 

instead of a college prep program. Some 

commenters argued that serving 

students with a high academic risk for 

failure unfairly penalizes students who 

are doing well in school, while others 

recommended that we expand the 

definition of high academic risk for 

failure to include social risks, such as 

coming from a single parent home or 

exposure to gang pressure. 

Discussion: We do not agree that the 

priority will penalize students for doing 

well in school. Students doing well 

academically do not generally need the 

intensive academic services provided by 

the UB program and those services are 

not intended to be a reward for good 

academic performance. In fact, section 

402C(d)(3) of the HEA requires that a 

determination be made that the student 

‘‘has a need for academic support in 

order to pursue successfully a program 

of education beyond secondary school,’’

(emphasis added) to provide services to 

that student. 

We recognize that many students who 

are doing well in their academic 

subjects may have additional needs 

related to social and environmental 

issues. Those non-academic needs 

alone, however, are not a basis on which 

students may be selected to participate 

in UB. The TRIO Talent Search Program 

is designed to provide assistance to 

students who have the potential for 

success at the postsecondary level, but 

who need encouragement and other 

support to pursue a postsecondary 

education. 

Change: None. 

Comment: Commenters expressed 

concern that the targeting of Upward 

Bound on students with high academic 

risk for failure as indicated by their 

grade point average is not supported by 

the previous national evaluation of 

Upward Bound. 

Discussion: We agree that recent 

evaluation findings suggest that grade 

point average is an imperfect indicator 

of educational expectations and of a 

student’s likelihood to benefit from the 

UB program. Nonetheless, we believe 

that a low grade point average certainly 

is one of several possible indicators of 

a student’s need for academic support in 

order to pursue successfully a program 

of postsecondary study. Recent research 

from the national UB program 

evaluation and other sources (including 

The Condition of Education 2001, 

Indicator 24, which may be reviewed at 

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/ 

2001072_3.pdf) suggests another 

possible indicator of a first-generation 

student’s need for academic support. 

Specifically, there is evidence that 

failure to take algebra (or higher) in 

grade eight or nine may indicate a 

student’s potential to benefit from UB or 

similar programs. 

Change: We have modified the 

priority to allow projects to count a 

student as at high academic risk for 

failure if the student has not completed 

pre-algebra, algebra, or geometry by the 

end of grade eight, and (in cases in 

which the student is recruited early 

during grade nine) if the student is not 

taking algebra or geometry in grade 

nine. This criterion further grounds the 

priority in recent research and gives UB 

projects a fourth option for identifying 

the 30 percent of new students who 

must be at high academic risk for 

failure. 

Comment: Several commenters stated 

that the proposed priority would 

remove the individual programs’

flexibility and create a one-size-fits-all 

approach that would damage UB’s 

mission of helping needy students gain 

admission to college. 

Discussion: Within the parameters of 

the priority, programs will continue to 

have flexibility in determining which 

students are served. We believe that the 

priority will ensure that the students 

who receive UB program services are 

those who most need those services. 

Under the priority not less than 30 

percent of the new participants must be 

selected from those students who have 

a high academic risk for failure. The 

remaining students will continue to be 

selected from among all eligible 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Notices 55449 

students based upon the discretion of 

the UB project staff. 

Change: None. 

Proposed Evaluation 

Comment: One commenter supported 

including in the priority a requirement 

to participate in the Department’s 

evaluation of the UB program. The 

remaining commenters opposed the 

proposed evaluation. The objections to 

the proposed priority relating to the 

evaluation include the following: (a) 

Several of the commenters stated that 

they believe many colleges and 

universities would have reservations 

about approving ‘‘human subjects 

standards’’ in their internal review 

boards, if the review does not 

demonstrate that members of the control 

group are ‘‘done no harm;’’ (b) other 

commenters stated that the control 

group would not be a true control group, 

as a true control group would not be 

referred to other support services and 

any UB project that does not refer needy 

students to another student support 

program or who would try to insulate 

them from other available academic 

resources would be unethical and 

inhuman; and (c) many commenters 

expressed concern about what they 

thought would be the undue burden and 

cost if UB projects were required to 

recruit twice the number of eligible 

students to be served, work with twice 

the number of parents, and were 

required to encourage students to fill 

out the forms when the students know 

that they stand only a 50 percent chance 

of getting selected. 

Discussion: We do not share the 

commenters’ concerns about the 

burdens associated with the evaluation. 

All plans for data collection and random 

assignment will be submitted to the 

evaluator’s Institutional Review Board 

(IRB) and the U.S. Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for their approval to 

minimize the burden to students and 

protect the rights of all human subjects. 

Because the evaluation will be 

conducted by the Institute of Education 

Sciences and its contractor, institutions 

of higher education will not be required 

to obtain internal review board 

approval. The UB program only has 

funds to serve a small percent of the 

eligible low-income, first-generation 

students in the U.S., so some eligible 

and potentially interested students will 

not be served regardless of whether a 

random assignment evaluation occurs. 

We did not intend to suggest that 

control group students would be 

prohibited from receiving services from 

other programs. For ethical, legal, and 

practical reasons, control group students 

will be free to receive supplemental 

educational services from numerous 

other student support programs. The 

evaluator will carefully measure the 

variety and intensity of services 

received by all students in the 

evaluation in order to interpret the 

impact of the UB program services, as 

opposed to the gross impact of other 

college preparation programs in which 

students may be involved. The question 

the evaluation will address is: Does 

Upward Bound have a benefit, above 

and beyond the benefit of the other 

services already available to eligible 

students applying to the program? 

We agree with the commenters that 

there will likely be some additional 

burden on grantee staff, particularly 

during the first year of the evaluation. 

Some grantees will have to increase 

their recruiting efforts to meet not only 

any evaluation requirements, but also 

the new requirements to focus the 

program on students who have a high 

academic risk for failure. On the other 

hand, casting a wider net for applicants 

also has significant advantages. It will 

likely raise the profile of the UB 

program among eligible students. The 

extra recruiting required for the 

evaluation is a one-time effort and 

seems unlikely to have a lingering effect 

on program activities. The burden of the 

new data collection will be borne 

primarily by the evaluator, not grantees, 

and the evaluator will work with 

grantees to minimize any burdens as 

required for IRB and OMB approval of 

data collection plans. Any outreach or 

publicity to obtain enough applications 

to create the control group will build on 

grantees’ current admission procedures 

or those proposed as a condition of 

receiving 2007 grants. As required for 

IRB and OMB approval of data 

collection plans, the evaluator will seek 

informed and written consent from a 

parent or guardian before a student is 

included in the evaluation. 

Change: None. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use this priority, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. A 

notice soliciting applications for new awards 

for the UB program for fiscal year 2007 is 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. 

Priority 

Absolute Priority: Upward Bound 

Program Participant Selection and 

Evaluation 

This priority supports regular Upward 

Bound Program projects that—

1. Select first-time participants from 

otherwise eligible students who have 

completed the 8th grade but not the 

10th grade in secondary school, except 

a student who has previously 

participated in a regular Upward Bound 

project may be selected notwithstanding 

the student’s grade level; 

2. Select not less than 30 percent of 

all first-time participants from students 

who have completed the 8th grade but 

not the 9th grade in secondary school 

and who have a ‘‘high academic risk for 

failure.’’

‘‘High academic risk for failure’’ refers 

to otherwise eligible students who—

a. Have not achieved at the proficient 

level on State assessments in reading/ 

language arts for grade eight; 

b. Have not achieved at the proficient 

level on State assessments in math for 

grade eight; 

c. Have a grade point average of 2.5 

or less (on a 4.0 scale) for the most 

recent school year for which grade point 

averages are available; or 

d. Have not completed pre-algebra, 

algebra, or geometry by the end of grade 

eight, and (in cases in which students 

are recruited early during grade nine) 

are not taking algebra or geometry in 

grade nine. 

To meet this priority, an applicant 

also must agree to conduct its Upward 

Bound project in a manner consistent 

with the evaluation that the Department 

plans to conduct for the Upward Bound 

Program. An applicant also must agree, 

if selected to participate in the 

evaluation, to—

1. Recruit at least twice as many 

eligible new students in project year 

2007–2008 as the grantee plans to serve 

in its project. Of that larger pool of 

eligible new students, not less than 30 

percent must have completed the 8th 

grade but not the 9th grade in secondary 

school and meet the definition of ‘‘high 

academic risk for failure;’’

2. Refrain from admitting new 

students into the Upward Bound project 

for project year 2007–2008 until the 

evaluator has completed its data 

collection and random assignment for 

those students; 

3. Agree that eligible new students 

will be assigned randomly by the 

evaluator either to participate in 

Upward Bound or to serve as part of a 

control group (not in Upward Bound); 

and 

4. Agree that a student assigned to 

serve as part of a control group will not 

be subsequently selected to participate 

in Upward Bound. 

This priority does not apply to the 

Veterans Upward Bound projects and 

Upward Bound Math/Science projects. 

Executive Order 12866 

This notice of final priority has been 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
55450 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 2006 / Notices 

Order 12866. Under the terms of the 

order, we have assessed the potential 

costs and benefits of this regulatory 

action. 

The potential costs associated with 

the notice of final priority are those 

resulting from statutory requirements 

and those we have determined are 

necessary for administering this 

program effectively and efficiently. 

In assessing the potential costs and 

benefits—both quantitative and 

qualitative—of this notice of final 

priority, we have determined that the 

benefits of the proposed priority justify 

the costs. 

We have also determined that this 

action does not unduly interfere with 

State, local, and tribal governments in 

the exercise of their governmental 

functions. 

Intergovernmental Review 

This program is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 645. 

Electronic Access to This Document 

You may view this document, as well 

as all other documents of this 

Department published in the Federal 

Register, in text or Adobe Portable 

Document Format (PDF) on the Internet 

at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/ 

news/fedregister. 

To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free 

at this site. If you have questions about 

using PDF, call the U.S. Government 

Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–

888–293–6498; or in the Washington, 

DC area at (202) 512–1530. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Number 84.047A Upward Bound Program) 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070a–13. 

Dated: September 19, 2006. 

James F. Manning, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary 

Education. 

[FR Doc. 06–8101 Filed 9–21–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Postsecondary Education; 

Overview Information; Upward Bound 

Program (Includes Regular Upward 

Bound (UB), Veterans Upward Bound 

(VUB) and Upward Bound Math and 

Science (UBMS)) Notice Inviting 

Applications for New Awards for Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2007 

Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance (CFDA) Numbers: 84.047A 

and 84.047M. 

Dates: Applications Available: 

September 22, 2006. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: November 6, 2006. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: January 5, 2007. 

Eligible Applicants: Institutions of 

higher education; public or private 

agencies and organizations; 

combinations of institutions, agencies, 

and organizations; and secondary 

schools under exceptional 

circumstances, if there is no institution, 

agency, or organization capable of 

carrying out an applicable Upward 

Bound project in the proposed target 

area. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration’s budget request for FY 

2007 does not include funds for the 

Upward Bound Program. However, we 

are inviting applications to allow 

enough time to complete the grant 

process if Congress appropriates funds 

for this program. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$250,000–$853,000 for year one of UB; 

$250,000–$543,000 for year one of VUB; 

and $250,000–$354,000 for year one of 

UBMS. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$350,000 for UB; $300,000 for VUB; and 

$270,000 for UBMS. 

Maximum Award: We will not fund 

any application at an amount exceeding 

the maximum amounts specified below 

for a single budget period of 12 months. 

We may choose not to further consider 

or review applications with budgets that 

exceed the maximum amounts specified 

below, if we conclude, during our initial 

review of the application, that the 

proposed goals and objectives cannot be 

obtained with the specified maximum 

amount. 

For an applicant applying for a new 

UB, VUB or UBMS grant the maximum 

award amount is $250,000. For a current 

grantee applying for a VUB or UBMS 

grant (to continue funding for a 

currently funded project), the maximum 

award amount is the greater of (a) 

$250,000 or (b) an amount equal to 103 

percent of the applicant’s currently 

funded grant award amount for FY 

2006. 

For a current grantee that did not 

receive supplemental funds under the 

UB Expansion Initiative in FY 2006 that 

is applying for a UB grant, the 

maximum award amount is the greater 

of (a) $250,000 or (b) an amount equal 

to 103 percent of the applicant’s 

currently funded grant award amount 

for FY 2006. For a current grantee that 

received supplemental funds under the 

UB Expansion Initiative in FY 2006 that 

is applying for a UB grant, the 

maximum award amount is the greater 

of (a) $250,000 or (b) an amount equal 

to 103 percent of the sum of the 

applicant’s currently funded grant 

award amount plus 50 percent of its UB 

Expansion Initiative grant award 

amount for FY 2006. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 766 for 

UB; 42 for VUB; and 128 for UBMS. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 60 months. 

Applicants whose peer review scores 

are within the highest ten percent of 

scores of all applicants receiving awards 

will receive five-year awards. All other 

successful applicants will receive fouryear awards. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The Upward 

Bound program is one of seven 

programs known as the Federal TRIO 

programs. There are three types of 

grants under the Upward Bound 

program: Regular Upward Bound grants; 

Veterans Upward Bound grants; and 

Upward Bound Math and Science 

grants. 

The regular Upward Bound projects 

are designed to generate in participants 

the skills and motivation necessary for 

success in education beyond secondary 

school. The Veterans Upward Bound 

projects are designed to assist veterans 

in preparing for a program of 

postsecondary education. The Upward 

Bound Math and Science projects are 

designed to prepare high school 

students for postsecondary education 

programs that lead to careers in the 

fields of math and science. 

Priority: This priority is from the 

notice of final priority for this program 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES