5572 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education; Overview Information, Early 

Childhood Educator Professional 

Development (ECEPD) Program; 

Notice Inviting Applications for New 

Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.349A 

Dates: 

Applications Available: February 6, 

2006. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 7, 2006. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 6, 2006. 

Eligible Applicants: A partnership 

that has not previously received an 

ECEPD grant and that consists of at least 

one entity from each of the following 

categories: 

(i) One or more institutions of higher 

education, or other public or private 

entities (including faith-based 

organizations), that provide professional 

development for early childhood 

educators who work with children from 

low-income families in high-need 

communities. 

(ii) One or more public agencies 

(including local educational agencies, 

State educational agencies, State human 

services agencies, and State and local 

agencies administering programs under 

the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant Act of 1990), Head Start agencies, 

or private organizations (including faithbased organizations). 

(iii) If feasible, an entity with 

demonstrated experience in providing 

training to educators in early childhood 

education programs concerning 

identifying and preventing behavior 

problems or working with children 

identified as or suspected to be victims 

of abuse. This entity may be one of the 

partners described in paragraphs (i) and 

(ii) under Eligible Applicants. 

A partnership may apply for these 

funds only if one of the partners 

currently provides professional 

development for early childhood 

educators working in programs located 

in high-need communities with children 

from low-income families. 

Estimated Available Funds: 

$14,330,800. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$2,400,000–$4,800,000. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$3,600,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 3–6 

awards. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 36 months. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the ECEPD program is to enhance the 

school readiness of young children, 

particularly disadvantaged young 

children, and to prevent them from 

encountering difficulties once they enter 

school, by improving the knowledge 

and skills of early childhood educators 

who work in communities that have 

high concentrations of children living in 

poverty. 

Projects funded under the ECEPD 

program provide high-quality, 

sustained, and intensive professional 

development for these early childhood 

educators in how to provide 

developmentally appropriate schoolreadiness services for preschool-age 

children that are based on the best 

available research on early childhood 

pedagogy and on child development 

and learning. For these grants, increased 

emphasis is being placed on the quality 

of program evaluations for the proposed 

projects. 

The specific activities for which 

recipients may use grant funds are 

identified in the application package. 

Priorities 

This competition includes one 

absolute priority, a competitive 

preference priority and two invitational 

priorities that are as follows. 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2006 this 

priority is an absolute priority. In 

accordance with 34 CFR 

75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is from 

section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act of 1965, 

as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 

6651(e)(5)(A). Under 34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3) we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. This 

priority is: 

High-Need Communities 

The applicant partnership, if awarded 

a grant, shall use the grant funds to 

carry out activities that will improve the 

knowledge and skills of early childhood 

educators who are working in early 

childhood programs that are located in 

‘‘high-need communities.’’ 

An eligible applicant must 

demonstrate in its application how it 

meets the statutory requirement in 

section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the ESEA by 

including relevant demographic and 

socioeconomic data about the ‘‘highneed community’’ in which each 

program is located, as indicated in the 

application package. (See section 

2151(e)(3)(B)(i) of the ESEA.) 

‘‘High-need community,’’ as defined 

in section 2151(e)(9)(B) of the ESEA, 

means— 

(a) A political subdivision of a State, 

or a portion of a political subdivision of 

a State, in which at least 50 percent of 

the children are from low-income 

families; or 

(b) A political subdivision of a State 

that is among the 10 percent of political 

subdivisions of the State having the 

greatest numbers of such children. 

Note: The following additional terms used 

in or related to this absolute priority have 

statutory definitions that are included in the 

application package: ‘‘early childhood 

educator,’’ ‘‘low-income family,’’ and 

‘‘professional development.’’ 

Competitive Preference Priority: For 

FY 2006, this priority is a competitive 

preference priority. This priority is from 

the notice of final priority for 

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods, published in the Federal 

Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 

3586), available at http://www.ed.gov/

legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2005–1/ 

012505a.html. Under 34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an 

additional 20 points to an application, 

depending on how well the application 

meets this priority. These points are in 

addition to any points the application 

earns under the selection criteria. 

When using the priority to give 

competitive preference to an 

application, the Secretary will review 

applications using a two-stage process. 

In the first stage, the application will be 

reviewed without taking the priority 

into account. In the second stage of 

review, the applications rated highest in 

stage one will be reviewed for 

competitive preference. We consider 

awarding additional (competitive 

preference) points only to those 

applicants with top-ranked scores on 

their selection criteria. 

This priority is: 

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods 

The Secretary establishes a priority 

for projects proposing an evaluation 

plan that is based on rigorous 

scientifically based research methods to 

assess the effectiveness of a particular 

intervention, as described in the 

following paragraphs. The Secretary 

intends that this priority will allow 

program participants and the 

Department to determine whether the 

project produces meaningful effects on 

student achievement or teacher 

performance. 

Evaluation methods using an 

experimental design are best for 

determining project effectiveness. Thus, 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 5573 

when feasible, the project must use an 

experimental design under which 

participants—e.g., students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools—are randomly 

assigned to participate in the project 

activities being evaluated or to a control 

group that does not participate in the 

project activities being evaluated. 

If random assignment is not feasible, 

the project may use a quasiexperimental design with carefully 

matched comparison conditions. This 

alternative design attempts to 

approximate a randomly assigned 

control group by matching 

participants—e.g., students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools—with nonparticipants having similar pre-program 

characteristics. 

In cases where random assignment is 

not possible and participation in the 

intervention is determined by a 

specified cutting point on a quantified 

continuum of scores, regression 

discontinuity designs may be employed. 

For projects that are focused on 

special populations in which sufficient 

numbers of participants are not 

available to support random assignment 

or matched comparison group designs, 

single-subject designs such as multiple 

baseline or treatment-reversal or 

interrupted time series that are capable 

of demonstrating causal relationships 

can be employed. 

Proposed evaluation strategies that 

use neither experimental designs with 

random assignment nor quasiexperimental designs using a matched 

comparison group nor regression 

discontinuity designs will not be 

considered responsive to the priority 

when sufficient numbers of participants 

are available to support these designs. 

Evaluation strategies that involve too 

small a number of participants to 

support group designs must be capable 

of demonstrating the causal effects of an 

intervention or program on those 

participants. 

The proposed evaluation plan must 

describe how the project evaluator will 

collect—before the project intervention 

commences and after it ends—valid and 

reliable data that measure the impact of 

participation in the program or in the 

comparison group. 

If the priority is used as a competitive 

preference priority, points awarded 

under this priority will be determined 

by the quality of the proposed 

evaluation method. In determining the 

quality of the evaluation method, we 

will consider the extent to which the 

applicant presents a feasible, credible 

plan that includes the following: 

(1) The type of design to be used (that 

is, random assignment or matched 

comparison). If matched comparison, 

include in the plan a discussion of why 

random assignment is not feasible. 

(2) Outcomes to be measured. 

(3) A discussion of how the applicant 

plans to assign students, teachers, 

classrooms, or schools to the project and 

control group or match them for 

comparison with other students, 

teachers, classrooms, or schools. 

(4) A proposed evaluator, preferably 

independent, with the necessary 

background and technical expertise to 

carry out the proposed evaluation. An 

independent evaluator does not have 

any authority over the project and is not 

involved in its implementation. 

In general, depending on the 

implemented program or project, under 

a competitive preference priority, 

random assignment evaluation methods 

will receive more points than matched 

comparison evaluation methods. 

Definitions 

As used in this notice—

Scientifically based research (section 

9101(37) of the ESEA as amended by 

NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7801(37)): 

(A) Means research that involves the 

application of rigorous, systematic, and 

objective procedures to obtain reliable 

and valid knowledge relevant to 

education activities and programs; and 

(B) Includes research that—

(i) Employs systematic, empirical 

methods that draw on observation or 

experiment; 

(ii) Involves rigorous data analyses 

that are adequate to test the stated 

hypotheses and justify the general 

conclusions drawn; 

(iii) Relies on measurements or 

observational methods that provide 

reliable and valid data across evaluators 

and observers, across multiple 

measurements and observations, and 

across studies by the same or different 

investigators; 

(iv) Is evaluated using experimental or 

quasi-experimental designs in which 

individuals entities, programs, or 

activities are assigned to different 

conditions and with appropriate 

controls to evaluate the effects of the 

condition of interest, with a preference 

for random-assignment experiments, or 

other designs to the extent that those 

designs contain within-condition or 

across-condition controls; 

(v) Ensures that experimental studies 

are presented in sufficient detail and 

clarity to allow for replication or, at a 

minimum, offer the opportunity to build 

systematically on their findings; and 

(vi) Has been accepted by a peerreviewed journal or approved by a panel 

of independent experts through a 

comparably rigorous, objective, and 

scientific review. 

Random assignment or experimental 

design means random assignment of 

students, teachers, classrooms, or 

schools to participate in a project being 

evaluated (treatment group) or not 

participate in the project (control 

group). The effect of the project is the 

difference in outcomes between the 

treatment and control groups. 

Quasi-experimental designs include 

several designs that attempt to 

approximate a random assignment 

design. 

Carefully matched comparison groups 

design means a quasi-experimental 

design in which project participants are 

matched with non-participants based on 

key characteristics that are thought to be 

related to the outcome. 

Regression discontinuity design 

means a quasi-experimental design that 

closely approximates an experimental 

design. In a regression discontinuity 

design, participants are assigned to a 

treatment or control group based on a 

numerical rating or score of a variable 

unrelated to the treatment such as the 

rating of an application for funding. 

Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, 

or schools above a certain score (‘‘cut 

score’’) are assigned to the treatment 

group and those below the score are 

assigned to the control group. In the 

case of the scores of applicants’

proposals for funding, the ‘‘cut score’’ is 

established at the point where the 

program funds available are exhausted. 

Single subject design means a design 

that relies on the comparison of 

treatment effects on a single subject or 

group of single subjects. There is little 

confidence that findings based on this 

design would be the same for other 

members of the population. 

Treatment reversal design means a 

single subject design in which a pretreatment or baseline outcome 

measurement is compared with a posttreatment measure. Treatment would 

then be stopped for a period of time, a 

second baseline measure of the outcome 

would be taken, followed by a second 

application of the treatment or a 

different treatment. For example, this 

design might be used to evaluate a 

behavior modification program for 

disabled students with behavior 

disorders. 

Multiple baseline design means a 

single subject design to address 

concerns about the effects of normal 

development, timing of the treatment, 

and amount of the treatment with 

treatment-reversal designs by using a 

varying time schedule for introduction 

of the treatment and/or treatments of 

different lengths or intensity. 

Interrupted time series design means 

a quasi-experimental design in which 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
5574 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 

the outcome of interest is measured 

multiple times before and after the 

treatment for program participants only. 

Invitational Priorities: For FY 2006 

these priorities are invitational 

priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we 

do not give an application that meets 

these invitational priorities a 

competitive or absolute preference over 

other applications. 

These priorities are: 

Invitational Priority 1—English 

Language Acquisition Plan 

For applicants serving children with 

limited English proficiency, the 

Secretary is especially interested in 

applications that include a specific plan 

for the development of English language 

acquisition for these children from the 

start of their preschool experience. The 

ECEPD program is designed to prepare 

children to enter kindergarten with the 

necessary cognitive, early language, and 

literacy skills for success in school. 

School success often is dependent on 

each child entering kindergarten being 

as proficient as possible in English so 

that the child is ready to benefit from 

formal reading instruction in English 

when the child starts school. 

The English language acquisition plan 

should, at a minimum: (1) Include a 

description of the approach for the 

development of language, based on the 

linguistic factors or skills that serve as 

the foundation for a strong language 

base, which is a necessary precursor for 

success in the development of preliteracy and literacy skills for children 

with limited English proficiency; (2) 

explain the acquisition strategies, based 

on best available valid and reliable 

research, that the applicant will use to 

address English language acquisition in 

a multi-lingual classroom; (3) describe 

how the project will facilitate the 

children’s transition to English 

proficiency by means such as the use of 

environmental print in appropriate 

multiple languages, and hiring bilingual 

teachers, paraprofessionals, or 

translators to work in the preschool 

classroom; (4) include intensive 

professional development for instructors 

and paraprofessionals on the 

development of English language 

proficiency; and (5) include a timeline 

that describes benchmarks for the 

introduction of the development of 

English language proficiency and the 

use of measurement tools. 

Ideally, at least one instructional staff 

member in each ECEPD classroom 

should be dual-language proficient both 

in a child’s first language and in English 

to facilitate the child’s understanding of 

instruction and transition to English 

proficiency. At a minimum, each 

classroom should include a teacher who 

is proficient in English. 

Invitational Priority 2—Classroom 

Curricula and Teacher Professional 

Development 

The Secretary is especially interested 

in applications that focus the 

professional development that will be 

provided for early childhood educators 

on the specific curricula promoting 

young children’s school readiness in the 

areas of language and cognitive 

development and early reading and 

numeracy skills that are being used in 

those educators’ early childhood 

programs, and on the research base 

supporting that curricula. In addition to 

being based on scientifically based 

research, the curricula should have 

standardized training procedures and 

published curriculum materials to 

support implementation by the early 

childhood educators. The chosen 

curricula should include a scope and 

sequence of skills and content with 

concrete instructional goals that are 

designed to promote early language, 

reading, and numeracy skills. 

The need for rigorous preschool 

curricula is driven by the national focus 

on high-quality preschool experiences 

that prepare children for formal reading 

instruction in the elementary grades. 

The professional development in the 

ECEPD program provides opportunities 

for the program participants to achieve 

greater understanding of the 

implementation of scientifically based 

curricula that focus on early language, 

reading, and numeracy skills of young 

children. Grantees should focus on 

assisting the early childhood educators 

to implement fully the selected 

curricula and measuring learning 

outcomes for the children taught by 

those educators. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6651(e). 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 

34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 

84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99, as applicable. 

(b) The notice of final priority for 

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods, published in the Federal 

Register on January 25, 2005 (70 FR 

3586). 

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 only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Discretionary grant. 

Estimated Available Funds: 

$14,330,800. 

Estimated Range of Awards: 

$2,400,000–$4,800,000. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$3,600,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 3–6 

awards. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 36 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: A partnership 

that has not previously received an 

ECEPD grant and that consists of at least 

one entity from each of the following 

categories: 

(i) One or more institutions of higher 

education, or other public or private 

entities (including faith-based 

organizations), that provide professional 

development for early childhood 

educators who work with children from 

low-income families in high-need 

communities. 

(ii) One or more public agencies 

(including local educational agencies, 

State educational agencies, State human 

services agencies, and State and local 

agencies administering programs under 

the Child Care and Development Block 

Grant Act of 1990), Head Start agencies, 

or private organizations (including faithbased organizations). 

(iii) If feasible, an entity with 

demonstrated experience in providing 

training to educators in early childhood 

education programs concerning 

identifying and preventing behavior 

problems or working with children 

identified as or suspected to be victims 

of abuse. This entity may be one of the 

partners described in paragraphs (i) and 

(ii) under Eligible Applicants. 

A partnership may apply for these 

funds only if one of the partners 

currently provides professional 

development for early childhood 

educators working in programs located 

in high-need communities with children 

from low-income families. 

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Each 

partnership that receives a grant under 

this program must provide (1) at least 50 

percent of the total cost of the project for 

the entire grant period; and (2) at least 

20 percent of the project cost for each 

year. The project may provide these 

funds from any source, other than this 

program, including other Federal 

sources. The partnership may satisfy 

these cost-sharing requirements by 

providing contributions in cash or inkind, fairly evaluated, including plant, 

equipment, and services. Only 

allowable costs may be counted as part 

of the grantee’s share. For example, any 

indirect costs over and above the 

allowable amount may not be counted 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 5575 

toward a grantee’s share. For additional 

information about indirect costs, see 

section IV.5. Funding Restrictions of 

this notice. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Address to Request Application 

Package: You may obtain an application 

package via the Internet or from the 

Education Publications Center (ED 

Pubs). To obtain an application via the 

Internet, use the following Web address: 

http://www.ed.gov/programs/ 

eceducator/index.html. 

To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write 

or call the following: Education 

Publications Center, P.O. Box 1398, 

Jessup, MD 20794–1398. Telephone (toll 

free): 1–877–433–7827. FAX: (301) 470–

1244. If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD), you may call 

(toll free): 1–877–576–7734. 

You may also contact ED Pubs at its 

Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ 

edpubs.html or you may contact ED 

Pubs at its e-mail address: 

edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

If you request an application from ED 

Pubs, be sure to identify this 

competition as follows: CFDA number 

84.349A. 

Individuals with disabilities may 

obtain a copy of the application package 

in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, 

large print, audiotape, or computer 

diskette) by contacting the program 

contact person listed in section VII of 

this notice. 

2. Content and Form of Application 

Submission: Requirements concerning 

the content of the application, together 

with the forms you must submit, are in 

the application package for this 

competition. 

Page Limits: The application narrative 

for this program (Part III of the 

application) is where you, the applicant, 

address the selection criteria that 

reviewers use to evaluate your 

application. You must limit Part III of 

the application to the equivalent of no 

more than 30 typed pages. Part IV of the 

application is where you, the applicant, 

provide a budget narrative that 

reviewers use to evaluate your 

application. You must limit the budget 

narrative in Part IV of the application to 

the equivalent of no more than 5 typed 

pages. Part V of the application is where 

you, the applicant, include the 

Appendices described later in this 

section, including any response to the 

Competitive Preference Priority—

Scientifically Based Evaluation 

Methods. You must limit any response 

to the Competitive Preference Priority to 

no more than 3 typed pages. 

For all page limits, 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 and budget narratives, 

including titles, headings, footnotes, 

quotations, references, and captions. 

Text in tables, charts, or graphs, and the 

limited Appendices, may be single 

spaced. 

• Use a font that is either 12-point or 

larger or no smaller than 10 pitch 

(characters per inch). You may use other 

point fonts for any tables, charts, graphs, 

and the limited Appendices, but those 

tables, charts, graphs and limited 

Appendices should be in a font size that 

is easily readable by the reviewers of 

your application. 

• Any tables, charts, or graphs are 

included in the overall narrative page 

limit. The limited Appendices, 

including the partnership agreement 

required as a group agreement under 34 

CFR 75.128, and any Competitive 

Preference Priority response, are not 

part of the overall narrative page limits. 

• Appendices are limited to the 

following: Absolute Priority Form 

(required); partnership agreement 

(required); any response to the 

Competitive Preference Priority; and 

any position descriptions (and resumes 

or curriculum vitae if available) of key 

personnel (including key contract 

personnel and consultants). 

Other application materials are 

limited to the specific materials 

indicated in the application package, 

and may not include any video or other 

non-print materials. 

Our reviewers will not read any pages 

of your application that—

• Exceed the page limits if you apply 

these standards; or 

• Exceed the equivalent of the page 

limits if you apply other standards. 

3. Submission Dates and Times. 

Applications Available: February 6, 

2006. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 7, 2006. 

Applications for grants under this 

program must be submitted 

electronically using the Grants.gov 

Apply site (Grants.gov). For information 

(including dates and times) about how 

to submit your application 

electronically or by mail or hand 

delivery if you qualify for an exception 

to the electronic submission 

requirement, please refer to section IV.6. 

Other Submission Requirements in this 

notice. 

We do not consider an application 

that does not comply with the deadline 

requirements. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 6, 2006. 

4. Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

5. Funding Restrictions: 

(a) Indirect Costs. For purposes of 

indirect cost charges, the Secretary 

considers all ECEPD program grants to 

be ‘‘educational training grants’’ within 

the meaning of section 75.562(a) of 

EDGAR. Consistent with 34 CFR 75.562, 

the indirect cost rate for any fiscal agent 

other than a State agency or agency of 

local government (such as a local 

educational agency or a federally 

recognized Indian tribal government) is 

limited to a maximum of eight percent 

or the amount permitted by the fiscal 

agent’s negotiated indirect cost rate 

agreement, whichever is less. This 

indirect cost limit applies to cost-type 

contracts only if those contracts are for 

educational training as defined in 34 

CFR 75.562. Further information about 

indirect cost rates is in the application 

package for this competition. 

(b) Pre-award Costs. For FY 2006 the 

Secretary approves, under sections 

75.263 and 74.25(e)(1) of EDGAR, preaward costs incurred by recipients of 

ECEPD grants more than 90 calendar 

days before the grant award. 

Specifically, the Secretary approves 

necessary and reasonable pre-award 

costs incurred by grant recipients for up 

to 90 days before the application 

deadline date. These pre-award costs 

must be related to the needs assessment 

that applicants conduct under section 

2151(e)(3)(B)(iii) of the ESEA before 

submitting their applications to 

determine the most critical professional 

development needs of the early 

childhood educators to be served by the 

project and in the broader community. 

Applicants incur any pre-award costs 

at their own risk. The Secretary is under 

no obligation to reimburse these costs if 

for any reason the applicant does not 

receive an award or if the award is less 

than anticipated and inadequate to 

cover these costs. 

We reference additional regulations 

outlining funding restrictions in the 

Applicable Regulations section of this 

notice. 

6. Other Submission Requirements. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically unless you qualify for an 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
5576 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 

exception to this requirement in 

accordance with the instructions in this 

section. 

a. Electronic Submission of 

Applications. 

Applications for grants under the 

ECEPD program-CFDA 84.349A must be 

submitted electronically using the 

Grants.gov Apply site at: http:// 

www.grants.gov. Through this site, you 

will be able to download a copy of the 

application package, complete it offline, 

and then upload and submit your 

application. You may not e-mail an 

electronic copy of a grant application to 

us. 

We will reject your application if you 

submit it in paper format unless, as 

described elsewhere in this section, you 

qualify for one of the exceptions to the 

electronic submission requirement and 

submit, no later than two weeks before 

the application deadline date, a written 

statement to the Department that you 

qualify for one of these exceptions. 

Further information regarding 

calculation of the date that is two weeks 

before the application deadline date is 

provided later in this section under 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement. 

You may access the electronic grant 

application for the ECEPD program at: 

http://www.grants.gov. You must search 

for the downloadable application 

package for this program by the CFDA 

number. Do not include the CFDA 

number’s alpha suffix in your search. 

Please note the following: 

• When you enter the Grants.gov site, 

you will find information about 

submitting an application electronically 

through the site, as well as the hours of 

operation. 

• Applications received by Grants.gov 

are time and date stamped. Your 

application must be fully uploaded and 

submitted, and must be date/time 

stamped by the Grants.gov system no 

later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC 

time, on the application deadline date. 

Except as otherwise noted in this 

section, we will not consider your 

application if it is date/time stamped by 

the Grants.gov system later than 4:30 

p.m., Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date. When we 

retrieve your application from 

Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are 

rejecting your application because it 

was date/time stamped by the 

Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date. 

• The amount of time it can take to 

upload an application will vary 

depending on a variety of factors 

including the size of the application and 

the speed of your Internet connection. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend that 

you do not wait until the application 

deadline date to begin the submission 

process through Grants.gov. 

• You should review and follow the 

Education Submission Procedures for 

submitting an application through 

Grants.gov that are included in the 

application package for this competition 

to ensure that you submit your 

application in a timely manner to the 

Grants.gov system. You can also find the 

Education Submission Procedures 

pertaining to Grants.gov at http://eGrants.ed.gov/help/ 

GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf. 

• To submit your application via 

Grants.gov, you must complete all of the 

steps in the Grants.gov registration 

process (see http://www.Grants.gov/ 

GetStarted). These steps include (1) 

registering your organization, (2) 

registering yourself as an Authorized 

Organization Representative (AOR), and 

(3) getting authorized as an AOR by 

your organization. Details on these steps 

are outlined in the Grants.gov 3-Step 

Registration Guide (see http:// 

www.grants.gov/assets/ 

GrantsgovCoBrandBrochure8X11.pdf. 

You also must provide on your 

application the same D-U-N-S Number 

used with this registration. Please note 

that the registration process may take 

five or more business days to complete, 

and you must have completed all 

registration steps to allow you to 

successfully submit an application via 

Grants.gov. 

• You will not receive additional 

point value because you submit your 

application in electronic format, nor 

will we penalize you if you qualify for 

an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement, as described 

elsewhere in this section, and submit 

your application in paper format. 

• You must submit all documents 

electronically, including all information 

typically included on the Application 

for Federal Education Assistance (ED 

424), Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED 524), the 

Absolute Priority Form and all 

necessary assurances and certifications 

and required and optional Appendices. 

You must attach any narrative sections 

of your application as files in a .DOC 

(document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF 

(Portable Document) format. If you 

upload a file type other than the three 

file types specified above or submit a 

password protected file, we will not 

review that material. 

• Your electronic application must 

comply with any page limit 

requirements described in this notice. 

• After you electronically submit 

your application, you will receive an 

automatic acknowledgment from 

Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov 

tracking number. The Department will 

retrieve your application from 

Grants.gov and send you a second 

confirmation by e-mail that will include 

a PR/Award number (an ED-specified 

identifying number unique to your 

application). 

• We may request that you provide us 

original signatures on forms at a later 

date. 

Application Deadline Date Extension in 

Case of Technical Issues With the 

Grants.gov System 

If you are prevented from 

electronically submitting your 

application on the application deadline 

date because of technical problems with 

the Grants.gov system, we will grant you 

an extension until 4:30 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, the following 

business day to enable you to transmit 

your application electronically, or by 

hand delivery. You also may mail your 

application by following the mailing 

instructions as described elsewhere in 

this notice. If you submit an application 

after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the deadline date, please contact the 

person listed elsewhere in this notice 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT, and provide an explanation of 

the technical problem you experienced 

with Grants.gov, along with the 

Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number 

(if available). We will accept your 

application if we can confirm that a 

technical problem occurred with the 

Grants.gov system and that that problem 

affected your ability to submit your 

application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, on the application deadline 

date. The Department will contact you 

after a determination is made on 

whether your application will be 

accepted. 

Note: Extensions referred to in this section 

apply only to the unavailability of or 

technical problems with the Grants.gov 

system. We will not grant you an extension 

if you failed to fully register to submit your 

application to Grants.gov before the deadline 

date and time or if the technical problem you 

experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov 

system. 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement 

You qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, and 

may submit your application in paper 

format, if you are unable to submit an 

application through the Grants.gov 

system because—

• You do not have access to the 

Internet; or 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 5577 

• You do not have the capacity to 

upload large documents to the 

Grants.gov system; and 

• No later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date (14 calendar 

days or, if the fourteenth calendar day 

before the application deadline date 

falls on a Federal holiday, the next 

business day following the Federal 

holiday), you mail or fax a written 

statement to the Department, explaining 

which of the two grounds for an 

exception prevent you from using the 

Internet to submit your application. If 

you mail your written statement to the 

Department, it must be postmarked no 

later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date. If you fax 

your written statement to the 

Department, we must receive the faxed 

statement no later than two weeks 

before the application deadline date. 

Address and mail or fax your statement 

to: Rosemary V. Fennell, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., Room 3C122, FB–6, 

Washington, DC 20202–6132. Fax: (202) 

260–7764. 

Your paper application must be 

submitted in accordance with the mail 

or hand delivery instructions described 

in this notice. 

b. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Mail. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

may mail (through the U.S. Postal 

Service or a commercial carrier), your 

application to the Department. You 

must mail the original and two copies 

of your application, on or before the 

application deadline date, to the 

Department at the applicable following 

address: 

By mail through the U.S. Postal 

Service: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

CFDA Number 84.349A, 400 Maryland 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202–

4260. or 

By mail through a commercial carrier: 

U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center—Stop 4260, 

Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A, 7100 

Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 

20785–1506. 

Regardless of which address you use, 

you must show proof of mailing 

consisting of one of the following: 

(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service 

postmark, 

(2) A legible mail receipt with the 

date of mailing stamped by the U.S. 

Postal Service, 

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or 

receipt from a commercial carrier, or 

(4) Any other proof of mailing 

acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. 

Department of Education. 

If you mail your application through 

the U.S. Postal Service, we do not 

accept either of the following as proof 

of mailing: 

(1) A private metered postmark, or 

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by 

the U.S. Postal Service. 

If your application is postmarked after 

the application deadline date, we will 

not consider your application. 

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not 

uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before 

relying on this method, you should check 

with your local post office. 

c. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Hand Delivery. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

(or a courier service) may deliver your 

paper application to the Department by 

hand. You must deliver the original and 

two copies of your application by hand, 

on or before the application deadline 

date, to the Department at the following 

address: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

CFDA Number 84.349A, 550 12th Street, 

SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

The Application Control Center 

accepts hand deliveries daily between 8 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC 

time, except Saturdays, Sundays and 

Federal holidays. 

Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper 

Applications: If you mail or hand deliver 

your application to the Department: 

(1) You must indicate on the envelope 

and—if not provided by the Department—in 

Item 4 of the Application for Federal 

Education Assistance (ED 424) the CFDA 

number—and suffix letter, if any—of the 

competition under which you are submitting 

your application. 

(2) The Application Control Center will 

mail a grant application receipt 

acknowledgment to you. If you do not receive 

the grant application receipt 

acknowledgment within 15 business days 

from the application deadline date, you 

should call the U.S. Department of Education 

Application Control Center at (202) 245–

6288. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this competition are from 

section 75.210 of EDGAR. The 

maximum score for all the selection 

criteria is 100 points. The maximum 

score for each criterion is indicated in 

parentheses. Each criterion also 

includes the factors that the reviewers 

will consider in determining how well 

an application meets the criterion. The 

selection criteria are as follows: 

(a) Need for project (10 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the need 

for the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the need for the 

proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the following factor: 

(i) The extent to which the proposed 

project will focus on serving or 

otherwise addressing the needs of 

disadvantaged individuals. 

(b) Significance (10 points). The 

Secretary considers the significance of 

the proposed project. In determining the 

significance of the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The importance or magnitude of 

the results or outcomes likely to be 

attained by the proposed project, 

especially improvements in teaching 

and student achievement. 

(ii) The extent to which the proposed 

project is likely to build local capacity 

to provide, improve, or expand services 

that address the needs of the target 

population. 

(c) Quality of the project design (20 

points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the design of the proposed 

project. In determining the quality of the 

design of the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The extent to which the proposed 

activities constitute a coherent, 

sustained program of training in the 

field. 

(ii) The extent to which the design of 

the proposed project reflects up-to-date 

knowledge from research and effective 

practice. 

(d) Quality of project services (10 

points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the services to be provided by 

the proposed project. 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. In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) 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. 

(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. 

(e) Quality of project personnel (10 

points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the personnel who will carry 

out the proposed project. In determining 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3
5578 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2006 / Notices 

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 been 

traditionally underrepresented based on 

race, color, national origin, gender, age, 

or disability. In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of key 

project personnel. 

(ii) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of 

project consultants or subcontractors. 

(f) Quality of the management plan 

(10 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the management plan for the 

proposed project. 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. 

(g) Quality of the project evaluation 

(25 points). The Secretary considers the 

quality of the evaluation to be 

conducted of the proposed project. 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 will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment or progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes. 

(h) Adequacy of Resources (5 points). 

The Secretary considers the adequacy of 

resources for the proposed project. In 

determining the adequacy of resources 

for the proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the costs are 

reasonable in relation to the objectives, 

design, and potential significance of the 

proposed project. 

(ii) The potential for continued 

support of the project after Federal 

funding ends, including, as appropriate, 

the demonstrated commitment of 

appropriate entities to such support. 

2. Review and Selection Process: An 

additional factor we consider in 

selecting an application for an award is 

geographical distribution (section 

2151(e)(4)(B) of the ESEA). 

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 Notice (GAN). 

We may also notify you informally. 

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. Reporting: 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 multi-year 

award, you must submit an annual 

performance report that provides the 

most current performance and financial 

expenditure information as specified by 

the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118. For 

specific requirements on grantee 

reporting, please go to: http:// 

www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/ 

appforms/appforms.html. 

4. Performance Measures: For FY 

2006, grants under the ECEPD program 

will be governed by the achievement 

indicators that the Secretary published 

in the Federal Register on March 31, 

2003 (68 FR 15646–15648). These 

achievement indicators are included in 

the application package. 

In addition, in response to the 

Government Performance and Results 

Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has 

established performance measures for 

assessing the effectiveness of the ECEPD 

program, which are coordinated with 

the achievement indicators and are 

included in the application package. 

The coordination of these achievement 

indicators and performance measures is 

designed to improve program 

management, and to help Congress, the 

Department, the Office of Management 

and Budget, and others review a 

program’s progress toward its goals. For 

FY 2006 ECEPD grants, the Secretary 

expects all grantees to document, in the 

required annual performance report 

their success in addressing the GPRA 

performance measures through the 

following assessment tools: The Early 

Language and Literacy Classroom 

Observation (ELLCO); the Peabody 

Picture Vocabulary Test–III (Receptive); 

and the PALS Pre-K Alphabet 

Knowledge-Upper Case subtask. The 

applicant’s evaluation design provided 

in response to the selection criterion for 

Quality of project evaluation in section 

V.1. of this notice should include the 

use of these assessment tools, at a 

minimum. 

VII. Agency Contact 

For Further Information Contact: 

Rosemary Fennell, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 3C–122, Washington, DC 20202–

6132. Telephone: (202) 260–0792, or by 

e-mail: eceprofdev@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 program contact person 

listed in this section. 

VIII. Other Information 

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. 

Dated: January 27, 2006. 

Henry L. Johnson, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 06–937 Filed 1–31–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 


dsatterwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES3