36676 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: 

Training records will be stored 

electronically for five years. 

SYSTEM MANGER AND ADDRESS: 

Donna Simpson, Director, Office of 

Human Resources, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814. 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES: 

Freedom of Information/Privacy Act 

Officer, Office of the Secretary, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

Same as notification. 

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: 

Same as notification. 

RECORDS SOURCE CATEGORIES: 

Personal information in these records 

is obtained from the individual 

requesting training. 

[FR Doc. E7–12906 Filed 7–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

Commission Agenda, Priorities and 

Strategic Plan; Request for Comments 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The staff of the Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(Commission or CPSC) is requesting 

interested parties to comment about the 

CPSC’s agenda and priorities for 

Commission attention during fiscal year 

2009, which begins October 1, 2008, and 

about revisions to its current strategic 

plan, the revised version of which will 

be submitted to Congress in the fall of 

2007 pursuant to the Government 

Performance and Results Act (GPRA). 

Written comments concerning the 

Commission’s agenda and priorities for 

fiscal year 2009 and revisions to the 

strategic plan become part of the public 

record. 

DATES: Written comments from 

members of the public must be received 

by the Office of the Secretary not later 

than July 20, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be captioned ‘‘Agenda, Priorities and 

Strategic Plan’’ and e-mailed to cpscos@cpsc.gov, or mailed or delivered to 

the Office of the Secretary, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 4330 East 

West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 

20814, to be received not later than July 

20, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

a copy of the current strategic plan, email, call or write Todd A. Stevenson, 

Office of the Secretary, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 4330 East 

West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 

20814; e-mail cpsc-os@cpsc.gov; 

telephone (301) 504–7923; facsimile 

(301) 504–0127. An electronic copy of 

the 2003 Strategic Plan can be found at 

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/ 

reports/2003strategic.pdf. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

306(d) of the Government Performance 

and Results Act (GPRA) (5 U.S.C. 

306(d)) requires the Commission to seek 

comments from interested parties as 

part of the process of revising the 

current CPSC strategic plan. The 

strategic plan is a GPRA requirement. 

The revised plan will provide an overall 

guide to the formulation of future 

agency actions and budget requests. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

requires all Federal agencies to submit 

their budget requests 13 months before 

the beginning of each fiscal year. The 

draft CPSC budget request for fiscal year 

2009, which begins on October 1, 2008, 

is being formulated now by staff. The 

final budget request must reflect the 

contents of the agency’s strategic plan 

developed under GPRA. 

The Commission staff desires to 

obtain the views of a wide range of 

interested persons including consumers; 

manufacturers, importers, distributors, 

and retailers of consumer products; 

members of the academic community; 

consumer advocates; and health and 

safety officers of state and local 

governments on both the fiscal year 

2009 budget and potential revisions to 

the strategic plan. 

Written comments on the 

Commission’s current strategic plan, 

and agenda and priorities for fiscal year 

2009, should be received in the Office 

of the Secretary not later than July 20, 

2007. Persons who desire a hard copy of 

the current strategic plan may contact 

the Office of the Secretary, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 4330 East 

West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, email cpsc-os@cpsc.gov, telephone (301) 

504–7923, facsimile (301) 504–0127. 

The strategic plan is also available on 

the CPSC Web site at http:// 

www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/reports/ 

2003strategic.pdf. 

The CPSC’s FY 2008 budget request 

that is currently pending before 

Congress is available at http:// 

www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/reports/ 

2008plan.pdf. 

Dated: June 28, 2007. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–12965 Filed 7–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Special Demonstration Programs—

Model Demonstration Projects to 

Improve the Postsecondary and 

Employment Outcomes of Youth with 

Disabilities 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice of final priority and 

definitions. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services (OSERS) announces a final 

priority and definitions under the 

Special Demonstration Programs 

administered by the Rehabilitation 

Services Administration (RSA). The 

Assistant Secretary may use the priority 

and definitions for competitions in 

fiscal year (FY) 2007 and later years. We 

intend for the priority to support 

projects that demonstrate the use of 

promising practices in collaborative 

transition planning and service delivery 

to improve the postsecondary education 

and employment outcomes of youth 

with disabilities. 

DATES: Effective Date: The priority and 

definitions are effective August 6, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edwin Powell, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

room 5038, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–2800. 

Telephone: (202) 245–7505 or via 

Internet: Edwin.Powell@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: The 

purpose of the Special Demonstration 

Programs is to provide financial 

assistance to projects that expand and 

improve the provision of vocational 

rehabilitation (VR) and other services 

for individuals with disabilities 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation 

Act). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 36677 

We published a notice of proposed 

priority and definitions (NPP) for this 

program in the Federal Register on 

February 15, 2007 (72 FR 7427). The 

NPP included a background statement 

that described our rationale for the 

priority and definitions. 

More specifically, the background 

section of the NPP described the 

challenges that youth with disabilities 

face as they transition to adult life and 

how too many of these youth experience 

difficulties in achieving successful postschool outcomes. We explained the 

importance of the State VR programs in 

assisting youth with disabilities to 

prepare for education, training, and 

employment opportunities beyond high 

school. The NPP also included a 

discussion of the need for programs that 

build on collaborative State and local 

efforts and use promising practices to 

improve the postsecondary education 

and employment outcomes of youth 

with disabilities. 

This notice of final priority and 

definitions (NFP) contains several 

changes from the NPP. These changes 

are explained in the following section, 

Analysis of Comments and Changes. 

Analysis of Comments and Changes 

In response to our invitation in the 

NPP, 75 parties submitted comments on 

the proposed priority and definitions. 

An analysis of the comments and 

changes in the priority and definitions 

since publication of the NPP follows. 

Generally, we do not address 

technical and other minor changes and 

suggested changes the law does not 

authorize us to make under the 

applicable statutory authority. 

Comments: Two commenters stated 

that the language in the priority should 

address cultural concerns. 

Discussion: Without more detailed 

information from the commenters, we 

cannot respond specifically to their 

concerns. However, we note that under 

the Rehabilitation Act, VR services must 

be provided to eligible individuals with 

disabilities irrespective of an 

individual’s ethnicity or race. An 

applicant under this priority may 

submit a proposal that speaks to the 

need for specific interventions or 

activities that address cultural concerns. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Seven commenters 

suggested expanding the age range for 

individuals receiving transition services 

under this priority. Some commenters 

suggested we include children younger 

than 16 in the age range; others 

suggested we include young adults over 

the age of 22. Still other commenters 

suggested that the definition be 

consistent with their State’s regulations 

or other Federal regulations. One 

commenter specifically recommended 

that the definition of youth with 

disabilities include language from the 

definition of child with a disability 

found in 34 CFR 300.8. 

Discussion: The regulations for 

Special Demonstration Programs in 34 

CFR 373.4 define youth or young adults 

with disabilities as individuals with 

disabilities who are between the ages of 

16 and 26. However, we determined that 

this age range was overly inclusive for 

this priority. We therefore proposed that 

these projects should serve youth from 

the age of 16 through the age of 22 in 

order to focus on the majority of 

students receiving transition services 

under the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA). We also 

determined that this age range would be 

the most relevant for providing 

transition services to youth receiving 

educational services under section 504 

plans and youth who have dropped out 

of school. 

The IDEA regulations require 

transition services to be included in the 

first individualized education program 

(IEP) to be in effect when the child turns 

16, or younger if determined 

appropriate by the IEP Team (34 CFR 

300.320(b)). We recognize that some 

States may have regulations that require 

transition services to be provided to 

youth under the age of 16. We also 

recognize that States have the option of 

providing transition services to youth 

with disabilities over the age of 22, if 

permitted by State regulations. Despite 

these considerations, we believe that it 

is important to designate a specific age 

range to ensure that all of these projects 

serve a comparable population, thus 

providing for consistency among the 

projects that will allow for valid 

comparisons among project results for 

evaluation purposes. Furthermore, we 

have not incorporated language from the 

definition of child with a disability in 34 

CFR 300.8, as one commenter 

recommended, because this definition 

includes disability categories that apply 

to students with disabilities receiving 

special education services under the 

IDEA but which do not necessarily 

apply to other transition age youth (e.g., 

students under section 504 plans or 

youth who have dropped out of school). 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the priority should not require the 

creation of a State interagency transition 

taskforce, because a new taskforce could 

duplicate the functions of other State 

entities, such as the State Rehabilitation 

Councils (SRCs). 

Discussion: Given the very specific 

functions of the State interagency 

transition taskforce and the requirement 

that the taskforce focus only on the 

transition of youth with disabilities, we 

think it is unlikely that many States 

have an existing entity that could serve 

these functions. However, the priority 

does not necessarily require the creation 

of a new taskforce. Accordingly, as long 

as the entity meets the definition of 

State interagency transition taskforce 

and can perform the specific functions 

outlined in the definition, the priority 

does not preclude an applicant from 

using an existing entity to facilitate 

interagency collaboration and 

coordination for the project. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Four commenters 

suggested that youth with disabilities be 

included on the State interagency 

transition taskforce. 

Discussion: We do not find it 

necessary to require that transitioning 

youth with disabilities serve on the 

State interagency transition taskforce. 

Our proposed definition of State 

interagency transition taskforce stated, 

in part, that the taskforce must include 

‘‘individuals to represent the 

perspectives of * * * transitioning 

youth with disabilities.’’ A transitioning 

youth with a disability could certainly 

serve on the taskforce in this capacity. 

However, we believe that individuals 

other than transitioning youth with 

disabilities also could represent 

adequately the perspectives of these 

transitioning youth. Thus, it is 

appropriate to allow the applicant to 

determine who will represent this 

population. 

Changes: In order to clarify that youth 

with disabilities may, but are not 

required to, serve on the State 

interagency transition taskforce, we 

revised the definition of State 

interagency transition taskforce to 

explicitly include youth with 

disabilities among those who may serve 

on the taskforce. 

Comments: One commenter stated 

that the priority does not adequately 

refer to the important services provided 

by the private sector to transitioning 

youth with disabilities. 

Discussion: We are well aware of the 

contributions made by the private sector 

to improve the post-secondary and 

employment outcomes of youth with 

disabilities. For this reason, the State 

interagency transition taskforce must 

include among its members 

‘‘individuals to represent the 

perspectives of business and industry.’’

We believe that requiring the taskforce 

to include this group of individuals 

addresses adequately the private sector’s 

involvement in providing services to 

youth with disabilities. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
36678 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Seven commenters 

suggested that the priority require more 

collaboration among the State VR 

agency or agencies, the State 

educational agency (SEA), local 

educational agencies (LEAs), and 

community stakeholders on the topic of 

transition. 

Discussion: We believe the priority, as 

proposed, already requires significant 

coordination and collaboration among 

the State VR agency, the SEA, LEAs, and 

community stakeholders. For instance, 

under the priority, the State interagency 

transition taskforce must implement a 

model transition program to be carried 

out at two sites in coordination with the 

applicable LEA or LEAs. The taskforce 

also must provide training and technical 

assistance to LEAs on planning and 

providing transition services to youth 

with disabilities. Additionally, the 

priority provides for local interagency 

teams to implement the VR service 

delivery models developed by the 

taskforce. We believe that these 

activities, as well as others outlined in 

the priority, are more than sufficient to 

ensure significant collaboration among 

local, State, and community 

stakeholders. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter stated 

that the priority does not address the 

role of partners specified in the 

Workforce Investment Act (WIA). 

Discussion: We recognize the valuable 

contributions that WIA partners and 

other entities providing services under 

WIA, such as State employment and 

training agencies, local one-stop 

workforce centers, and State and local 

workforce investment boards, can make 

in improving post-secondary education 

and employment outcomes for youth 

with disabilities. Accordingly, in the 

definition of State interagency transition 

taskforce, we proposed that the 

taskforce include representatives of the 

State VR agency; the State VR agency for 

the Blind, in a State where there is such 

an agency; and the State Labor and 

Employment/Workforce agency, three of 

the required partners under WIA. An 

applicant may include other WIA 

partners in addition to these required 

participants on its taskforce. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that SEAs and LEAs be excluded from 

the priority. 

Discussion: The purpose of the 

priority is to promote and strengthen 

collaboration among various partners at 

the State and local levels to improve 

post-school outcomes for youth with 

disabilities. We believe SEAs and LEAs 

are vital partners in facilitating 

successful transitions from school to 

post-school activities for youth with 

disabilities, and therefore, decline to 

make the changes requested. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the priority include support for the 

cost of transportation. 

Discussion: The priority permits the 

provision of individualized VR services 

for youth with disabilities who are 

eligible for these services under 34 CFR 

361.42. These individualized services 

may include providing transportation if 

it is needed by the youth to access 

necessary and appropriate transition 

services. In addition, the priority does 

not preclude an applicant from 

including in its proposed model 

transition program transportation or any 

other service that is allowable under the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) cost principles. Therefore, we 

believe the priority is broad enough to 

permit the use of funds for 

transportation services if needed by the 

individuals served by the project. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Two commenters 

suggested that we require applicants to 

provide the following additional 

services under the priority: mentoring, 

assistive technology services, driver’s 

education, services provided by parent 

training and information centers, 

summer programs, services to youth 

who are involved in the juvenile justice 

system, and intensive reading 

remediation programs. 

Discussion: We agree that the services 

identified by the commenters are 

important services in a transition 

program. The services that we identified 

in the priority, however, were not 

intended to be an exhaustive list of all 

services that could be provided under 

the priority. Rather, we expect that, 

through the State interagency transition 

taskforce, the grantee will identify the 

services to be delivered as part of the 

coordinated set of promising practices 

to be provided under paragraph 4(c) of 

the priority. Thus, while the priority 

does not preclude a grantee from 

providing any of the services identified 

by the commenters, we believe it is 

better left to an applicant and the State 

interagency transition taskforce to 

identify the particular services that 

would best address the needs in the 

State or local area that the project will 

serve. Therefore, we do not think it is 

necessary to require all grantees to 

provide the particular additional 

services suggested by the commenters. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the priority require every middle 

school, high school, and college 

involved in the model demonstration 

project to have a transition counselor to 

work with youth with disabilities. 

Discussion: The priority does not 

preclude applicants from including 

transition counselors in their model 

demonstration projects. However, that 

approach may not be feasible in some 

instances because of staffing constraints 

and funding limitations. Therefore, we 

do not believe that we should require all 

applicants to adopt such an approach. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the priority include a requirement 

to train personnel in institutions of 

higher education and personnel 

responsible for planning and providing 

services to youth with disabilities. 

Discussion: Applicants under the 

priority must provide training and 

technical assistance to LEAs and VR 

personnel. The priority does not 

preclude an applicant from proposing, 

as part of its model demonstration 

project, to train personnel in institutions 

of higher education or other personnel 

responsible for planning and providing 

services to youth with disabilities. 

However, we do not believe we should 

require each model demonstration 

project to train personnel in institutions 

of higher education or other personnel 

responsible for planning and providing 

services to youth with disabilities 

because training of those personnel may 

not be necessary to meet the specific 

needs in the State or local area(s) that 

the project will cover. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter requested 

that the priority require projects funded 

under the priority to cultivate 

community employment possibilities. 

Discussion: With regard to 

employment, the purpose of the priority 

is to improve employment outcomes for 

youth with disabilities. Employment 

outcomes may be improved through a 

variety of methods, including the use of 

activities that focus on cultivating 

community employment possibilities. In 

order to provide flexibility and promote 

creativity, we do not believe the priority 

should include a requirement to 

cultivate community employment 

possibilities. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Two commenters 

suggested that the priority require 

projects to educate parents and students 

at an early age about transition services. 

Discussion: The priority requires 

projects to provide a coordinated set of 

promising practices, which must 

include, among other things, youth 

development activities and practices to 

enhance family involvement. Through 

these youth development activities and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 36679 

practices to enhance family 

involvement, we expect that grantees 

will provide information and other 

services to youth with disabilities and 

their parents so that they are well 

informed about the transition services 

available to them and thus able to make 

better decisions. 

Changes: None. 

Comment: One commenter suggested 

that we require applicants to propose in 

their applications a specific life skills 

curriculum that includes vocational 

preparation and training and 

community field trips. 

Discussion: Under the priority, 

applicants must provide, among other 

things, a description of promising 

practices they propose to provide, 

including youth development activities. 

The definition of youth development 

activities, in turn, specifically identifies 

training in life skills (e.g., independent 

living skills, self-advocacy, and conflict 

resolution) that an applicant may 

include in its model demonstration 

project. We do not believe it is 

appropriate to prescribe more 

specifically the types of youth 

development activities an applicant may 

propose; such decisions are best left to 

the applicant and the State interagency 

transition taskforce who can better 

assess the needs of the youth who will 

be served. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the progress of a youth with 

disabilities be evaluated with a variety 

of assessments (e.g., work samples, 

behavioral observation, communitybased or situational assessment, family 

questionnaires, etc.) conducted at 

various points in the program of 

services for that youth. 

Discussion: Assessment of a youth’s 

progress, through means such as those 

described by the commenter, may be 

utilized at the discretion of the 

applicant. However, the outcome data 

that each grantee must collect, at a 

minimum, are specified in paragraph 

4(d) of the priority. Therefore, the 

assessments the grantee chooses to use 

must ultimately focus on improving 

postsecondary education and 

employment outcomes for youth with 

disabilities. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the priority require a Web-based 

clearinghouse to compile and 

disseminate information about the 

results of projects funded under the 

priority. 

Discussion: OSERS currently funds 

several transition-related technical 

assistance and dissemination centers 

that serve as clearinghouses, including 

the National Dropout Prevention Center 

for Students with Disabilities, the 

National Secondary Transition 

Technical Assistance Center, and the 

National Dissemination Center for 

Children with Disabilities (NICHCY). 

Information on promising practices 

resulting from the model demonstration 

projects funded under the priority will 

be shared with these technical 

assistance centers; thus, these existing 

centers will be used to disseminate 

information stemming from projects 

funded under the priority. We believe 

this is a more efficient use of resources 

and, therefore, decline to make the 

change recommended by the 

commenter. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Three commenters 

recommended that the priority require 

an evaluation plan that includes both 

formative and summative analyses. 

Discussion: Paragraph 4(d) of the 

priority requires applicants to provide 

an evaluation plan in their applications 

that includes, among other things, the 

data to be collected and how it will be 

analyzed. All grantees will necessarily 

conduct summative analyses of the data 

they collect to include in the final report 

they are required to submit to the 

Department. Grantees also may utilize 

formative analyses so that they can 

better assess the progress they are 

making with youth at various points 

during the period of the project. 

However, we do not believe it is 

necessary to require that all applicants 

conduct formative analyses, but instead, 

will leave this decision to the discretion 

of the applicant. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter asked 

that we clarify whether a third-party 

evaluation is required under the 

priority. 

Discussion: Paragraph 2(f) of the 

priority requires an applicant to 

demonstrate that the project for which 

it seeks funding will conduct an 

evaluation plan of the project’s 

performance, including an evaluation of 

the effectiveness of the practices and 

strategies implemented by the project in 

achieving project goals, particularly 

post-school outcomes. This project 

evaluation does not need to be 

conducted by a third party. However, 

during the first year of these projects, 

we intend to work with grantees to 

ensure that the required evaluation data 

under paragraph 4(d) are collected 

uniformly to allow the Department to 

analyze project outcomes across models. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that all post-school outcome data be 

disaggregated and available to examine 

all categories of disabilities. 

Discussion: We recognize the 

importance of making certain that 

grantees can disaggregate data by 

disability. In order to be responsive to 

this concern, we have revised paragraph 

4(d) of the priority to require applicants 

to use a consistent approach to 

collecting and reporting data that can be 

disaggregated by disability. 

Changes: Paragraph 4(d) of the 

priority has been changed to require that 

the evaluation plan include the 

collection of data about the disability or 

disabilities of a youth, consistent with 

the disability coding system used by 

State VR agencies. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that we require that the project findings 

be disseminated to the local community, 

including institutions of higher 

education, served by the LEA. 

Discussion: Paragraph 4(e) of the 

priority requires a plan for the 

systematic dissemination of project 

findings and knowledge gained that will 

assist State and local agencies in 

adapting or replicating the transition 

model carried out by the project. 

Applicants may propose to disseminate 

their findings in the manner suggested 

by the commenter. However, we do not 

believe there is a sufficient basis to 

require all grantees to disseminate 

project findings to specific groups. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Three commenters 

recommended that the priority require 

applicants to base their projects on 

objective evidence of the specific needs 

in the State. 

Discussion: We recognize the 

importance of basing the project design 

on objective evidence regarding specific 

needs in the State. Objective evidence of 

State needs will be used as a selection 

criterion in reviewing applications 

submitted under the priority. 

Accordingly, we do not believe it is 

necessary to include this requirement in 

the priority. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that applicants be required to 

demonstrate that they are currently 

participating in research-based designs 

for best practices and have significant 

linkages to other transition-outcome 

improvement projects. 

Discussion: Restricting applicants to 

those currently participating in 

research-based designs and those that 

have significant linkages to other 

transition-outcome improvement 

projects may too severely restrict the 

applicant pool. In fact, through this 

priority, we hope to encourage the 

adoption of research-based designs and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
36680 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 

promising transition practices in 

additional States and localities. 

However, we agree with the commenter 

that projects funded under the priority 

should link with other transition 

projects, if they do not already do so. 

Through ongoing technical assistance 

and information dissemination activities 

during the project period, we will 

advise grantees of new and existing 

transition-outcome improvement 

projects with which they may establish 

linkages. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: Two commenters 

suggested that the term ‘‘internship’’ be 

included in the definition of career 

preparatory and pre-employment 

experiences. 

Discussion: We did not intend the 

definition of career preparatory and preemployment experiences to preclude 

internships as one of the training 

activities. To clarify our intent, we have 

revised the definition. 

Changes: The definition of career 

preparatory and pre-employment 

experiences has been revised to clarify 

that the list of experiences and activities 

included in the definition is not 

exhaustive. 

Comments: One commenter suggested 

that the list of definitions in the priority 

include: career planning, vocational 

preparation, and successful transition. 

Discussion: The terms ‘‘career 

planning’’ and ‘‘vocational preparation’’

are not used in this priority and 

therefore are not included in the list of 

definitions. Career planning and 

vocational preparation are strategies that 

the applicant may propose in providing 

career preparatory and pre-employment 

experiences and student-focused 

planning activities consistent with 

paragraph 4(d) of the priority. Regarding 

the suggestion to add the definition of 

successful transition to the list of 

definitions, the term may be defined 

differently for each student or project. 

Thus, adding a definition for successful 

transition to the list of definitions is not 

necessary or appropriate. 

Changes: None. 

Comments: One commenter 

recommended requiring each project to 

define employment for the sake of 

clarity because some projects consider 

sheltered work to be employment. 

Discussion: We believe that the 

definition of employment outcome in 34 

CFR part 373 addresses the issue raised 

by the commenter. Under the 

regulations, the term employment 

outcome has the same meaning as 

employment outcome in the State VR 

services program regulations in 34 CFR 

361.5(b)(16). That definition of 

employment outcome does not include 

sheltered work. Therefore, it is not 

necessary for an applicant to define 

employment. In order to clarify that 

applicants must use the definition of 

employment outcome found in 34 CFR 

361.5(b)(16), a reference to this 

definition has been added in paragraph 

2(b)(i) of the priority in which the 

individualized VR services that an 

applicant must provide are described. 

Changes: Paragraph 2(b)(i) of the 

priority has been revised to clarify that 

the individualized VR services that are 

provided are designed to achieve an 

employment outcome consistent with 

the definition in 34 CFR 361.5(b)(16). 

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. 

When inviting applications we designate the 

priority as absolute, competitive preference, 

or invitational. The effect of each type of 

priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by either (1) Awarding 

additional points, depending on how 

well or the extent to which the 

application meets the competitive 

priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 

selecting an application that meets the 

competitive priority over an application 

of comparable merit that does not meet 

the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

invitational priority. However, we do 

not give an application that meets the 

invitational priority a competitive or 

absolute preference over other 

applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Priority 

Priority—Model Demonstration Projects 

to Improve the Postsecondary and 

Employment Outcomes of Youth with 

Disabilities 

This priority supports projects that 

demonstrate the use of promising 

practices of collaborative transition 

planning and service delivery in 

improving the postsecondary education 

and employment outcomes of youth 

with disabilities. 

In order to meet this priority, an 

applicant must—

(1) Provide an assurance that the State 

has an interagency transition taskforce 

that provides input in the development 

of the application and that the 

interagency transition taskforce will—

(a) Play an advisory role in the 

operation of the project; 

(b) Assist in the development of 

project goals; 

(c) Review project findings; and 

(d) Assist in the dissemination of 

project findings; 

(2) Demonstrate that the project for 

which it seeks funding will—

(a) Implement a model transition 

program that is designed to improve 

post-school outcomes of students with 

disabilities through the use of local 

interagency transition teams and the 

implementation of a coordinated set of 

promising practices and strategies. The 

activities must be implemented at a 

minimum of two sites to be carried out 

in coordination with the applicable LEA 

or LEAs; 

(b) Provide transition services to 

youth with disabilities, including—

(i) Individualized VR services to 

youth with disabilities who are eligible 

for such services consistent with 34 CFR 

361.42 and designed to achieve an 

employment outcome as defined in 34 

CFR 361.5(b)(16); and 

(ii) Services to groups of youth with 

disabilities, through methods such as 

workshops and seminars, to support the 

transition of such youth to post-school 

and employment outcomes; 

(c) Provide training and technical 

assistance to LEAs and State VR 

personnel responsible for planning and 

providing transition services to youth 

with disabilities; 

(d) Conduct outreach activities that 

assist in the identification of youth with 

disabilities who are in need of VR 

services; 

(e) Analyze and use the secondary 

education and post-school outcome data 

of youth with disabilities collected by 

the SEA and other relevant data to assist 

the project to improve transition 

services and post-school outcomes; 

(f) Conduct an evaluation of the 

project’s performance, including an 

evaluation of the effectiveness of the 

practices and strategies implemented by 

the project in achieving project goals, 

particularly post-school outcomes; 

(3) Provide evidence that the LEAs 

responsible for providing transition 

services to children with disabilities 

under the IDEA in the local sites 

proposed by the applicant will 

participate in carrying out project 

activities (e.g., letter of support); and 

(4) Provide a description of—

(a) The State interagency transition 

taskforce members, including their roles 

and responsibilities with respect to 

transition planning and the provision of 

services; 

(b) The local interagency team 

members, including their roles and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 36681 

responsibilities with respect to 

transition planning and the provision of 

services; 

(c) The coordinated set of promising 

practices that it proposes to provide, 

which, at a minimum, must include 

student-focused planning, career 

preparatory and pre-employment 

experiences, youth development 

activities, and practices to enhance 

family involvement; 

(d) The evaluation plan, including 

project goals, measurable objectives, and 

operational definitions and the data to 

be collected and how it will be 

analyzed. At a minimum these data 

must include: the disability or 

disabilities of the youth, reported 

consistent with the disability coding 

system used by State VR agencies; high 

school exit data (academic achievement 

and functional performance data, high 

school graduation outcomes, including 

type of diploma received); student’s 

post-school goals; services provided; 

postsecondary education outcomes; 

employment outcomes (type of 

employment, wages and earnings, hours 

worked, weeks of employment); and 

public benefits received such as 

Supplemental Security Income and 

Social Security Disability Insurance; 

and 

(e) A plan for the systematic 

dissemination of project findings and 

knowledge gained that will assist State 

and local agencies in adapting or 

replicating the transition model carried 

out by the project. 

Definitions 

(1) Career preparatory and preemployment experiences means 

experiences and activities to help 

students become prepared for a 

successful future in postsecondary 

education or employment including, but 

not limited to: instruction in learning 

and study strategies; career education 

activities that assist the student to form 

and develop career aspirations and to 

make informed choices about careers; 

structured work experiences such as job 

shadowing, volunteer and community 

service, and on-the-job training 

experiences; and employment skills 

instruction such as work-related 

behaviors and skills training, job 

seeking skills, and occupation-specific 

vocational skill training. 

(2) State interagency transition 

taskforce means a group of individuals 

who meet on a regular basis to facilitate 

interagency collaboration and the 

coordination of practices and services to 

improve the transition of students with 

disabilities from secondary education to 

postsecondary education and 

employment, such as identifying and 

addressing systemic transition barriers; 

facilitating the coordination of 

transition policies, practices, and 

services within the State; providing 

technical assistance; and disseminating 

information on promising practices. 

(a) The group must, at a minimum, 

include one or more representatives of 

the State VR agency (including, where 

applicable, the State VR agency for the 

Blind), SEA, State Labor and 

Employment/Workforce agency, Social 

Security Administration, State 

developmental disabilities agency, and 

the State mental health agency. The 

group also must include individuals to 

represent the perspectives of business 

and industry and transitioning youth 

with disabilities. 

(b) The group also may include 

representatives from other relevant 

entities such as the State Rehabilitation 

Council (if applicable in the State), State 

Independent Living Council, State 

Developmental Disabilities and Mental 

Health Planning Councils, 

postsecondary educational institutions, 

and transition service providers, youth 

with disabilities, parents of 

transitioning youth with a disability, 

and other stakeholders. 

(3) Student-focused planning means 

activities designed to facilitate student 

participation, self-evaluation and selfdetermination, including goal setting 

and decision making within the 

planning process. Examples of such 

activities include the identification of 

student interests and preferences; use of 

educational, career and psychological 

assessments in the development of 

postsecondary education, training, and 

vocational goals; career, vocational 

counseling, and guidance; VR 

participation at IEP meetings; joint IEP 

and individualized plan for 

employment (IPE) planning meetings; 

and timely referrals to adult service 

providers. 

(4) Transition services, as defined in 

section (7)(37) of the Rehabilitation Act, 

means a coordinated set of activities for 

a student, designed within an outcomeoriented process, that promotes 

movement from school to post-school 

activities, including postsecondary 

education, vocational training, and 

integrated employment (including 

supported employment), continuing and 

adult education, adult services, 

independent living, or community 

participation. The coordinated set of 

activities must be based upon the 

individual student’s needs, taking into 

account the student’s preferences and 

interests, and shall include instruction, 

community experiences, the 

development of employment and other 

post-school adult living objectives, and, 

when appropriate, acquisition of daily 

living skills and functional vocational 

evaluation. 

(5) Youth development activities 

means activities that help students 

control and direct their own lives based 

on informed decisions and become selfsufficient and productive members of 

society, such as learning to 

communicate their disability-related 

work support and accommodation 

needs and learning to find, request, and 

secure appropriate supports and 

reasonable accommodations in 

education, training, and employment 

settings. Examples of youth 

development activities include: 

mentoring opportunities, training in life 

skills such as independent living skills, 

self-advocacy, and conflict resolution; 

exposure to personal leadership and 

youth development activities; and 

exposure to post-program supports. 

(6) Youth with disabilities means an 

individual with a disability as defined 

in paragraph (b) of the definition of 

individual with a disability in 34 CFR 

373.4 who is no younger than age 16 

and no older than age 22. 

Executive Order 12866 

This NFP has been reviewed in 

accordance with Executive Order 12866. 

Under the terms of the Executive order, 

we have assessed the potential costs and 

benefits of this regulatory action. 

The potential costs associated with 

the NFP are those resulting from 

statutory requirements and those we 

have determined as necessary for 

administering this program effectively 

and efficiently. 

In assessing the potential costs and 

benefits—both quantitative and 

qualitative—of this NFP we have 

determined that the benefits of the 

priority and related definitions justify 

the costs. 

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 373. 

Electronic Access to This Document 

You may view this document, as well 

as all other Department of Education 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
36682 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 128 / Thursday, July 5, 2007 / Notices 

documents 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 84.235U Special Demonstration 

Programs) 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b). 

Dated: June 28, 2007. 

John H. Hager, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 07–3249 Filed 7–3–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services; Overview 

Information; Special Demonstration 

Programs—Model Demonstration 

Projects to Improve the Postsecondary 

and Employment Outcomes of Youth 

with Disabilities; Notice Inviting 

Applications for New Awards for Fiscal 

Year (FY) 2007 and Later Years 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.235U. 

Dates: Applications Available: July 5, 

2007. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: August 6, 2007. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: October 3, 2007. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Special Demonstration Programs is 

to provide financial assistance to 

eligible entities to expand and improve 

the provision of rehabilitation and other 

services for individuals with 

disabilities. 

Priority: This priority is from the 

notice of final priority and definitions 

for this program, published elsewhere in 

this issue of the Federal Register. 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2007, this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

Model Demonstration Projects to 

Improve the Postsecondary and 

Employment Outcomes of Youth with 

Disabilities. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 773(b). 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 

34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 

85, 97, and 99. (b) The regulations for 

this program in 34 CFR part 373. (c) The 

notice of final priority and definitions, 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Discretionary grants. 

Estimated Available Funds: 

$2,250,000. 

Maximum Award: We will reject any 

application that proposes a budget 

exceeding $575,000 for a single budget 

period of 12 months. The Assistant 

Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services may change the 

maximum amount through a notice 

published in the Federal Register. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 4–7. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 60 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: Only State 

vocational rehabilitation agencies are 

eligible for assistance under this 

program. 

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This 

competition does not require cost 

sharing or matching. 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Address to Request Application 

Package: Education Publications Center 

(ED Pubs), 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), call, toll free: 1–877–

576–7734. 

You can contact ED Pubs at its Web 

site, also: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ 

edpubs.html or at its e-mail address: 

edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

If you request an application package 

from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this 

program or competition as follows: 

CFDA number 84.235U. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain a copy of the application package 

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

large print, audiotape, or computer 

diskette) by contacting the person or 

team listed under Alternative Format in 

section VIII of this notice. 

2. Content and Form of Application 

Submission: Requirements concerning 

the content of an application, together 

with the forms you must submit, are in 

the application package for this 

competition. 

3. Submission Dates and Times: 

Applications Available: July 5, 2007. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: August 6, 2007. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically using the Grants.gov 

Apply site (http://www.Grants.gov). For 

information (including dates and times) 

about how to submit your application 

electronically, or in paper format 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. 

Individuals with disabilities who 

need an accommodation or auxiliary aid 

in connection with the application 

process should contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT in section VII in this notice. If 

the Department provides an 

accommodation or auxiliary aid to an 

individual with a disability in 

connection with the application 

process, the individual’s application 

remains subject to all other 

requirements and limitations in this 

notice. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: October 3, 2007. 

4. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

5. Funding Restrictions: We reference 

regulations outlining funding 

restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section in this notice. 

6. Other Submission Requirements: 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically unless you qualify for an 

exception to this requirement in 

accordance with the instructions in this 

section. 

a. Electronic Submission of 

Applications. 

Applications for grants under the 

Special Demonstration Programs—

Model Demonstration Projects to 

Improve the Postsecondary and 

Employment Outcomes of Youth with 

Disabilities, CFDA Number 84.235U, 

must be submitted electronically using 

the Government-wide Grants.gov Apply 

site at http://www.Grants.gov. Through 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES