```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11363-11366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04490]

[[Page 11363]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Chapter II

[Docket ID ED-2013-OESE-0159; CFDA Number: 84.215G]

Proposed Priorities, Requirement, and Definitions--Innovative 
Approaches to Literacy (IAL) Program

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of 
Education (Department).

ACTION: Proposed priorities, requirement, and definitions.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education 
proposes priorities, a requirement, and definitions under the IAL 
program. The Assistant Secretary may use the priorities, requirement, 
and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 and later 
years. We take this action to ensure IAL projects will be supported, at 
a minimum, by evidence of strong theory, and to focus Federal financial 
assistance on projects that serve rural local educational agencies 
(LEAs).

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before March 31, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not 
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after 
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies, 
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the 
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to 
submit your comments electronically. Information on using 
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents, 
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site 
under ``Are you new to the site?''
     Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you 
mail or deliver your comments about these proposed regulations, address 
them to David Moore Miller, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland 
Avenue SW., room 3E241, Washington, DC 20202-6200.

    Privacy Note:  The Department's policy is to make all comments 
received from members of the public available for public viewing in 
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to 
include in their comments only information that they wish to make 
publicly available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melvin Graham, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 3E334, Washington, DC 20202-
6200. Telephone: (202) 260-8268 or by email: melvin.graham@ed.gov.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding 
this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in 
developing the notice of final priorities, requirement, and 
definitions, we urge you to identify clearly the specific proposed 
priority, requirement, or definition that each comment addresses.
    We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific 
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of 
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed 
priorities, requirement, and definitions. Please let us know of any 
further ways we could reduce potential costs or increase potential 
benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of 
the program.
    During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public 
comments about these proposed regulations by accessing Regulations.gov. 
You may also inspect the comments in person in room 3E241 400 Maryland 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, 
DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays. 
Please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 
Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking 
Record: On request we will provide an appropriate accommodation or 
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance 
to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking 
record for this notice. If you want to schedule an appointment for this 
type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Purpose of Program: The purpose of the IAL program is to support 
high-quality projects designed to develop and improve literacy skills 
for children and students from birth through 12th grade within the 
attendance boundaries of high-need LEAs and schools.

    Program Authority:  20 U.S.C. 7243-7243b.

    Proposed Priorities:
    This notice contains two proposed priorities.
    Proposed Priority 1--High-quality plan for innovative approaches to 
literacy that include book distribution, childhood literacy activities, 
or both, and that is supported, at a minimum, by evidence of strong 
theory (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
    Background:
    We have developed a priority that describes the components of a 
high-quality plan and the level of evidence of effectiveness most 
appropriate for the IAL program.
    The components of a high-quality plan include a description of how 
the activity improves literacy in early childhood, improves students' 
reading ability, motivates older children to read, or teaches children 
and students to read. The plan must also include a description of the 
populations to be served, key goals and activities, the rationale for 
the activities chosen, timeline for the project, parties responsible 
for implementing the project, and the credibility of the plan.
    The Secretary published final regulations in the Federal Register 
on August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49338), that include a description of four 
levels of evidence for the Department to use in determining the 
potential effectiveness of proposed projects.
    Considering that the new regulations were established, in part, to 
provide incentives and opportunities to build the body of evidence of 
effectiveness in education, and considering the wide range of new and 
innovative approaches possible under the IAL program, we have 
determined that the most appropriate level of evidence for the IAL 
program is strong theory.
    While there exists evidence in the field to support a higher level 
of evidence for the IAL program, we selected strong theory in order to 
broaden the evidence base by supporting innovative and new ideas, as 
well as to empower applicants to propose activities and approaches that 
have shown evidence of promise or effectiveness anecdotally or in 
theory, but that have not yet been included in a published research 
study or not met the requirements of a higher level of evidence.
    The final regulations also note the importance of applicants 
proposing project evaluations that increase the level of evidence of 
the proposed project's effectiveness. In order to provide opportunities 
for applicants to build the body of evidence of effectiveness in 
education, we will include a related selection criterion that 
encourages applicants to incorporate evaluation designs that will, if 
well-implemented, produce evidence of

[[Page 11364]]

promise for future projects. Evidence of promise is a more rigorous 
level of evidence than strong theory.
    Proposed Priority:
    To meet this priority, applicants must submit a plan that is 
supported by evidence of strong theory, including a rationale for the 
proposed process, product, strategy, or practice and a corresponding 
logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)).
    The applicant must submit a plan with the following information:
    (a) a description of the proposed book distribution, childhood 
literacy activities, or both, that are designed to improve the literacy 
skills of children and students by one or more of the following--
    (1) promoting early literacy and preparing young children to read;
    (2) developing and improving students' reading ability;
    (3) motivating older children to read; and
    (4) teaching children and students to read.
    (b) the age or grade spans of children and students from birth 
through 12th grade to be served within the attendance boundaries of 
high-need LEAs (as defined in this notice);
    (c) a detailed description of the key goals, the activities to be 
undertaken, the rationale for those activities, the timeline, the 
parties responsible for implementing the activities, and the 
credibility of the plan (as judged, in part, by the information 
submitted as evidence of strong theory); and
    (d)(i) a description of how the proposed project is supported by 
strong theory; and (ii) the corresponding logic model (as defined in 34 
CFR 77.1(c)).
    Proposed Priority 2--Serving Rural LEAs
    Background:
    Rural school districts often lack the personnel and resources 
needed to compete effectively for Federal competitive grants. 
Therefore, we wish to establish a priority to better enable eligible 
rural applicants to compete effectively for IAL funds.
    Proposed Priority:
    To meet this priority, an applicant must propose a project designed 
to provide high-quality literacy programming, or distribute books, or 
both, to students served by a rural LEA (as defined in this notice).
    Types of Priorities:
    When inviting applications for a competition using one or more 
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, 
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal 
Register. 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 (1) 
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the 
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) 
selecting an application that meets the 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 priority. 
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a 
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
    Proposed Requirement:
    Background:
    The IAL program is guided by the Senate report that accompanied the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (S. Rep. no. 113-71, at 173 
(2013)). According to that report, funds made available under the IAL 
program are for competitive awards to national not-for-profit 
organizations (NNPs) or school libraries.
    School libraries generally do not have the capacity to manage 
Federal grants independently of the schools and districts they serve. 
We believe LEAs are better equipped to compete for, and meet the 
requirements of, Federal grants than are school libraries. Therefore, 
school libraries should coordinate with their LEAs in competing for IAL 
funds.
    Proposed Requirement:
    The Assistant Secretary proposes the following requirement for this 
program. We may apply this requirement in any year in which this 
program is in effect.
    Eligibility: To be considered for an award under this competition, 
an applicant must be one of the following: (1) A high-need LEA (as 
defined in this notice); (2) an NNP (as defined in this notice) that 
serves children and students within the attendance boundaries of one or 
more high-need LEAs; (3) a consortium of NNPs that serve children and 
students within the attendance boundaries of one or more high-need 
LEAs; (4) a consortium of high-need LEAs; or (5) a consortium of one or 
more high-need LEAs and one or more NNPs that serve children and 
students within the attendance boundaries of one or more high-need 
LEAs.
    Proposed Definitions:
    Background:
    Six important terms associated with this program are not defined in 
the authorizing statute, applicable regulations, or EDGAR.
    Proposed Definitions:
    The Assistant Secretary proposes the following definitions for this 
program. We may apply one or more of these definitions in any year in 
which this program is in effect.
    College- and career-ready standards means content standards for 
kindergarten through 12th grade that build towards college and career 
readiness by the time of high school graduation. A State's college- and 
career-ready standards must be either (1) standards that are common to 
a significant number of States; or (2) standards that are approved by a 
State network of institutions of higher education, which must certify 
that students who meet the standards will not need remedial course work 
at the postsecondary level.
    Comprehensive statewide literacy plan means a plan (which may be a 
component or modification of the plan submitted under the Striving 
Readers Comprehensive Literacy formula grant program, CFDA 84.371B) 
that addresses the literacy and language needs of children from birth 
through 12th grade, including English Learners and students with 
disabilities; aligns literacy policies, resources, and practices; 
contains clear instructional goals; and sets high expectations for all 
students and student subgroups.
    High-need local educational agency (High-need LEA) means an LEA, 
including a charter school or State-administered school that is 
considered an LEA under State law, in which at least 25 percent of the 
students aged 0-17 in the geographic area served by the LEA (or, in the 
case of a charter school that is an LEA, at least 25 percent of the 
students enrolled in the school) are from families with incomes below 
the poverty line based on the most recent satisfactory data available 
from the U.S. Census Bureau at the time a notice inviting applications 
is published.
    National not-for-profit (NNP) organization means an agency, 
organization, or institution owned and operated by one or more 
corporations or associations whose net earnings do not benefit, and 
cannot lawfully benefit, any private shareholder or entity. In 
addition, it means, for the purposes of this program, an organization 
of national scope that is supported by staff or affiliates at the State 
and local levels, who may include volunteers, and that has a 
demonstrated history of effectively developing and implementing 
literacy activities. Note: A local affiliate of an NNP does not meet 
the definition of NNP. Only a national agency,

[[Page 11365]]

organization, or institution is eligible to apply as an NNP.
    Rural local educational agency (Rural LEA) means an LEA that is 
eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement program (SRSA) or the 
Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI, 
Part B of the ESEA at the time of application.
    Universal design for learning (UDL) means a scientifically valid 
framework for guiding educational practice that (i) provides 
flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students 
respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students 
are engaged; and (ii) reduces barriers in instruction, provides 
appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains 
high achievement expectations for all students, including students with 
disabilities and students who are English Learners.
    Final Priorities, Requirement, and Definitions:
    We will announce the final priorities, requirement, and definitions 
in a notice in the Federal Register. We will determine the final 
priorities, requirement, and definitions after considering responses to 
this notice and other information available to the Department. This 
notice does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities, 
requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject to meeting 
applicable rulemaking requirements.

    Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in 
which we choose to use one or more of these priorities, requirement, 
and definitions we invite applications through a notice in the 
Federal Register.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether 
this proposed regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, 
subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of 
Executive Order 12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an 
action likely to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or 
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive order.
    This proposed regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866.
    We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under 
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the 
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review 
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, 
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We are issuing these proposed priorities, requirement, and 
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would 
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory 
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net 
benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes 
that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in 
Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those 
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as 
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
    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.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person 
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free 
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the 
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System 
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well 
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal 
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF 
you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the 
site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.

[[Page 11366]]

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Deborah Delisle,
Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2014-04490 Filed 2-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
```