4228 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 

Dated: January 16, 2024. 

H.R. Mattern, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Sector Ohio Valley. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01186 Filed 1–22–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket ID ED–2023–OESE–0209] 

Proposed Priorities, Requirements, 

Definitions, and Selection Criteria— 

Comprehensive Centers Program 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

proposes priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria under 

the Comprehensive Centers Program, 

Assistance Listing Number 84.283B. The 

Assistant Secretary may use one or more 

of these priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria for 

competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2024 

and later years. We intend to award 

grants to establish Comprehensive 

Centers that provide high-quality 

capacity-building services to State, 

regional, and local educational agencies 

and schools that improve educational 

opportunities and outcomes, close 

achievement gaps, and improve the 

quality of instruction for all students. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before February 22, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

submitted via the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at www.regulations.gov. However, 

if you require an accommodation or 

cannot otherwise submit your 

comments via www.regulations.gov, 

please contact the program contact 

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 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: Please 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 ‘‘FAQ.’’ 

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: Dr. 

Michelle Daley. Telephone: (202) 987– 

1057. Email: OESE.Comprehensive

Centers@ed.gov. 

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

have a speech disability and wish to 

access telecommunications relay 

services, please dial 7–1–1. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding the 

proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria. To 

ensure that your comments have 

maximum effect in developing the final 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria, please identify clearly 

the specific proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria that each comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 14094 and their 

overall requirement of reducing 

regulatory burden that might result from 

these proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria. 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 public comments about 

the proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria by 

accessing Regulations.gov. To inspect 

comments in person, 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 these proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria. 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 

Comprehensive Centers Program 

supports the establishment of 

Comprehensive Centers to provide 

capacity-building services to State 

educational agencies (SEAs), regional 

educational agencies (REAs), local 

educational agencies (LEAs), and 

schools that improve educational 

outcomes, close achievement gaps, and 

improve the quality of instruction for all 

students, and particularly for groups of 

students with the greatest need, 

including students from low-income 

families and students attending schools 

implementing comprehensive support 

and improvement or targeted or 

additional targeted support and 

improvement activities under section 

1111(d) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act of 1965, as 

amended (ESEA). 

Program Authority: Section 203 of the 

Educational Technical Assistance Act of 

2002 (ETAA) (20 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.). 

Public Participation: In developing 

proposed priorities for this program, the 

Department consulted with education 

stakeholders, including through 

Regional Advisory Committees (RACs) 

established under section 206 of the 

ETAA, Tribes, chief State school 

officers, chief executive officers of 

States, and Regional Educational 

Laboratory (REL) governing boards. 

Tribal Consultation: Consistent with 

Executive Order 13175 and the 

Department’s Tribal consultation policy, 

on January 24, 2023, the Department 

conducted a Tribal Consultation to 

gather perspectives from Tribal leaders, 

including Tribal educational agency 

(TEA) leaders, to inform the 

development of the Department’s FY 

2024 Comprehensive Center grant 

competition. More than 150 attendees 

joined the consultation. 

Commenters highlighted the 

importance of including Tribes in 

developing Centers’ five-year service 

plans to carry out authorized activities 

for the Comprehensive Centers Program. 

Commenters emphasized Tribal 

inclusion on Center advisory boards 

(described in section 203(g) of the 

ETAA) and participation in annual 

planning to align goals among SEAs, 

LEAs, IHEs, and TEAs to generate 

greater synergy for more meaningful 

changes and success for Native persons 

within the educational system. 

Tribal leaders broadly affirmed the 

need for capacity-building services 

within the areas of focus of the 

Comprehensive Centers, in the 

following order of importance: (1) 

implement and scale up evidence-based 

programs, practices, and interventions 

that directly benefit recipients that have 

disadvantaged students or high 

percentages or numbers of students from 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4229 

low-income families; (2) support Tribal 

schools that are implementing support 

and improvement activities; (3) 

implement and scale up evidence-based 

programs, practices, and interventions 

that address the unique educational 

obstacles faced by rural populations; 

and (4) address corrective actions or 

results from audit findings and 

monitoring conducted by the 

Department at the request of the client. 

In addition, Tribal leaders identified 

specific needs for services in: (1) 

supporting rural areas with shortages of 

educators and student support staff, 

such as school psychologists, school 

social workers, and instructional 

coaches who have experience with 

trauma-informed instruction; (2) 

allocating resources to train and recruit 

professionals to work in Tribal 

communities; and (3) supporting TEAs 

with ongoing administrative functions. 

Regional Advisory Committees: In 

accordance with ETAA section 206, the 

Secretary established 10 RACs to 

conduct an education needs assessment 

and identify each region’s most critical 

educational needs and develop 

recommendations for technical 

assistance to meet those needs. The 

RACs met and engaged their respective 

constituencies to make their 

assessments and recommendations 

between August and November 2023. 

Final RAC reports were published in 

December 2023 on the Department’s 

website at https://oese.ed.gov/offices/ 

office-of-formula-grants/program-andgrantee-support-services/ 

comprehensive-centers-program/ 

regional-advisory-committees/. 

While specific needs and 

recommendations varied by region, the 

most common needs identified across 

all 10 RACs were: (1) supporting 

teachers, school leaders, and school 

personnel, including addressing 

workforce shortages, supporting 

educator preparation programs and 

pathways, strengthening recruitment 

and retention, and diversifying the 

educator workforce; (2) supporting 

strong instruction and academic 

achievement, including supporting 

evidence-based math and literacy 

instruction, ensuring equity and 

addressing issues of disproportionality, 

addressing opportunity gaps to promote 

academic achievement and growth for 

all learners, and promoting access to a 

high-quality early childhood education; 

(3) supporting student populations with 

specific learning needs, including early 

grades, English learners, multilingual 

learners, children with disabilities, and 

growing populations of refugee and 

immigrant children and youth; (4) 

supporting student well-being and 

mental health; (5) promoting safe and 

engaged school communities, including 

promoting authentic parent and 

community engagement, positive school 

climate, and addressing issues of 

chronic absenteeism; and (6) promoting 

career and postsecondary educational 

pathways. 

Education stakeholders noted that 

identified needs were not mutually 

exclusive and there is considerable 

overlap across educational priorities 

that may require coordinated 

approaches to implementing ESEA 

programs, promoting strong instruction, 

supporting educators, ensuring equity, 

and supporting school communities’ 

academic, social emotional, and mental 

health needs. Detailed 

recommendations for services to meet 

those needs are included in the 

individual report from each RAC. Some 

examples of RAC recommendations 

included: (1) providing professional 

development to assist teachers in 

translating evidence-based practices 

into educator-friendly tools, resources, 

and training; (2) creating resources to 

support effective family engagement and 

improve academic achievement; (3) 

supporting data use and disaggregation 

to better identify and understand the 

needs of special student populations; (4) 

identifying and disseminating evidencebased approaches to meeting student 

instructional needs; (5) developing, 

implementing, and evaluating ‘‘grow 

your own’’ and apprenticeship programs 

as well as alternative pathways into the 

teaching profession; (6) developing 

targeted recruitment strategies including 

financial incentives, scholarship 

programs, and marketing campaigns 

highlighting the value of the profession 

to attract more individuals from diverse 

backgrounds to the profession; (7) 

supporting LEAs to provide 

differentiated and evidence-based 

professional learning opportunities to 

both novice and experienced teachers 

that are specific to the needs and 

context of their unique LEA and/or 

school; (8) supporting educators in 

identifying high-quality curricular and 

digital learning materials; (9) supporting 

SEAs and LEAs in developing new and 

innovative secondary and 

postsecondary pathways that emphasize 

applied learning and mastery; (10) 

supporting partnerships with local 

communities, local Tribes, and Tribal 

governments to identify local career 

needs and work-based learning 

opportunities and appropriate 

pathways; (11) supporting LEAs in 

developing resource allocation systems 

that allow resources to be focused on 

student learning (e.g., budgeting, 

scheduling, resourcing, and long-term 

planning); and (12) developing models 

for multi-tiered systems of support 

(MTSS) and integrating Positive 

Behavioral Interventions and Supports 

(PBIS) to address school and community 

mental health needs. The RACs noted 

that professional development and 

technical assistance must be grounded 

in adult learning theory, address the 

needs of educators and students of 

color, and, when proven effective, be 

shared across the region and with other 

regions. 

Proposed Priorities 

We propose three priorities. The 

Assistant Secretary may use one or more 

of these priorities for the FY 2024 

Comprehensive Centers Program 

competition or for any subsequent 

competition. 

Background: 

The ESEA holds States accountable 

for closing achievement gaps and 

ensuring that all children, regardless of 

race, ethnicity, family income, English 

language proficiency, or disability, 

receive a high-quality education and 

meet challenging State academic 

standards. 

The ETAA authorizes support for not 

less than 20 grants to establish 

Comprehensive Centers to support State 

and local educational systems to 

implement activities described in the 

ESEA to improve academic 

opportunities and outcomes for 

students. Centers are operated through 

cooperative agreements with the U.S. 

Department of Education. Centers focus 

on building the capacity of those 

receiving Comprehensive Center 

services (recipients) in one of four 

dimensions of capacity-building: 

human, organizational, policy, and 

resource. Recipients primarily include 

staff of SEAs and, as appropriate, REAs, 

including TEAs as defined in ESEA 

section 6132(b)(3); LEAs; and schools. 

Under section 203(a)(2) of the ETAA, 

the Department must establish at least 

one Center in each of the 10 geographic 

regions served by the Department’s 

Regional Educational Laboratories 

authorized under section 941(h) of the 

Educational Research, Development, 

Dissemination, and Improvement Act of 

1994. The proposed funding for Centers 

established under the ETAA must take 

into consideration the school-age 

population, proportion of economically 

disadvantaged students, increased cost 

burdens of service delivery in rural 

areas, and number of schools identified 

for improvement under ESEA section 

1111(d). 

Section 203(d) of the ETAA directs 

the Centers to provide assistance to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4230 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1https://www.ed.gov/raisethebar. 

schools funded by the Bureau of Indian 

Education (BIE). Additionally, pursuant 

to authority granted to the Secretary in 

Title III of Division H of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 

(Pub. L. 114–113), and the Consolidated 

Appropriations Acts for 2017 through 

the last act in 2023, Comprehensive 

Center services have been provided to 

the BIE and schools within its 

jurisdiction. 

The Department last conducted a 

competition in 2019 and made five-year 

awards to 19 Regional Centers and one 

National Comprehensive Center 

(National Center). The 19 Regional 

Centers provide high-quality intensive 

capacity-building services to State 

clients and recipients to identify, 

implement, and sustain effective 

evidence-based (as defined in 34 CFR 

77.1) practices that support improved 

educator and student outcomes. The 

National Center provides high-quality 

universal and targeted capacity-building 

services to address: high-leverage 

problems identified in Regional Center 

service plans; common findings from 

finalized Department monitoring reports 

or audit findings; implementation 

challenges faced by States and Regional 

Centers; and emerging national 

education trends. Prior Comprehensive 

Centers competitions also funded 

national Content Centers, which provide 

focused services in areas of high 

national need. An additional Content 

Center, funded in response to 2016 

appropriations language and a new 

authority in the ESEA, focuses on 

students at risk of not attaining full 

literacy skills due to a disability. 

Through the proposed priorities in 

this document, the Department intends 

to maximize the ability of the 

Comprehensive Centers to be flexible 

and responsive to specific State and 

local client needs while also providing 

leadership and focused support on 

issues of national importance to support 

education systems through a time of 

continued challenge and transition. This 

approach aligns with ‘‘Raise the Bar: 

Lead the World’’ 1—the Department’s 

recent call to action to all stakeholders 

to transform pre-kindergarten through 

postsecondary education and unite 

around evidence-based strategies that 

advance educational equity and 

excellence for all students. 

The Department believes that the best 

way to support State and local efforts in 

achieving academic recovery and 

excellence through the Comprehensive 

Centers Program, consistent with the 

requirements of both the ESEA and the 

ETAA, is by supporting the capacity of 

State and local educational systems to 

improve core instruction, enable 

conditions to accelerate learning and 

deliver a comprehensive and rigorous 

education for every student, attend to 

the social, emotional, and mental 

wellbeing of school communities, 

eliminate the educator shortage, provide 

pathways to multilingualism, and meet 

the unique needs of all students. The 

Comprehensive Centers Program is also 

a critical support to SEAs, LEAs, and 

schools working to implement evidencebased practices to help accelerate 

academic recovery in math and literacy, 

while also promoting equity in student 

access to educational resources and 

opportunities to improve student 

outcomes and close opportunity gaps. 

Additionally, and as noted throughout 

this document, the Department is 

interested in supporting the 

implementation of evidence-based 

approaches to addressing important 

educational challenges. As an important 

complement to the research and 

evaluation and research-related 

technical assistance function provided 

by the RELs, under the proposed 

priorities, Comprehensive Centers 

would focus capacity-building services 

on selecting, implementing, and 

sustaining evidence-based programs, 

policies, practices, and interventions. In 

doing this work, Centers must consider 

clients’ capacity to select and 

implement evidence-based approaches, 

particularly for practice areas or 

populations where available evidence 

may be limited; help clients with 

implementation of evidence-based 

interventions that will help learners 

accelerate their learning and 

achievement; and document and 

disseminate information about their 

results. More information about using 

and building evidence is available in the 

Department’s Non-Regulatory Guidance: 

Using Evidence to Strengthen Education 

Investments, which can be found at 

https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/about/ 

discretionary/2023-non-regulatoryguidance-evidence.pdf. 

To support capacity-building that is 

customer-focused, results-driven, and 

most likely to help recipients sustain 

positive impact on students, we believe 

the Centers must focus services on 

helping recipients to (1) identify root 

causes of, and select the most 

appropriate and effective evidencebased solutions to address, highleverage educational problems, (2) 

create sustainable organizational 

structures and performance 

management systems that help 

recipients set priorities for using their 

resources to achieve desired results, (3) 

increase their ability to use those 

structures and systems to ensure that 

LEAs and schools are provided highquality services and supports, (4) 

support the implementation and scaling 

of evidence-based strategies in LEAs 

and schools, (5) identify and implement 

a continuum of supports and 

interventions to address the specific and 

varying needs of LEAs and schools, (6) 

support the sustainability of State- and 

local-led approaches, and (7) contact 

and engage with entities that have not 

asked for targeted support but may be in 

need of it based on available data. 

We believe three tiers of services can 

be offered: (1) universal, (2) targeted, 

and (3) intensive. Within the proposed 

priorities for the Comprehensive 

Centers, Regional Centers would 

specialize in providing intensive 

supports, whereas National and Content 

Center(s) would primarily provide 

targeted and universal services. 

Consistent with the RAC findings and 

recommendations and the requirements 

in the ESEA and ETAA, the proposed 

priorities address service delivery in all 

tiers related to the teaching and learning 

of all children, including those with 

disabilities and who are English 

Learners and multilingual; supporting 

school improvement activities; 

maximizing flexibility and 

responsiveness; and enabling more 

coherent, coordinated, and efficient 

service delivery to all States, while 

minimizing duplication of services 

across 14 Regional Centers, 4 Content 

Centers, and one National Center. Under 

the proposed priorities, Regional 

Centers and the National Center would 

address critical needs related to 

teaching and learning, while remaining 

flexible to address emerging needs, 

enhancing the ability of the Department 

to provide focused services in areas of 

high national need through the Content 

Centers. Such delineation would 

support a balance of responsiveness and 

coherent, coordinated, and efficient 

service delivery across Comprehensive 

Centers. 

National, Content, and Regional 

Comprehensive Centers 

Under the proposed priorities, the 

Comprehensive Centers would operate 

as a network comprised of National and 

Content Centers that identify and 

provide scalable solutions at the 

national level that can be replicated in 

States, and Regional Centers that serve 

as the entry point to the network and 

focus on providing individualized, 

intensive, and responsive support to 

meet the specific needs of States and 

systems within their regions. 

First, under the proposed priorities, 

the National Center would address 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4231 

educational issues related to instruction, 

learning, and improvement at a national 

level. Every State and LEA has a set of 

policies, programs, and systems that 

relate to each of these areas. The 

multitude of State and local needs and 

priorities identified by the RACs 

associated with aligning instruction, 

assessment, accountability, school 

improvement, school climate and 

environment, and addressing 

opportunity gaps are interconnected. 

The Department believes that one 

National Center can most effectively 

support these interconnected needs 

using an integrated technical assistance 

approach that models and supports 

alignment within the agencies it serves. 

The National Center would also 

support the implementation and scaleup of evidence-based practices across 

the Nation. For example, the National 

Center might begin by convening 

practitioners and education system 

leaders who were successfully 

addressing a common need using one or 

more evidence-based practices to elicit 

practitioner and leader feedback about 

their perceived barriers and success 

factors in implementing those practices. 

Using that feedback, the National Center 

could then develop and disseminate 

resources and tools that supported 

broader implementation of the practices, 

getting buy-in from stakeholders and 

supporting LEAs in change management 

and professional development. The 

National Center would disseminate 

these effective universal capacitybuilding resources and tools nationally 

and through the Regional Centers and 

other Federal technical assistance 

providers (federally funded providers), 

to provide targeted opportunities for 

SEA and LEA peers to work together to 

apply and implement them. 

Additionally, the National Center 

would serve as the core of the 

Comprehensive Center Network 

(CCNetwork), which would enable it to 

identify common implementation 

challenges and emerging national 

education issues facing States across 

regions and content areas and to 

coordinate support among Regional and 

Content Centers. In this role, the 

National Center’s activities could 

include facilitating peer learning among 

Centers and their clients, and 

identifying best practices in providing 

and scaling effective capacity-building 

services that will enhance the 

effectiveness of services provided across 

the network. The National Center would 

also most effectively cooperate with 

other federally funded providers to 

identify gaps in services where the 

National Center may provide needed 

support and avoid duplication of 

services across Federal investments. 

Finally, the National Center would most 

effectively disseminate resources from 

the CCNetwork to potential recipients. 

To effectively serve in this role, under 

the proposed requirements and 

selection criteria, the National Center 

must have expertise in implementation 

science, adult learning, and developing 

effective training materials for adults, to 

enable it to design effective universal 

capacity-building tools to assist 

Regional Centers in taking effective 

practices to scale within their States. 

Under the proposed priorities, the 

National Center would provide services 

to SEAs, LEAs, REAs, TEAs, and other 

recipients, in addition to Regional and 

Content Centers, to address identified 

national needs. Accordingly, under the 

proposed requirements, Regional 

Centers must be poised to share timely 

information from a variety of regional 

stakeholders about their capacity needs 

with the National Center and must 

reserve a portion of their time to support 

their States in participating in targeted 

capacity-building services facilitated 

through National or Content Centers and 

implementing the tools and resources 

the National and Content Centers 

produce. 

Under the proposed priorities, 

Regional Centers would serve as the 

entry point for States to the CCNetwork 

and support States in navigating 

available support from the CCNetwork 

and other federally funded providers. 

The Department acknowledges the 

importance of aligning Federal supports 

to State and local needs within each 

identified region; therefore, we propose 

closely aligning these centers to the 

existing REL regions, while also 

enhancing support for States and 

recipients with higher needs or special 

initiatives being undertaken by State, 

intermediate, or local educational 

agencies, or BIE-funded schools, as 

appropriate, which may require special 

assistance from the Regional Center. 

In turn, under the proposed priorities, 

the Content Centers funded under this 

program would work to increase the 

depth of knowledge and expertise 

available to Regional Centers, SEAs, and 

LEAs in key areas of high national 

importance and need. Content Centers 

would complement the work of the 

Regional Centers by providing targeted, 

universal, and, where appropriate, 

intensive capacity-building services, 

including information, publications, 

tools, and specialized technical 

assistance based on evidence-based 

practices, in their specific content area. 

The Content Centers would also play a 

key role in improving efficiency in 

developing and disseminating technical 

assistance by, for example, avoiding the 

duplication and higher costs of parallel 

efforts by two or three Regional Centers. 

Content Centers must have national 

subject matter expertise and practitioner 

experience to ensure both the ability to 

draw on the latest research and 

evidence related to the area of need, as 

well as to provide high-quality 

assistance that draws from the 

experience of professionals who have 

successfully led State and local agencies 

and provided successful high-quality 

capacity-building services. 

To meet specific areas of need, 

including topics identified by the RACs 

and through monitoring of ESEA 

programs that are not otherwise served 

by the National Center or other 

Department investments, the Assistant 

Secretary proposes funding priorities for 

four Content Centers: (1) the Center on 

English Learners and Multilingualism, 

(2) the Center for Early School Success, 

(3) the Center on Fiscal Equity, and (4) 

the Center on Strengthening and 

Supporting the Educator Workforce. 

The Department also acknowledges 

that some important priorities identified 

through Tribal consultation and by the 

RACs are already being addressed 

through other significant Federal 

investments in technical assistance. 

Such investments include substantial 

support provided through technical 

assistance centers funded under Title 

IV, Part A of the ESEA and the 

Bipartisan Safer Communities Act 

(BSCA) for promoting student wellbeing and mental health, establishing 

safe and supportive school 

communities, and addressing school 

climate and chronic absenteeism; 

investments in family engagement 

through the Statewide Family 

Engagement Centers; and significant 

support provided through centers 

funded under IDEA technical assistance 

and dissemination programs for 

children with disabilities. Where 

services are already being provided, the 

Department encourages Comprehensive 

Centers to refer to or partner with those 

federally funded providers, and to focus 

Comprehensive Center services on 

meeting gaps in identified needs that are 

not yet being addressed through other 

Federal investments. 

Proposed Priority 1—National 

Comprehensive Center. 

Projects that propose to establish a 

National Center to (1) provide highquality, high-impact technical 

assistance and capacity-building 

services to the Nation that are designed 

to improve educational opportunities 

and educator and student outcomes and 

(2) coordinate the work of the 

CCNetwork to effectively use program 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4232 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

resources to support evidence use and 

the implementation of evidence-based 

(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) practices to 

close opportunity gaps and improve 

educational outcomes, particularly 

accelerating academic achievement in 

math and literacy for all students, and 

particularly for groups of students with 

the greatest need, including students 

from low-income families and students 

attending schools implementing 

comprehensive support and 

improvement or targeted or additional 

targeted support and improvement 

activities under section 1111(d) of the 

ESEA, in a manner that reaches and 

supports as many SEAs, REAs, TEAs, 

LEAs, and schools in need of services as 

possible. 

The National Center must design and 

implement an effective approach to 

providing high-quality, useful, and 

relevant universal, targeted, and, as 

appropriate and in partnership with 

Regional Centers, intensive capacitybuilding services that are likely to 

achieve desired recipient outcomes. The 

approach must be driven by adult 

learning strategies and incorporate 

implementation, improvement, and 

systems change frameworks. The 

approach must promote alignment 

across interconnected areas of need, 

programs, and agency systems. 

The National Center must implement 

effective strategies for coordinating with 

the Regional Centers and Content 

Centers to assess educational needs; 

coordinate common areas of support 

across Centers; share and disseminate 

information about CCNetwork services, 

tools, and resources to maximize the 

reach of the CCNetwork across clients 

and education stakeholders; coordinate 

with other federally funded providers 

regarding the work of the CCNetwork 

and support navigation of available 

support for clients; and support the 

selection, implementation, scale-up, and 

dissemination of evidence-based 

practices that will improve educational 

outcomes, particularly academic 

achievement in math and literacy, and 

close opportunity gaps for all students, 

particularly for groups of students with 

the greatest need, including students 

from low-income families and students 

attending schools implementing 

comprehensive support and 

improvement or targeted or additional 

targeted support and improvement 

activities under section 1111(d) of the 

ESEA. 

Services must address: common highleverage problems identified in Regional 

Center service plans (as outlined in the 

Program Requirements for the National 

Center); findings from finalized 

Department monitoring reports or audit 

findings; implementation challenges 

faced by States and LEAs related to 

teaching, learning, and development; 

needs of schools designated for 

improvement; needs related to closing 

achievement and opportunity gaps; 

needs to improve core instruction; and 

emerging education topics of national 

importance. 

The National Center must provide 

universal and targeted capacity-building 

services that demonstrably assist SEAs, 

REAs, TEAs, LEAs, and Regional Center 

clients and recipients to— 

(1) Implement approved ESEA 

Consolidated State Plans, with 

preference given to implementing and 

scaling evidence-based programs, 

practices, and interventions that directly 

benefit entities that have high 

percentages or numbers of students from 

low-income families as referenced in 

Title I, Part A of the ESEA (ESEA sec. 

1113(a)(5)); 

(2) Implement and scale up evidencebased programs, practices, and 

interventions that lead to the increased 

capacity of SEAs and LEAs to address 

the unique educational challenges and 

improve outcomes of schools 

implementing comprehensive support 

and improvement activities or targeted 

or additional targeted support and 

improvement activities as referenced in 

Title I, Part A of the ESEA (ESEA sec. 

1111(d)) and their students; 

(3) Implement State accountability 

and assessment systems consistent with 

Title I, Part A of the ESEA (ESEA 

section 1111(b)–(d)); 

(4) Implement and scale up evidencebased programs, practices, and 

interventions that improve instruction 

and outcomes in core subjects, 

including math and literacy instruction; 

(5) Address the unique educational 

obstacles faced by rural and Tribal 

students; and 

(6) Implement and scale up evidencebased programs, practices, and 

interventions that address other 

emerging education topics of national 

importance that are not being met by 

another federally funded provider (e.g., 

best practices in the use of education 

technology). 

An applicant under this priority must 

demonstrate how it will cultivate a 

network of national subject matter 

experts from a diverse set of 

perspectives or organizations to provide 

capacity-building support to Regional 

Centers and clients regarding the ESEA 

topical areas listed above and other 

emerging education issues of national 

importance. 

Proposed Priority 2—Regional 

Centers. 

Projects that propose to establish 

Regional Centers to provide highquality, intensive capacity-building 

services to State and local clients and 

recipients to assist them in selecting, 

implementing, and sustaining evidencebased programs, practices, and 

interventions that will result in 

improved educator practice and student 

outcomes, especially in math and 

literacy. 

Each Regional Center must provide 

high-quality, useful, and relevant 

capacity-building services that 

demonstrably assist clients and 

recipients in— 

(1) Carrying out Consolidated State 

Plans approved under the ESEA, with 

preference given to the implementation 

and scaling up of evidence-based 

programs, practices, and interventions 

that directly benefit recipients that have 

high percentages or numbers of students 

from low-income families as referenced 

in Title I, Part A of the ESEA (ESEA sec. 

1113(a)(5)) and recipients that are 

implementing comprehensive support 

and improvement activities or targeted 

or additional targeted support and 

improvement activities as referenced in 

Title I, Part A of the ESEA (ESEA sec. 

1111(d)); 

(2) Implementing, scaling up, and 

sustaining evidence-based programs, 

practices, or interventions that focus on 

key initiatives that lead to LEAs and 

schools improving student outcomes. 

Key initiatives may include 

implementing evidence-based practices 

to help accelerate academic recovery in 

math and literacy (include, high-impact 

tutoring, high-quality summer and afterschool programming, and effective 

interventions to reduce chronic 

absenteeism), improving core 

instruction, implementing innovative 

approaches to assessment, responding to 

educator shortages, or developing 

aligned and integrated agency systems; 

(3) Addressing the unique educational 

obstacles faced by underserved 

populations, including students from 

low-income families, students of color, 

students living in rural areas, Tribal 

students, English learners, students in 

foster care, migratory children, 

immigrant children and youth, and 

other student populations with specific 

needs defined in the ESEA; and 

(4) Improving implementation of 

ESEA programs by addressing corrective 

actions or results from audit findings 

and ESEA program monitoring, 

conducted by the Department, that are 

programmatic in nature, at the request 

of the client. 

Regional Centers must effectively 

work with the National Center and 

Content Centers, as needed, to assist 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4233 

clients in selecting, implementing, and 

sustaining evidence-based programs, 

policies, practices, and interventions; 

and must develop cost-effective 

strategies to make their services 

available to as many SEAs, REAs, TEAs, 

LEAs, and schools within the region in 

need of support as possible. 

Applicants must propose to operate a 

Regional Center in one of the following 

regions: 

Region 1 (Northeast): Connecticut, 

Massachusetts, Maine, New 

Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, 

Vermont 

Region 2 (Islands): Puerto Rico, Virgin 

Islands 

Region 3 (Mid-Atlantic): Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maryland, New 

Jersey, Pennsylvania 

Region 4 (Appalachia): Kentucky, 

Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia 

Region 5 (Southeast): Georgia, North 

Carolina, South Carolina 

Region 6 (Gulf): Alabama, Florida, 

Mississippi 

Region 7 (Midwest): Indiana, Michigan, 

Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, 

Wisconsin 

Region 8 (Central): Colorado, Kansas, 

Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, 

South Dakota, Wyoming 

Region 9 (Southwest): Arkansas, 

Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, 

Texas 

Region 10 (West): Arizona, California, 

Nevada, Utah 

Region 11 (Northwest): Alaska, Oregon, 

Washington, Idaho, Montana 

Region 12 (Pacific 1): American Samoa, 

Hawaii, Republic of the Marshall 

Islands 

Region 13 (Pacific 2): Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands, 

Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, 

Palau 

Region 14: Bureau of Indian Education 

Proposed Priority 3—Content Centers. 

Projects that propose to establish 

Content Centers to provide targeted and 

universal capacity-building services in a 

designated content area of expertise to 

SEA, REA, TEA, and LEA clients 

designed to improve educational 

opportunities, educator practice, and 

student outcomes. 

Content Centers must be designed to 

build the capacity of practitioners, 

education system leaders, public 

schools serving preschool through 12th 

grades (P–12) (which may include Head 

Start and community-based preschool), 

LEAs, and SEAs to use evidence in the 

designated content area. Capacitybuilding services may include, for 

example, developing evidence-based 

products and tools, and providing 

services that directly inform the use of 

evidence in a State or local policy or 

program or improved program 

implementation to achieve desired 

educational outcomes. Services must 

promote the use of the latest evidence, 

including research and data; be 

effectively delivered using best practices 

in technical assistance and training; and 

demonstrate a rationale for how they 

will result in improved recipient 

outcomes. 

Content Centers must support 

Regional Centers, as needed, with 

subject matter expertise to enhance the 

intensive capacity-building services 

provided by the Regional Centers or to 

design universal or targeted capacitybuilding services to meet identified 

SEA, REA, TEA, or LEA needs. 

Content Centers must effectively 

coordinate and align targeted capacitybuilding services with the National 

Center, Regional Centers, and other 

federally funded providers, as 

appropriate, to address high-leverage 

problems and provide access to urgently 

needed services to build Centers’ 

capacity to support SEAs and local 

clients. Content Centers must effectively 

coordinate with the National Center, 

Regional Centers, and other federally 

funded providers to assess potential 

client needs, avoid duplication of 

services, and widely disseminate 

products or tools to practitioners, 

education system leaders, and 

policymakers in formats that are high 

quality, easily accessible, 

understandable, and actionable to 

ensure use of services by as many SEA, 

REA, TEA, and LEA recipients as 

possible. 

Applicants must propose to operate a 

Content Center in one of the following 

areas: 

(1) English Learners and 

Multilingualism. The Center on English 

Learners and Multilingualism must 

provide universal, targeted, and, as 

appropriate and in partnership with 

Regional Centers, intensive capacitybuilding services designed to support 

SEAs and LEAs to meet the needs of 

English learners, including the needs of 

English learners with disabilities, and 

increase access to high-quality language 

programs so that they, along with all 

students, have the opportunity to 

become multilingual. The Center must 

also support the selection, 

implementation, and scale-up of 

evidence-based practices, in 

coordination with the National 

Clearinghouse for English Language 

Acquisition, related to meeting the 

needs of English learners. 

(2) Early School Success: The Center 

for Early School Success must provide 

universal, targeted, and, as appropriate 

and in partnership with Regional 

Centers, intensive capacity-building 

services designed to support SEAs and 

LEAs to implement comprehensive and 

aligned preschool to third-grade (P–3) 

early learning systems in order to 

increase the number of children who 

experience success in early learning and 

achievement, including 

developmentally informed and 

evidence-based instructional practices 

in social emotional development, early 

literacy, and math. The Center must 

support the selection, implementation, 

and scale-up of programs, policies, and 

practices, informed by research on child 

development, that can strengthen P–3 

learning experiences and support social, 

emotional, cognitive, and physical 

development. 

(3) Fiscal Equity: The Center on Fiscal 

Equity must provide universal, targeted, 

and, as appropriate and in partnership 

with Regional Centers, intensive 

capacity-building services designed to 

support SEAs and LEAs in 

strengthening equitable and adequate 

school funding strategies, including the 

allocation of State and local funding; 

improving the quality and transparency 

of fiscal data at the school level; and 

prioritizing supports for students and 

communities with the greatest need. 

The Center must support the selection, 

implementation, and scale-up of 

evidence-based programs, policies, and 

practices that promote responsible fiscal 

planning and management and effective 

and permissible uses of ESEA formula 

funds, including through combining 

those funds with other available and 

allowable Federal, State, and local funds 

(‘‘blending and braiding’’) and 

considering how ESEA funds may 

interact with and complement other 

Federal programs, such as IDEA, 

Medicaid, and Head Start to improve 

student opportunities and outcomes. 

(4) Strengthening and Supporting the 

Educator Workforce: The Center on 

Strengthening and Supporting the 

Educator Workforce must provide 

universal, targeted, and, as appropriate 

and in partnership with Regional 

Centers, intensive capacity-building 

services designed to support SEAs to 

support their LEAs and schools in 

designing and scaling practices that 

establish and enhance high-quality, 

comprehensive, evidence-based, and 

affordable educator pathways, including 

educator residency and Grow Your Own 

programs, as well as emerging pathways 

into the profession such as registered 

apprenticeship programs for teachers 

and that improve educator diversity, 

recruitment, and retention. The Center 

must support the selection, 

implementation, and scale-up of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4234 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

evidence-based programs, policies, and 

practices that are likely to support 

States and LEAs in addressing educator 

shortages and providing all students 

with highly qualified educators across 

the P–12 continuum, including through 

increased compensation and improved 

working conditions; high-quality, 

comprehensive, evidence-based, and 

affordable educator preparation, 

including educator residency and Grow 

Your Own programs, as well as 

emerging pathways into the profession 

such as registered apprenticeship 

programs for teachers; providing 

opportunities for teacher leadership and 

career advancement; ongoing 

professional learning throughout 

educators’ careers, including 

implementing evidence-based strategies 

for effective teaching and learning; 

strengthening new teacher induction; 

and supporting and diversifying the 

educator workforce, as well as other 

actions to improve learning conditions 

and educator well-being. 

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 Requirements 

Background 

The Department proposes program 

and application requirements to support 

effective administration of 

Comprehensive Center services. 

The proposed application 

requirements are designed to 

complement the proposed program 

requirements. Under the proposed 

program requirements, Centers would 

be required to model best practices in 

implementation design and performance 

management. Under the proposed 

application requirements, applicants 

must demonstrate how they will model 

best practices, including by describing 

strategies to identify the root causes 

driving high-leverage problems, select 

the evidence-based practices that most 

effectively address those causes, and 

implement effective practices in 

implementation design and performance 

management to achieve desired 

outcomes. 

In meeting the proposed program 

requirement for annual service plans, 

proposed capacity-building services 

must be in service of outcomes that (a) 

are co-designed with clients; (b) address 

authentic needs based on needs-sensing 

activities; (c) are clear and measurable; 

and (d) have associated achievable, 

specific targets. Long-term goals should 

serve as a ‘‘north star’’ for the work of 

the Centers and should be in service of 

their clients’ goals. This requires highly 

inclusive needs sensing processes that 

include relevant stakeholders and 

recipients in the process of defining the 

needs to be addressed, and disciplined 

processes by which Centers help clients 

to define the specific outcomes they aim 

to achieve that will result in improved 

educational outcomes. 

In addition, the proposed 

requirements for stakeholder 

engagement would ensure that 

meaningful efforts are made to engage 

with, and incorporate the views of, a 

broad range of potential clients, 

including those who did not initially 

request support but may benefit from it 

based on available data. These 

stakeholder engagement requirements 

would be reinforced through the 

proposed communication and 

dissemination requirements, which 

would require Centers to ensure services 

are broadly disseminated to reach as 

many potential clients as possible. 

Finally, the proposed program 

requirements for performance 

management would require Centers to 

quantify and collect data on the use, 

reach, and impact of Center services in 

alignment with the performance 

measures for this program. 

Effective service delivery requires 

highly qualified personnel who bring 

both subject matter content and 

technical expertise. Under the proposed 

program requirements, subject matter 

experts must include professionals with 

significant and demonstrated scholarly 

expertise in content areas and 

approaches relevant to the work the 

Center undertakes as well as 

practitioners who have significant—and, 

ideally, recent—experience directly 

leading State or local educational 

systems. Under the proposed 

application requirements, applicants 

must describe how highly qualified 

personnel will combine subject matter 

expertise with strong demonstrated 

expertise providing effective technical 

assistance through teaching and leading 

professional development in those 

content areas. 

Additionally, successfully managing a 

Center, developing deep customerfocused relationships with States, and 

managing complex projects with varied 

stakeholders requires significant 

investment of personnel time and 

leadership. Under the proposed program 

requirements, Centers must strive to 

achieve as close to full-time equivalency 

(FTE) as practicable for all personnel in 

key leadership and service-delivery 

roles, and at least .75 FTE for the 

Program Director, to help ensure that 

sufficient leadership and expertise are 

available to support effective 

management and service provision. 

Additionally, the proposed program 

requirements for the National Center 

require at least 1 FTE Project Director, 

or co-Directors each with at least .75 

FTE, to ensure sufficient leadership 

capacity for the project. 

While Centers assist clients in 

selecting evidence-based practices, they 

additionally help them develop and 

implement practices that may become 

models to others. To expand the reach 

of the Centers, each Center must 

effectively curate and disseminate 

effective practices. Under the proposed 

program requirement for 

communications and dissemination 

plans, Centers must intentionally plan 

for how information will be used and by 

whom, and what strategies most 

effectively engage their target audiences 

to expand the reach and potential 

impact of their services, tools, and 

products. And under the proposed 

program requirement for performance 

management systems, Centers must 

measure and report on the effectiveness 

of these strategies, including the reach 

of their services, to monitor and 

improve the efficacy of their 

communication and dissemination 

strategies. 

In providing services within the 

CCNetwork, and in alignment with 

other providers who are servicing the 

same clients, Centers must approach 

collaboration intentionally to reduce 

client burden in interacting with 

multiple providers, and to ensure that 

Federal resources are being used most 

efficiently and effectively to meet a 

variety of needs across federally funded 

providers. While each Center may have 

a specific recipient type or area of 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4235 

expertise, all work in service of the 

same goals. To avoid duplication 

wherever possible, under the program 

requirements for annual service plans 

and partnership agreements, Centers 

must coordinate common activities, 

such as needs sensing with State agency 

leadership, with other federally funded 

providers serving their intended clients, 

to the extent practicable, and must 

establish processes to identify which 

Centers may be best suited to meet 

expressed and identified needs. 

Under the proposed program 

requirements relating to CCNetwork 

peer learning, Centers must share with 

other regions knowledge of effective 

practices and approaches to capacitybuilding used with their clients. We 

believe that Centers will benefit by 

learning from each other and that this 

requirement would promote the 

achievement of each Center’s intended 

outcomes, as well as enhance the overall 

impact of the CCNetwork. 

The Department recognizes that we 

cannot anticipate every need a State 

may have, and that critical needs could 

emerge throughout the grant period that 

will require Centers to rapidly respond 

to meet new demands. For that reason, 

the Department proposes to require each 

Center to reserve funds annually to 

address emerging needs. 

Proposed Program Requirements: 

The Assistant Secretary proposes the 

following program requirements for this 

program. We may apply one or more of 

these requirements in any year in which 

this program is in effect. 

Program Requirements for All 

Centers: National, Regional, and Content 

Center grantees under this program 

must: 

(1) Develop service plans annually for 

carrying out the technical assistance and 

capacity-building activities to be 

delivered by the Center in response to 

educational challenges facing students, 

practitioners, and education system 

leaders. Plans must include: Highleverage problems to be addressed, 

including identified client needs, 

capacity-building services to be 

delivered, time-based outcomes (i.e., 

short-term, mid-term, long-term), 

responsible personnel, key technical 

assistance partners, milestones, outputs, 

dissemination plans, fidelity measures, 

if appropriate, and any other elements 

specified by the Department. The 

annual service plans must be an update 

to the Center’s five-year plan submitted 

as part of the initial grant application 

and account for changes in client needs. 

(2) Develop and implement capacitybuilding services, including tools and 

resources, in partnership with State and 

local clients and recipients to reflect 

and address specific client needs and 

contexts and promote sustainable 

evidence utilization to address 

identified educational challenges. 

(3) Develop and implement an 

effective performance management 

system that integrates continuous 

improvement to promote effective 

achievement of client outcomes. The 

system must include methods to 

measure and monitor progress towards 

agreed upon outcomes, outputs, and 

milestones and to measure the reach, 

use, and impact of the services being 

delivered to ensure capacity-building 

services are implemented as intended, 

reaching intended clients and 

recipients, and achieving desired 

results. Progress monitoring must 

include periodic assessment of client 

satisfaction and timely identification of 

changes in State contexts that may 

impact the project’s success. The 

performance management system must 

include strategies to report on defined 

program performance measures. 

(4) Develop and implement a 

stakeholder engagement system to 

regularly communicate, engage, and 

coordinate, using feedback to inform 

improvement, across organizational 

levels (Federal, State, and local), and 

facilitate regular engagement of 

stakeholders involved in or affected by 

proposed services. This system must 

provide regular and ongoing 

opportunities for outreach activities 

(e.g., regular promotion of services and 

products to potential and current 

recipients, particularly at the local level) 

and regular opportunities for 

engagement with potential beneficiaries 

or participants involved in or impacted 

by proposed school improvement 

activities (e.g., students, parents, 

educators, administrators, Tribal 

leaders) to ensure services reflect their 

needs. 

(5) Develop and implement a highquality personnel management system 

to efficiently obtain and retain the 

services of nationally recognized 

technical and content experts and other 

consultants with direct experience 

working with SEAs, REAs, and LEAs. 

The Center must ensure that personnel 

have the appropriate expertise to deliver 

high-quality capacity-building services 

that meet client and recipient need and 

be staffed at a level sufficient for 

achieving the goals of its assigned 

projects and responsibilities. 

(6) Develop and implement a 

comprehensive communication and 

dissemination plan that includes 

strategies to disseminate information in 

multiple formats and media (e.g., 

evidence-based practice tool kits, briefs, 

informational webinars) including 

through CCNetwork websites, social 

media, and other methods as 

appropriate, and strategies to monitor 

the use of the information it 

disseminates. The plan must include 

approaches to determine, at the outset of 

each project, in consultation with 

clients, the most effective modality and 

methodology for capturing evidencebased practices and lessons learned, 

dissemination strategies customized and 

based on needs of the targeted 

audience(s), and strategies to monitor 

and measure audience engagement and 

use of information and products of the 

Center. Centers must work with partners 

to disseminate products through 

networks in which the targeted 

audiences are most likely to seek or 

receive information with the goal of 

expanding the reach of Centers to the 

largest number of recipients possible. 

(7) Identify and enter into partnership 

agreements with federally funded 

providers, State and national 

organizations, businesses, and industry 

experts, as applicable, to support States 

in the implementation and scaling-up of 

evidence-based programs, practices, and 

interventions, as well as reduce 

duplication of services and engagement 

burden to States. Where appropriate, the 

agreements should document how the 

partnerships might advance along a 

continuum to effectively meet program 

and client goals. 

(8) Within 90 days of receiving 

funding for an award, demonstrate to 

the Department that it has secured client 

and partner commitments to carry out 

proposed annual service plans. 

(9) Participate in a national evaluation 

of the Comprehensive Centers Program. 

Program Requirements for National 

Comprehensive Center: In addition to 

the requirements for all Centers, 

National Center grantees under this 

program must: 

(1) Design and implement robust 

needs sensing activities and processes to 

consult with and integrate feedback 

from the Department, Regional and 

Content Centers, and advisory boards 

that surface high-leverage problems that 

could be effectively addressed in 

developing the national annual service 

plan. 

(2) Collaborate with Regional and 

Content Centers to implement universal 

and targeted services for recipients to 

address high-leverage problems 

identified in the annual service plan. In 

providing targeted services (e.g., multiState and cross-regional peer-to-peer 

exchanges or communities of practice 

on problems), the National Center must 

provide opportunities for recipients to 

learn from their peers and subject matter 

experts and apply evidence-based 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4236 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

practices and must define tangible, 

achievable capacity-building outcomes 

for recipient participation. Universal 

services must be grounded in evidencebased practices, be produced in a 

manner that recipients are most likely to 

use, be shared via multiple mechanisms 

such as the CCNetwork website, social 

media, and other channels as 

appropriate, and be appropriate for a 

variety of education stakeholders, 

including the general public. 

(3) Develop and implement a strategy 

to recruit and retain a comprehensive 

cadre of national subject matter experts 

that includes qualified education 

practitioners, researchers, policy 

professionals, and other consultants 

with (1) direct experience working in or 

with SEAs, REAs, and LEAs and (2) indepth expertise in specific subject areas 

with an understanding of State contexts 

available to support universal and 

targeted services of the National Center 

and intensive capacity-building services 

of Regional Centers. Cadre experts must 

have a proven record of designing and 

implementing effective capacitybuilding services, using evidence 

effectively, and delivering quality adult 

learning experiences or professional 

development experiences that meet 

client and recipient needs and must 

have recognized subject matter expertise 

including publishing in peer-reviewed 

journals and presenting at national 

conferences on the ESEA programs or 

content areas for which they are 

engaged as experts to provide universal, 

targeted, or intensive capacity building. 

(4) Reserve not less than one half of 

the annual budget to provide universal, 

targeted, and, as needed, intensive 

services to address topics 1–5 

enumerated in the priority for this 

Center and as approved by the 

Department in the annual service plan. 

(5) Include in the communications 

and dissemination plan, and implement, 

processes for outreach activities (e.g., 

regular promotion of services and 

products to clients and potential and 

current recipients), use of feedback 

loops across organizational levels 

(Federal, State, and local), regular 

engagement and coordination with the 

Department, Regional Centers, and 

partner organizations (e.g., federally 

funded providers), and engagement of 

stakeholders involved in or impacted by 

proposed school improvement 

activities. 

(6) Design and implement 

communications and dissemination 

vehicles for the CCNetwork, including 

maintaining the CCNetwork website 

with an easy-to-navigate design that 

meets government or industry 

recognized standards for accessibility, 

including compliance with Section 504 

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and 

maintain a consistent media presence, 

in collaboration with Regional and 

Content Centers and the Department 

Communications office, that promotes 

increased engagement. 

(7) Develop peer learning 

opportunities for Regional and Content 

Center staff (and other partners, as 

appropriate) to address implementation 

challenges and scale effective practices 

to improve service delivery across the 

CCNetwork. 

(8) Collect and share information 

about services provided through the 

CCNetwork for the purpose of 

coordination, collaboration, and 

communication across Centers and 

other providers, including an annual 

analysis of service plans to identify and 

disseminate information about services 

rendered across the CCNetwork. 

(9) Ensure that the Project Director is 

capable of managing all aspects of the 

Center and is either staffed at 1 FTE or 

there are two Co-Project Directors each 

at a minimum of 0.75 FTE. The Project 

Director or Co-Project Directors and all 

key personnel must be able to provide 

services at the intensity, duration, and 

modality appropriate to achieving 

agreed-upon milestones, outputs, and 

outcomes described in annual service 

plans. 

(10) Reserve not less than one third of 

the budget to address the program 

requirements for CCNetwork 

coordination (requirements 5 through 

8). 

Program Requirements for Regional 

Centers: Regional Center grantees under 

this program must: 

(1) Actively coordinate and 

collaborate with the REL serving their 

region. Coordination must include 

annual joint need sensing in a manner 

designed to comprehensively inform 

service delivery across both programs 

while reducing burden on State 

agencies. The goals of this coordination 

and collaboration are to share, 

synthesize, and apply information, 

ideas, and lessons learned; to enable 

each type of provider to focus on its 

designated role; to ensure that work is 

non-duplicative; to streamline and 

simplify service provision to States and 

LEAs; and to collaborate on projects to 

better support regional stakeholders. 

(2) Consult with a broad range of 

stakeholders, including chief State 

school officers and other SEA leaders, 

TEAs, LEAs, educators, students, and 

parents, and integrate their feedback in 

developing the annual service plan to 

reflect the needs of all States (and to the 

extent practicable, of LEAs) within the 

region to be served. 

(3) In developing the annual service 

plan, ensure services are provided to 

support students and communities with 

the highest needs, including recipients: 

(i) that have high percentages or 

numbers of students from low-income 

families as referenced in Title I, Part A 

of the ESEA (ESEA sec. 1113(a)(5)); (ii) 

that are implementing comprehensive 

support and improvement activities or 

targeted or additional targeted support 

and improvement activities as 

referenced in Title I, Part A of the ESEA 

(ESEA sec. 1111(d)); (iii) in rural areas; 

and (iv) serving student populations 

with demonstrated needs unmet or 

under-met through other Federal, State, 

or local interventions. 

(4) Explore and provide opportunities 

to connect peers within and across 

regions. 

(5) Collaborate with the National 

Center and Content Centers, as 

appropriate, including to support client 

and recipient participation in targeted 

capacity-building services, and obtain 

and retain the services of nationally 

recognized content experts through 

partnership with the National Center, 

Content Centers, or other federally 

funded providers. 

(6) Support the participation of 

Regional Center staff in CCNetwork peer 

learning opportunities, including 

sharing information about effective 

practices in the region, to extend the 

Center’s reach to as many SEAs, REAs, 

LEAs, and schools in need of services as 

possible while also learning about 

effective capacity-building approaches 

to enhance the Center’s ability to 

provide high-quality services. 

(7) Within 90 days of receiving 

funding for an award, provide to the 

Department copies of partnership 

agreements with the REL(s) in the region 

that the Center serves and, as 

appropriate, other Department-funded 

technical assistance providers that are 

charged with supporting 

comprehensive, systemic changes in 

States or Department-funded technical 

assistance providers with particular 

expertise (e.g., early learning or 

instruction for English language 

learners) relevant to the region’s service 

plan. Partnership agreements must 

define processes for coordination and 

support collaboration to meet relevant 

program requirements. 

(8) Be located in the region the Center 

serves. The Project Director must be 

capable of managing all aspects of the 

Center and be either at a minimum of 

0.75 FTE or there must be two CoProject Directors each at a minimum of 

0.5 FTE. The Project Director or CoProject Directors and key personnel 

must also be able to provide on-site 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4237 

services at the intensity, duration, and 

modality appropriate to achieving 

agreed-upon milestones, outputs, and 

outcomes described in annual service 

plans. 

Program Requirements for Content 

Centers: Content Center grantees under 

this program must: 

(1) Consult and integrate feedback 

from the National and Regional Centers 

in developing the annual service plan to 

inform high-quality tools, resources, and 

overall technical assistance in priority 

areas. 

(2) Collaborate with Regional Centers 

to address specific requests for 

assistance from States within the 

regions and strengthen Regional Center 

staff knowledge and expertise on the 

evidence base and effective practices 

within its specific content area. 

(3) Produce high-quality universal 

capacity-building services, and identify, 

organize, select, and translate existing 

key research knowledge and Department 

guidance related to the Center’s content 

area and examples of workable 

strategies and systems for implementing 

provisions and programs that have 

produced positive outcomes for schools 

and students, and communicate the 

information in ways that are highly 

relevant and highly useful to State- and 

local-level policy makers and 

practitioners. 

(4) Collaborate with the National 

Center and Regional Centers to convene 

States and LEAs, researchers, and other 

experts, including other Federal entities 

and providers of technical assistance as 

identified by the Department, to learn 

from each other about practical 

strategies for implementing ESEA 

provisions and programs related to the 

Center’s area of focus. 

(5) Support the participation of 

Content Center staff in CCNetwork peer 

learning opportunities with the goal of 

providing high-quality services while 

reaching as many SEAs, REAs, LEAs, 

and schools in need of services as 

possible. 

(6) Within 90 days of receiving 

funding for an award, provide copies to 

the Department of partnership 

agreements with Department-funded 

technical assistance providers that are 

charged with supporting 

comprehensive, systemic changes in 

States or Department-funded technical 

assistance providers with particular 

expertise relevant to the Center’s 

content area. Partnership agreements 

must define processes for coordination 

and support collaboration to meet 

relevant program requirements. 

Proposed Application Requirements: 

Application Requirements for All 

Centers: 

(1) Present a plan for operating the 

Comprehensive Center that clearly 

establishes the critical educational 

challenges proposed to be addressed by 

the Center, the impact the Center plans 

to achieve, including the proposed 

scope of services in relation to the 

number of SEAs, REAs, TEAs, LEAs, 

and, as appropriate, schools served, 

with respect to specific State and local 

outcomes that would represent 

significant achievement in advancing 

the efforts of State and local systems to 

improve educational opportunities and 

student outcomes, and proposes how 

the Center will efficiently and 

effectively provide appropriate capacitybuilding services to achieve the desired 

outcomes. 

(2) Present applicable regional, State, 

and local educational needs, including 

relevant data demonstrating the 

identified needs, and including the 

perspectives of underrepresented 

groups, that could be addressed through 

capacity-building to implement and 

scale up evidence-based programs, 

practices, and interventions. 

(3) Demonstrate how key personnel 

possess expert knowledge of statutory 

requirements, regulations, and policies 

related to ESEA programs, current 

education issues, and policy initiatives 

for supporting the implementation and 

scaling up of evidence-based programs, 

practices, and interventions. 

(4) Demonstrate expertise in 

providing highly relevant and highly 

effective technical assistance (e.g., that 

is co-designed with clients; 

demonstrably addresses authentic needs 

based on needs-sensing activities; is 

timely, relevant, useful, clear and 

measurable; and results in demonstrable 

improvements or outcomes), including 

by demonstrating expertise in the 

current research on adult learning 

principles, coaching, and 

implementation science that will drive 

the applicant’s capacity-building 

services; how the applicant has 

successfully supported clients to 

achieve desired outcomes; and how the 

applicant will promote self-sufficiency 

and sustainability of State- and local-led 

school improvement activities. 

(5) Present a logic model (as defined 

in 34 CFR 77.1) informed by research or 

evaluation findings that demonstrates a 

rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) 

explaining how the project is likely to 

improve or achieve relevant and 

expected outcomes. The logic model 

must communicate how the proposed 

project would achieve its expected 

outcomes (short-term, mid-term, and 

long-term), and provide a framework for 

both the formative and summative 

evaluations of the project consistent 

with the applicant’s performance 

management plan. Include a description 

of underlying concepts, assumptions, 

expectations, beliefs, and theories, as 

well as the relationships and linkages 

among these variables, and any 

empirical support for this framework. 

(6) Present a management plan that 

describes the applicant’s proposed 

approach to managing the project to 

meet all program requirements related 

to needs assessment, stakeholder 

engagement, communications and 

dissemination, and personnel 

management. 

(7) Present a performance 

management plan that describes the 

applicant’s proposed approach to 

meeting the program requirements 

related to performance management, 

including the applicant’s proposed 

strategy to report on defined program 

performance measures, and describes 

the criteria for determining the extent to 

which: capacity-building services 

proposed in annual service plans were 

implemented as intended; recipient 

outcomes were met (short-term, 

midterm, and long-term); recipient 

capacity was developed; and services 

reached and were used by intended 

recipients. 

(8) Include, in the budget, a line item 

for an annual set-aside of five percent of 

the grant amount to support emerging 

needs that are consistent with the 

proposed project’s intended outcomes, 

as those needs are identified in 

consultation with, and approved by, the 

OESE program officer. With approval 

from the program officer, the project 

must reallocate any remaining funds 

from this annual set-aside no later than 

the end of the third quarter of each 

budget period. 

Application Requirements for the 

National Center: In addition to meeting 

the application requirements for all 

Centers, a National Center applicant 

must: 

(1) Demonstrate expertise and 

experience in leading digital 

engagement strategies to attract and 

sustain the involvement of education 

stakeholders, including, but not limited 

to: implementing a robust web and 

social media presence and engagement, 

overseeing customer relations 

management, providing editorial 

support to Regional and Content 

Centers, and utilizing web analytics to 

improve content engagement. 

(2) Describe the proposed approach to 

providing targeted capacity-building 

services, including how the applicant 

intends to collaborate with Regional 

Centers to identify potential recipients 

and estimate how many SEAs, REAs, 

TEAs, and LEAs it has the capacity to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4238 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

reach; how it will measure the readiness 

and capacity of potential recipients; and 

how it will measure the extent to which 

targeted capacity-building services 

achieve intended recipient outcomes 

and result in increased recipient 

capacity (and specifically, increase 

capacity in one or more of the four 

dimensions of capacity-building). 

(3) Describe the proposed approach to 

universal capacity-building services, 

including how many and which 

recipients it plans to reach and how the 

applicant intends to: measure the extent 

to which products and services 

developed actually address common 

problems; support recipients in the 

selection, implementation, and 

monitoring of evidence-based practices; 

improve the use of evidence with regard 

to emerging national education trends; 

and build recipient capacity in at least 

one of the four dimensions of capacitybuilding. 

Application Requirements for 

Regional Centers: 

In addition to meeting the application 

requirements for all Centers, a Regional 

Center applicant must— 

(1) Describe the proposed approach to 

intensive capacity-building services, 

including identification of intended 

recipients based on available data in 

each of the content areas identified, 

alignment of proposed capacity-building 

services to client needs, and engagement 

of clients who may not initiate contact 

to request services. The applicant must 

also describe how it intends to measure 

the readiness of clients and recipients to 

work with the Center; co-design projects 

and define outcomes; measure and 

monitor client and recipient capacity 

across the four dimensions of capacitybuilding; and measure the outcomes 

achieved throughout and at the 

conclusion of a project. 

(2) Demonstrate that proposed key 

personnel have the appropriate 

expertise to deliver high-quality, 

intensive services that meet client and 

recipient needs similar to those in the 

region to be served. 

Application Requirements for Content 

Centers: In addition to meeting the 

application requirements for all Centers, 

a Content Center applicant must— 

(1) Describe the proposed approach to 

carry out targeted capacity-building 

services that increase the use of 

evidence-based products or tools 

regarding the designated content area 

amongst practitioners, education system 

leaders, elementary schools and 

secondary schools, LEAs, and SEAs. 

(2) Describe the proposed approach to 

providing universal capacity-building 

services, including how it will develop 

evidence-based products or tools 

regarding the designated content area; 

widely disseminate such products or 

tools to practitioners, education system 

leaders, and policymakers in formats 

that are high quality, easily accessible, 

understandable, and actionable; identify 

intended recipients; and align proposed 

capacity-building services to client 

needs. 

(3) Demonstrate that key personnel 

have appropriate subject matter and 

technical expertise to translate evidence 

into high-quality technical assistance 

services and products for State and local 

clients, including expertise applying 

adult-learning principles and 

implementation science to the delivery 

of technical assistance services and 

products. 

Proposed Definitions: The Assistant 

Secretary proposes the following 

definitions of ‘‘client,’’ ‘‘collaboration,’’ 

‘‘coordination,’’ ‘‘English learner,’’ ‘‘key 

personnel,’’ and ‘‘recipient,’’ for use in 

this program in any year in which this 

program is in effect. We propose these 

definitions to aid applicants in 

understanding the intent and purpose of 

the priorities, requirements, and 

selection criteria. 

We also propose to replace certain 

terms established in the Notice of Final 

Priorities, Requirements, Definitions, 

and Performance Measures published in 

the Federal Register on April 4, 2019 

(84 FR 13122) (2019 NFP). Specifically, 

although the 2019 NFP is not generally 

intended to be superseded by this 

proposed action, we are proposing new 

definitions for the terms ‘‘high-leverage 

problem,’’ ‘‘outcomes,’’ and ‘‘regional 

educational agency’’ to better reflect 

how they are used in this document. 

Additionally, as established in the 2019 

NFP, the term ‘‘capacity building 

services’’ includes within it definitions 

for the ‘‘four dimensions of capacitybuilding services’’ and the ‘‘three tiers 

of capacity-building services.’’ In this 

NPP, we propose to define these terms 

separately. Other than separating these 

terms, we have not proposed changes to 

the general term ‘‘capacity building 

services’’ or the ‘‘four dimensions of 

capacity-building services’’ as 

established in the 2019 NFP; however, 

to reflect how they apply to the 

proposed priorities in this document, 

we propose revised definitions for the 

three tiers of capacity-building services: 

‘‘intensive capacity-building services,’’ 

‘‘targeted capacity-building services,’’ 

and ‘‘universal capacity-building 

services.’’ 

We also propose to use, in the 

proposed priorities, requirements, and 

selection criteria, the following terms, 

which are defined in the ESEA: 

‘‘immigrant children and youth,’’ 

‘‘migratory child,’’ and ‘‘tribal 

educational agency.’’ 

The proposed priorities, 

requirements, and selection criteria also 

incorporate the following terms 

established for use in this program by 

the 2019 NFP: ‘‘capacity-building 

services,’’ ‘‘milestone,’’ and ‘‘outputs.’’ 

We have included the definitions of 

those terms in Appendix 1 to this 

document. 

Capacity-building services means 

assistance that strengthens an 

individual’s or organization’s ability to 

engage in continuous improvement and 

achieve expected outcomes. 

Client means the organization with 

which the Center enters into agreement 

for negotiated capacity-building 

services. The client is engaged in 

defining the high-leverage problems, 

capacity-building services, and timebased outcomes for each project noted 

in the Center’s annual service plan. 

Representatives of clients include but 

are not limited to Chief State School 

Officers or their designees, LEA leaders, 

and other system leaders. 

Collaboration means exchanging 

information, altering activities, and 

sharing in the creation of ideas and 

resources to enhance the capacity of one 

another for mutual benefit to 

accomplish a common goal. 

Coordination means exchanging 

information, altering activities, and 

synchronizing efforts to make unique 

contributions to shared goals. 

English learner means an individual 

who is an English learner as defined in 

section 8101(20) of the ESEA, or an 

individual who is an English language 

learner as defined in section 203(7) of 

the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act. 

Four dimensions of capacity-building 

services are: 

(1) Human capacity means 

development or improvement of 

individual knowledge, skills, technical 

expertise, and ability to adapt and be 

resilient to policy and leadership 

changes. 

(2) Organizational capacity means 

structures that support clear 

communication and a shared 

understanding of an organization’s 

visions and goals, and delineated 

individual roles and responsibilities in 

functional areas. 

(3) Policy capacity means structures 

that support alignment, differentiation, 

or enactment of local, State, and Federal 

policies and initiatives. 

(4) Resource capacity means tangible 

materials and assets that support 

alignment and use of Federal, State, 

private, and local funds. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4239 

High-leverage problems means 

problems that (1) if addressed could 

result in substantial improvements for 

groups of students with the greatest 

need, including for students from lowincome families and for students 

attending schools implementing 

comprehensive support and 

improvement or targeted or additional 

targeted support and improvement 

activities under ESEA section 1111(d)); 

(2) are priorities for education 

policymakers, particularly at the State 

level; and (3) require intensive capacitybuilding services to achieve outcomes 

that address the problem. 

Immigrant children and youth have 

the meaning ascribed in section 3201(5) 

of the ESEA. 

Intensive capacity-building services 

means assistance often provided on-site 

and requiring a stable, ongoing 

relationship between the 

Comprehensive Center and its clients 

and recipients, as well as periodic 

reflection, continuous feedback, and use 

of evidence-based improvement 

strategies. This category of capacitybuilding services should support 

increased recipient capacity in more 

than one dimension of capacity-building 

services and result in medium-term and 

long-term outcomes at one or more 

system levels. 

Key personnel means any personnel 

considered to be essential to the work 

being performed on the project. 

Migratory child has the meaning 

ascribed it in section 1309(3) of the 

ESEA. 

Outcomes means demonstrable effects 

of receiving capacity-building services 

and must reflect the result of capacity 

built in at least one of the four 

dimensions of capacity building. 

‘‘Outcomes’’ includes short-term 

outcomes, medium-term outcomes, and 

long-term outcomes: 

(1) Short-term outcomes means effects 

of receiving capacity-building services 

after 1 year. 

(2) Medium-term outcomes means 

effects of receiving capacity-building 

services after 2 to 3 years. 

(3) Long-term outcomes means effects 

of receiving capacity-building services 

after 4 or more years. 

Recipient means organizations 

including, but not limited to, SEAs, 

LEAs, REAs, TEAs, and schools that 

have received ‘‘intensive’’ and 

‘‘targeted’’ capacity-building services 

and products from Regional Centers, or 

that received ‘‘targeted’’ or ‘‘universal’’ 

capacity-building services and products 

from the National Center or Content 

Centers. 

Regional educational agency means 

educational agencies that serve regional 

areas within a State. 

Targeted capacity-building services 

means assistance based on needs 

common to multiple clients and 

recipients and not extensively 

individualized. A relationship is 

established between the recipient(s), the 

National Center or Content Center, and 

Regional Center(s), as appropriate. This 

category of capacity-building services 

includes one-time, labor-intensive 

events, such as facilitating strategic 

planning or hosting national or regional 

conferences. It can also include services 

that extend over a period of time, such 

as facilitating a series of conference 

calls, virtual or in-person meetings, or 

learning communities on single or 

multiple topics that are designed around 

the needs of the recipients. Facilitating 

communities of practice can also be 

considered targeted capacity-building 

services. 

Tribal educational agency has the 

meaning ascribed in section 6132(b)(3) 

of the ESEA. 

Universal capacity-building services 

means assistance and information 

provided to independent users through 

their own initiative, involving minimal 

interaction with National or Content 

Center staff. This category of capacitybuilding services includes information 

or products, such as newsletters, 

guidebooks, policy briefs, or research 

syntheses, downloaded from the 

Center’s website by independent users, 

and may include one-time, invited or 

offered webinar or conference 

presentations by National or Content 

Center staff. Brief communications or 

consultations by National or Content 

Center staff with recipients, either by 

telephone or email, are also considered 

universal services. 

Proposed Selection Criteria 

The Assistant Secretary proposes the 

following selection criteria for 

evaluating an application under this 

program. We may apply one or more of 

these criteria in any year in which this 

program is in effect. In the notice 

inviting applications we will announce 

the maximum possible points available 

under each criterion. 

Approach to Capacity Building. In 

determining the overall quality of the 

approach to capacity building of the 

proposed project, the Secretary may 

consider one or more of the following 

factors. 

(1) The extent to which the proposed 

project represents an exceptional 

approach to responding to the priority 

or priorities established for the 

competition that will likely result in 

building SEA capacity to implement 

State-level initiatives and support localand school-level initiatives that improve 

educational outcomes, close 

achievement gaps, and improve the 

quality of instruction for all students. 

(2) The extent to which the applicant 

demonstrates an exceptional approach 

to developing and delivering highquality, useful, and relevant capacitybuilding services that— 

(a) In the case of an applicant for the 

National Center, would be expected to 

assist SEAs, REAs, TEAs, LEAs, and 

Regional Center clients and recipients, 

including those who do not proactively 

request assistance, to address the 

activities described in the priority; 

(b) In the case of an applicant for a 

Regional Center, would be expected to 

assist clients and recipients to address 

the activities described in the priority; 

and 

(c) In the case of an applicant for a 

Content Center, would be expected to 

assist clients and recipients, including 

those who do not proactively request 

assistance, to address activities 

described in the priority related to the 

designated content area. 

(3) The extent to which the proposed 

technical assistance plan provides 

strategies that address the technical 

assistance needs of State and local 

educational systems in key areas of 

identified need, as evidenced by indepth knowledge and understanding 

of— 

(a) In the case of an applicant for the 

National Center, implementation 

challenges faced by States; evidencebased practices related to teaching, 

learning, and development; needs of 

schools designated for improvement; 

needs to improve core instruction; and 

emerging education topics of national 

importance; 

(b) In the case of an applicant for a 

Regional Center, the specific 

educational goals and priorities of the 

States to be served by the applicant, 

including emerging priorities based on 

State-led reform efforts, and the 

applicable State and regional 

demographics, policy contexts, and 

other factors and their relevance to 

improving student outcomes, closing 

opportunity and achievement gaps, and 

improving instruction; and 

(c) In the case of an applicant for a 

Content Center, State technical 

assistance needs and evidence-based 

practices related to the Content Center 

priority for which the applicant is 

applying. 

(4) In the case of an applicant for the 

National Center, the extent to which the 

capacity-building and management 

plans propose an exceptional approach 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4240 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

to meeting the requirements for the 

National Center. 

(5) In the case of an applicant for a 

Regional Center, the extent to which the 

applicant’s capacity-building plan 

proposes an exceptional approach to 

meeting the requirements for all 

Regional Centers. 

(6) In the case of an applicant for a 

Content Center, the extent to which the 

applicant’s capacity-building plan 

proposes an exceptional approach to 

meeting the requirements for all Content 

Centers. 

Quality of Project Design. In 

determining the quality of the project 

design of the proposed center for which 

the applicant is applying, the Assistant 

Secretary may consider one or more of 

the following factors. 

(1) The extent to which the proposed 

performance management system and 

processes demonstrate an exceptional 

approach to integrating continuous 

improvement processes and evaluation 

that will result in regular and ongoing 

improvement in the quality of the 

services provided and increase the 

likelihood that recipient outcomes are 

achieved. 

(2) The extent to which the proposed 

stakeholder and communication 

engagement system is likely to result in 

a high level of engagement with 

multiple potential beneficiaries or 

participants involved in or impacted by 

the proposed capacity-building 

activities to ensure that the proposed 

services reflect their needs, are 

delivered in a manner that is relevant 

and useful, and reach the largest 

number of recipients possible. 

(3) The extent to which the proposed 

personnel management system includes 

performance management processes for 

staff, subcontractors, and consultants 

that enable effective hiring, developing, 

supervising, and retaining a team of 

subject-matter and technical assistance 

experts and professional staff that will 

effectively meet the needs of the project. 

(4) The extent to which the proposed 

partnerships represent an intentional 

approach to collaboration that is likely 

to reduce client burden and to ensure 

that Federal resources are being used 

most efficiently and effectively to meet 

a variety of needs across federally 

funded providers. 

(5) In the case of an applicant for the 

National Center, the extent to which the 

proposed project represents an 

exceptional management approach, 

including with respect to managing 

budgets; selecting, coordinating, and 

overseeing multiple consultant and 

subcontractor teams; managing 

communications and dissemination 

systems; and leading large-scale projects 

to coordinate with and deliver tools, 

training, and capacity-building services 

to governments, agencies, communities, 

schools, or other organizations. 

Subject Matter and Technical 

Assistance Expertise. In determining the 

subject-matter and technical expertise of 

key project personnel, the Assistant 

Secretary considers the extent to which 

the applicant encourages applications 

for employment from persons who are 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. In addition, 

the Assistant Secretary may consider 

one or more of the following factors. 

(1) The extent to which key project 

personnel demonstrate the required 

expertise and relevant knowledge, 

understanding, and experience in 

operating and administering State and 

local educational systems to effectively 

support recipients. 

(2) The extent to which the applicant 

has demonstrated experience providing 

high-quality, timely, relevant, and 

useful technical assistance and capacitybuilding services to State and local 

educational systems. 

(3) The extent to which the applicant 

has demonstrated the ability to develop 

ongoing partnerships with leading 

experts and organizations nationwide or 

regionally, as appropriate, that enhance 

its ability to provide high-quality 

technical assistance and subject-matter 

expertise. 

(4) In the case of an applicant for the 

National Center, the extent to which the 

applicant has demonstrated ability in 

operating a project of such scope. 

Final priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria: We 

will announce the final priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria in a document in the Federal 

Register. We will determine the final 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria after considering 

responses to this document and other 

information available to the Department. 

This document does not preclude us 

from proposing additional priorities, 

requirements, definitions, or selection 

criteria, subject to meeting applicable 

rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This document does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we 

choose to use one or more of these 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 

14094 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by OMB. Section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, as amended by 

Executive Order 14094, 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 $200 million or more (as of 

2023 but to be adjusted every 3 years by 

the Administrator of OIRA for changes 

in gross domestic product); or adversely 

affect in a material way the economy, a 

sector of the economy, productivity, 

competition, jobs, the environment, 

public health or safety, or State, local, 

territorial, or Tribal governments or 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise legal or policy issues for 

which centralized review would 

meaningfully further the President’s 

priorities, or the principles set forth in 

this Executive order, as specifically 

authorized in a timely manner by the 

Administrator of OIRA in each case. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 (as amended by 

Executive Order 14094). 

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 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 4241 

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, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria 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 these 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. 

Potential Costs and Benefits 

The Department believes that this 

proposed regulatory action would not 

impose significant costs on eligible 

entities, whose participation in our 

programs is voluntary, and whose costs 

can generally be covered with grant 

funds. As a result, the proposed 

regulatory action would not impose any 

particular burden, except when an 

entity voluntarily elects to apply for a 

grant. The proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria would help ensure that the grant 

program selects a high-quality applicant 

to implement activities that meet the 

goals of the program for each Center. We 

believe these benefits would outweigh 

any associated costs. 

Clarity of the Regulations 

Executive Order 12866 and the 

Presidential memorandum ‘‘Plain 

Language in Government Writing’’ 

require each agency to write regulations 

that are easy to understand. 

The Assistant Secretary invites 

comments on how to make the proposed 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria easier to understand, 

including answers to questions such as 

the following: 

• Are the requirements in the 

proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria clearly 

stated? 

• Do the proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria contain technical terms or other 

wording that interferes with their 

clarity? 

• Could the description of the 

proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

the preamble be more helpful in making 

the proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria easier 

to understand? If so, how? 

• What else could we do to make the 

proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria easier 

to understand? 

To send any comments on how the 

Department could make the proposed 

priorities, requirements, definitions, and 

selection criteria easier to understand, 

see the instructions in the ADDRESSES

section. 

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. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

The Assistant Secretary certifies that 

this proposed regulatory action would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The U.S. Small Business 

Administration Size Standards define 

proprietary institutions as small 

businesses if they are independently 

owned and operated, are not dominant 

in their field of operation, and have total 

annual revenue below $7,000,000. 

Nonprofit institutions are defined as 

small entities if they are independently 

owned and operated and not dominant 

in their field of operation. Public 

institutions are defined as small 

organizations if they are operated by a 

government overseeing a population 

below 50,000. 

Of the impacts we estimate accruing 

to grantees or eligible entities, all are 

voluntary. Therefore, we do not believe 

that the proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria would significantly impact 

small entities beyond the potential for 

increasing the likelihood of their 

applying for, and receiving, a 

competitive grant from the Department. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: 

These proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria 

contain information collection 

requirements that are approved by OMB 

under OMB control number 1894–0006. 

The proposed priorities, requirements, 

definitions, and selection criteria do not 

affect the currently approved data 

collection. 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

program contact person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

individuals with disabilities can obtain 

this document in an accessible format. 

The Department will provide the 

requestor with an accessible format that 

may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or 

text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 

file, braille, large print, audiotape, or 

compact disc, or other accessible format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of the Department published 

in the Federal Register, in text or 

Portable Document Format (PDF). To 

use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat 

Reader, which is available free at the 

site. You may also access documents of 

the Department published in the 

Federal Register by using the article 

search feature at 

www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, 

through the advanced search feature at 

this site, you can limit your search to 

documents published by the 

Department. 

Adam Schott, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Programs, Delegated the Authority to Perform 

the Functions and Duties of the Assistant 

Secretary Office of Elementary and Secondary 

Education. 

Appendix I 

The proposed priorities, requirements, and 

selection criteria incorporate the following 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
4242 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 23, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

terms established for use in this program by 

the 2019 NFP: 

Milestone means an activity that must be 

completed. Examples include: Identifying 

key district administrators responsible for 

professional development, sharing key 

observations from needs assessment with 

district administrators and identified 

stakeholders, preparing a logic model, 

planning for State-wide professional 

development, identifying subject matter 

experts, and conducting train-the-trainer 

sessions. 

Outputs means products and services that 

must be completed. Examples include: Needs 

assessment, logic model, training modules, 

evaluation plan, and 12 workshop 

presentations. 

Note: A product output under this program 

would be considered a deliverable under the 

open licensing regulations at 2 CFR 3474.20. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01257 Filed 1–19–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2023–0576; FRL–11679– 

01–R1] 

Air Plan Approval; New Hampshire; 

Single Source Order for PAK Solutions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of New 

Hampshire. This revision proposes to 

approve reasonable available control 

technology (RACT) requirements for 

PAK Solutions, LLC, located in 

Lancaster, New Hampshire. This action 

is being taken under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 22, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2023–0576 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Patrick Lillis at: lillis.patrick@epa.gov. 

For comments submitted at 

Regulations.gov, follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

For either manner of submission, the 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e. on the web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

at https://www.regulations.gov or at the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Air and 

Radiation Division, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays and 

facility closures due to COVID–19. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patrick Lillis, Air Quality Branch (AQB), 

Air and Radiation Division (ARD) (Mail 

Code 5–MD), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, 

Massachusetts, 02109–3912; (617) 918– 

1067; lillis.patrick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Purpose 

II. Proposed Action 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background and Purpose 

On December 14, 2022, the New 

Hampshire Air Resources Division 

(ARD) submitted a revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision 

consists of an order establishing 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) requirements for PAK Solutions, 

LLC, located in Lancaster, New 

Hampshire. The RACT requirements are 

intended to limit emissions of volatile 

organic chemicals (VOCs) from the 

facility. 

PAK Solutions, LLC (PAK) conducts 

commercial printing operations on a 

variety of plastic and film substrates 

with VOCs and solvent-containing inks. 

PAK owns and operates three printing 

presses that coat a variety of plastic and 

film substrates at its facility located on 

16 Page Hill Road in Lancaster, New 

Hampshire. PAK operates a Ship & 

Shore Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer 

(RTO) to control VOC emissions from 

three printing presses. On August 24, 

2022, PAK submitted an application for 

a RACT Order (Order) that would allow 

the company to generate and use 

Discrete Emissions Reductions (DERs) 

in order to comply with the VOC 

reduction requirements during periods 

when the RTO is shut down due to 

maintenance or malfunction. 

RACT Order RO–0007 issued on 

December 14, 2022, by the New 

Hampshire DES requires PAK Solutions 

to comply with the VOC control 

standards specified in Env-A 1215 

Rotogravure and Flexographic Printing. 

PAK Solutions shall conduct monitoring 

and testing activities of the RTO as well 

as operate and maintain equipment to 

continuously monitor the temperature 

of the combustion chamber of the RTO. 

This Order also outlines the consistent 

maintenance of the RTO based on the 

manufacture’s recommendations. For 

times that the capture and control 

system is unable to meet the 60% 

capture and 90% reduction requirement 

specified in Env-A 1215.03(b) and EnvA 1215.04(b)(3) due to a malfunction or 

during routine maintenance of the RTO, 

PAK shall be allowed to use DERs in 

accordance with RACT Order RO–0007. 

This is for the purpose of complying 

with the VOC RACT requirements. 

According to the instructions of RACT 

Order RO–0007, PAK shall be allowed 

to generate DERs for VOC emission 

reductions that exceed the reductions 

specified in this Order and be allowed 

to use these DERs for RACT compliance. 

PAK is also allowed to sell DERs to 

other entities within the State of New 

Hampshire. PAK Solutions will also 

maintain sufficient recordkeeping and 

timely annual reporting. 

Regarding reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, PAK is 

required to submit an annual report to 

NHDES on the projected use of credits 

(DERs) for the upcoming calendar year 

by November 30th. The requirements for 

this report are outlined in Env-A 

3104.08, Notice of Intent and Use of 

DERs. PAK is also required to submit an 

annual report by April 15th to NHDES 

on the balance of credits (DERs) for the 

previous calendar year. The 

requirements for this report are outlined 

in Env-A 3103.08, Notice and 

Certification of Generation and Env-A 

3104.09, Notice and Certification of Use. 

Records are required to be maintained 

on site and submitted upon request for 

control device monitoring and 

maintenance. PAK Solutions is also 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS