Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 11257 

interested in making a verbal comment 

at the open meeting, the individual 

must submit a request to the ADFO with 

a brief statement of the subject matter to 

be addressed by the comment. (See the 

information listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section; email is 

preferred.) The request must be 

submitted to the ADFO at least three 

business days before the meeting. The 

ADFO will log each request in the order 

received. In consultation with the 

Chairperson(s), the DFO will determine 

whether the subject matter of each 

comment is relevant to the ACANC 

mission and/or to the agenda of this 

public meeting. Members of the public 

who asked to make a verbal comment 

and whose comments are deemed 

relevant under the process described 

above will be invited to speak in the 

order in which the ADFO received their 

request. The appropriate Chairperson(s) 

may allot a specific amount of time for 

verbal comments. 

James W. Satterwhite, Jr., 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03066 Filed 2–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3711–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army 

Board of Visitors for the Western 

Hemisphere Institute for Security 

Cooperation Meeting Notice 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, 

Department of Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army 

is publishing this notice to announce 

the following Federal advisory 

committee meeting of the Board of 

Visitors for the Western Hemisphere 

Institute for Security Cooperation 

(WHINSEC). This meeting is open to the 

public. 

DATES: The Board of Visitors will meet 

from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Wednesday, 

March 13, 2024 and from 9 a.m. to 12 

p.m. on Thursday, March 14, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Western Hemisphere 

Institute for Security Cooperation, 

Bradley Hall, 7301 Baltzell Avenue, 

Building 396, Fort Benning, GA 31905. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Richard Procell, Alternate Designated 

Federal Officer for the Committee, by 

email at richard.d.procell2.civ@

army.mil, or by telephone at (913) 684– 

2963. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

committee meeting is being held under 

the provisions of the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., 

Appendix, as amended), the 

Government in the Sunshine Act of 

1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), 41 

CFR 102–3.140(c), and 41 CFR 102– 

3.150. 

Purpose of the Meeting: The Board of 

Visitors for the Western Hemisphere 

Institute for Security Cooperation is a 

non-discretionary Federal Advisory 

Committee chartered to provide the 

Secretary of Defense, through the 

Secretary of the Army, independent 

advice and recommendations on matters 

pertaining to the curriculum, 

instruction, physical equipment, fiscal 

affairs, and academic methods of the 

institute; other matters relating to the 

institute that the board decides to 

consider; and other items that the 

Secretary of Defense determines 

appropriate. The board reviews 

curriculum to determine whether it 

adheres to current U.S. doctrine, 

complies with applicable U.S. laws and 

regulations, and is consistent with U.S. 

policy goals toward Latin America and 

the Caribbean. The board also 

determines whether the instruction 

under the curriculum of the institute 

appropriately emphasizes human rights, 

the rule of law, due process, civilian 

control of the military, and the role of 

the military in a democratic society. The 

Secretary of Defense may act on the 

committee’s advice and 

recommendations. 

Agenda: Update on the Human Rights 

and Democracy Program; Women Peace 

and Security Panel; Review of the 

WHINSEC Strategy and Implementation 

Plan; Briefs from the Department of 

State, U.S. Northern Command, U.S. 

Southern Command, and the U.S. Army 

Training and Doctrine Command; a 

public comments period; and 

presentation of other information 

appropriate to the board’s interests. 

Public Accessibility to the Meeting: 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, 

and 41 CFR 102–3.140 through 102– 

3.165, and subject to the availability of 

space, this meeting is open to the 

public. A 30-minute period will be 

available for verbal public comments 

between 10:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. on 

Thursday, March 14, 2024. Seating is on 

a first to arrive basis. Those interested 

in attending are requested to submit 

their name, affiliation, and daytime 

phone number seven business days 

prior to the meeting to Mr. Procell, via 

electronic mail at the address listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. Because the meeting of the 

committee will be held in a Federal 

Government facility on a military base, 

security screening is required. A photo 

ID is required to enter the base. Please 

note that security and gate guards have 

the right to inspect vehicles and persons 

seeking to enter and exit the 

installation. Bradley Hall is fully 

handicap accessible. Wheelchair access 

is available in front at the main entrance 

of the building. For additional 

information about public access 

procedures, contact Mr. Procell at the 

email address or telephone number 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

Written Comments and Statements: 

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102–3.105(j) and 

102–3.140 and section 10(a)(3) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act, the 

public or interested organizations may 

submit written comments or statements 

to the committee, in response to the 

stated agenda of the open meeting or 

regarding the committee’s mission in 

general. Written comments or 

statements should be submitted to Mr. 

Procell via electronic mail at the address 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. Written comments or 

statements being submitted in response 

to the agenda set forth in this notice 

must be received at least five business 

days prior to the meeting to be 

considered by the committee. The 

Designated Federal Officer will review 

all timely submitted written comments 

or statements with the committee 

chairperson, and ensure the comments 

are provided to all members of the 

committee before the meeting. Written 

comments or statements received after 

this date will be filed and presented to 

the committee during its next meeting. 

James W. Satterwhite, Jr., 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2024–03041 Filed 2–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3711–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; 

Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination To Improve Services 

and Results for Children With 

Disabilities—Model Demonstration 

Projects to Develop Equitable Family 

Engagement With Underserved 

Families of Children With Disabilities 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education 

(Department) is issuing a notice inviting 

applications for new awards for fiscal 

year (FY) 2024 for Model Demonstration 

Projects to Develop Equitable Family 

Engagement with Underserved Families 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
11258 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 

1www.ed.gov/raisethebar/. 

2www.whitehouse.gov/joiningforces/. 

3See https://sites.ed.gov/idea/idea-files/letter-tostate-directos-of-special-education-on-ensuring-ahigh-quality-education-for-highly-mobile-childrennovember-10-2022/. 

of Children with Disabilities, Assistance 

Listing Number 84.326M. This notice 

relates to the approved information 

collection under OMB control number 

1820–0028. 

DATES: 

Applications Available: February 14, 

2024. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 24, 2024. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 24, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for 

obtaining and submitting an 

application, please refer to our Common 

Instructions for Applicants to 

Department of Education Discretionary 

Grant Programs, published in the 

Federal Register on December 7, 2022 

(87 FR 75045), and available at 

www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carmen Sanchez, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 4A10, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 987–0117. Email: 

carmen.sanchez@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: 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination to Improve Services and 

Results for Children with Disabilities 

program is to promote academic 

achievement and to improve results for 

children with disabilities by providing 

technical assistance (TA), supporting 

model demonstration projects, 

disseminating useful information, and 

implementing activities that are 

supported by scientifically based 

research. 

Priorities: This competition includes 

one absolute priority and, within that 

absolute priority, one competitive 

preference priority. In accordance with 

34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), the absolute 

priority is from allowable activities 

specified in or otherwise authorized in 

sections 663 and 681(d) of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1463 and 

1481(d)). 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2024 and 

any subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition, this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

Model Demonstration Projects to 

Develop Equitable Family Engagement 

with Underserved Families of Children 

with Disabilities. 

Background 

Model demonstrations to improve 

early intervention, educational, or 

transitional results for children with 

disabilities and their families have been 

authorized under the IDEA since the 

law’s inception. For the purposes of this 

priority, a model is a set of existing 

evidence-based practices, including 

interventions and implementation 

strategies (i.e., core model components), 

that research suggests will improve 

outcomes for children, families, 

personnel, administrators, or systems, 

when implemented with fidelity. Model 

demonstrations involve investigating 

the degree to which a given model can 

be implemented and sustained in realworld settings, by staff employed in 

those settings, while achieving 

outcomes similar to those attained 

under research conditions. 

The work of the proposed models is 

consistent with the Secretary’s 

Supplemental Priorities, published in 

the Federal Register on December 10, 

2021 (86 FR 70612), as well as ‘‘Raise 

the Bar: Lead the World’’,1 through its 

focus on promoting equity in student 

access to educational resources and 

opportunities; meeting student social, 

emotional, and academic needs; and 

strengthening cross-agency coordination 

and community engagement to advance 

systemic change. Proposed models may 

also address a competitive preference 

priority that builds on the absolute 

priority by being responsive to the focus 

in the First Lady’s Joining Forces 

initiative 2 whose mission is to support 

military families, including families of 

service members and veterans, 

caregivers, and survivors. The initiative 

includes a focus on military child 

education, and specifically advancing 

programming to support militaryconnected children in their classrooms 

and help ease the burdens created by 

the highly mobile military lifestyle. For 

military-connected children with 

disabilities this includes simplifying 

and streamlining the onboarding 

process into a new school system, 

facilitating the transfer of individualized 

education programs (IEPs) from 

students’ previous schools into their 

new schools, and providing required 

services to children and families 

without disruptions in educational 

programming when there is a change in 

duty station. This focus is aligned with 

the Department’s focus on supporting 

military-connected and other highly 

mobile children with disabilities 

outlined in a February 2022 Letter to 

State Directors of Special Education on 

Ensuring a High-Quality Education for 

Highly Mobile Children, which provided 

resources and guidance for States, 

school districts, school staff, parents, 

families, and others on ensuring that 

highly mobile children with disabilities 

receive required special education and 

related services designed to meet their 

unique needs in a timely manner.3

Decades of research have shown the 

positive relationship between family 

engagement and improved outcomes for 

children (Fan & Chen, 2001; Henderson 

& Mapp, 2002; Hill & Tyson, 2009; 

Jeynes, 2005, 2007, 2012; Kim & Hill, 

2015). The growing evidence base 

indicates that children with disabilities 

benefit when their families are 

systemically engaged in their education 

in ways that are responsive to the 

families’ strengths, needs, cultures, and 

experiences. While not independently 

explored in the research, it stands to 

reason that systematic and responsive 

family engagement is particularly 

important when supporting military 

families with their unique strengths, 

needs, cultures, and experiences. 

IDEA, through its emphasis on 

empowering parents to understand their 

rights and responsibilities under the law 

and by placing families at the center of 

the individualized education program 

process, has emphasized the importance 

of engaging families of children with 

disabilities. Furthermore, IDEA places 

families as vital partners with schools, 

districts, and States in creating systemic 

change through the development and 

implementation of comprehensive 

strategies to improve outcomes for 

children with disabilities (section 650(2) 

of IDEA; 20 U.S.C. 1450(c)). 

Schools often have difficulty 

effectively supporting family 

engagement practices and instead focus 

on narrow ideas of family participation 

(e.g., participating in back-to-school 

nights or parent teacher organization 

fundraisers) that disengage many 

families, and particularly disempower 

and exclude underserved families of 

children with disabilities (BaquedanoLopez et al., 2013; Doucet, 2011; 

Dyrness, 2009; Lareau & Horvat, 1999; 

Olivos, 2006; Xu, 2020). Family 

disempowerment and inequity, created 

when schools do not account for the 

lived realities of underserved families 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 11259 

4For purposes of this priority, ‘‘evidence-based’’ 

means the proposed project component is 

supported by promising evidence, which is 

evidence of the effectiveness of a key project 

component in improving a ‘‘relevant outcome’’ (as 

defined in 34 CFR 77.1), based on a relevant finding 

from one of the sources identified under ‘‘promising 

evidence’’ in 34 CFR 77.1. 

5For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘underserved 

families’’ refers to foster, kinship, migrant, 

technologically unconnected, and military- or 

veteran-connected families; and families of color, 

living in poverty, without documentation of 

immigration status, experiencing homelessness or 

housing insecurity, or impacted by the justice 

system, including the juvenile justice system. 

Underserved families also refers to families that 

include: members of a federally or State recognized 

Indian Tribe; English learners; adults who 

experience a disability; members who are lesbian, 

gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, or 

intersex (LGBTQI+); adults in need of improving 

their basic skills or with limited literacy; and 

disconnected adults. 

6For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘family 

engagement’’ refers to the systematic inclusion of 

families in activities and programs that promote 

children’s development, learning, and wellness, 

including in the planning, development, and 

evaluation of such activities, programs, and 

systems. 

within their communities, mirrors the 

deep educational inequities in their 

children’s experiences, (Buren et al., 

2020) and can increase the 

disproportionate representation of 

underserved children in some disability 

categories, disproportionate discipline, 

and placement in more restrictive and 

segregated settings (Kramarczuk 

Voulgarides et al., 2017). 

To support the engagement of 

underserved families, research points to 

the need to create ongoing, dynamic, 

and equitable collaborations that 

reorganize power structures, develop 

sustainable relationships (Ishimaru, 

2020), and are culturally and 

linguistically responsive and trauma 

informed. Equitable collaborations 

between schools, underserved families, 

and their communities show promise in 

creating sustainable structural changes 

that improve educational outcomes for 

underserved children, including 

children with disabilities (Ishimaru, 

2020). 

To improve outcomes for children 

with disabilities, including militaryconnected children with disabilities, the 

Department is funding school-based 

models of equitable family engagement 

that systemically involve underserved 

families of children with disabilities as 

partners and leaders in creating more 

equitable and inclusive schools that are 

responsive to the families’ priorities, 

strengths, and needs. 

Priority 

The purpose of this priority is to fund 

four cooperative agreements to establish 

and operate evidence-based 4 model 

demonstration projects. The models 

must implement sustainable, 

schoolwide policies, practices, and 

strategies that systemically engage 

underserved families 5 of children with 

disabilities as partners and leaders in 

creating more equitable and inclusive 

schools that lead to improved outcomes 

for children with disabilities. 

The models must address the 

infrastructure (e.g., implementation 

teams, data systems) and ongoing 

supports needed to foster the 

development, implementation, and 

evaluation of sustainable, schoolwide 

family engagement 6 policies, practices, 

and strategies that systemically involve 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities to create more equitable and 

inclusive schools that are responsive to 

the priorities, strengths and needs of 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities. 

The models must demonstrate 

methods for identifying evidence-based 

strategies that build the capacity of 

school personnel and underserved 

families of children with disabilities to 

jointly develop and implement 

sustainable, equitable, and inclusive 

systemic change. 

The models must capture information 

about challenges to implementation and 

determine what system supports may 

assist in meeting those challenges. 

Additionally, the models must use data 

to provide information about how the 

models affect family engagement 

policies, strategies, and practices within 

schools; school personnel’s capacity to 

engage with underserved families of 

children with disabilities and their 

communities; underserved families’ 

engagement and leadership in school 

activities; and systemic change that 

leads to more equitable and inclusive 

schools that improve outcomes for 

underserved children with disabilities. 

The model demonstration projects 

must assess how models can— 

(a) Increase the sustainable 

implementation of school policies, 

strategies, and practices that support the 

engagement of underserved families of 

children with disabilities; 

(b) Increase the capacity of school 

personnel, underserved families of 

children with disabilities and their 

communities to build trusting 

relationships that support children with 

disabilities’ learning and achievement; 

(c) Increase the capacity of 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities to be leaders in partnership 

with school personnel in setting policy, 

making decisions, and implementing 

practices; 

(d) Increase the engagement of 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities and their children with 

disabilities in school and extracurricular 

activities; and 

(e) Improve the academic, social, 

emotional, and behavioral development 

and outcomes for underserved children 

with disabilities; increase access for 

underserved children with disabilities 

to general education and extracurricular 

activities with their peers without 

disabilities; and decrease 

disproportionality in the identification, 

placement, and discipline of 

underserved children with disabilities. 

Applicants must propose models that 

meet the following requirements: 

(a) The model’s core intervention 

components must include— 

(1) Family engagement practices 

based on evidence; 

(2) Practices to build the capacity of 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities to engage with school 

personnel and act as leaders in systemic 

change; 

(3) Practices to build the capacity of 

school personnel to engage with 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities and their communities; 

(4) Practices that enable school 

personnel, underserved families of 

children with disabilities and their 

communities to jointly develop and 

implement systemic changes reflective 

of families’ priorities, strengths, and 

needs; 

(5) Methods for implementing 

capacity building activities for school 

personnel and underserved families of 

children with disabilities and their 

communities; 

(6) Methods for measuring the impact 

of the model, including fidelity 

measures on the implementation of the 

practices, and data on increased 

equitable engagement between school 

personnel and underserved families of 

children with disabilities; decreased 

disproportionate application of 

practices in identification, placement, 

and discipline for underserved children 

with disabilities; and improved 

outcomes of children with disabilities; 

(7) Measures of the model’s social 

validity, i.e., measures of school 

personnel’s and underserved families’, 

satisfaction with the model components, 

processes, and outcomes; and 

(8) Procedures to refine the model 

based on data from the ongoing fidelity 

measures on the implementation of the 

practices, and the data collected on 

improved outcomes and increased 

capacity. 

(b) The model’s core implementation 

components must include— 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
11260 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 

7For factors to consider when selecting model 

demonstration sites, the applicant should refer to 

Assessing Sites for Model Demonstration: Lessons 

Learned for OSEP Grantees at mdcc.sri.com/ 

documents/MDCC_Site_Assessment_Brief_09–30– 

11.pdf. The document also contains a site 

assessment tool. 

8For factors to consider when preparing for 

model demonstration implementation, the 

applicant should refer to Preparing for Model 

Demonstration Implementation at mdcc.sri.com/ 

documents/MDCC_PreparationStage_Brief_

Apr2013.pdf. 

9As defined in 34 CFR 77.1, ‘‘logic model’’ (also 

referred to as a theory of action) means a framework 

that identifies key project components of the 

proposed project (i.e., the active ‘‘ingredients’’ that 

are hypothesized to be critical to achieving the 

relevant outcomes) and describes the theoretical 

and operational relationships among the key project 

components and relevant outcomes. 

(1) Criteria and strategies used to 

select 7 and recruit a minimum of three 

sites, which include demographic 

information, community context, and 

school initiatives, including approaches 

to introducing the model to, and 

promoting the model among, site 

participants.8 Applicants are 

encouraged to choose sites in a variety 

of communities (e.g., urban, rural, 

suburban). The sites must include 

various families and underserved 

families, whether defined by race, 

ethnicity, socioeconomic status, 

religious affiliation, family composition, 

or military connection among others; 

and have the need to improve equity 

and inclusion as demonstrated by 

disproportionality in the identification, 

placement, discipline, or outcomes of 

underserved children with disabilities. 

The selected sites can include any 

combination of grades from Pre-K 

through high school. 

(2) A staggered implementation 

design, which allows for model 

development and refinement at the first 

site in year one of the project period, 

with sites two and three implementing 

a revised model based on data from the 

first site beginning in subsequent project 

years; 

(3) A professional development 

component that includes a strategy to 

work with school personnel and 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities, to enable sites to 

implement, with fidelity, models of 

schoolwide equitable family 

engagement that systemically involve 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities as partners and leaders; and 

(4) Measures of the results of the 

professional development required by 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 

(c) The core strategies for sustaining 

the model must include— 

(1) Procedures and materials that 

permit current and future site-based 

staff to replicate or appropriately tailor 

and sustain the model at any site; 

(2) Guidelines and procedures to— 

(i) Provide professional development 

activities to build school personnel’s 

capacity to systematically and equitably 

engage with underserved families of 

children with disabilities, and build 

underserved families’ leadership 

capacity; 

(ii) Implement system changes to 

improve equitable engagement and 

shared leadership between school 

personnel and underserved families of 

children with disabilities; 

(iii) Administer activities that allow 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities to take on leadership roles 

within schools; 

(iv) Identify and establish 

collaborations with the communities to 

which the underserved families belong; 

(v) Identify the strengths, needs, and 

priorities of underserved families of 

children with disabilities through the 

collaborative collection and analysis of 

data by school personnel and 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities and their communities; 

(vi) Create and implement 

sustainable, equitable, and inclusive 

systemic changes that reflect the 

strengths, needs, and priorities of 

underserved families of children with 

disabilities; and 

(vii) Collect, analyze, and use data 

regarding the engagement of 

underserved children with disabilities 

in schools and the impact of that 

engagement on— 

(A) Academic, social, emotional, and 

behavioral development and outcomes 

for underserved children with 

disabilities; 

(B) Increased access for underserved 

children with disabilities to general 

education and extracurricular activities 

with their peers without disabilities; 

and 

(C) Decreased disproportionality in 

the identification, placement, and 

discipline of underserved children with 

disabilities; 

(3) Strategies for the grantee to 

develop a manual, toolkit and other 

user-friendly and widely accessible 

resources for disseminating information 

on the final version of the model by the 

end of the grant period, such as 

developing easily accessible online 

products that specify model core 

components critical for improving 

outcomes, professional development 

materials, fidelity measures, key 

outcomes from the model (e.g. increases 

in the equity of referrals), and 

implementation procedures for 

disseminating the model and its 

components; and 

(4) Strategies for the grantee to assist 

schools and school districts to scale up 

a model and its components. 

To be considered for funding under 

this absolute priority, applicants must 

meet the requirements contained in this 

priority. 

Application Requirements 

An applicant must include in its 

application— 

(a) A detailed review of the literature 

addressing the proposed evidence-based 

model or its implementation 

components and the proposed processes 

to develop equitable and schoolwide 

family engagement with underserved 

families of children with disabilities 

that systemically involve them as 

partners and leaders; 

(b) A logic model 9 that depicts, at a 

minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, 

and outcomes (described in the 

requirements in paragraph (a) under the 

heading Priority) of the proposed model 

demonstration project. 

Note: The following websites provide 

resources for constructing logic models: 

https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/ 

default/files/2021-12/ 

ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf 

and www.osepideasthatwork.org/ 

resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/ 

tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptualframework; 

(c) A description of the activities and 

measures to be incorporated into the 

proposed model demonstration project 

(i.e., the project design) to develop 

equitable and schoolwide family 

engagement with underserved families 

of children with disabilities that 

systemically involve them as partners 

and leaders. A detailed and complete 

description must include the following: 

(1) Each of the capacity building, 

collaboration, and data gathering 

components; 

(2) The existing and proposed 

measures of fidelity of the 

implementation of equitable and 

schoolwide family engagement and 

capacity building activities as well as 

social validity measures. The measures 

must be described as completely as 

possible, referenced as appropriate, and 

included, when available, in Appendix 

A; 

(3) Each of the implementation 

components, including, at a minimum, 

those listed under requirements 

paragraph (b) under the heading 

Priority. The existing or proposed 

implementation fidelity measures must 

be described as completely as possible, 

referenced as appropriate, and included, 

when available, in Appendix A. In 

addition, this description must 

include— 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 11261 

10See the IES Cost Analysis Starter Kit at https:// 

ies.ed.gov/seer/cost_analysis.asp. 

(i) Demographics of the sites that have 

been identified and successfully 

recruited as implementation sites for the 

purposes of completing an application 

using the selection and recruitment 

strategies described in requirements 

paragraph (b)(1) under the heading 

Priority. The demographic data should 

include the race and ethnicity, 

socioeconomic status, military 

connectedness, and primary home 

language of all families; the number of 

families of children with disabilities in 

the schools’ catchment area, and the 

larger school community; and indicators 

of the extent to which schools are 

equitable and inclusive, including 

identification rates for special 

education, placement data, discipline 

data, and outcomes of underserved 

children with disabilities; 

Note: Applicants are encouraged to 

identify, to the extent possible, the sites 

willing to participate in the applicant’s 

model demonstration. Final site 

selection will be determined in 

consultation with the Office of Special 

Education Programs (OSEP) project 

officer following the kick-off meeting 

described in paragraph (f)(1) of these 

application requirements; and 

(ii) The staggered implementation 

design for implementation consistent 

with the requirements in paragraph 

(b)(2) under the heading Priority; 

(4) Each of the strategies to promote 

sustaining and replicating the model, 

including, at a minimum, those listed 

under requirements paragraph (c) under 

the heading Priority; and 

(5) The cost of the fully developed 

model and its implementation, 

including the resources used by the 

model as well as their actual or 

estimated costs; 10

(d) A description of the evaluation 

activities and measures to be 

incorporated into the proposed model 

demonstration project. A detailed and 

complete description must include— 

(1) A formative evaluation plan, 

consistent with the project’s logic 

model, that includes evaluation 

questions, sources of data, a timeline for 

data collection, and analysis plans. The 

plan must show how the outcome data 

(e.g., engagement, capacity, and social 

validity measures) and implementation 

data (e.g., fidelity, effectiveness of 

school personnel professional 

development and capacity building 

activities, effectiveness of family 

capacity building, and effectiveness of 

activities that result in systemic 

changes) will be used separately or in 

combination to improve the project 

during the project period. These data 

will be reported in the annual 

performance report (APR). The plan also 

must outline how these data will be 

reviewed by project staff, when they 

will be reviewed, and how they will be 

used during the course of the project to 

adjust the model or its implementation 

to increase the model’s usefulness, 

generalizability, and potential for 

sustainability; and 

(2) A summative evaluation plan, 

including a timeline, to collect and 

analyze data on changes in the 

engagement of underserved families of 

children with disabilities, student 

outcomes, and systems improvements 

over time that can be reasonably 

attributable to project activities. The 

plan must show how the family, 

student, or system outcome and 

implementation data collected by the 

project will be used separately or in 

combination to demonstrate the promise 

of the model; 

(e) A plan to disseminate the results 

of the project, including the findings 

that show the model had a beneficial 

effect on outcomes, the final version of 

the implemented model, and its 

associated products (such as curricula, 

professional development materials, 

implementation procedures, measures 

and assessments, guides, and toolkits). 

The dissemination plan must include 

the audiences who would most likely 

benefit from implementing the model 

and detailed strategies for reaching 

these audiences. 

(1) In disseminating the results of the 

project, grantees must, at a minimum, 

conduct at least four of the following six 

activities: 

(i) Promote the model to potential 

users through the grant’s website or 

social media; 

(ii) Promote the model to potential 

users through presentations at national 

meetings or conferences or publishing 

journal articles; 

(iii) Promote the model in personnel 

preparation programs at institutions of 

higher education; 

(iv) Promote the model to 

Department-funded dissemination 

networks (e.g., OSEP TA Centers, 

Regional Education Labs, 

Comprehensive Centers); 

(v) Provide training on model 

implementation to State educational 

agencies (SEAs), local educational 

agencies (LEAs), schools, early 

childhood programs or other new sites; 

and 

(vi) Apply for additional funding to 

continue model dissemination and scale 

up to new sites. 

(2) To facilitate implementation of the 

model in new sites, grantees may also 

consider collaborating with OSEPfunded TA centers, personnel 

preparation programs, and OSEP-funded 

State Personnel Development Grant 

projects; providing webinars, training 

sessions, or workshops to State and 

local agencies; and engaging with other 

federally funded TA centers, research 

networks, or Regional Educational 

Laboratories; and 

(f) A budget for attendance at the 

following: 

(1) A one and one-half day virtual 

kickoff meeting, after receipt of the 

award; 

(2) A three-day project directors’ 

conference in Washington, DC, during 

each year of the project period. The 

project must reallocate funds for travel 

to the project directors’ conference no 

later than the end of the third quarter of 

each budget period if the conference is 

conducted virtually; and 

(3) Four travel days spread across 

years two through four of the project 

period to attend planning meetings, 

Department briefings, Departmentsponsored conferences, and other 

meetings, as requested by OSEP. 

Other Project Activities 

To meet the requirements of this 

priority, each project, at a minimum, 

must— 

(a) Communicate and collaborate on 

an ongoing basis with other Departmentfunded projects, consistent with 

paragraph (e) under the heading 

Application Requirements; 

(b) Maintain ongoing telephone and 

email communication with the OSEP 

project officer and the other model 

demonstration projects funded under 

this priority; 

(c) Provide information annually 

using a template that captures 

descriptive data on project site selection 

and the process of implementing the 

model in the sites. 

Note: The following website provides 

more information about implementation 

research: https://

implementation.fpg.unc.edu/. 

(d) If the project maintains a website, 

include relevant information about the 

model, the intervention, and the 

demonstration activities and ensure that 

the website meets or exceeds 

government- or industry-recognized 

standards for accessibility; and 

(e) Ensure that annual progress 

toward meeting project goals is posted 

on a public website. 

Fifth Year of Project 

The Secretary may extend a project 

one year beyond the initial 48 months 

to disseminate the results of the project 

if the grantee is achieving the intended 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
11262 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 

11A military-connected student is defined as a 

student whose parent or guardian is on active duty, 

in the National Guard, or in the Reserve 

components of the United States military services. 

outcomes of the project (as 

demonstrated by data gathered as part of 

the project evaluation) and making a 

positive contribution to identifying the 

system supports needed to implement 

the model. Each applicant must include 

in its application a plan for the full 60- 

month period. The fifth year should be 

budgeted at $100,000. In deciding 

whether to continue funding the project 

for the fifth year, the Secretary will 

consider the requirements of 34 CFR 

75.253(a), including— 

(a) The recommendations of a review 

team consisting of the OSEP project 

officer and other experts who have 

experience and knowledge in family 

engagement and children with 

disabilities. This review will be held 

during the first half of the fourth year of 

the project period; 

(b) The success and timeliness with 

which the requirements of the 

negotiated cooperative agreement have 

been or are being met by the project; and 

(c) The degree to which the project’s 

activities have contributed to changed 

practices and improved outcomes for 

children with disabilities. 

Competitive Preference Priority: 

Within this absolute priority, we give 

competitive preference to applications 

that address the following priority. 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award 

up to an additional 9 points to an 

application that meets the competitive 

preference priority. Applicants should 

indicate in the abstract whether the 

competitive preference priority is 

addressed. 

The competitive preference priority 

is: 

Models in Schools with High 

Percentages of Military-Connected 

Students (0, 5, 7, or 9 points). 

(a) Under this priority, applicants will 

receive five points if they propose to 

locate one site for the model in a school 

with a high percentage of militaryconnected 11 students, seven points if 

they propose to locate two sites for the 

model in schools with a high percentage 

of military-connected students, and nine 

points if they propose to locate three or 

more sites for the model in schools with 

a high percentage of military-connected 

students. Applicants must include a 

letter of commitment from the proposed 

sites describing how the unique needs 

of military-connected families— 

including simplifying and streamlining 

the onboarding process into the new 

school system, facilitating the transfer of 

IEPs without a major disruption in 

service delivery, and providing required 

services to children without disruptions 

in educational programming—will be 

addressed in the implementation of the 

model. 

(b) For the purpose of this priority, a 

high percentage of military-connected 

students is 20 percent or higher of the 

school population. 

References 

Baquedano-Lopez, P., Alexander, R.A., 

& Hernandez, S.J. (2013). Equity 

issues in parental and community 

involvement in schools: What 

teacher educators need to know. 

Review of Research in Education, 

37, 149–182. www.jstor.org/stable/ 

24641960. 

Buren, M., Maggin, D., & Brown, C. 

(2020). Meta-synthesis on the 

experiences of families from 

nondominant communities and 

special education collaboration. 

Exceptionality, 28(4), 259–278. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/ 

09362835.2018.1480953. 

Doucet, F. (2011). (Re)Constructing 

home and school: Immigrant 

parents, agency, and the 

(un)desirability of bridging multiple 

worlds. Teachers College Record, 

113(12), 2705–2738. https://doi.org/ 

10.1177/016146811111301201. 

Dyrness, A. (2009). Cultural exclusion 

and critique in the era of good 

intentions: Using participatory 

research to transform parent roles in 

urban school reform. Social Justice, 

36(4)(118), 36–53. www.jstor.org/ 

stable/29768560. 

Fan, X., & Chen, M. (2001). Parental 

involvement and students’ 

academic achievement: A metaanalysis. Educational Psychology 

Review, 13(1), 1–22. www.jstor.org/ 

stable/23358867. 

Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). 

A new wave of evidence: The 

impact of school, family, and 

community connections on student 

achievement. National Center for 

Family and Community 

Connections with Schools, 

Southwest Educational 

Development Laboratory. https://

eric.ed.gov/?id=ED536946. 

Hill, N.E., & Tyson, D.F. (2009). Parental 

involvement in middle school: A 

meta-analytic assessment of the 

strategies that promote 

achievement. Development 

Psychology, 45(3), 740–763. https:// 

doi.org/10.1037/a0015362. 

Ishimaru, A.M. (2020). Just schools: 

Building equitable collaborations 

with families and communities. 

Teachers College Press. 

Jeynes, W.H. (2005). A meta-analysis of 

the relation of parental involvement 

to urban elementary school student 

academic achievement. Urban 

Education, 40(3), 237–269. https://

doi.org/10.1177/ 

0042085905274540. 

Jeynes, W.H. (2007). The relationship 

between parental involvement and 

urban secondary school student 

academic achievement: A metaanalysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 

82–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 

0042085906293818. 

Jeynes, W.H. (2012). A meta-analysis of 

the efficacy of different types of 

parental involvement programs for 

urban students. Urban Education, 

47(4), 706–742. https://doi.org/ 

10.1177/0042085912445643. 

Kim, S.W., & Hill, N.E. (2015). Including 

fathers in the picture: A metaanalysis of parental involvement 

and students’ academic 

achievement. Journal of 

Educational Psychology, 107(4), 

919–934. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 

edu0000023. 

Kramarczuk Voulgarides, C., Fergus, E., 

& King Thorius, K.A. (2017). 

Pursuing equity: Disproportionality 

in special education and the 

reframing of technical solutions to 

address systemic inequities. Review 

of Research in Education, 41(1), 61– 

87. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 

0091732X16686947. 

Lareau, A., & Horvat, E.M. (1999). 

Moments of social inclusion and 

exclusion race, class, and cultural 

capital in family-school 

relationships. Sociology of 

Education, 72(1), 37–53. https://

doi.org/10.2307/2673185. 

Olivos, E.M. (2006). The power of 

parents: A critical perspective of 

bicultural parent involvement in 

public schools. Peter Lang New 

York. 

Xu, Y. (2020). Engaging families of 

young children with disabilities 

through family-school-community 

partnerships. Early Child 

Development and Care, 190(12), 

1959–1968. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 

03004430.2018.1552950. 

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: 

Under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department 

generally offers interested parties the 

opportunity to comment on proposed 

priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA, 

however, makes the public comment 

requirements of the APA inapplicable to 

the priorities in this notice. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 

and 1481. 

Note: Projects will be awarded and 

must be operated in a manner consistent 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 11263 

with the nondiscrimination 

requirements contained in Federal civil 

rights laws. 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR 

parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, 

and 99. (b) The Office of Management 

and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on 

Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR 

part 180, as adopted and amended as 

regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3485. (c) The Uniform 

Administrative Requirements, Cost 

Principles, and Audit Requirements for 

Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as 

adopted and amended as regulations of 

the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

79 apply to all applicants except 

federally recognized Indian Tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

86 apply to institutions of higher 

education (IHEs) only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

agreements. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration has requested 

$55,345,000 for the Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination to 

Improve Services and Results for 

Children with Disabilities program for 

FY 2024, of which we intend to use an 

estimated $1,600,000 for this 

competition. The actual level of 

funding, if any, depends on final 

congressional action. However, we are 

inviting applications to allow enough 

time to complete the grant process if 

Congress appropriates funds for this 

program. 

Contingent upon the availability of 

funds and the quality of applications, 

we may make additional awards in FY 

2025 from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition. 

Estimated Range of Awards: $300,000 

to $400,000. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$350,000. 

Maximum Award: We will not make 

an award exceeding $1,600,000 per 

project for a project period of 60 

months. 

Note: Applicants must describe, in 

their applications, the amount of 

funding being requested for each 12- 

month budget period. The fifth-year 

budget period should be budgeted at 

$100,000. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 4. 

Note: The Department is not bound by 

any estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 60 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, 

including charter schools that are 

considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; 

other public agencies; private nonprofit 

organizations; outlying areas; freely 

associated States; Indian Tribes or 

Tribal organizations; and for-profit 

organizations. 

Note: If you are a nonprofit 

organization, under 34 CFR 75.51, you 

may demonstrate your nonprofit status 

by providing: (1) proof that the Internal 

Revenue Service currently recognizes 

the applicant as an organization to 

which contributions are tax deductible 

under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal 

Revenue Code; (2) a statement from a 

State taxing body or the State attorney 

general certifying that the organization 

is a nonprofit organization operating 

within the State and that no part of its 

net earnings may lawfully benefit any 

private shareholder or individual; (3) a 

certified copy of the applicant’s 

certificate of incorporation or similar 

document if it clearly establishes the 

nonprofit status of the applicant; or (4) 

any item described above if that item 

applies to a State or national parent 

organization, together with a statement 

by the State or parent organization that 

the applicant is a local nonprofit 

affiliate. 

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This 

competition does not require cost 

sharing or matching. 

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This 

program uses an unrestricted indirect 

cost rate. For more information 

regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a 

negotiated indirect cost rate, please see 

www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/ 

intro.html. 

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: 

This program does not include any 

program-specific limitation on 

administrative expenses. All 

administrative expenses must be 

reasonable and necessary and conform 

to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR 

part 200 subpart E of the Uniform 

Guidance. 

3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 

75.708(b) and (c), a grantee under this 

competition may award subgrants—to 

directly carry out project activities 

described in its application—to the 

following types of entities: IHEs, 

nonprofit organizations suitable to carry 

out the activities proposed in the 

application, and other public agencies. 

The grantee may award subgrants to 

entities it has identified in an approved 

application or that it selects through a 

competition under procedures 

established by the grantee, consistent 

with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2). 

4. Other General Requirements: 

a. Recipients of funding under this 

competition must make positive efforts 

to employ and advance in employment 

qualified individuals with disabilities 

(see section 606 of IDEA). 

b. Applicants for, and recipients of, 

funding must, with respect to the 

aspects of their proposed project 

relating to the absolute priority, involve 

individuals with disabilities, or parents 

of individuals with disabilities ages 

birth through 26, in planning, 

implementing, and evaluating the 

project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of 

IDEA). 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Application Submission 

Instructions: Applicants are required to 

follow the Common Instructions for 

Applicants to Department of Education 

Discretionary Grant Programs, 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 7, 2022 (87 FR 75045), and 

available at www.federalregister.gov/d/ 

2022-26554, which contain 

requirements and information on how to 

submit an application. 

2. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference 

regulations outlining funding 

restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

4. Recommended Page Limit: The 

application narrative is where you, the 

applicant, address the selection criteria 

that reviewers use to evaluate your 

application. We recommend that you (1) 

limit the application narrative to no 

more than 50 pages and (2) use the 

following standards: 

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5′′ x 11′′, on one side 

only, with 1′′ margins at the top, bottom, 

and both sides. 

• Double-space (no more than three 

lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application narrative, including titles, 

headings, footnotes, quotations, 

reference citations, and captions, as well 

as all text in charts, tables, figures, 

graphs, and screen shots. 

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger. 

• Use one of the following fonts: 

Times New Roman, Courier, Courier 

New, or Arial. 

The recommended page limit does not 

apply to the cover sheet; the budget 

section, including the narrative budget 

justification; the assurances and 

certifications; or the abstract (follow the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
11264 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 

guidance provided in the application 

package for completing the abstract), the 

table of contents, the list of priority 

requirements, the resumes, the reference 

list, the letters of support, or the 

appendices. However, the 

recommended page limit does apply to 

all of the application narrative, 

including all text in charts, tables, 

figures, graphs, and screen shots. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this competition are from 34 

CFR 75.210 and are as follows: 

(a) Significance (15 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

significance of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the significance of 

the proposed project, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The potential contribution of the 

proposed project to increased 

knowledge or understanding of 

educational problems, issues, or 

effective strategies; 

(ii) The extent to which the proposed 

project is likely to build local capacity 

to provide, improve, or expand services 

that address the needs of the target 

population; 

(iii) The importance or magnitude of 

the results or outcomes likely to be 

attained by the proposed project, 

especially improvements in teaching 

and student achievement; and 

(iv) The likely utility of the products 

(such as information, materials, 

processes, or techniques) that will result 

from the proposed project, including the 

potential for their being used effectively 

in a variety of other settings. 

(b) Quality of the project design (35 

points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the design of the proposed 

project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

design of the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The extent to which the goals, 

objectives, and outcomes to be achieved 

by the proposed project are clearly 

specified and measurable; 

(ii) The extent to which the design of 

the proposed project includes a 

thorough, high-quality review of the 

relevant literature, a high-quality plan 

for project implementation, and the use 

of appropriate methodological tools to 

ensure successful achievement of 

project objectives; 

(iii) The quality of the proposed 

demonstration design and procedures 

for documenting project activities and 

results; 

(iv) The extent to which the design for 

implementing and evaluating the 

proposed project will result in 

information to guide possible 

replication of project activities or 

strategies, including information about 

the effectiveness of the approach or 

strategies employed by the project; and 

(v) The extent to which performance 

feedback and continuous improvement 

are integral to the design of the 

proposed project. 

(c) Adequacy of resources and quality 

of the management plan (25 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

adequacy of resources and the quality of 

the management plan for the proposed 

project. 

(2) In determining the adequacy of 

resources and the quality of the 

management plan for the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The adequacy of support, including 

facilities, equipment, supplies, and 

other resources, from the applicant 

organization or the lead applicant 

organization; 

(ii) The relevance and demonstrated 

commitment of each partner in the 

proposed project to the implementation 

and success of the project; 

(iii) The extent to which the time 

commitments of the project director and 

principal investigator and other key 

project personnel are appropriate and 

adequate to meet the objectives of the 

proposed project; 

(iv) How the applicant will ensure 

that a diversity of perspectives are 

brought to bear in the operation of the 

proposed project, including those of 

parents, teachers, the business 

community, a variety of disciplinary 

and professional fields, recipients or 

beneficiaries of services, or others, as 

appropriate; and 

(v) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project 

tasks. 

(d) Quality of the project evaluation 

(25 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the evaluation to be 

conducted of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

evaluation, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and 

appropriate to the goals, objectives, and 

outcomes of the proposed project; 

(ii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment of progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes; 

(iii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation provide for examining the 

effectiveness of project implementation 

strategies; 

(iv) The extent to which the 

evaluation will provide guidance about 

effective strategies suitable for 

replication or testing in other settings; 

and 

(v) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation include the use of 

objective performance measures that are 

clearly related to the intended outcomes 

of the project and will produce 

quantitative and qualitative data to the 

extent possible. 

2. Review and Selection Process: We 

remind potential applicants that in 

reviewing applications in any 

discretionary grant competition, the 

Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 

75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the 

applicant in carrying out a previous 

award, such as the applicant’s use of 

funds, achievement of project 

objectives, and compliance with grant 

conditions. The Secretary may also 

consider whether the applicant failed to 

submit a timely performance report or 

submitted a report of unacceptable 

quality. 

In addition, in making a competitive 

grant award, the Secretary requires 

various assurances, including those 

applicable to Federal civil rights laws 

that prohibit discrimination in programs 

or activities receiving Federal financial 

assistance from the Department (34 CFR 

100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

3. Additional Review and Selection 

Process Factors: In the past, the 

Department has had difficulty finding 

peer reviewers for certain competitions 

because so many individuals who are 

eligible to serve as peer reviewers have 

conflicts of interest. The standing panel 

requirements under section 682(b) of 

IDEA also have placed additional 

constraints on the availability of 

reviewers. Therefore, the Department 

has determined that for some 

discretionary grant competitions, 

applications may be separated into two 

or more groups and ranked and selected 

for funding within specific groups. This 

procedure will make it easier for the 

Department to find peer reviewers by 

ensuring that greater numbers of 

individuals who are eligible to serve as 

reviewers for any particular group of 

applicants will not have conflicts of 

interest. It also will increase the quality, 

independence, and fairness of the 

review process, while permitting panel 

members to review applications under 

discretionary grant competitions for 

which they also have submitted 

applications. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 11265 

4. Risk Assessment and Specific 

Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 

200.206, before awarding grants under 

this competition the Department 

conducts a review of the risks posed by 

applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the 

Secretary may impose specific 

conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, in 

appropriate circumstances, high-risk 

conditions on a grant if the applicant or 

grantee is not financially stable; has a 

history of unsatisfactory performance; 

has a financial or other management 

system that does not meet the standards 

in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not 

fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; 

or is otherwise not responsible. 

5. Integrity and Performance System: 

If you are selected under this 

competition to receive an award that 

over the course of the project period 

may exceed the simplified acquisition 

threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 

CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a 

judgment about your integrity, business 

ethics, and record of performance under 

Federal awards—that is, the risk posed 

by you as an applicant—before we make 

an award. In doing so, we must consider 

any information about you that is in the 

integrity and performance system 

(currently referred to as the Federal 

Awardee Performance and Integrity 

Information System (FAPIIS)), 

accessible through the System for 

Award Management. You may review 

and comment on any information about 

yourself that a Federal agency 

previously entered and that is currently 

in FAPIIS. 

Please note that, if the total value of 

your currently active grants, cooperative 

agreements, and procurement contracts 

from the Federal Government exceeds 

$10,000,000, the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, 

require you to report certain integrity 

information to FAPIIS semiannually. 

Please review the requirements in 2 CFR 

part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant 

plus all the other Federal funds you 

receive exceed $10,000,000. 

6. In General: In accordance with the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all 

applicable Federal laws, and relevant 

Executive guidance, the Department 

will review and consider applications 

for funding pursuant to this notice 

inviting applications in accordance 

with— 

(a) Selecting recipients most likely to 

be successful in delivering results based 

on the program objectives through an 

objective process of evaluating Federal 

award applications (2 CFR 200.205); 

(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain 

telecommunication and video 

surveillance services or equipment in 

alignment with section 889 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act of 

2019 (Pub. L. 115–232) (2 CFR 200.216); 

(c) Providing a preference, to the 

extent permitted by law, to maximize 

use of goods, products, and materials 

produced in the United States (2 CFR 

200.322); and 

(d) Terminating agreements in whole 

or in part to the greatest extent 

authorized by law if an award no longer 

effectuates the program goals or agency 

priorities (2 CFR 200.340). 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notification 

(GAN); or we may send you an email 

containing a link to access an electronic 

version of your GAN. We may notify 

you informally, also. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Open Licensing Requirements: 

Unless an exception applies, if you are 

awarded a grant under this competition, 

you will be required to openly license 

to the public grant deliverables created 

in whole, or in part, with Department 

grant funds. When the deliverable 

consists of modifications to pre-existing 

works, the license extends only to those 

modifications that can be separately 

identified and only to the extent that 

open licensing is permitted under the 

terms of any licenses or other legal 

restrictions on the use of pre-existing 

works. Additionally, a grantee that is 

awarded competitive grant funds must 

have a plan to disseminate these public 

grant deliverables. This dissemination 

plan can be developed and submitted 

after your application has been 

reviewed and selected for funding. For 

additional information on the open 

licensing requirements please refer to 2 

CFR 3474.20. 

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a 

grant under this competition, you must 

ensure that you have in place the 

necessary processes and systems to 

comply with the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive 

funding under the competition. This 

does not apply if you have an exception 

under 2 CFR 170.110(b). 

(b) At the end of your project period, 

you must submit a final performance 

report, including financial information, 

as directed by the Secretary. If you 

receive a multiyear award, you must 

submit an APR that provides the most 

current performance and financial 

expenditure information as directed by 

the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The 

Secretary may also require more 

frequent performance reports under 34 

CFR 75.720(c). For specific 

requirements on reporting, please go to 

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

appforms/appforms.html. 

(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the 

Secretary may provide a grantee with 

additional funding for data collection, 

analysis, and reporting. In this case the 

Secretary establishes a data collection 

period. 

5. Performance Measures: For the 

purposes of Department reporting under 

34 CFR 75.110, the Department has 

established a set of performance 

measures, including long-term 

measures, that are designed to yield 

information on various aspects of the 

effectiveness and quality of the Model 

Demonstration Projects to Improve 

Services and Results for Infants, 

Toddlers, and Children with Disabilities 

under the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination to Improve Services and 

Results for Children With Disabilities 

program. These measures are: 

• Current Program Performance 

Measure: The percentage of effective 

evidence-based program models 

developed by model demonstration 

projects that are promoted to States and 

their partners through the Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination Network; 

• Pilot Program Performance 

Measure: The percentage of effective 

program models developed by Model 

Demonstration Grants that are sustained 

beyond the life of the model 

demonstration project and promoted to 

other potential users. 

The current program performance 

measure and the pilot program 

performance measure apply to projects 

funded under this competition, and 

grantees are required to submit data on 

these measures as directed by OSEP. 

Grantees will be required to report 

information on their project’s 

performance in annual and final 

performance reports to the Department 

(34 CFR 75.590). 

6. Continuation Awards: In making a 

continuation award under 34 CFR 

75.253, the Secretary considers, among 

other things: whether a grantee has 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
11266 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 14, 2024 / Notices 

made substantial progress in achieving 

the goals and objectives of the project; 

whether the grantee has expended funds 

in a manner that is consistent with its 

approved application and budget; and, 

if the Secretary has established 

performance measurement 

requirements, whether the grantee has 

made substantial progress in achieving 

the performance targets in the grantee’s 

approved application. 

In making a continuation award, the 

Secretary also considers whether the 

grantee is operating in compliance with 

the assurances in its approved 

application, including those applicable 

to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination in programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance 

from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 

104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

VII. Other Information 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

program contact person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

individuals with disabilities can obtain 

this document and a copy of the 

application package 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 this 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. 

Dante ́ Allen, 

Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services 

Administration, Office of Special Education 

and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2024–02973 Filed 2–13–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

[Docket No.: ED–2024–SCC–0024] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Comment Request; 

Evaluation of the Toolkit To Support 

Evidence-Based Algebra Instruction in 

Middle and High School 

AGENCY: Institute of Education Sciences 

(IES), Department of Education (ED). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 

1995, the Department is proposing a 

new information collection request 

(ICR). 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before April 15, 

2024. 

ADDRESSES: To access and review all the 

documents related to the information 

collection listed in this notice, please 

use http://www.regulations.gov by 

searching the Docket ID number ED– 

2024–SCC–0024. Comments submitted 

in response to this notice should be 

submitted electronically through the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov by selecting the 

Docket ID number or via postal mail, 

commercial delivery, or hand delivery. 

If the regulations.gov site is not 

available to the public for any reason, 

the Department will temporarily accept 

comments at ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. 

Please include the docket ID number 

and the title of the information 

collection request when requesting 

documents or submitting comments. 

Please note that comments submitted 

after the comment period will not be 

accepted. Written requests for 

information or comments submitted by 

postal mail or delivery should be 

addressed to the Manager of the 

Strategic Collections and Clearance 

Governance and Strategy Division, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Ave. SW, LBJ, Room 6W203, 

Washington, DC 20202–8240. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

specific questions related to collection 

activities, please contact Amy Johnson, 

(202) 453–7439. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the 

general public and Federal agencies 

with an opportunity to comment on 

proposed, revised, and continuing 

collections of information. This helps 

the Department assess the impact of its 

information collection requirements and 

minimize the public’s reporting burden. 

It also helps the public understand the 

Department’s information collection 

requirements and provide the requested 

data in the desired format. The 

Department is soliciting comments on 

the proposed information collection 

request (ICR) that is described below. 

The Department is especially interested 

in public comment addressing the 

following issues: (1) is this collection 

necessary to the proper functions of the 

Department; (2) will this information be 

processed and used in a timely manner; 

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate; 

(4) how might the Department enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (5) how 

might the Department minimize the 

burden of this collection on the 

respondents, including through the use 

of information technology. Please note 

that written comments received in 

response to this notice will be 

considered public records. 

Title of Collection: Evaluation of the 

Toolkit to Support Evidence-Based 

Algebra Instruction in Middle and High 

School. 

OMB Control Number: 1850–NEW. 

Type of Review: New ICR. 

Respondents/Affected Public: 

Individuals or Households. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 1,029. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Burden Hours: 348. 

Abstract: The current authorization 

for the Regional Educational 

Laboratories (REL) program is under the 

Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, 

Part D, Section 174, (20 U.S.C. 9564), 

administered by the Department of 

Education, Institute of Education 

Sciences (IES), National Center for 

Education Evaluation and Regional 

Assistance (NCEE). The central mission 

and primary function of the RELs is to 

support applied research and provide 

technical assistance to state and local 

education agencies within their region 

(ESRA, Part D, section 174[f]). The REL 

program’s goal is to partner with 

educators and policymakers to conduct 

work that is change-oriented and 

supports meaningful local, regional, or 

state decisions about education policies, 

programs, and practices to improve 

outcomes for students. 

Even prior to the COVID–19 

pandemic, Algebra 1 proved challenging 

for many students because of the 

extensive abstract thinking it requires 

(Katz, 2007; Susa et al., 2014). To help 

students succeed in Algebra 1, REL 

Central is developing a toolkit of 

professional learning supports to help 

Algebra 1 teachers learn about, make 

sense of, plan for, and implement three 

evidence-based Algebra 1 teaching 

practices that were identified in the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1