Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 15187 

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: The 

Department has established the 

following performance measures for 

Department reporting under 34 CFR 

75.110 for the Mental Health Service 

Professional Demonstration Grant 

Program: 

(a) The unduplicated, cumulative 

number of school-based mental health 

services providers trained by the grantee 

under the project to provide schoolbased mental health services in highneed LEAs. 

(b) The unduplicated, cumulative 

number of school-based mental health 

services providers placed in a practicum 

or internship by the grantee in highneed LEAs to provide school-based 

mental health services. 

(c) The unduplicated, cumulative 

number of school-based mental health 

services providers hired by high-need 

LEAs to provide school-based mental 

health services. 

(d) For grantees that addressed 

Competitive Preference Priority 1, the 

number of such grantees that met their 

goal of increasing the diversity of 

school-based mental health services 

providers. 

These measures constitute the 

Department’s indicators of success for 

this program. Consequently, we advise 

an applicant for a grant under this 

program to give careful consideration to 

these measures in conceptualizing the 

approach and evaluation for its 

proposed project. Each grantee will be 

required to provide, in its annual 

performance and final reports, data 

about its progress in meeting these 

measures. This data will be considered 

by the Department in making potential 

continuation awards. 

Consistent with 34 CFR 75.591, 

grantees funded under this program 

shall cooperate in any evaluation of the 

program conducted by the Department 

or an evaluator selected by the 

Department. 

Performance measure targets: The 

applicant must propose annual targets 

for the measures listed above in their 

application. Applications must also 

provide the following information as 

directed under 34 CFR 75.110(b) and (c): 

(1) An explanation of how each 

proposed performance target is 

ambitious (as defined in this notice) yet 

achievable compared to the baseline (as 

defined in this notice) for the 

performance measure. 

(2) An explanation of the data 

collection and reporting methods the 

applicant would use and why those 

methods are likely to yield reliable, 

valid, and meaningful performance data; 

and 

(3) An explanation of the applicant’s 

capacity to collect and report reliable, 

valid, and meaningful performance data, 

as evidenced by high-quality data 

collection, analysis, and reporting in 

other projects or research. 

Note: If the applicant does not have 

experience with the collection and 

reporting of performance data through 

other projects or research, the applicant 

should provide other evidence of 

capacity to successfully carry out data 

collection and reporting for its proposed 

project. 

The reviewers of each application will 

score related selection criteria on the 

basis of how well an applicant has 

considered these measures in 

conceptualizing the approach and 

evaluation of the project. 

All grantees must submit an annual 

performance report and final 

performance report with information 

that is responsive to these performance 

measures. 

6. Continuation Awards: In making a 

continuation award under 34 CFR 

75.253, the Secretary considers, among 

other things, whether a grantee has 

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 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. 

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. 

[FR Doc. 2024–04356 Filed 2–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; 

Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals With 

Disabilities Program—Stepping-Up 

Technology Implementation 

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 Stepping-up 

Technology Implementation, Assistance 

Listing Number 84.327S. This notice 

relates to the approved information 

collection under OMB control number 

1820–0028. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15188 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 

1Applicants should note that other laws, 

including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.; 28 CFR part 35) and 

section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended (29 U.S.C. 794; 34 CFR part 104), may 

require that State educational agencies (SEAs) and 

local educational agencies (LEAs) provide 

captioning, video description, and other accessible 

educational materials to students with disabilities 

when these materials are necessary to provide 

equally integrated and equally effective access to 

the benefits of the educational program or activity, 

or as part of a ‘‘free appropriate public education’’ 

as defined in 34 CFR 104.33. 

2The term ‘‘artificial intelligence’’ or ‘‘AI’’ has the 

meaning set forth in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3): a machinebased system that can, for a given set of humandefined objectives, make predictions, 

recommendations, or decisions influencing real or 

virtual environments. Artificial intelligence systems 

use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive 

real and virtual environments; abstract such 

perceptions into models through analysis in an 

automated manner; and use model inference to 

formulate options for information or action. 

3For the purposes of this priority, projects must 

meet at least the definition of ‘‘promising 

evidence,’’ which means that there is evidence of 

the effectiveness of a key project component in 

improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant 

finding from one of the following: (a) a practice 

DATES: 

Applications Available: March 1, 

2024. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 30, 2024. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: July 1, 2024. 

Pre-Application Webinar Information: 

No later than March 6, 2024, the Office 

of Special Education Programs and 

Rehabilitative Services will post details 

on pre-recorded informational webinars 

designed to provide technical assistance 

to interested applicants. Links to the 

webinars may be found at https://

www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/ 

new-osep-grants.html. 

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/documents/ 

2022/12/07/2022-26554/commoninstructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anita Vermeer, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 4A10, Washington, DC 20202. 

Telephone: (202) 987–0155. Email: 

anita.vermeer@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 Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities Program (ETechM2 

Program) is to improve results for 

children with disabilities by (1) 

promoting the development, 

demonstration, and use of technology; 

(2) supporting educational activities

designed to be of educational value in

the classroom for children with

disabilities; (3) providing support for

captioning and video description that is

appropriate for use in the classroom;

and (4) providing accessible educational

materials to children with disabilities in

a timely manner.1

Priorities: This competition includes 

one absolute priority and one 

competitive preference priority. In 

accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), 

the absolute priority is from allowable 

activities specified in sections 674(b)(2) 

and 681(d) of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); 20 

U.S.C. 1474(b)(2) and 1481(d). The 

competitive preference priority is from 

the Secretary’s Administrative Priorities 

for Discretionary Grant Programs 

published in the Federal Register on 

March 9, 2020 (85 FR 13640) 

(Administrative Priorities). 

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: 

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) 2 to 

Meet Individual Needs of Students with 

Disabilities Through Learning and 

Assessment. 

Background 

The evolution and recent 

developments in educational technology 

tools integrating AI have generated 

increased interest in the potential of AI 

to transform and support innovations in 

learning across educational settings for 

all learners, including learners with 

disabilities. As part of the 

Administration’s comprehensive 

strategy related to responsible 

innovation afforded by AI, the 

Department (2023) released a report that 

summarizes the opportunities and risks 

for AI in teaching and learning. Such 

opportunities for using AI in 

educational technologies include 

promising innovations to improve 

student-educator interactions, address 

individual learner needs and leverage 

learner strengths, refine feedback loops 

that improve learner outcomes, and 

support educators by reducing 

administrative task burden and 

improving practices. 

Opportunities to leverage educational 

technology tools integrating AI to 

improve learning outcomes and advance 

equity have been noted for all learners 

(e.g., Chen et al., 2022; Huang et al., 

2021; Zafari et al., 2022; U.S. 

Department of Education, 2023). 

Research indicates that these 

technologies hold promise in supporting 

individualized instruction and 

intervention and improving access in 

multiple areas, including 

communication, social, literacy, and 

mathematical skills (e.g., Barua et al., 

2022; U.S. Department of Education, 

2023). Therefore, it is critical that 

children with disabilities are provided 

appropriate levels of support in using 

existing and developing educational 

technologies integrating AI (e.g., Barua 

et al., 2022; Marino et al., 2023) to 

enhance learner outcomes. 

As educational technology tools that 

integrate AI continue to be developed 

and made available, factors that support 

their successful implementation in 

educational settings need to be 

considered. For example, evidencebased intelligent tutoring systems have 

demonstrated positive outcomes for 

learners, but additional research is 

needed on how to effectively implement 

such systems in different settings (e.g., 

Phillips et al., 2020), including how best 

to support children with disabilities. 

The role of the educator in 

implementing these technologies to 

complement ongoing instruction and 

intervention is critical in supporting 

children with disabilities (e.g., U.S. 

Department of Education, 2023). Several 

key factors that facilitate or limit 

successful implementation of 

educational technology tools in 

educational settings have been noted, 

including buy-in by and sustainability 

with users, alignment with existing 

priorities, development of materials to 

support fidelity of implementation, how 

the data are used, technology 

infrastructure, and data security (e.g., 

Evmenova et al., 2023; U.S. Department 

of Education, 2023). 

Priority 

The purpose of this priority is to fund 

four cooperative agreements to establish 

and operate projects that achieve, at a 

minimum, the following expected 

outcomes: 

(a) Improved student outcomes using

an evidence-based technology-based 

tool or approach 3 that integrates AI; 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 15189 

guide prepared by the What Works Clearinghouse 

(WWC) reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ or 

‘‘moderate evidence base’’ for the corresponding 

practice recommendation; (b) an intervention report 

prepared by the WWC reporting a ‘‘positive effect’’ 

or ‘‘potentially positive effect’’ on a relevant 

outcome with no reporting of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or 

‘‘potentially negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome; 

or (c) a single study assessed by the Department, as 

appropriate, that is an experimental study, a quasiexperimental design study, or a well-designed and 

well-implemented correlational study with 

statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study 

using regression methods to account for differences 

between a treatment group and a comparison 

group); and includes at least one statistically 

significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a 

relevant outcome. See 34 CFR 77.1 for definitions 

of ‘‘project component,’’ ‘‘promising evidence,’’ 

‘‘experimental study,’’ ‘‘moderate evidence,’’ 

‘‘quasi-experimental design study,’’ ‘‘relevant 

outcome,’’ and ‘‘strong evidence.’’ 

4For the purpose of this priority, ‘‘educators’’ 

include teachers, early childhood providers, 

administrators, paraprofessionals, and other 

providers. 

5For the purposes of this priority, an 

instructional setting can be an environment that is 

regulated by the public school or an ‘‘early 

childhood education program,’’ as defined under 

the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, 

within the local educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 

110–315, title VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 

Stat. 3398). 

(b) Improved educator 4 use and 

knowledge of an evidence-based 

technology-based tool or approach using 

AI to deliver effective instruction to 

students with disabilities; 

(c) Improved educator collaboration 

and professional learning opportunities 

focusing on improving outcomes for 

student with disabilities using an 

evidence-based technology-based tool or 

approach using AI; 

(d) Improved educator and family 

engagement regarding the use of an 

evidence-based technology-based tool or 

approach using AI to support student 

learning; and 

(e) Sustained use of the evidencebased technology-based tool or 

approach using AI by aligning its use 

with existing instructional priorities and 

initiatives. 

To be considered for funding under 

this priority, in the application, 

applicants must describe the— 

(a) Evidence-based technology-based 

tool or approach that is ready to use at 

the time of the application submission. 

If the AI component is not yet 

completed, describe how this will be 

integrated within the first year and how 

it will enhance the current developed 

technology-based tool or approach; 

(b) Outcomes of students with 

disabilities that will be improved by 

implementing the technology-based tool 

or approach using AI; 

(c) Approach to increase educators’ 

use and knowledge of the technologybased tool or approach using AI to 

improve the outcomes of students with 

disabilities in an instructional setting; 5

and 

(d) Fully accessible products and 

resources that will help educators and 

families to effectively use and 

implement the technology-based tool or 

approach using AI (See for example, 

NIST AI Risk Management 

Framework—https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/ 

nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.100-1.pdf-for 

information on managing risks across 

the AI lifecycle). 

Note: Grantees may, but are not 

required to, use up to the first 12 

months of the performance period and 

up to $200,000 of funds awarded in the 

first budget period for project 

development activities, including 

technology enhancement, prior to 

implementing the tool or approach in 

instructional settings. If an applicant 

proposes to use the first year for project 

development activities, then the 

applicant must provide sufficient 

justification, including the goals, 

objectives, and intended outcomes at 

the end of year one. 

In addition to these programmatic 

requirements and application 

requirements, to be considered for 

funding under this priority, applicants 

must also meet the following 

application and administrative 

requirements: 

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed 

project will address the need for a 

technology-based tool or approach that 

integrates AI. To meet this requirement 

applicants must— 

(1) Verify that the developed 

technology-based tool or approach and 

core components of the intervention are 

based on at least promising evidence; 

(2) Describe how AI will be used with 

the identified technology-based tool or 

approach and describe the potential to 

improve student outcomes; 

(3) Describe the current impact and 

reach of the technology-based tool or 

approach that is currently developed 

and include the population of users and, 

if the applicant has received any Federal 

funding within the last three years 

related to this technology-based tool or 

approach, describe how the funding 

impacted the reach and current use; 

(4) Identify how the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI will improve 

educators’ pedagogy and their capacity 

to deliver effective instruction for 

students with disabilities in PK–12 

instructional settings; 

(5) Identify how the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI will improve 

parent/family engagement/partnership 

to support student learning; 

(6) Present applicable national, State, 

regional, or local data demonstrating the 

need for the identified technology-based 

tool or approach using AI to enhance 

the outcomes for students with 

disabilities; 

(7) Identify how the proposed 

technology-based tool or approach using 

AI aligns with current policies, 

procedures, and practices used by 

educators to enhance the outcomes for 

students with disabilities; and 

(8) Identify systemic barriers, gaps, or 

challenges, including challenges to 

using the identified technology-based 

tool or approach using AI. 

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the 

proposed project will— 

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment 

for members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe how it will— 

(i) Identify the target population, 

including students with disabilities and 

their educators, that the applicant will 

service, the need that population has for 

the technology-based tool or approach, 

and the intended recipients for ongoing 

professional learning and coaching 

support; and 

(ii) Ensure that the products and 

resources meet the needs of the 

intended recipients of this grant; 

(2) Utilize a design process for the 

implementation approach that promotes 

sustainability of the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI beyond the 

life of the project; 

(3) Achieve its goals, objectives, and 

intended outcomes. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must provide 

measurable intended project outcomes; 

(4) Be based on current research. To 

meet this requirement, the applicant 

must— 

(i) Describe how the proposed project 

will align with current research, 

policies, and practices related to the 

benefits, services, or opportunities that 

are available using the technology-based 

tool or approach; 

(ii) Describe how the proposed project 

will incorporate current and evidencebased research and practices, including 

research and practices relating to 

accessibility and usability, to guide the 

development and delivery of its 

products and resources; and 

(iii) Document that the technologybased tool or approach to be used by the 

proposed project is developed, has been 

tested and shown to have promising 

evidence, and addresses, at a minimum, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15190 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 

6A ‘‘site’’ is a public school building or an ‘‘early 

childhood education program,’’ as defined under 

the Higher Education Act, within the local 

educational agency (LEA) (Pub. L. 110–315, title 

VIII, section 801, Aug. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 3398). 

7The following website provides more 

information about implementation research: https:// 

nirn.fpg.unc.edu/national-implementationresearch-network. 

8For additional information on the open 

licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 

3474.20 and this resource https://oese.ed.gov/files/ 

2022/06/Open-Licensing-Requirement-QuickGuide.pdf. 

the following principles of universal 

design for learning: 

(A) Multiple means of representation 

so that information can be delivered in 

more than one way (e.g., specialized 

software and websites, customizing 

display for visual or physical 

modalities); 

(B) Multiple means of expression that 

allow knowledge to be exhibited 

through options (e.g., writing, online 

concept mapping, or speech-to-text 

programs, where appropriate); and 

(C) Multiple means of engagement to 

stimulate interest in and motivation for 

learning (e.g., individual or group 

learning experiences or activities, 

learner choice); and 

(5) Develop and implement products 

and resources that are of high quality 

and sufficient intensity and duration to 

achieve the intended outcomes of the 

proposed project. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must— 

(i) Provide a plan for recruiting and 

selecting sites from a variety of 

instructional settings that include the 

targeted population including students 

with disabilities, which must include 

the following: 

(A) Two product and resource 

development sites.6 Applicants must 

describe at least two proposed product 

and resource development sites, where 

the project would conduct iterative 

development of the products and 

resources intended to support the 

implementation of the technology-based 

tool or approach and produce, by the 

end of year two, preliminary feasibility 

and useability data. Applicants must 

include a letter in Appendix A from at 

least one site that indicates agreement to 

serve as a product and resource 

development site, at a minimum, in year 

one of the project. 

(B) Three pilot sites. Pilot sites are the 

sites in which ongoing refinement of the 

developed products and resources, and 

the continued collection of feasibility 

and usability data, will occur. 

Applicants must describe how they 

would work with a minimum of three 

pilot sites no later than year three of the 

project, where the project would 

continue to refine the developed 

products and resources; collect 

feasibility and usability data; and 

demonstrate that the educational 

technology-based tool or approach using 

AI is producing the intended outcome(s) 

for students with disabilities. 

(C) Five dissemination sites. 

Applicants must describe how they 

would work with a minimum of five 

dissemination sites, where the project 

would complete its activities, by year 

four of the project period, to (1) refine 

the products for use by educators and 

students, and (2) evaluate the 

performance of the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI on educators’ 

pedagogy and students’ outcomes. 

Dissemination sites would receive less 

implementation support from the 

project than development and pilot 

sites. 

Note: A site may not serve in more 

than one category (i.e., development, 

pilot, dissemination); 

(ii) Describe how the project will 

incorporate components from 

implementation science 7 to select sites 

for continued use of the technologybased tool or approach using AI and 

support and sustain such continued use 

at the selected site; 

(iii) Provide a plan to systematically 

disseminate information about the 

technology-based tool or approach using 

AI to varied audiences throughout the 

project period. To address this 

requirement the applicant must 

describe— 

(A) The variety of dissemination 

strategies the project will use 

throughout the five years of the project 

to promote awareness and use of its 

technology-based tool or approach using 

AI; 

(B) How the project will tailor 

dissemination strategies across all years 

of technology refinements and to ensure 

that, by the end of year two, the 

technology-based tool or approach can 

be accessed by, is reaching, and is used 

by intended recipients; 

(C) Dissemination efforts that will go 

beyond conference presentations and 

articles and reach intended audiences to 

support implementation and scale up 

and increase the use of the technologybased tool or approach using AI by 

intended users; 

(D) How the project’s dissemination 

plan is connected to the proposed 

outcomes of the project; and 

(E) How the project will ensure that 

all digital products and all external 

communications are routinely evaluated 

for and, if necessary, remediated to meet 

or exceed government or industryrecognized standards for accessibility; 

and 

(iv) Provide assurances that all 

products or tools developed with project 

funds will be open educational 

resources.8

(c) In the narrative section of the 

application under ‘‘Quality of the 

project evaluation,’’ include an 

evaluation plan for the project as 

described in the following paragraphs. 

In designing the evaluation plan, the 

applicant must— 

(1) Provide a logic model (as defined 

in 34 CFR 77.1) or conceptual 

framework that depicts, at a minimum, 

the goals, activities, project evaluation, 

methods, performance measures, 

outputs, and intended outcomes of the 

proposed project; 

(2) Provide a plan, linked to the 

proposed project’s logic model or 

conceptual framework, for a formative 

evaluation of the proposed project’s 

activities. The plan must describe how 

the formative evaluation will use clear 

performance objectives to ensure 

continuous improvement in the 

operation of the proposed project, 

including objective measures of progress 

in implementing the project and 

ensuring the quality of products and 

resources; 

(3) Describe a plan or method for 

assessing— 

(i) The development and pilot sites’ 

educator training use and needs and the 

knowledge and availability of dedicated 

on-site technology training personnel; 

(ii) The readiness of pilot sites to pilot 

or try-out the technology-based tool or 

approach using AI, including, at a 

minimum, their current infrastructure, 

technology or instructional alignment, 

available resources, and ability to build 

capacity; 

(iii) Whether the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI has achieved 

its intended outcomes; and 

(iv) The ongoing professional learning 

needs of educators to implement with 

fidelity; 

(4) Describe a plan to collect 

formative and summative data from the 

professional learning to refine and 

evaluate the products and resources; 

(5) Describe a plan or method for 

assessing whether dissemination efforts 

are increasing the knowledge and use by 

the intended users of the technologybased tool or approach using AI and the 

developed products and resources; 

(6) Describe a plan to collect 

summative data to report on the quality, 

relevance, usefulness, and efficacy of 

the technology-based tool or approach 

using AI and its products and resources; 

and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 15191 

(7) Provide an assurance that, by the

end of the project period, the project 

will provide— 

(i) Information supported by the

project evaluation on the products and 

resources, including accessibility 

features, that will enable other sites to 

implement and sustain implementation 

of the technology-based tool or 

approach using AI; 

(ii) Information in the project’s final

performance report, including 

implementation data, on how intended 

users (e.g., educators, families, and 

students) utilized the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI; how the 

technology-based tool or approach was 

implemented with fidelity; and the 

effectiveness of the technology-based 

tool or approach using AI in improving 

outcomes for students with disabilities; 

(iii) Data on how the technologybased tool or approach using AI 

changed educators’ practices; and 

(iv) A plan for continuing to

disseminate or scale up the technologybased tool or approach using AI and 

accompanying products beyond the 

sites directly involved in the project. 

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative

section of the application under 

‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of 

project personnel,’’ how the— 

(1) Proposed project will encourage

applications for employment and 

project activity opportunities from 

persons who are members of groups that 

have traditionally been 

underrepresented based on race, color, 

national origin, gender, age, or 

disability, as appropriate; 

(2) Proposed key project personnel,

consultants, and subcontractors have 

the qualifications and experience to 

carry out the proposed activities and 

achieve the project’s intended outcomes 

and how the proposed project team will 

include qualified experts on topics such 

as technology, education theory, 

practice, research methods, and scale-up 

or commercialization to support 

sustainability and dissemination; 

(3) Applicant and any key partners

have adequate resources to carry out the 

proposed activities; and 

(4) Proposed costs are reasonable in

relation to the anticipated results and 

benefits. 

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’ 

how— 

(1) The proposed management plan

will ensure that the project’s intended 

outcomes will be achieved on time and 

within budget. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe— 

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for

key project personnel, consultants, and 

subcontractors, as applicable; and 

(ii) Timelines and milestones for

accomplishing the project tasks; 

(2) Key project personnel and any

consultants and subcontractors will be 

allocated and how these allocations are 

appropriate and adequate to achieve the 

project’s intended outcomes; 

(3) The proposed management plan

will ensure that the products and 

resources provided are of high quality, 

relevant, and useful to recipients; and 

(4) The proposed project will benefit

from a diversity of perspectives, 

including those of families, educators, 

researchers, and policy makers, among 

others, in its development and 

operation. 

(f) Address the following application

requirements. The applicant must 

include— 

(1) In Appendix A, personnel-loading

charts and timelines, as applicable, to 

illustrate the management plan 

described in the narrative; 

(2) In Appendix A, the logic model or

conceptual framework by which the 

proposed project will develop project 

plans and activities and achieve its 

intended outcomes. The logic model or 

conceptual framework must include a 

description of any underlying concepts, 

assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or 

theories, as well as the presumed 

relationships or linkages among these 

variables, and any empirical support for 

this framework and depict, at a 

minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, 

and intended outcomes of the proposed 

project; and 

Note: The following websites provide 

more information on logic models and 

conceptual frameworks: https://osep

ideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/ 

2021-12/ConceptualFramework_

Updated.pdf;www.osepideasthatwork.

org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ 

ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-andconceptual-framework; https://

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

discretionary/2023-non-regulatoryguidance-evidence.pdf; and http://

ies.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.

asp?pubid=REL2015057. 

(3) In the budget, attendance at the

following: 

(i) A one-day kick-off meeting in

Washington, DC, after receipt of the 

award, and an annual planning meeting 

in Washington, DC, with the Office of 

Special Education Programs (OSEP) 

project officer and other relevant staff 

during each subsequent year of the 

project period. 

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the 

award, a post-award teleconference 

must be held between the OSEP project 

officer and the grantee’s project director 

or other authorized representative. 

(ii) A three-day project directors’

conference in Washington, DC, during 

each year of the project period. 

(iii) One annual trip, to attend

Department briefings, Departmentsponsored conferences, and other 

meetings, as requested by OSEP. 

Cohort Collaboration and Support 

OSEP project officers will provide 

coordination support among the 

projects. Each project funded under this 

priority must— 

(a) Participate in monthly conferencecall discussions to collaborate on 

implementation and project issues; and 

(b) Provide annual information to

OSEP using a template that captures 

descriptive data on project site selection 

and the processes for implementation 

and use of the technology-based tool or 

approach. 

Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary 

may reduce continuation awards or 

discontinue awards in any year of the 

project period for excessive carryover 

balances or a failure to make substantial 

progress. The Department intends to 

closely monitor unobligated balances 

and substantial progress under this 

program and may reduce or discontinue 

funding accordingly. 

Competitive Preference Priority: For 

FY 2024, this priority is a competitive 

preference priority. Under 34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(i), we award an additional 

three points to an application that meets 

the competitive preference priority. 

Applicants should indicate in the 

abstract if the competitive preference 

priority is addressed and must address 

the competitive preference priority in 

the narrative section. 

This priority is: 

Applications from New Potential 

Grantees (0 or 3 points). 

(a) Under this priority, an applicant

must demonstrate that the applicant has 

not had an active discretionary grant 

under the 84.327S program from which 

it seeks funds, including through 

membership in a group application 

submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 

75.127–75.129, in the five years before 

the deadline date for submission of 

applications under the program. 

(b) For the purpose of this priority, a

grant or contract is active until the end 

of the grant’s or contract’s project or 

funding period, including any 

extensions of those periods that extend 

the grantee’s or contractor’s authority to 

obligate funds. 

References 

Barua, P. D., Vicnesh, J., Gururajan, R., Oh, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15192 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 

S. L., Palmer, E., Azizan, M. M., Kadri,

N. A., & Acharya, U. R. (2022). Artificial

intelligence enabled personalised

assistive tools to enhance education of

children with neurodevelopmental

disorders—A review. International

Journal of Environmental Research and

Public Health, 19(3), 1192–1217. https://

doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031192.

Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, 

C. (2022). Two decades of artificial

intelligence in education: Contributors,

collaborations, research topics,

challenges, and future directions.

Educational Technology & Society, 25(1),

28–47. www.jstor.org/stable/48647028.

Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K. S., Schladant, M., 

Hall, T. E., Buzhardt, J., Erickson, K. A., 

Ai, J., Sudduth, C., & Jackson, T. (2023). 

Stepping-up technology 

implementation—How does it happen? 

Journal of Special Education 

Technology, 38(1), 61–74. https://

doi.org/10.1177/01626434221074357. 

Huang, J., Salah, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). A 

review on artificial intelligence in 

education. Academic Journal of 

Interdisciplinary Studies, 10(3), 206–217. 

https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2021-0077. 

Marino, M. T., Vasquez, E., Dieker, L., 

Basham, J., & Blackorby, J. (2023). The 

future of artificial intelligence in special 

education technology. Journal of Special 

Education Technology, 38(3), 404–416. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/

01626434231165977. 

Phillips, A., Pane, J. F., Reumann-Moore, R., 

& Shenbanjo, O. (2020). Implementing an 

adaptive intelligent tutoring system as an 

instructional supplement. Educational 

Technology Research and Development, 

68, 1409–1437. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 

s11423-020-09745-w. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of 

Educational Technology. (2023). 

Artificial intelligence and future of 

teaching and learning: Insights and 

recommendations. https://tech.ed.gov/aifuture-of-teaching-and-learning. 

Zafari, M., Bazargani, J. S., Sadeghi-Niaraki, 

A. & Choi, S. M. (2022). Artificial

intelligence applications in K–12

education: A systematic literature

review. IEEE Access, 10, 61905–61921.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.

2022.3179356.

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 absolute priority in this notice. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 

and 1481. 

Note: Projects will be awarded and 

must be operated in a manner consistent 

with 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. (d) 

The Administrative Priorities. 

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 

$41,433,000 for the ETechM2 Program 

for FY 2024, of which we intend to use 

an estimated $1,500,000 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: $350,000 

to $375,000 per year. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$375,000 per year. 

Maximum Award: We will not make 

an award exceeding $375,000 for a 

single budget period of 12 months. 

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 public charter schools that 

operate as LEAs under State law; IHEs; 

other public agencies; private nonprofit 

organizations; freely associated States 

and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or 

Tribal organizations; and for-profit 

organizations. 

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This

program 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 the 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/ 

documents/2022/12/07/2022-26554/ 

common-instructions-for-applicants-todepartment-of-education-discretionarygrant-programs, 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. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 15193 

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 

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 significance of the problem or 

issue to be addressed by the proposed 

project; 

(ii) The extent to which specific gaps 

or weaknesses in services, 

infrastructure, or opportunities have 

been identified and will be addressed by 

the proposed project, including the 

nature and magnitude of those gaps or 

weaknesses; 

(iii) The potential contribution of the 

proposed project to increased 

knowledge or understanding of 

educational problems, issues, or 

effective strategies; and 

(iv) The potential replicability of the 

proposed project or strategies, 

including, as appropriate, the potential 

for implementation in a variety of 

settings. 

(b) Quality of project services (30 

points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the services to be provided by 

the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

services to be provided by the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

quality and sufficiency of strategies for 

ensuring equal access and treatment for 

eligible project participants who are 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. 

(3) In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the services to 

be provided by the proposed project 

reflect up-to-date knowledge from 

research and effective practice; 

(ii) The extent to which the training 

or professional development services to 

be provided by the proposed project are 

of sufficient quality, intensity, and 

duration to lead to improvements in 

practice among the recipients of those 

services; 

(iii) The extent to which the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

involve the collaboration of appropriate 

partners for maximizing the 

effectiveness of project services; 

(iv) The extent to which the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

are appropriate to the needs of the 

intended recipients or beneficiaries of 

those services; and 

(v) The likely impact of the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

on the intended recipients of those 

services. 

(c) Quality of the project evaluation 

(20 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 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; 

(iii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation provide for examining the 

effectiveness of project implementation 

strategies; 

(iv) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment of progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes; and 

(v) The extent to which the evaluation 

plan clearly articulates the key project 

components, mediators, and outcomes, 

as well as a measurable threshold for 

acceptable implementation. 

(d) Adequacy of resources and quality 

of project personnel (20 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

adequacy of resources for the proposed 

project and the quality of the personnel 

who will carry out the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of 

project personnel, the Secretary 

considers the extent to which the 

applicant encourages applications for 

employment from persons who are 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. 

(3) In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of key 

project personnel; 

(ii) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of 

project consultants or subcontractors; 

(iii) The adequacy of support, 

including facilities, equipment, 

supplies, and other resources, from the 

applicant organization or the lead 

applicant organization; 

(iv) The relevance and demonstrated 

commitment of each partner in the 

proposed project to the implementation 

and success of the project; and 

(v) The extent to which the costs are 

reasonable in relation to the objectives, 

design, and potential significance of the 

proposed project. 

(e) Quality of the management plan 

(15 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the management plan for the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

management plan for the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project 

tasks; 

(ii) The extent to which the time 

commitments of the project director and 

principal investigator and other key 

project personnel are appropriate and 

adequate to meet the objectives of the 

proposed project; 

(iii) How the applicant will ensure 

that a diversity of perspectives are 

brought to bear in the operation of the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
15194 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 

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 

(iv) The adequacy of procedures for 

ensuring feedback and continuous 

improvement in the operation of the 

proposed project. 

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. 

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. 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 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 42 / Friday, March 1, 2024 / Notices 15195 

submit an annual performance report 

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, we have 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 

ETechM2 Program. These measures are: 

• Program Performance Measure 1: 

The percentage of ETechM2 Program 

products and services judged to be of 

high quality by an independent review 

panel of experts qualified to review the 

substantial content of the products and 

services. 

• Program Performance Measure 2: 

The percentage of ETechM2 Program 

products and services judged to be of 

high relevance to improving outcomes 

for infants, toddlers, children, and 

youth with disabilities. 

• Program Performance Measure 3: 

The percentage of ETechM2 Program 

products and services judged to be 

useful in improving results for infants, 

toddlers, children, and youth with 

disabilities. 

• Program Performance Measure 4.1: 

The Federal cost per unit of accessible 

educational materials funded by the 

ETechM2 Program. 

• Program Performance Measure 4.2: 

The Federal cost per unit of accessible 

educational materials from the National 

Instructional Materials Access Center 

funded by the ETechM2 Program. 

• Program Performance Measure 4.3: 

The Federal cost per unit of video 

description funded by the ETechM2 

Program. 

Program Performance Measures 1, 2, 

and 3 apply to projects funded under 

this competition, and grantees are 

required to submit data on Program 

Performance Measures 1, 2, and 3 as 

directed by OSEP. 

Grantees will be required to report 

information on their project’s 

performance in annual performance 

reports and additional performance data 

to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 

75.591). 

6. Continuation Awards: In making a 

continuation award under 34 CFR 

75.253, the Secretary considers, among 

other things: whether a grantee has 

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. 

Glenna Wright-Gallo, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2024–04316 Filed 2–29–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Agency Information Collection 

Extension 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) invites public comment on a 

proposed collection of information that 

DOE is developing for submission to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) pursuant to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Comments regarding this 

proposed information collection must 

be received on or before April 1, 2024. 

If you anticipate that you will be 

submitting comments but find it 

difficult to do so within the period of 

time allowed by this notice, please 

advise the DOE Desk Officer at OMB of 

your intention to make a submission as 

soon as possible. The Desk Officer may 

be telephoned at 202–395–4718. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this information 

collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 

30-day Review—Open for Public 

Comments’’ or by using the search 

function. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ira 

Birnbaum, Ira.Birnbaum@hq.doe.gov, 

202–304–4940. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments 

are invited on: (a) Whether the extended 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology. 

This information collection request 

contains: 

(1) OMB No.: 1910–NEW; 

(2) Information Collection Request 

Title: DOE Qualified List of Energy 

Service Companies; 

(3) Type of Request: New; 

(4) Purpose: The ESPC statute (42 

U.S.C. 8287(b)(2)(A)–(B)) requires the 

Secretary of Energy to establish and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1