Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 10111 

this proposed priority is consistent with 

the principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

Orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

The benefits of the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program have been well 

established over the years. Projects 

similar to one envisioned by the 

proposed priority have been completed 

successfully, and the proposed priority 

would generate new knowledge through 

research. The new RRTC would 

generate, disseminate, and promote the 

use of new information that would 

improve recovery, health, and wellness 

outcomes for individuals with serious 

mental illness (SMI) and co-occurring 

conditions. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: February 19, 2015. 

Kathy Greenlee, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03880 Filed 2–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4151–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Community Living 

[CFDA Number: 84.133B–3] 

Proposed priority—National Institute 

on Disability, Independent Living, and 

Rehabilitation Research— 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers 

AGENCY: Administration for Community 

Living, Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority. 

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the 

Administration for Community Living 

proposes a priority for the 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) Program administered by 

the National Institute on Disability, 

Independent Living, and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDILRR). Specifically, this 

notice proposes a priority for an RRTC 

on Employment Policy and 

Measurement. We take this action to 

focus research attention on an area of 

national need. We intend this priority to 

contribute to improved employment 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before March 27, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail or commercial 

delivery. We will not accept comments 

submitted by fax or by email or those 

submitted after the comment period. To 

ensure that we do not receive duplicate 

copies, please submit your comments 

only once. In addition, please include 

the Docket ID at the top of your 

comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov to submit your 

comments electronically. Information 

on using Regulations.gov, including 

instructions for accessing agency 

documents, submitting comments, and 

viewing the docket, is available on the 

site under ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ 

• Postal Mail or Commercial Delivery: 

If you mail or deliver your comments 

about these proposed regulations, 

address them to Patricia Barrett, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5142, Potomac Center Plaza 

(PCP), Washington, DC 20202–2700. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s 

policy is to make all comments received 

from members of the public available for 

public viewing in their entirety on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only 

information that they wish to make 

publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia Barrett. Telephone: (202) 245– 

6211 or by email: 

patricia.barrett@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice of proposed priority is in concert 

with NIDRR’s currently approved LongRange Plan (Plan). The Plan, which was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 4, 2013 (78 FR 20299), can be 

accessed on the Internet at the following 

site: www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ 

osers/nidrr/policy.html. 

The Plan identifies a need for research 

and training regarding employment of 

individuals with disabilities. To address 

this need, NIDILRR seeks to: (1) Improve 

the quality and utility of disability and 

rehabilitation research; (2) foster an 

exchange of research findings, expertise, 

and other information to advance 

knowledge and understanding of the 

needs of individuals with disabilities 

and their family members, including 

those from among traditionally 

underserved populations; (3) determine 

effective practices, programs, and 

policies to improve community living 

and participation, employment, and 

health and function outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities; (4) identify 

research gaps and areas for promising 

research investments; (5) identify and 

promote effective mechanisms for 

integrating research and practice; and 

(6) disseminate research findings to all 

major stakeholder groups, including 

individuals with disabilities and their 

family members in formats that are 

appropriate and meaningful to them. 

This notice proposes one priority that 

NIDILRR intends to use for one or more 

competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2015 

and possibly later years. NIDILRR is 

under no obligation to make an award 

under this priority. The decision to 

make an award will be based on the 

quality of applications received and 

available funding. NIDILRR may publish 

additional priorities, as needed. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

proposed priority. To ensure that your 

comments have maximum effect in 

developing the final priority, we urge 

you to identify clearly the specific topic 

within the priority that each comment 

addresses. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10112 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from this proposed priority. 

Please let us know of any further ways 

we could reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments by 

following the instructions found under 

the ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ portion 

of the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

wwww.regulations.gov. Any comments 

sent to NIDILRR via postal mail or 

commercial delivery can be viewed in 

Room 5142, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 

Washington, DC, between the hours of 

8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, Monday through Friday of 

each week except Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals With 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for this notice. If you want to 

schedule an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research Projects and Centers Program 

is to plan and conduct research, 

demonstration projects, training, and 

related activities, including 

international activities, to develop 

methods, procedures, and rehabilitation 

technology that maximize the full 

inclusion and integration into society, 

employment, independent living, family 

support, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with 

disabilities, especially individuals with 

the most severe disabilities, and to 

improve the effectiveness of services 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation 

Act). 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers 

The purpose of the RRTCs, which are 

funded through the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program, is to achieve the goals 

of, and improve the effectiveness of, 

services authorized under the 

Rehabilitation Act through welldesigned research, training, technical 

assistance, and dissemination activities 

in important topical areas as specified 

by NIDILRR. These activities are 

designed to benefit rehabilitation 

service providers, individuals with 

disabilities, family members, 

policymakers and other research 

stakeholders. Additional information on 

the RRTC program can be found at: 

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/rrtc/ 

index.html#types. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 

764(b)(2). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priority 

This notice contains one proposed 

priority. 

RRTC on Employment Policy and 

Measurement 

Background 

Since the 2007 recession, Social 

Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) 

applications and awards have increased 

rapidly. There are nearly 9 million 

beneficiaries currently receiving SSDI 

payments, and this figure is expected to 

grow as workers age and increase their 

likelihood of experiencing disability. 

With this growth in program 

participation, actuaries estimate that the 

SSDI trust fund will be depleted in late 

2016 unless substantial changes occur 

(Social Security Administration, 2014). 

Given this scenario, developing 

informed employment policy options is 

essential. These options require sound 

research to inform policymakers 

regarding the projected impacts of 

policies that encourage employment 

among individuals with disabilities 

while ensuring an adequate safety net. 

Research is also needed to evaluate the 

long-term impacts of policies and 

programs that aim to facilitate 

employment and improve the quality of 

life among people with disabilities. 

The interactions between Social 

Security disability programs and public 

health insurance programs have long 

been considered a substantial barrier to 

employment for people with disabilities 

(Loprest & Maag, 2001; National Council 

on Disability, 2007). The 2010 

enactment of the Patient Protection and 

Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided 

improved access to public and private 

insurance for all Americans including 

those with disabilities. For example, the 

ACA prevents health care coverage 

denials due to pre-existing conditions, 

increases coverage requirements, and 

provides mental health parity for 

persons with psychiatric disabilities. 

The impact of the ACA on employment 

outcomes for people with disabilities is 

an important research area. 

Prior RRTC–EPM work focused on 

examining and improving extant 

methods of measuring disability status, 

as well as measuring employment 

outcomes among people with 

disabilities. For example, the RRTC 

illustrated how self-reported disability 

status changes over time through an 

analysis of longitudinal data focusing on 

youth (Mann and Honeycutt, 2014). 

These analyses indicated that the 

proportion of respondents with a 

disability doubled from 12 percent to 

nearly 25 percent over the course of 13 

years. Multivariate analyses showed that 

women were more likely than men to 

report changes in health condition or 

disability status, and those with mild 

disabilities were relatively less likely 

than those without or with severe 

disabilities to experience changes in 

disability status. The RRTC also studied 

extant surveys and found that 

commonly used measures overestimated 

employment and underestimated receipt 

of disability income assistance such as 

SSDI (Burkhauser, Houtenville and 

Tenant, 2014). Other researchers have 

recently explored similar issues related 

to the reliability and stability of 

disability measures (Brault, 2013; 

Davies & Fisher, 2013; Sears & Rupp, 

2003). Knowledge gained through this 

work has highlighted a need to develop 

improved methods of measuring both 

disability and employment in ways that 

generate more reliable and valid 

research findings. Continued innovation 

is thus needed to develop measures and 

metrics that accurately reflect the 

changing nature of disability across the 

life span as well as changes in the 

workforce over time. By doing so, 

research results may be more relevant 

for policy and program decisions aimed 

at improving employment outcomes for 

people with disabilities. 

References 

Brault, M. (2013). Reliability and stability of 

the 6-question disability measure in the 

Survey of Income and Program 

Participation. Retrieved December 31, 

2014, from: http://www.census.gov/

people/disability/files/sipp_reliabilityjsm2013.pdf. 

Burkhauser, R., Houtenville, A., and 

Tennant, J. (2014). Capturing the elusive 

working-age population with disabilities: 

Reconciling conflicting social success 

estimates from the Current Population 

Survey and American Community 

Survey. Journal of Disability Policy 

Studies, 24(4) 195–205. 

Davies, P., and Fisher, T.L. (2013). 

Measurement issues associated with 

using survey data matched with 

administrative data from the Social 

Security Administration. Retrieved 

January 19, 2015, from: http://www.ssa.

gov/policy/docs/ssb/v69n2/


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 10113 

v69n2p1.html. 

Loprest, P., and Maag, E. (2001). Barriers to 

and Supports for Work Among Adults 

with Disabilities: Results from the NHIS– 

D. Retrieved on December 31, 2014, 

from: http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/ 

barriers.htm. 

Mann, D. and Honeycutt, T. (2014). Changes 

in disability status and survey attrition: 

A longitudinal analysis. Retrieved 

January 9, 2015, from: http://www.

researchondisability.org/docs/

publications/statsrrtc-r3-longitudinalstudy-final-report-12-19-14.pdf?sfvrsn=2. 

National Council on Disability (2007). 

Empowerment for Americans with 

disabilities: Breaking barriers to careers 

and full employment. Retrieved January 

19, 2015, from: http://www.ncd.gov/

publications/2007/Oct2007. 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 

Public Law 111—148 (2010). Retrieved 

December 31, 2014, from: http://www.

gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ148/

content-detail.html. 

Sears, J., Rupp, K. (2003). Exploring Social 

Security payment history matched with 

the Survey of Income and Program 

Participation. Retrieved December 31, 

2014, from: http://www.oecd.org/std/

36232603.pdf. 

Social Security Administration (2014). The 

2014 Annual Report of the Board of 

Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and 

Survivors Insurance and Federal 

Disability Insurance Trust Funds. 

Retrieved December 31, 2014, from: 

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/tr/2014/

index.html. 

Definitions 

The research that is proposed under 

this priority must be focused on one or 

more stages of research. If the RRTC is 

to conduct research that can be 

categorized under more than one 

research stage, or research that 

progresses from one stage to another, 

those research stages must be clearly 

specified. For purposes of this priority, 

the stages of research are from the notice 

of final priorities and definitions 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 7, 2013 (78 FR 34261). 

(a) Exploration and Discovery means 

the stage of research that generates 

hypotheses or theories by conducting 

new and refined analyses of data, 

producing observational findings, and 

creating other sources of research-based 

information. This research stage may 

include identifying or describing the 

barriers to and facilitators of improved 

outcomes of individuals with 

disabilities, as well as identifying or 

describing existing practices, programs, 

or policies that are associated with 

important aspects of the lives of 

individuals with disabilities. Results 

achieved under this stage of research 

may inform the development of 

interventions or lead to evaluations of 

interventions or policies. The results of 

the exploration and discovery stage of 

research may also be used to inform 

decisions or priorities. 

(b) Intervention Development means 

the stage of research that focuses on 

generating and testing interventions that 

have the potential to improve outcomes 

for individuals with disabilities. 

Intervention development involves 

determining the active components of 

possible interventions, developing 

measures that would be required to 

illustrate outcomes, specifying target 

populations, conducting field tests, and 

assessing the feasibility of conducting a 

well-designed interventions study. 

Results from this stage of research may 

be used to inform the design of a study 

to test the efficacy of an intervention. 

(c) Intervention Efficacy means the 

stage of research during which a project 

evaluates and tests whether an 

intervention is feasible, practical, and 

has the potential to yield positive 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities. Efficacy research may assess 

the strength of the relationships 

between an intervention and outcomes, 

and may identify factors or individual 

characteristics that affect the 

relationship between the intervention 

and outcomes. Efficacy research can 

inform decisions about whether there is 

sufficient evidence to support ‘‘scalingup’’ an intervention to other sites and 

contexts. This stage of research can 

include assessing the training needed 

for wide-scale implementation of the 

intervention, and approaches to 

evaluation of the intervention in real 

world applications. 

(d) Scale-Up Evaluation means the 

stage of research during which a project 

analyzes whether an intervention is 

effective in producing improved 

outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities when implemented in a realworld setting. During this stage of 

research, a project tests the outcomes of 

an evidence-based intervention in 

different settings. It examines the 

challenges to successful replication of 

the intervention, and the circumstances 

and activities that contribute to 

successful adoption of the intervention 

in real-world settings. This stage of 

research may also include well-designed 

studies of an intervention that has been 

widely adopted in practice, but that 

lacks a sufficient evidence-base to 

demonstrate its effectiveness. 

Proposed Priority 

The Administrator of the 

Administration for Community Living 

proposes a priority for an RRTC on 

Employment Policy and Measurement. 

The purpose of the proposed RRTC on 

Employment Policy and Measurement 

RRTC (RRTC–EPM) is to investigate the 

impact of Federal and State policies and 

programs on employment of individuals 

with disabilities, paying particular 

attention to the effects of program 

interactions. The RRTC–EPM will also 

examine new ways of measuring 

employment outcomes and facilitate the 

translation of research findings to guide 

policymaking and program 

administration. Applicants must 

identify targeted research questions in 

response to the problems identified 

below and propose rigorous research 

methodologies to answer these 

questions. Of particular interest is 

research that investigates the interaction 

between the Affordable Care Act (ACA), 

Social Security Disability Insurance 

(SSDI), and employment. The desired 

outcome of this investment is new 

knowledge about the effect of new or 

existing policies on employment-related 

decision-making of individuals with 

disabilities, and ultimately on rates and 

quality of employment by these 

individuals. 

The RRTC must contribute to 

improving the employment outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities by: 

(a) Generating new knowledge about 

the effects of program interactions on 

employment outcomes of individuals 

with disabilities, including but not 

necessarily limited to the interaction 

between Social Security disability 

benefit programs and the ACA. 

Specifically, the RRTC must generate 

new knowledge of the potential impacts 

of varied policy scenarios regarding the 

SSDI trust fund exhaustion on the 

employment and economic outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities. 

(b) Developing reliable and valid 

methods of measuring employment 

outcomes for people with disabilities; 

(c) Serving as a national resource 

center on policy issues that impact 

employment outcomes of individuals 

with disabilities, and 

(d) Increasing incorporation of 

research findings from the RRTC into 

practice or policy by: 

(1) Collaborating with stakeholder 

groups to develop, evaluate, or 

implement strategies to increase 

utilization of research findings; 

(2) Conducting training and 

dissemination activities to facilitate the 

utilization of research findings by 

policymakers, employers, and 

individuals with disabilities; 

(3) Providing technical assistance to 

facilitate use of information produced 

by the RRTC research; and 

(4) Collaborating and sharing 

information with other agencies across 

the Federal government. In addition, the 

RRTC must collaborate with appropriate 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10114 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 37 / Wednesday, February 25, 2015 / Notices 

NIDILRR-funded grantees, including 

knowledge translation grantees and 

grantees involved with employment 

research. 

Final Priority 

We will announce the final priority in 

a notice in the Federal Register. We will 

determine the final priority after 

considering responses to this notice and 

other information available to the 

Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities, requirements, definitions, or 

selection criteria, subject to meeting 

applicable rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use this priority, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register or 

in a Funding Opportunity Announcement 

posted at www.grants.gov. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive Order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as an action likely to 

result in a rule that may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

stated in the Executive Order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this regulatory 

action under Executive Order 13563, 

which supplements and explicitly 

reaffirms the principles, structures, and 

definitions governing regulatory review 

established in Executive Order 12866. 

To the extent permitted by law, 

Executive Order 13563 requires that an 

agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing this proposed priority 

only upon a reasoned determination 

that its benefits would justify its costs. 

In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, we selected 

those approaches that would maximize 

net benefits. Based on the analysis that 

follows, the Department believes that 

this proposed priority is consistent with 

the principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

Orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

The benefits of the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program have been well 

established over the years. Projects 

similar to one envisioned by the 

proposed priority have been completed 

successfully, and the proposed priority 

would generate new knowledge through 

research. The new RRTC would 

generate, disseminate, and promote the 

use of new information that would 

improve outcomes for individuals with 

disabilities in the area of employment. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to Executive 

Order 12372. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: February 19, 2015. 

Kathy Greenlee, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03882 Filed 2–24–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4154–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Community Living 

[CFDA Number: 84.133A–7] 

Proposed Priority—National Institute 

on Disability, Independent Living, and 

Rehabilitation Research—Disability 

and Rehabilitation Research Projects 

Program 

AGENCY: Administration for Community 

Living, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed priority. 

SUMMARY: The Administrator of the 

Administration for Community Living 

proposes a priority for the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects 

(DRRPs) Program administered by the 

National Institute on Disability, 

Independent Living, and Rehabilitation 

Research (NIDILRR). Specifically, this 

notice proposes a priority for Promoting 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES