9596 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Ruth E. Ryder, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Programs, Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03643 Filed 2–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; 

Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination To Improve Services 

and Results for Children With 

Disabilities—National Technical 

Assistance Center to Support 

Implementation and Scaling Up of 

Evidence-Based Practices 

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) 2022 for the National 

Technical Assistance Center to Support 

Implementation and Scaling Up of 

Evidence-Based Practices, Assistance 

Listing Number (ALN) 84.326K. This 

notice relates to the approved 

information collection under OMB 

control number 1820–0028. 

DATES:

Applications Available: February 22, 

2022. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 25, 2022. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 22, 2022. 

Pre-Application Webinar Information: 

No later than February 28, 2022, the 

Office of Special Education Programs 

(OSEP) will post details on pre-recorded 

informational webinars designed to 

provide technical assistance (TA) to 

interested applicants. Links to the 

webinars may be found at www2.ed.gov/ 

fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osepgrants.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 27, 2021 

(86 FR 73264) and available at 

www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-27979. 

Please note that these Common 

Instructions supersede the version 

published on February 13, 2019, and, in 

part, describe the transition from the 

requirement to register in SAM.gov a 

Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) number to the implementation 

of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). 

More information on the phase-out of 

DUNS numbers is available at https://

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

docs/unique-entity-identifier-transitionfact-sheet.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jennifer Coffey, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 5134, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–5076. 

Telephone: (202) 245–6673. Email: 

Jennifer.Coffey@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: 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Technical Assistance and 

Dissemination to Improve Services and 

Results for Children with Disabilities 

program is to promote academic 

achievement and to improve results for 

children with disabilities by providing 

TA, supporting model demonstration 

projects, disseminating useful 

information, and implementing 

activities that are supported by 

scientifically based research. 

Priority: This competition includes 

one absolute priority. In accordance 

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

priority is from allowable activities 

specified in sections 663 and 681(d) of 

the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1463 

and 1481(d). 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2022 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: 

National Center to Support 

Implementation and Scaling Up of 

Evidence-Based Practices. 

Background: 

The University of Washington’s 

Implementation Science Resource Hub 

defines ‘‘implementation science’’ as 

‘‘the scientific study of methods and 

strategies that facilitate the uptake of 

evidence-based practice and research 

into regular use by practitioners and 

policymakers.’’ (The University of 

Washington, 2021). Implementation 

science provides the bridge between 

research and practice, supporting 

implementation of effective 

interventions, programs, and practices 

that can improve results for children 

with disabilities. 

OSEP has supported the use of 

implementation science since 2007, 

with the inception of a TA Center 

created to assist State educational 

agencies (SEAs) in implementing and 

scaling up effective practices, such as 

evidence-based reading, math, and 

behavior interventions. As a result of 

this assistance, States are building 

infrastructure that supports the use and 

scaling up of effective practices that 

improve outcomes for children with 

disabilities (Ruedel et al., 2021). While 

many of these States report using the 

frameworks and resources developed 

and disseminated by OSEP’s TA Center, 

they also report significant challenges to 

their efforts to create a lasting 

infrastructure that supports 

implementation (Ruedel et al., 2021). 

They struggle to provide support to their 

districts while keeping an agency-wide 

focus on building this infrastructure. 

When supported by a TA Center, 

partnerships among the SEA, local 

educational agencies (LEAs), 

institutions of higher education (IHEs), 

and regional TA providers can build a 

lasting statewide infrastructure. 

The magnitude of change that must 

occur at the State, district, and school 

levels for large-scale use of 

implementation science requires a 

specialist who can support collaboration 

and systemic alignment (Kittelman et 

al., 2020). There is rarely a sufficient 

number of TA providers trained in 

implementation science (Sanetti & 

Collier-Meek, 2019) to support each 

district in a State. The work of the SEA 

is also made more challenging by staff 

turnover and overall lack of personnel 

capacity (Weiss & McGuinn, 2017). 

A new corps of implementation 

specialists could be developed through 

the establishment of implementation 

science competencies supported via 

micro-credentials. These 

implementation specialists would then 

be available to assist the State, regional, 

and district levels of the education 

system. Additionally, by integrating 

implementation science into doctoral 

leadership programs, universities could 

support the development of 

implementation science competencies 

in their educator, leader, and scholar 

preparation programs. 

This Center will advance the 

Secretary’s priorities in the areas of 

supporting a diverse educator workforce 

and their professional growth to 

strengthen student learning and 

strengthening cross-agency coordination 

and community engagement to advance 

systemic change. The Center will 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 9597 

1For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘evidencebased’’ means, at a minimum, evidence that 

demonstrates a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 

77.1), where a key project component included in 

the project’s logic model is informed by research or 

evaluation findings that suggest the project 

component is likely to improve relevant outcomes. 

2Florida, New Jersey, and Virginia currently 

receive TA from the Center funded under the FY 

2017 competition. The Center must continue to 

provide TA to these States, if the States elect. Note 

that each of the States that elects to continue 

receiving TA counts as one of the 8 States. 

3Logic model (34 CFR 77.1) (also referred to as 

a theory of action) means a framework that 

identifies key project components of the proposed 

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

hypothesized to be critical to achieving the relevant 

outcomes) and describes the theoretical and 

operational relationships among the key project 

components and relevant outcomes. 

4 ‘‘Universal, general TA’’ means TA and 

information provided to independent users through 

their own initiative, resulting in minimal 

interaction with TA center staff and including onetime, invited or offered conference presentations by 

TA center staff. This category of TA also includes 

information or products, such as newsletters, 

guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded 

from the TA center’s website by independent users. 

Brief communications by TA center staff with 

recipients, either by telephone or email, are also 

considered universal, general TA. 

support States in implementing 

evidence-based practices that improve 

results for children with disabilities. 

The Center will also expand 

opportunities for educators to receive 

the implementation support they need. 

Priority: 

The purpose of this priority is to fund 

a cooperative agreement to establish and 

operate a National Technical Assistance 

Center to Support Implementation and 

Scaling Up of Evidence-Based Practices. 

The Center will support States’ use of 

implementation science to create a 

statewide infrastructure that supports 

implementation of evidence-based 1

practices (EBPs). The Center must 

achieve, at a minimum, the following 

expected outcomes: 

(a) Development of implementation 

science micro-credentials; 

(b) A minimum of 25 individuals 

trained annually as implementation 

science specialists through the 

completion of the micro-credentials; 

(c) Creation of a TA hub for OSEPfunded doctoral programs that results in 

at least five of these programs 

integrating implementation science into 

their program of study; 

(d) A community of practice (CoP) for 

IHE faculty interested in learning about 

implementation science and how to 

integrate implementation science into 

their curricula; 

(e) Integration of implementation 

science into the program of study of at 

least five OSEP-funded State leadership 

projects (ALN 84.325L); 

(f) An infrastructure that facilitates 

scaling implementation supports, 

including developing the capacity of 

regional TA providers, in eight States; 2

(g) A CoP for States interested in 

learning more about implementation 

science, but that are not yet ready for 

full implementation; and 

(h) The integration of implementation 

science frameworks and related 

resources into the provision of TA by at 

least five OSEP-funded TA Centers. 

In addition to these programmatic 

requirements, to be considered for 

funding under this priority, applicants 

must meet the application and 

administrative requirements in this 

priority, which are: 

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Significance,’’ how the proposed 

project will— 

(1) Address gaps in State 

infrastructure to support full 

implementation and scaling up of EBPs. 

To meet this requirement, the applicant 

must— 

(i) Present applicable national, State, 

regional, and local data, and research 

addressing how SEAs, Regional 

Education Service Agencies (RESAs), 

IHEs, and TA providers are integrating 

implementation science into their 

services; 

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current 

educational issues and policy initiatives 

relating to implementation science and 

scaling up EBPs; and 

(iii) Present information about the 

current level of use of implementation 

science in the field of education; and 

(2) Improve outcomes for children 

with disabilities by assisting with the 

development of statewide infrastructure 

that supports full implementation and 

scaling up of EBPs and indicate the 

likely magnitude or importance of the 

improvements. 

(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 needs of the intended 

recipients for TA and information; and 

(ii) Ensure that products and services 

meet the needs of the intended 

recipients of the grant; 

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and 

intended outcomes. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

provide— 

(i) Measurable intended project 

outcomes; and 

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 3

by which the proposed project will 

achieve its intended outcomes that 

depicts, at a minimum, the goals and 

how they will be measured, activities, 

outputs, and intended outcomes of the 

proposed project; 

(3) Use a conceptual framework (and 

provide a copy in Appendix A) to 

develop project plans and activities, 

describing 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; 

Note: The following websites provide 

more information on logic models and 

conceptual frameworks: https://

osepideasthatwork.org/find-a-resource/ 

cipp-logic-model-outline; https://

osepideasthatwork.org/find-a-resource/ 

logic-models-and-performancemeasures; and 

www.osepideasthatwork.org/resourcesgrantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tadproject-logic-model-and-conceptualframework. 

(4) Be based on current research and 

make use of EBPs. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe— 

(i) The current research on 

performance measurement related to 

implementation science and the EBPs 

that States are supporting with 

implementation science; 

(ii) The current research about adult 

learning principles and implementation 

science that will inform the proposed 

TA; and 

(iii) How the proposed project will 

incorporate current research and EBPs 

in the development and delivery of its 

products and services; 

(5) Develop products and provide 

services 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 

describe— 

(i) How it proposes to identify or 

develop and expand the knowledge 

base; 

(ii) Its proposed approach to 

universal, general TA,4 which must 

identify the intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services, a description of the 

products and services that the Center 

proposes to make available, and the 

expected impact of those products and 

services under this approach; 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9598 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 

5 ‘‘Targeted, specialized TA’’ means TA services 

based on needs common to multiple recipients and 

not extensively individualized. A relationship is 

established between the TA recipient and one or 

more TA center staff. This category of TA includes 

one-time, labor-intensive events, such as facilitating 

strategic planning or hosting regional or national 

conferences. It can also include episodic, less laborintensive events that extend over a period of time, 

such as facilitating a series of conference calls on 

single or multiple topics that are designed around 

the needs of the recipients. Facilitating 

communities of practice can also be considered 

targeted, specialized TA. 

6 ‘‘Intensive, sustained TA’’ means TA services 

often provided on-site and requiring a stable, 

ongoing relationship between the TA center staff 

and the TA recipient. ‘‘TA services’’ are defined as 

negotiated series of activities designed to reach a 

valued outcome. This category of TA should result 

in changes to policy, program, practice, or 

operations that support increased recipient capacity 

or improved outcomes at one or more systems 

levels. 

7The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, 

and oversee the design of formative evaluations for 

every large discretionary investment (i.e., those 

awarded $500,000 or more per year and required to 

participate in the 3+2 process) in OSEP’s Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination; Personnel 

Development; Parent Training and Information 

Centers; and Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials programs. The efforts of CIPP are 

expected to enhance individual project evaluation 

plans by providing expert and unbiased TA in 

designing the evaluations with due consideration of 

the project’s budget. CIPP does not function as a 

third-party evaluator. 

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, 

specialized TA,5 which must identify— 

(A) The intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services under this approach; and 

(B) Its proposed approach to measure 

the readiness of potential TA recipients 

to work with the project, assessing, at a 

minimum, their current infrastructure, 

available resources, and ability to build 

capacity at the local level; and 

(iv) Its proposed approach to 

intensive, sustained TA,6 which must 

identify— 

(A) The intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services, a description of the 

products and services that the Center 

proposes to make available, and the 

expected impact of those products and 

services under this approach; 

(B) Its proposed approach to measure 

the readiness of the SEAs to work with 

the project, including their commitment 

to the initiative, alignment of the 

initiative to their needs, current 

infrastructure, available resources, and 

ability of the SEAs to build capacity at 

the local level; 

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting 

SEAs to build or enhance training 

systems that include professional 

development based on adult learning 

principles and coaching; and 

(D) Its proposed plan for working with 

appropriate levels of the education 

system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA 

providers, districts, schools, families) to 

ensure that there is communication 

between each level and that there are 

systems in place to support the use of 

EBPs; 

(6) Develop products and implement 

services that maximize efficiency. To 

address this requirement, the applicant 

must describe— 

(i) How the proposed project will use 

technology to achieve the intended 

project outcomes; 

(ii) With whom the proposed project 

will collaborate and the intended 

outcomes of this collaboration; and 

(iii) How the proposed project will 

use non-project resources to achieve the 

intended project outcomes; and 

(7) Develop a dissemination plan that 

describes how the applicant will 

systematically distribute information, 

products, and services to varied 

intended audiences, using a variety of 

dissemination strategies, to promote 

awareness and use of the Center’s 

products and services. 

(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. 

The evaluation plan must describe: 

Measures of progress in 

implementation, including the criteria 

for determining the extent to which the 

project’s products and services have met 

the goals for reaching its target 

population; measures of intended 

outcomes or results of the project’s 

activities in order to evaluate those 

activities; and how well the goals or 

objectives of the proposed project, as 

described in its logic model, have been 

met. 

The applicant must provide an 

assurance that, in designing the 

evaluation plan, it will— 

(1) Designate, with the approval of the 

OSEP project officer, a project liaison 

with sufficient dedicated time, 

experience in evaluation, and 

knowledge of the project to work in 

collaboration with the Center to 

Improve Program and Project 

Performance (CIPP),7 the project 

director, and the OSEP project officer on 

the following tasks: 

(i) Revise the logic model submitted 

in the application to provide for a more 

comprehensive measurement of 

implementation and outcomes and to 

reflect any changes or clarifications to 

the model discussed at the kick-off 

meeting; 

(ii) Refine the evaluation design and 

instrumentation proposed in the 

application consistent with the revised 

logic model and using the most rigorous 

design suitable (e.g., prepare evaluation 

questions about significant program 

processes and outcomes; develop 

quantitative or qualitative data 

collections that permit both the 

collection of progress data, including 

fidelity of implementation, as 

appropriate, and the assessment of 

project outcomes; and identify analytic 

strategies); and 

(iii) Revise the evaluation plan 

submitted in the application such that 

it— 

(A) Clearly specifies the evaluation 

questions, measures, and associated 

instruments or sources for data 

appropriate to answer these questions, 

suggests analytic strategies for those 

data, provides a timeline for conducting 

the evaluation, and includes staff 

assignments for completing the 

evaluation activities; 

(B) Clearly delineates the data 

expected to be available by the end of 

the second project year for use during 

the project’s evaluation (3+2 review) for 

continued funding described under the 

heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the 

Project; and 

(C) Can be used to assist the project 

director and the OSEP project officer, 

with the assistance of CIPP, as needed, 

to specify the project performance 

measures to be addressed in the 

project’s annual performance report; 

(2) Dedicate sufficient staff time and 

other resources during the first six 

months of the project to collaborate with 

CIPP staff, including regular meetings 

(e.g., weekly, biweekly, or monthly) 

with CIPP and the OSEP project officer, 

in order to accomplish the tasks 

described in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section; and 

(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each 

budget year to cover the costs of 

carrying out the tasks described in 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section 

and revising and implementing the 

evaluation plan. Please note in your 

budget narrative the funds dedicated for 

this activity. 

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Adequacy of resources and quality of 

project personnel,’’ how— 

(1) The proposed project will 

encourage 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, as appropriate; 

(2) The proposed key project 

personnel, consultants, and 

subcontractors have the qualifications 

and experience to carry out the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 9599 

proposed activities and achieve the 

project’s intended outcomes; 

(3) The applicant and any key 

partners have adequate resources to 

carry out the proposed activities; and 

(4) The 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 

services 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, 

TA providers, researchers, and policy 

makers, among others, in its 

development and operation. 

(f) Address the following application 

requirements. The applicant must— 

(1) Include, in Appendix A, 

personnel-loading charts and timelines, 

as applicable, to illustrate the 

management plan described in the 

narrative; 

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance 

at the following: 

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off 

meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, 

after receipt of the award, and an annual 

planning meeting in Washington, DC, or 

virtually, with the 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 two and one-half day project 

directors’ conference in Washington, 

DC, or virtually, during each year of the 

project period; 

(iii) One annual two-day trip, or 

virtually, to attend Department 

briefings, Department-sponsored 

conferences, and other meetings, as 

requested by OSEP; and 

(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review 

meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, 

during the last half of the second year 

of the project period; 

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

for an annual set-aside of 5 percent of 

the grant amount to support emerging 

needs that are consistent with the 

proposed project’s intended outcomes, 

as those needs are identified in 

consultation with, and approved by, the 

OSEP project officer. With approval 

from the OSEP project officer, the 

project must reallocate any remaining 

funds from this annual set-aside no later 

than the end of the third quarter of each 

budget period; 

(4) Maintain a high-quality website, 

with an easy-to-navigate design, that 

meets government or industryrecognized standards for accessibility; 

(5) Ensure that annual project 

progress toward meeting project goals is 

posted on the project website; and 

(6) Include, in Appendix A, an 

assurance to assist OSEP with the 

transfer of pertinent resources and 

products and to maintain the continuity 

of services to States during the 

transition to this new award period and 

at the end of this award period, as 

appropriate. 

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project: 

In deciding whether to continue 

funding the project for the fourth and 

fifth years, the Secretary will consider 

the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), 

including— 

(a) The recommendations of a 3+2 

review team consisting of experts who 

have experience and knowledge in 

implementation science and EBPs. This 

review will be conducted during a oneday intensive meeting that will be held 

during the last half of the second year 

of the project period; 

(b) The timeliness with which, and 

how well, the requirements of the 

negotiated cooperative agreement have 

been or are being met by the project; and 

(c) The quality, relevance, and 

usefulness of the project’s products and 

services and the extent to which the 

project’s products and services are 

aligned with the project’s objectives and 

likely to result in the project achieving 

its intended outcomes. 

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. 

References 

Kittelman, A., Horner, R. H., & Rowe, D. A. 

(2020). Selecting Evidence-Based 

Practices to Improve Learning and 

Behavior. Teaching Exceptional 

Children, 53(2): 96–98. https://doi.org/ 

10.1177/0040059920964684. 

Ruedel, K., Thompson, A. L., Kuchle, L., & 

D’Agord, C. (2021). Highlights from five 

years of reviewing State systemic 

improvement plans. Unpublished 

Report. 

Sanetti, L., & Collier-Meek, M. (2019). 

Increasing implementation science 

literacy to address the research-topractice gap in school psychology. 

Journal of School Psychology, 76, 33–47. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.07.008. 

The University of Washington. (2021). What 

is implementation science? 

Implementation Science Resource Hub. 

https://impsciuw.org/implementationscience/learn/implementation-scienceoverview/. 

Weiss, J., & McGuinn, P. (2017). The evolving 

role of the State education agency in the 

era of ESSA and Trump: Past, present, 

and uncertain future (CPRE Working 

Paper No. 14). Consortium for Policy 

Research in Education. http://repository.

upenn.edu/cpre_workingpapers/14/. 

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 priority in this notice. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1463 

and 1481. 

Note: Projects will be awarded and 

must be operated in a manner consistent 

with the nondiscrimination 

requirements contained in Federal civil 

rights laws. 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR 

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

and 99. (b) The Office of Management 

and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on 

Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR 

part 180, as adopted and amended as 

regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3485. (c) The Uniform 

Administrative Requirements, Cost 

Principles, and Audit Requirements for 

Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as 

adopted and amended as regulations of 

the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

79 apply to all applicants except 

federally recognized Indian Tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

86 apply to IHEs only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

agreement. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration has requested 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9600 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 

$49,345,000 for the Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination to 

Improve Services and Results for 

Children with Disabilities program for 

FY 2022, of which we intend to use an 

estimated $1,200,000 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 

2023 from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition. 

Maximum Award: We will not make 

an award exceeding $1,200,000 for a 

single budget period of 12 months. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 1. 

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 are 

considered 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 

competition does not require cost 

sharing or matching. 

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This 

program uses an unrestricted indirect 

cost rate. For more information 

regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a 

negotiated indirect cost rate, please see 

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

intro.html. 

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: 

This program does not include any 

program-specific limitation on 

administrative expenses. All 

administrative expenses must be 

reasonable and necessary and conform 

to the Cost Principles described in 2 

CFR part 200 subpart E of the Uniform 

Guidance. 

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this 

competition may not award subgrants to 

entities to directly carry out project 

activities described in its application. 

Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may 

contract for supplies, equipment, and 

other services in accordance with 2 CFR 

part 200. 

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 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264) and 

available at www.federalregister.gov/d/ 

2021-27979, which contain 

requirements and information on how to 

submit an application. Please note that 

these Common Instructions supersede 

the version published on February 13, 

2019, and, in part, describe the 

transition from the requirement to 

register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to 

the implementation of the UEI. More 

information on the phase-out of DUNS 

numbers is available at https://

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

docs/unique-entity-identifier-transitionfact-sheet.pdf. 

2. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference 

regulations outlining funding 

restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

4. Recommended Page Limit: The 

application narrative is where you, the 

applicant, address the selection criteria 

that reviewers use to evaluate your 

application. We recommend that you (1) 

limit the application narrative to no 

more than 70 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 listed below: 

(a) Significance (10 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 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. 

(ii) The importance or magnitude of 

the results or outcomes likely to be 

attained by the proposed project. 

(b) Quality of project services (35 

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 goals, 

objectives, and outcomes to be achieved 

by the proposed project are clearly 

specified and measurable. 

(ii) The extent to which the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

reflect up-to-date knowledge from 

research and effective practice. 

(iii) 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. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 9601 

(iv) The extent to which the TA 

services to be provided by the proposed 

project involve the use of efficient 

strategies, including the use of 

technology, as appropriate, and the 

leveraging of non-project resources. 

(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 provide for examining the 

effectiveness of project implementation 

strategies. 

(d) Adequacy of resources and quality 

of project personnel (15 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 relevance and demonstrated 

commitment of each partner in the 

proposed project to the implementation 

and success of the project. 

(iii) The extent to which the budget is 

adequate to support the proposed 

project. 

(e) Quality of the management plan 

(20 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 

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. 

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 for 

Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232) (2 

CFR 200.216); 

(c) Providing a preference, to the 

extent permitted by law, to maximize 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9602 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 

use of goods, products, and materials 

produced in the United States (2 CFR 

200.322); and 

(d) Terminating agreements in whole 

or in part to the greatest extent 

authorized by law if an award no longer 

effectuates the program goals or agency 

priorities (2 CFR 200.340). 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notification 

(GAN); or we may send you an email 

containing a link to access an electronic 

version of your GAN. We may notify 

you informally, also. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Open Licensing Requirements: 

Unless an exception applies, if you are 

awarded a grant under this competition, 

you will be required to openly license 

to the public grant deliverables created 

in whole, or in part, with Department 

grant funds. When the deliverable 

consists of modifications to pre-existing 

works, the license extends only to those 

modifications that can be separately 

identified and only to the extent that 

open licensing is permitted under the 

terms of any licenses or other legal 

restrictions on the use of pre-existing 

works. Additionally, a grantee that is 

awarded competitive grant funds must 

have a plan to disseminate these public 

grant deliverables. This dissemination 

plan can be developed and submitted 

after your application has been 

reviewed and selected for funding. For 

additional information on the open 

licensing requirements please refer to 2 

CFR 3474.20. 

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

grant under this competition, you must 

ensure that you have in place the 

necessary processes and systems to 

comply with the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive 

funding under the competition. This 

does not apply if you have an exception 

under 2 CFR 170.110(b). 

(b) At the end of your project period, 

you must submit a final performance 

report, including financial information, 

as directed by the Secretary. If you 

receive a multiyear award, you must 

submit an 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. 

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 

Technical Assistance and Dissemination 

to Improve Services and Results for 

Children With Disabilities program. 

These measures are: 

• Program Performance Measure 1: 

The percentage of technical assistance 

and dissemination products and 

services deemed to be of high quality by 

an independent review panel of experts 

qualified to review the substantive 

content of the products and services. 

• Program Performance Measure 2: 

The percentage of special education 

technical assistance and dissemination 

products and services deemed by an 

independent review panel of qualified 

experts to be of high relevance to 

educational and early intervention 

policy or practice. 

• Program Performance Measure 3: 

The percentage of all special education 

technical assistance and dissemination 

products and services deemed by an 

independent review panel of qualified 

experts to be useful in improving 

educational or early intervention policy 

or practice. 

• Program Performance Measure 4: 

The cost efficiency of the Technical 

Assistance and Dissemination to 

Improve Services and Results for 

Children with Disabilities program 

includes the percentage of milestones 

achieved in the current annual 

performance report period and the 

percentage of funds spent during the 

current fiscal year. 

• Long-term Program Performance 

Measure: The percentage of States 

receiving special education technical 

assistance and dissemination services 

regarding scientifically or evidencebased practices for infants, toddlers, 

children, and youth with disabilities 

that successfully promote the 

implementation of those practices in 

school districts and service agencies. 

The measures apply to projects 

funded under this competition, and 

grantees are required to submit data on 

these measures as directed by OSEP. 

Grantees will be required to report 

information on their project’s 

performance in annual and final 

performance reports to the Department 

(34 CFR 75.590). 

The Department will also closely 

monitor the extent to which the 

products and services provided by the 

Center meet needs identified by 

stakeholders and may require the Center 

to report on such alignment in their 

annual and final performance reports. 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2022 / Notices 9603 

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. 

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. 

Katherine Neas, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Delegated the 

authority to perform the functions and duties 

of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03680 Filed 2–18–22; 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) 2022 for Stepping-up 

Technology Implementation, Assistance 

Listing Number 84.327S. This notice 

relates to the approved information 

collection under OMB control number 

1820–0028. 

DATES:

Applications Available: February 22, 

2022. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: April 25, 2022. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: June 22, 2022. 

Pre-Application Webinar Information: 

No later than February 28, 2022, the 

Office of Special Education Programs 

(OSEP) will post details on pre-recorded 

informational webinars designed to 

provide technical assistance (TA) to 

interested applicants. Links to the 

webinars may be found at www2.ed.gov/ 

fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osepgrants.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 27, 2021 

(86 FR 73264) and available at 

www.federalregister.gov/d/2021–27979. 

Please note that these Common 

Instructions supersede the version 

published on February 13, 2019, and, in 

part, describe the transition from the 

requirement to register in SAM.gov a 

Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) number to the implementation 

of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). 

More information on the phase-out of 

DUNS numbers is available at https://

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

docs/unique-entity-identifier-transitionfact-sheet.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richelle Davis, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 5025, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–5076. 

Telephone: (202) 245–7401. Email: 

Richelle.Davis@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: 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purposes of 

the Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities Program are 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(c)(1)(D) and 681(d) of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act (IDEA); 20 U.S.C. 1474(c)(1)(D) 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 2022 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: 

Supporting Early Childhood and K–12 

Educators of English Learners (ELs) with 

Disabilities and ELs at Risk to Deliver 

Literacy Instruction Based on the 

Science of Reading. 

Background: 

Since 2010, the number of ELs in 

American public schools has increased 

by five million students (National 

Center on Education Statistics, 2020). 

Data has consistently shown poorer 

academic outcomes for ELs compared to 

their non-EL peers, particularly in 

reading (Mancilla-Martinez, 2020). 

These poor reading outcomes are even 

more apparent for ELs with disabilities. 

For example, a greater proportion of ELs 

with disabilities (4th grade: 89 percent; 

8th grade: 89 percent) scored below the 

basic level on the 2019 National 

Assessment of Educational Progress 

(NAEP) in reading, compared to all 

students with disabilities who scored 

below the basic level (4th grade: 67 

percent; 8th grade: 60 percent) or ELs 

without disabilities who scored below 

the basic level (4th grade: 61 percent; 

8th grade: 68 percent) (U.S. Department 

of Education, 2021). This reading 

achievement gap for ELs has remained 

static for over a decade. Given EL 

reading outcomes, increasing equity in 

educational opportunity and providing 

supports to improve literacy skills is a 

pressing educational necessity 

(Mancilla-Martinez, 2020). 

Many educators report using some 

type of digital learning resource or 

technologies to provide instruction on a 

daily or weekly basis to ELs (U.S. 

Department of Education, 2019). 

Improving the capacity of educators to 

use the most appropriate and effective 

technologies in their delivery of literacy 

instruction that meet their students’ 

needs is important for improving 

literacy outcomes. Technology that 

provides a range of support features 

(e.g., visual, auditory), in multiple 

languages, is also viewed by educators 

as critical for supporting ELs’ learning 

of content and building language and 

literacy skills. Educators are interested 

in how technologies can be used to 

individualize and adapt literacy 

instruction based on the student’s 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1