24718 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

National Institute on Disability and

Rehabilitation Research; Notice of

Proposed Funding Priorities for Fiscal

Years 1998–1999 for Rehabilitation

Research and Training Centers

SUMMARY: The Secretary proposes

funding priorities for two Rehabilitation

Research and Training Centers (RRTCs)

under the National Institute on

Disability and Rehabilitation Research

(NIDRR) for fiscal years 1998–1999. The

Secretary takes this action to focus

research attention on areas of national

need. These priorities are intended to

improve rehabilitation services and

outcomes for individuals with

disabilities.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 3, 1998.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning

these proposed priorities should be

addressed to Donna Nangle, U.S.

Department of Education, 600 Maryland

Avenue, S.W., room 3418, Switzer

Building, Washington, D.C. 20202–2645.

Comments may also be sent through the

Internet: comments@ed.gov

You must include the term ‘‘Mental

Retardation-RRTC’s’’ in the subject line

of your electronic message.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donna Nangle. Telephone: (202) 205–

5880. Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD) may call the TDD number at (202)

205–2742. Internet:

DonnalNangle@ed.gov

Individuals with disabilities may

obtain this document in an alternate

format (e.g., Braille, large print,

audiotape, or computer diskette) on

request to the contact person listed in

the preceding paragraph.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice contains proposed priorities

under the Disability and Rehabilitation

Research Projects and Centers Program

for two RRTCs related to: aging with

mental retardation and disability

statistics.

These proposed priorities support the

National Education Goal that calls for

every adult American to possess the

skills necessary to compete in a global

economy.

The authority for the Secretary to

establish research priorities by reserving

funds to support particular research

activities is contained in sections 202(g)

and 204 of the Rehabilitation Act of

1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 761a(g)

and 762).

The Secretary will announce the final

priorities in a notice in the Federal

Register. The final priorities will be

determined by responses to this notice,

available funds, and other

considerations of the Department.

Funding of a particular project depends

on the final priority, the availability of

funds, and the quality of the

applications received. The publication

of these proposed priorities does not

preclude the Secretary from proposing

additional priorities, nor does it limit

the Secretary to funding only these

priorities, subject to meeting applicable

rulemaking requirements.

Note: This notice of proposed priorities

does not solicit applications. A notice

inviting applications under this competition

will be published in the Federal Register

concurrent with or following the publication

of the notice of final priorities.

Rehabilitation Research and Training

Centers

The authority for RRTCs is contained

in section 204(b)(2) of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760–

762). Under this program, the Secretary

makes awards to public and private

organizations, including institutions of

higher education and Indian tribes or

tribal organizations, for coordinated

research and training activities. These

entities must be of sufficient size, scope,

and quality to effectively carry out the

activities of the Center in an efficient

manner consistent with appropriate

State and Federal laws. They must

demonstrate the ability to carry out the

training activities either directly or

through another entity that can provide

that training.

The Secretary may make awards for

up to 60 months through grants or

cooperative agreements. The purpose of

the awards is for planning and

conducting research, training,

demonstrations, and related activities

leading to the development of methods,

procedures, and devices that will

benefit individuals with disabilities,

especially those with the most severe

disabilities.

Description of Rehabilitation Research

and Training Centers

RRTCs are operated in collaboration

with institutions of higher education or

providers of rehabilitation services or

other appropriate services. RRTCs serve

as centers of national excellence and

national or regional resources for

providers and individuals with

disabilities and the parents, family

members, guardians, advocates or

authorized representatives of the

individuals.

RRTCs conduct coordinated,

integrated, and advanced programs of

research in rehabilitation targeted

toward the production of new

knowledge to improve rehabilitation

methodology and service delivery

systems, to alleviate or stabilize

disabling conditions, and to promote

maximum social and economic

independence of individuals with

disabilities.

RRTCs provide training, including

graduate, pre-service, and in-service

training, to assist individuals to more

effectively provide rehabilitation

services. They also provide training

including graduate, pre-service, and inservice training, for rehabilitation

research personnel.

RRTCs serve as informational and

technical assistance resources to

providers, individuals with disabilities,

and the parents, family members,

guardians, advocates, or authorized

representatives of these individuals

through conferences, workshops, public

education programs, in-service training

programs and similar activities.

RRTCs disseminate materials in

alternate formats to ensure that they are

accessible to individuals with a range of

disabling conditions.

NIDRR encourages all Centers to

involve individuals with disabilities

and individuals from minority

backgrounds as recipients of research

training, as well as clinical training.

The Department is particularly

interested in ensuring that the

expenditure of public funds is justified

by the execution of intended activities

and the advancement of knowledge and,

thus, has built this accountability into

the selection criteria. Not later than

three years after the establishment of

any RRTC, NIDRR will conduct one or

more reviews of the activities and

achievements of the Center. In

accordance with the provisions of 34

CFR 75.253(a), continued funding

depends at all times on satisfactory

performance and accomplishment.

Proposed General RRTC Requirements

The Secretary proposes that the

following requirements apply to these

RRTCs pursuant to these absolute

priorities unless noted otherwise. An

applicant’s proposal to fulfill these

proposed requirements will be assessed

using applicable selection criteria in the

peer review process. The Secretary is

interested in receiving comments on

these proposed requirements:

The RRTC must provide: (1) Applied

research experience; (2) training on

research methodology; and (3) training

to persons with disabilities and their

families, service providers, and other

appropriate parties in accessible formats

on knowledge gained from the Center’s

research activities.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24719

The RRTC must develop and

disseminate informational materials

based on knowledge gained from the

Center’s research activities, and

disseminate the materials to persons

with disabilities, their representatives,

service providers, and other interested

parties.

The RRTC must involve individuals

with disabilities and, if appropriate,

their representatives, in planning and

implementing its research, training, and

dissemination activities, and in

evaluating the Center.

The RRTC must conduct a state-ofthe-science conference and publish a

comprehensive report on the final

outcomes of the conference. The report

must be published in the fourth year of

the grant.

Priorities

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), the

Secretary proposes to give an absolute

preference to applications that meet the

following priorities. The Secretary

proposes to fund under this competition

only applications that meet one of these

absolute priorities.

Proposed Priority 1: Aging With Mental

Retardation

Background

There are an estimated 550,000 adults

40 years and older with mental

retardation (McNeil, J., ‘‘Special Report

on Mental Retardation and Mental

Illness,’’ Bureau of the Census, Survey

of Income and Program Participation,

1997). This population has aging-related

health and social care needs specific to

their condition (McCarthy, J. and

Mullan, E., ‘‘The Elderly with a

Learning Disability (Mental

Retardation): An Overview,’’

International Psychogeriatrics, 8 (3),

pgs. 489–501, 1996).

Current research has begun to identify

secondary conditions that are causally

related to aging with mental retardation.

For instance, there is evidence that

persons aging with mental retardation

and a lifelong history of certain

medications (e.g., psychotropic, antiseizure) have a higher risk of developing

secondary conditions such as

osteoporosis or tardive dyskinesia

(Adlin, M., ‘‘Health Care Issues,’’ Older

Adults with Developmental Disabilities:

Optimizing Choice and Change,

Baltimore, Paul H. Brookes Pub. Co.,

pgs. 49–60, 1993). Persons with Downs

Syndrome have a higher prevalence of

Alzheimer’s disease at an earlier age

than the general population (Janicki, M.,

‘‘Practice Guidelines for the Clinical

Assessment and Care Management of

Alzheimer’s Disease and Other

Dementias Among Adults with

Intellectual Disability,’’ Journal of

Intellectual Disability Research, 40, pgs.

374–382, 1996). In addition, persons

aging with mental retardation

experience aging-related conditions like

hypertension, osteoarthritis, heart

disease, obesity, and high cholesterol

levels. Treating such conditions in

persons aging with mental retardation is

complicated by difficulty in

communicating about nutrition,

exercise, and prescribed treatment

protocols (Edgerton, R. ‘‘Some People

Know How to Be Old,’’ Life Course

Perspectives on Adulthood and Old

Age, American Association on Mental

Retardation Monograph Series, pgs. 53–

66, 1994) and by poor health

maintenance practices (Edgerton, R. et

al., ‘‘Health Care for Aging People with

Mental Retardation,’’ Mental

Retardation, 32 (2), pgs. 146–150, April,

1994).

The health status and needs of older

women with mental retardation have

received little research attention and

merit special consideration. We have

limited information on the availability

of screening for breast or cervical

cancers, onset and reactions to

menopause, and treatment for

osteoporosis in menopausal and postmenopausal women, or the general

health status of women with mental

retardation as they age (Murphy, L.,

Aging with Developmental Disabilities:

Women’s Health Issues, Texas ARC,

1997).

Approximately 80 percent of adults

with mental retardation live at home,

often with their families of origin, and

many are known to the service system

(Seltzer, M., ‘‘Aging Parents with CoResident Adult Children: The Impact of

Lifelong Caregiving,’’ Life Course

Perspectives on Adulthood and Old

Age, American Association on Mental

Retardation, pgs. 3–18, 1994). A major

issue facing older family caregivers is

planning for the future of their children

aging with mental retardation. A

shortage of alternative living

arrangements and the aging of family

members contribute to this concern

(Heller, T., ‘‘Support Systems, Wellbeing, and Placement Decision-making

Among Older Parents and Their Adult

Children with Developmental

Disabilities,’’ Older Adults with

Developmental Disabilities; Optimizing

Choice and Change, pgs. 107–122,

1993). For many families, planning for

the future financial needs of their

members with mental retardation is a

particular concern.

There has been little research

examining family caregiving throughout

the life of the person aging with mental

retardation, particularly analysis of

sibling roles in the caregiving process.

Cross-sectional studies have suggested

that older family caregivers perceive

less personal burden than do younger

caregivers (Hayden, M., ‘‘Support,

Problem-Solving/Coping Ability, and

Personal Burden of Younger and Older

Caregivers of Adults with Mental

Retardation,’’ Mental Retardation, 35,

pgs. 364–372, 1997). With increasing

age, there appears to be greater

acceptance of the family member and

greater reciprocity in caregiving as the

child with mental retardation takes on

caregiving roles with aging parents

(Heller, T., ‘‘Adults with Mental

Retardation as Supports to their Parents:

Effects on Parental Caregiving

Appraisal,’’ Mental Retardation, 35, pgs.

338–346, 1997).

For adults living in residential

settings, family involvement has been

low. However, such involvement has

many benefits for the adult including

increasing social interaction, oversight

of residential conditions, provision of

recreational opportunities, assistance

with financial planning activities

(Feinstein, C., ‘‘A Survey of Family

Satisfaction with Regional Treatment

Centers and Community Services to

Persons with Mental Retardation in

Minnesota,’’ Philadelphia: Conroy and

Feinstein Associates, 1988). Older

adults with mental retardation have

lower rates of family involvement than

younger adults (Hill, B., Living in the

Community: A Comparative Study of

Foster Homes and Small Group Homes

for People with Mental Retardation,

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota,

Center for Residential and Community

Services, 1989).

Approximately 40 percent of working

age persons with mental retardation

work outside the home (McNeil, J.,

‘‘Current Population Reports: Americans

With Disabilities,’’ U.S. Census Bureau,

P70–61, 1997). Research indicates that

as persons with mental retardation grow

older, they experience new work-related

problems because of functional decline

and changing job requirements.

Furthermore, many individuals with

mental retardation and their employers

are unaware of the resources and

services available to help them solve

these problems (Parent, W., ‘‘Social

Integration in the Workplace; An

Analysis of the Interaction Activities of

Workers with Mental Retardation and

their Co-workers,’’ Education and

Training in Mental Retardation, 27, pgs.

28–37, 1992).

Many individuals aging with mental

retardation have limited access to

assistive technology that might help

them cope with aging-related functional
24720 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

limitations such as decreased mobility.

Assistive technology has generally been

underutilized by persons with mental

retardation of all ages because few

devices successfully incorporate

accommodations that assist persons

with cognitive impairments in their use

(Wehmeyer, M., ‘‘The Use of Assistive

Technology by People with Mental

Retardation and Barriers to This

Outcome: A Pilot Study,’’ Technology

and Disability, 4, pgs. 195–204, 1995).

Also, staff and families often are

insufficiently aware of assistive

technology solutions or of options for its

funding.

Information on health care utilization

rates and educational and employment

status of persons with mental

retardation is not readily available.

Although a number of Federal agencies,

some States, and private research

institutions collect mental retardation

data, too often these data are

unanalyzed. Secondary analysis of

existing data on mental retardation

would help identify research questions

and gaps in service for persons with

mental retardation and their families.

Proposed Priority 1

The Secretary proposes to establish an

RRTC on Aging with Mental Retardation

to assist individuals aging with mental

retardation and their families to prevent

secondary conditions, maintain general

overall health, plan for the future, and

maximize independence. The RRTC

shall:

(1) Identify, develop, and evaluate

programs that promote health, including

early recognition and treatment of

secondary conditions, with special

emphasis on the needs of women aging

with mental retardation;

(2) Investigate determinants of the

role played by the family of origin in

providing care for persons aging with

mental retardation, with special

emphasis on adults in residential

settings and the role of siblings in the

caregiving process;

(3) Identify, develop, and evaluate

techniques that assist individuals with

mental retardation and their families

plan for future needs, including future

financial needs;

(4) Analyze and disseminate

information from national data sets and

public health surveillance data on

adults with mental retardation to

identify health care utilization,

educational, and employment patterns;

(5) Identify, develop, and evaluate

accommodations that help maintain

employment;

(6) Identify best practices in the use

of assistive technology or universal

design to compensate for physical and

psychological consequences of aging

with mental retardation.

In carrying out these purposes, the

RRTC must:

• Coordinate with other relevant

research and demonstration activities

sponsored by the National Center on

Medical Rehabilitation Research at the

National Institutes of Health, the

National Institute on Mental Health, the

National Institute on Aging, the

Rehabilitation Services Administration,

the Department of Veteran Affairs, the

Social Security Administration, the

Health Care Financing Administration,

and the Rehabilitation Research

Training Centers on Managed Care and

Personal Assistance Services.

Proposed Priority 2

Background

A number of Federal, State, and

private agencies collect information on

persons with disabilities. While some of

this information is analyzed, significant

amounts of unanalyzed data are

generated. The National Health

Interview Survey, the Survey of Income

and Program Participation, the

California Work and Health Survey,

other surveys, population data,

information on program participation,

data on institutions, and market

research profiles provide many

indicators about the lives of persons

with disabilities. Policy makers,

program directors, and others need

information on the incidence,

prevalence and distribution of

disabilities, as well as the integration of

persons with disabilities into society.

Likewise, reliable information on use of

services such as long-term care,

transportation, vocational rehabilitation

and personal care assistance is

extremely valuable to individuals with

disabilities and their organizations,

planners, researchers and policy

makers.

The 1994–95 National Health

Interview Survey on Disability (NHIS–

D) conducted by the National Center for

Health Statistics was developed, in part,

to meet the demands for data from

numerous agencies (Verbrugee, L.M.,

‘‘The Disability Supplement to the

1994–95 National Health Interview

Survey,’’ for the National Center for

Health Statistics). The 1994–95 NHIS–D

offers an excellent opportunity to

analyze many variables related to

persons with disabilities. Researchers

can use the NHIS–D to determine access

to health care and personal services, use

of assistive technologies, and

community participation, among other

key descriptors.

The major Federal agencies that

routinely collect information on

disability publish only a small fraction

of statistical information derived from

that data. Most agency data collections

are driven by statutory requirements

and agencies report statistics about

receipt of program services and subsets

of eligible individuals. These

constraints limit the usefulness of the

data that are collected. Easier access to

a full range of data on disability for

policy makers and others may be

assured, in part, by providing a central

resource for disability statistics and

information and an organized and

comprehensive system for the

collection, analysis, and synthesis of the

data. A disability statistics center can

use existing data to conduct metaanalyses focused on problems such as

employment, use of health care and

social services, household situations,

family composition, and educational

levels.

Researchers, policy makers and others

have begun to work within the

framework of the ‘‘New Paradigm of

Disability,’’ a contextual model of

disability that recognizes the role of the

built environment and of social and

cultural factors in the disablementenablement process. Most national

surveys fail to measure the role of

environmental factors in the operational

definitions of disability used, tending to

focus solely on health problems as the

locus of disability. (Kirchner, C.,

‘‘Looking Under the Streetlamp:

Inappropriate Use of Measures Just

Because They Are There’’ Journal of

Disability Policy Studies, 7:77–90.

1996). The Americans with Disabilities

Act (ADA) emphasizes barrier removal,

accessibility, and reasonable

accommodations. Barriers may be

physical or may involve programmatic

exclusions and other social obstacles.

Despite increasing recognition that data

systems must be enhanced to meet

newly developing information needs,

such as those suggested by the New

Paradigm of Disability and the ADA,

there is a lack of environmental

measures that have been tested for

accuracy and reliability. This has been

an impediment to the development of

survey and census measures of

disability at the national and State

levels.

New survey measures must be

developed to accurately and reliably

depict disability in the context of

individual health and environmental

factors. The resulting questions must

take into account the interaction

between the individual and the

environment and examine the effects of

that interaction on the ability to carry
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24721

out daily activities and normative social

roles. This includes examination of the

immediate living arrangements of the

person’s household and the larger

community environment. Architectural

accessibility features, assistive

technologies, transportation, and other

accommodations and supports must be

addressed.

With increased global interest in

disability, researchers must be aware of

new developments in the World Health

Organization sponsored International

Committee on Impairments, Disabilities,

and Handicaps, and consider

international data sets for purposes of

comparison with U.S. data and, as

appropriate, to generate hypotheses to

be tested against U.S. data.

Given these needs and opportunities

in the promotion and use of disability

statistics, a Center that can identify

major sources and perform secondary

analyses of existing data, including

meta-analyses on important topics, will

be a cornerstone of a future disability

data initiative. The Center can also

contribute to the future of disability

research through the development,

testing, and dissemination of data

collection items that address the New

Paradigm of Disability.

Proposed Priority 2

The Secretary proposes to establish an

RRTC to improve collection and

analysis of disability statistics to guide

development of disability policies. The

RRTC shall:

(1) Conduct secondary analyses of

critical and relevant data sets, including

estimates of the incidence, prevalence,

and distribution of various disabilities,

and disseminate analytical reports;

(2) Develop new measures, designed

for inclusion in general population

surveys, addressing the effect of

physical, policy, and social

environments on persons with

disabilities; and disseminate these to

survey designers, researchers, and

statistical agencies;

(3) Conduct meta-analyses on key

variables such as, but not limited to,

employment, income and health status,

using a range of relevant existing data

sets on disability; and analyze the

policy implications based upon the

results of these analyses;

(4) Identify major gaps in

demographic and program data on the

disabled population and develop

strategies for addressing those gaps; and

(5) Serve as a resource to researchers,

consumers and consumer groups,

planners, and policy makers for

statistical information on disability and

develop and implement a marketing

plan to support dissemination of that

information.

In carrying out the purposes of the

priority, the RRTC must coordinate with

relevant activities sponsored by the

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention, the Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in

the Department of Health and Human

Services, the Bureau of the Census, the

Department of Labor, and the National

Institutes of Health.

Electronic Access to This Document

Anyone may view this document, as

well as all other Department of

Education documents published in the

Federal Register, in text or portable

document format (pdf) on the World

Wide Web at either of the following

sites:

http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm

http://www.ed.gov/news.html

To use the pdf you must have the

Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with

Search, which is available free at either

of the preceding sites. If you have

questions about using the pdf, call the

U.S. Government Printing Office toll

free at 1–888–293–6498.

Anyone may also view these

documents in text copy only on an

electronic bulletin board of the

Department. Telephone: (202) 219–1511

or, toll free, 1–800–222–4922. The

documents are located under Option

G—Files/Announcements, Bulletins and

Press Releases.

Note: The official version of this document

is the document published in the Federal

Register.

Invitation to Comment

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments and recommendations

regarding these proposed priorities. All

comments submitted in response to this

notice will be available for public

inspection, during and after the

comment period, in Room 3424, Switzer

Building, 330 C Street S.W.,

Washington, D.C., between the hours of

9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday of each week except

Federal holidays.

Applicable Program Regulations: 34

CFR Parts 350 and 353.

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760–762.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Numbers 84.133B, Rehabilitation Research

and Training Centers)

Dated: April 28, 1998.

Judith E. Heumann,

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services.

[FR Doc. 98–11709 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P