27408 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA No.: 84.323A]

Special Education: State Program

Improvement Grants Program; Notice

Inviting Applications for New Awards

for Fiscal Year (FY) 1998

Note to Applicants: This notice is a

complete application package. Together with

the statute authorizing the program and the

applicable regulations governing this

program, including the Education

Department General Administrative

Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains all

of the information, application forms, and

instructions needed to apply for a grant

under this program.

Purpose of Program: The purpose of

this program, newly authorized under

the Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of

1997, is to assist State educational

agencies to establish a partnership with

local educational agencies and other

State agencies involved in, or concerned

with, reforming and improving their

systems for providing educational, early

intervention, and transitional services,

including their systems for professional

development, technical assistance, and

dissemination of knowledge about best

practices, to improve results for

children with disabilities.

Eligible Applicants: A State

educational agency of one of the 50

States, the District of Columbia, or the

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or an

outlying area (United States Virgin

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and

the Commonwealth of the Northern

Mariana Islands).

General Requirements: (a) Projects

funded under this notice must make

positive efforts to employ and advance

in employment qualified individuals

with disabilities in project activities (see

Section 606 of IDEA);

(b) Applicants and grant recipients

funded under this notice must involve

individuals with disabilities or parents

of individuals with disabilities in

planning, implementing, and evaluating

the projects (see Section 661(f)(1)(A) of

IDEA); and

(c) Projects funded under these

priorities must budget for a two-day

Project Directors’ meeting in

Washington, D.C. during each year of

the project.

Deadline for Transmittal of

Applications: October 1, 1998.

Deadline for Intergovernmental

Review: November 30, 1998.

Available Funds: $21 million.

Estimated Range of Awards: Awards

will be not less than $500,000, nor more

than $2,000,000, in the case of the 50

States, the District of Columbia, and the

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and not

less than $80,000, in the case of an

outlying area. The Secretary sets the

amount of each grant after considering:

(1) the amount of funds available for

making the grants; (2) the relative

population of the State or outlying area;

and (3) the types of activities proposed

by the State or outlying area.

Estimated Average Size of Awards:

$1,000,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 21.

Note: The Department of Education is not

bound by the estimated size and number of

awards in this notice.

Project Period: Not less than one year

and not more than five years.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The

Education Department General

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in

34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85,

and 86; and (b) The selection criteria for

this program are drawn from EDGAR in

34 CFR 75.210.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86

apply to institutions of higher education

only.

Description of Program

The statutory authorization for this

program and the application

requirements that apply to this

competition are set out in section 651–

655 of the IDEA.

Findings and Purposes

(a) States are responding with some

success to multiple pressures to

improve educational and transitional

services and results for children with

disabilities in response to growing

demands imposed by ever-changing

factors, such as demographics, social

policies, and labor and economic

markets.

(b) In order for States to address those

demands and to facilitate lasting

systemic change that is of benefit to all

students, including children with

disabilities, States must involve local

educational agencies, parents,

individuals with disabilities and their

families, teachers and other service

providers, and other interested

individuals and organizations in

carrying out comprehensive strategies to

improve educational results for children

with disabilities.

(c) Targeted Federal financial

resources are needed to assist States,

working in partnership with others, to

identify and make needed changes to

address the needs of children with

disabilities into the next century.

(d) State educational agencies, in

partnership with local educational

agencies and other individuals and

organizations, are in the best position to

identify and design ways to meet

emerging and expanding demands to

improve education for children with

disabilities and to address their special

needs.

(e) Research, demonstration, and

practice over the past 20 years in special

education and related disciplines have

built a foundation of knowledge on

which State and local systemic-change

activities can now be based.

(f) Such research, demonstration, and

practice in special education and related

disciplines have demonstrated that an

effective educational system now and in

the future must—

(1) Maintain high academic standards

and clear performance goals for children

with disabilities, consistent with the

standards and expectations for all

students in the educational system, and

provide for appropriate and effective

strategies and methods to ensure that

students who are children with

disabilities have maximum

opportunities to achieve those standards

and goals;

(2) Create a system that fully

addresses the needs of all students,

including children with disabilities, by

addressing the needs of children with

disabilities in carrying out educational

reform activities;

(3) Clearly define, in measurable

terms, the school and post-school

results that children with disabilities are

expected to achieve;

(4) Promote service integration, and

the coordination of State and local

education, social, health, mental health,

and other services, in addressing the full

range of student needs, particularly the

needs of children with disabilities who

require significant levels of support to

maximize their participation and

learning in school and the community;

(5) Ensure that children with

disabilities are provided assistance and

support in making transitions as

described in section 674(b)(3)(C) of the

Act;

(6) Promote comprehensive programs

of professional development to ensure

that the persons responsible for the

education or a transition of children

with disabilities possess the skills and

knowledge necessary to address the

educational and related needs of those

children;

(7) Disseminate to teachers and other

personnel serving children with

disabilities research-based knowledge

about successful teaching practices and

models and provide technical assistance

to local educational agencies and

schools on how to improve results for

children with disabilities;

(8) Create school-based disciplinary

strategies that will be used to reduce or
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27409

eliminate the need to use suspension

and expulsion as disciplinary options

for children with disabilities;

(9) Establish placement-neutral

funding formulas and cost-effective

strategies for meeting the needs of

children with disabilities; and

(10) Involve individuals with

disabilities and parents of children with

disabilities in planning, implementing,

and evaluating systemic-change

activities and educational reforms.

Absolute Priority

Under Section 653 of the Act and 34

CFR 75.105(c)(3), the Secretary gives an

absolute preference to applications that

meet the following priority. The

Secretary funds under this competition

only those applications that meet this

absolute priority.

This priority supports projects that

assist State educational agencies and

their partners in reforming and

improving their systems for providing

educational, early intervention, and

transitional services, including their

systems for professional development,

technical assistance, and dissemination

of knowledge about best practices, to

improve results for children with

disabilities.

State Improvement Plan

Applicants must submit a State

improvement plan that—

(a) Is integrated, to the maximum

extent possible, with State plans under

the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act of 1965 and the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, if

appropriate;

(b) Identifies those critical aspects of

early intervention, general education,

and special education programs

(including professional development,

based on an assessment of State and

local needs) that must be improved to

enable children with disabilities to meet

the goals established by the State under

section 612(a)(16) of the Act.

Specifically, applicants must include:

(1) An analysis of all information,

reasonably available to the State

educational agency, on the performance

of children with disabilities in the State,

including—

(i) Their performance on State

assessments and other performance

indicators established for all children,

including drop-out rates and graduation

rates;

(ii) Their participation in

postsecondary education and

employment; and

(iii) How their performance on the

assessments and indicators compares to

that of non-disabled children;

(2) An analysis of State and local

needs for professional development for

personnel to serve children with

disabilities that includes, at a minimum:

(i) The number of personnel providing

special education and related services;

and

(ii) Relevant information on current

and anticipated personnel vacancies

and shortages (including the number of

individuals described in paragraph

(b)(2)(i) with temporary certification),

and on the extent of certification or

retraining necessary to eliminate those

shortages, that is based, to the maximum

extent possible, on existing assessments

of personnel needs;

(3) An analysis of the major findings

of the Secretary’s most recent reviews of

State compliance, as they relate to

improving results for children with

disabilities; and

(4) An analysis of other information,

reasonably available to the State, on the

effectiveness of the State’s systems of

early intervention, special education,

and general education in meeting the

needs of children with disabilities;

(c) Describes a partnership agreement

that —

(1) Specifies —

(i) The nature and extent of the

partnership among the State educational

agency, local educational agencies, and

other State agencies involved in, or

concerned with, the education of

children with disabilities, and the

respective roles of each member of the

partnership; and

(ii) How those agencies will work in

partnership with other persons and

organizations involved in, and

concerned with, the education of

children with disabilities, including the

respective roles of each of these persons

and organizations; and

(2) Is in effect for the period of the

grant;

(d) Describes how grant funds will be

used in undertaking the systemicchange activities, and the amount and

nature of funds from any other sources,

including funds under part B of the Act

retained for use at the State level under

sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act,

that will be committed to the systemicchange activities;

(e) Describes the strategies the State

will use to address the needs identified

under paragraph (b), including how it

will—

(1) Change State policies and

procedures to address systemic barriers

to improving results for children with

disabilities;

(2) Hold local educational agencies

and schools accountable for educational

progress of children with disabilities;

(3) Provide technical assistance to

local educational agencies and schools

to improve results for children with

disabilities;

(4) Address the identified needs for

in-service and pre-service preparation to

ensure that all personnel who work with

children with disabilities (including

both professional and paraprofessional

personnel who provide special

education, general education, related

services, or early intervention services)

have the skills and knowledge necessary

to meet the needs of children with

disabilities, including a description of

how it will—

(i) Prepare general and special

education personnel with the content

knowledge and collaborative skills

needed to meet the needs of children

with disabilities, including how the

State will work with other States on

common certification criteria;

(ii) Prepare professionals and

paraprofessionals in the area of early

intervention with the content

knowledge and collaborative skills

needed to meet the needs of infants and

toddlers with disabilities;

(iii) Work with institutions of higher

education and other entities that (on

both a pre-service and an in-service

basis) prepare personnel who work with

children with disabilities to ensure that

those institutions and entities develop

the capacity to support quality

professional development programs that

meet State and local needs;

(iv) Work to develop collaborative

agreements with other States for the

joint support and development of

programs to prepare personnel for

which there is not sufficient demand

within a single State to justify support

or development of such a program of

preparation;

(v) Work in collaboration with other

States, particularly neighboring States,

to address the lack of uniformity and

reciprocity in the credentialing of

teachers and other personnel;

(vi) Enhance the ability of teachers

and others to use strategies, such as

behavioral interventions, to address the

conduct of children with disabilities

that impedes the learning of children

with disabilities and others;

(vii) Acquire and disseminate, to

teachers, administrators, school board

members, and related services

personnel, significant knowledge

derived from educational research and

other sources, and how the State, if

appropriate, will adopt promising

practices, materials, and technology;

(viii) Recruit, prepare, and retain

qualified personnel, including

personnel with disabilities and

personnel from groups that are
27410 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

underrepresented in the fields of regular

education, special education, and

related services;

(ix) Integrate its plan, to the maximum

extent possible, with other professional

development plans and activities,

including plans and activities

developed and carried out under other

Federal and State laws that address

personnel recruitment and training; and

(x) Provide for the joint training of

parents and special education, related

services, and general education

personnel;

(5) Address systemic problems

identified in Federal compliance

reviews, including shortages of qualified

personnel;

(6) Disseminate results of the local

capacity-building and improvement

projects funded under section 611(f)(4)

of the Act;

(7) Address improving results for

children with disabilities in the

geographic areas of greatest need; and

(8) Assess, on a regular basis, the

extent to which the strategies

implemented under this subpart have

been effective; and

(9) Coordinate its improvement

strategies with public and private sector

resources.

Required Partners

Applicants must:

(a) Establish a partnership with local

educational agencies and other State

agencies involved in, or concerned with,

the education of children with

disabilities; and

(b) Work in partnership with other

persons and organizations involved in,

and concerned with, the education of

children with disabilities, including—

(1) The Governor;

(2) Parents of children with

disabilities;

(3) Parents of nondisabled children;

(4) Individuals with disabilities;

(5) Organizations representing

individuals with disabilities and their

parents, such as parent training and

information centers;

(6) Community-based and other

nonprofit organizations involved in the

education and employment of

individuals with disabilities;

(7) The lead State agency for part C of

the Act;

(8) General and special education

teachers, and early intervention

personnel;

(9) The State advisory panel

established under part B of the Act;

(10) The State interagency

coordinating council established under

part C of the Act; and

(11) Institutions of higher education

within the State.

Optional Partners

A partnership established by

applicants may include agencies such

as—

(a) Individuals knowledgeable about

vocational education; (b) The State

agency for higher education;

(c) The State vocational rehabilitation

agency;

(d) Public agencies with jurisdiction

in the areas of health, mental health,

social services, and juvenile justice; and

(e) Other individuals.

Reporting Procedures

Each State educational agency that

receives a grant shall submit

performance reports to the Secretary

pursuant to a schedule to be determined

by the Secretary, but not more

frequently than annually. The reports

must describe the progress of the State

in meeting the performance goals

established under Section 612(a)(16) of

the Act, analyze the effectiveness of the

State’s strategies in meeting those goals,

and identify any changes in the

strategies needed to improve its

performance. Grantees must also

provide information required under

EDGAR at 34 CFR 80.40.

Use of Funds

Each State educational agency that

receives a State Improvement Grant

under this program—

(a) May use grant funds to carry out

any activities that are described in the

State’s application and that are

consistent with the purpose of this

program;

(b) Shall, consistent with its

partnership agreement established

under the grant, award contracts or

subgrants to local educational agencies,

institutions of higher education, and

parent training and information centers,

as appropriate, to carry out its State

improvement plan;

(c) May award contracts and subgrants

to other public and private entities,

including the lead agency under part C

of the Act, to carry out that plan;

(d)(1) Shall use not less than 75

percent of the funds it receives under

the grant for any fiscal year—

(i) To ensure that there are sufficient

regular education, special education,

and related services personnel who have

the skills and knowledge necessary to

meet the needs of children with

disabilities and developmental goals of

young children; or

(ii) To work with other States on

common certification criteria; or

(2) Shall use not less than 50 percent

of those funds for these purposes, if the

State demonstrates to the Secretary’s

satisfaction that it has the personnel

described in paragraph (d)(1).

Selection Criteria

(a)(1) The Secretary uses the following

selection criteria in 34 CFR 75.210 to

evaluate applications for new grants

under this competition.

(2) The maximum score for all of

these criteria is 100 points.

(3) The maximum score for each

criterion is indicated in parentheses.

(a) Need for project. (15 points) (1)

The Secretary considers the need for the

proposed project.

(2) In determining the need for the

proposed project, the Secretary

considers one or more of the following

factors:

(i) The magnitude of the need for the

services to be provided or the activities

to be carried out by the proposed

project.

(ii) The extent to which specific gaps

or weaknesses in services,

infrastructure, or opportunities have

been identified and will be addressed by

the proposed project, including the

nature and magnitude of those gaps or

weaknesses.

(iii) The extent to which the proposed

project will prepare personnel for fields

in which shortages have been

demonstrated.

(b) Significance. (15 points) (1) The

Secretary considers the significance of

the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of

the proposed project, the Secretary

considers one or more of the following

factors:

(i) The likelihood that the proposed

project will result in system change or

improvement.

(ii) The extent to which the proposed

project is likely to build local capacity

to provide, improve or expand services

that address the needs of the target

population.

(c) Quality of the project design. (15

points) (1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the design of the proposed

project.

(2) In determining the quality of the

design of the proposed project, the

Secretary considers one or more of the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the goals,

objectives, and outcomes to be achieved

by the proposed project are clearly

specified and measurable.

(ii) The extent to which the design of

the proposed project is appropriate to,

and will successfully address, the needs

of the target population or other

identified needs.

(iii) The extent to which the proposed

activities constitute a coherent,

sustained program of training in the

field.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27411

(iv) The extent to which the proposed

project is designed to build capacity and

yield results that will extend beyond the

period of Federal financial assistance.

(v) The extent to which the design of

the proposed project reflects up-to-date

knowledge from research and effective

practice.

(vi) The extent to which the proposed

project represents an exceptional

approach for meeting statutory purposes

and requirements.

(vii) The extent to which the proposed

project will be coordinated with similar

or related efforts, and with other

appropriate community, State, and

Federal resources.

(viii) The extent to which the

proposed project will establish linkages

with other appropriate agencies and

organizations providing services to the

target population.

(ix) The extent to which the proposed

project is part of a comprehensive effort

to improve teaching and learning and

support rigorous academic standards for

students.

(d) Quality of project services. (15

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 one or more of the following

factors:

(i) The extent to which the services to

be provided by the proposed project are

appropriate to the needs of the intended

recipients or beneficiaries of those

services.

(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 likely impact of the services

to be provided by the proposed project

on the intended recipients of those

services.

(iv) 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.

(v) The extent to which the training or

professional development services to be

provided by the proposed project are

likely to alleviate the personnel

shortages that have been identified or

are the focus of the proposed project.

(vi) The likelihood that the services to

be provided by the proposed project

will lead to improvements in the

achievement of students as measured

against rigorous academic standards.

(vii) The extent to which the services

to be provided by the proposed project

involve the collaboration of appropriate

partners for maximizing the

effectiveness of project services.

(viii) The extent to which the

technical assistance 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 nonproject resources.

(ix) The extent to which the services

to be provided by the proposed project

are focused on those with greatest

needs.

(e) Quality of project personnel. (10

points) (1) The Secretary considers 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 one or more of the following

factors:

(i) The qualifications, including

relevant training and experience, of key

project personnel.

(ii) The qualifications, including

relevant training and experience, of

project consultants or subcontractors.

(f) Adequacy of resources. (10 points)

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy of resources for the proposed

project.

(2) In determining the adequacy of

resources for the proposed project, the

Secretary considers one or more of the

following factors:

(i) The adequacy of support, including

facilities, equipment, supplies, and

other resources, from the applicant

organization or the lead applicant

organization.

(ii) The relevance and demonstrated

commitment of each partner in the

proposed project to the implementation

and success of the project.

(iii) The extent to which the budget is

adequate to support the proposed

project.

(iv) The extent to which the costs are

reasonable in relation to the objectives,

design, and potential significance of the

proposed project.

(v) The extent to which the costs are

reasonable in relation to the number of

persons to be served and to the

anticipated results and benefits.

(vi) The potential for continued

support of the project after Federal

funding ends, including, as appropriate,

the demonstrated commitment of

appropriate entities to such support.

(vii) The potential for the

incorporation of project purposes,

activities, or benefits into the ongoing

program of the agency or organization at

the end of Federal funding.

(g) Quality of the management plan.

(10 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 one or

more of 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 adequacy of procedures for

ensuring feedback and continuous

improvement in the operation of the

proposed project.

(iii) The adequacy of mechanisms for

ensuring high-quality products and

services from the proposed project.

(iv) How the applicant will ensure

that a diversity of perspectives are

brought to bear in the operation of the

proposed project, including those of

parents, teachers, the business

community, a variety of disciplinary

and professional fields, recipients or

beneficiaries of services, or others, as

appropriate.

(h) Quality of the project evaluation.

(10 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 one

or more of 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 are appropriate to the

context within which the project

operates.

(iii) The extent to which the methods

of evaluation provide for examining the

effectiveness of project implementation

strategies.

(iv) The extent to which the methods

of evaluation include the use of

objective performance measures that are

clearly related to the intended outcomes

of the project and will produce
27412 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

quantitative and qualitative data to the

extent possible.

(v) The extent to which the methods

of evaluation will provide performance

feedback and permit periodic

assessment of progress toward achieving

intended outcomes.

Intergovernmental Review

This program is subject to the

requirements of Executive Order 12372

and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79.

The objective of the Executive order is

to foster an inter-governmental

partnership and a strengthened

federalism by relying on processes

developed by State and local

governments for coordination and

review of proposed Federal financial

assistance.

Applicants must contact the

appropriate State Single Point of

Contact to find out about, and to comply

with, the State’s process under

Executive Order 12372. Applicants

proposing to perform activities in more

than one State should immediately

contact the Single Point of Contact for

each of those States and follow the

procedure established in each State

under the Executive Order. The

addresses of individual State Single

Point of Contact are in the Appendix to

this notice.

In States that have not established a

process or chosen a program for review,

State, areawide, regional, and local

entities may submit comments directly

to the Department.

Any State Process Recommendation

and other comments submitted by a

State Single Point of Contact and any

comments from State, areawide,

regional, and local entities must be

mailed or hand-delivered by the date

indicated in this notice to the following

address: The Secretary, E.O. 12372—

CFDA# 84.323A, U.S. Department of

Education, Room 6213, 600

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20202–0124.

Proof of mailing will be determined

on the same basis as applications (see 34

CFR 75.102). Recommendations or

comments may be hand-delivered until

4:30 p.m. (Washington, D.C. time) on

the date indicated in this notice.

Please note that the above Address is not

the same address as the one to which the

applicant submits its completed application.

Do not send applications to the above

address.

Instructions for Transmittal of

Applications

(a) If an applicant wants to apply for

a grant, the applicant shall—

(1) Mail the original and three copies

of the application on or before the

deadline date to: U.S. Department of

Education, Application Control Center,

Attention: (CFDA# 84.323A),

Washington, D.C. 20202–4725; or

(2) Hand-deliver the original and

three copies of the application by 4:30

p.m. (Washington, D.C. time) on or

before the deadline date to: U.S.

Department of Education, Application

Control Center, Attention: (CFDA#

84.323A), Room #3633, Regional Office

Building #3, 7th and D Streets, SW.,

Washington, D.C.

(b) An applicant must show one of the

following as proof of mailing:

(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service

postmark.

(2) A legible mail receipt with the

date of mailing stamped by the U.S.

Postal Service.

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or

receipt from a commercial carrier.

(4) Any other proof of mailing

acceptable to the Secretary.

(c) If an application is mailed through

the U.S. Postal Service, the Secretary

does not accept either of the following

as proof of mailing:

(1) A private metered postmark.

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by

the U.S. Postal Service.

Notes: (1) The U.S. Postal Service does not

uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before

relying on this method, an applicant should

check with its local post office.

(2) The Application Control Center will

mail a Grant Application Receipt

Acknowledgment to each applicant. If an

applicant fails to receive the notification of

application receipt within 15 days from the

date of mailing the application, the applicant

should call the U.S. Department of Education

Application Control Center at (202) 708–

9495.

(3) The applicant must indicate on the

envelope and—if not provided by the

Department—in Item 10 of the Application

for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424)

the CFDA number and suffix letter, if any, of

the competition under which the application

is being submitted.

Application Instructions and Forms

The appendix to this notice is divided

into three parts, plus a statement

regarding estimated public reporting

burden, additional non-regulatory

guidance, and various assurances,

certifications, and required

documentation. These parts and

additional materials are organized in the

same manner that the submitted

application should be organized. The

parts and additional materials are as

follows:

Part I: Application for Federal

Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev.

4–88)) and instructions.

Part II: Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED Form No.

524) and instructions.

Part III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials

The following forms and other items

must be included in the application:

a. Estimated Public Reporting Burden.

b. Assurances—Non-Construction

Programs (Standard Form 424B) and

instructions.

c. Certifications Regarding Lobbying;

Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free

Workplace Requirements (ED 80–0013)

and instructions.

d. Certification Regarding Debarment,

Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary

Exclusion—Lower Tier Covered

Transactions (ED 80–0014, 9/90) and

instructions. (NOTE: This form is

intended for the use of grantees and

should not be transmitted to the

Department.)

e. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

(Standard Form LLL) (if applicable) and

instructions. The document has been

marked to reflect statutory changes. See

the notice published by the Office of

Management and Budget in the Federal

Register (61 FR 1413) on (January 19,

1996).

f. Addresses of the individual State

Single Point of Contact.

g. Table of Contents.

An applicant may submit information

on a photostatic copy of the application

and budget forms, the assurances, and

the certifications. However, the

application form, the assurances, and

the certifications must each have an

original signature. All applicants must

submit one original signed application,

including ink signatures on all forms

and assurances, and three copies of the

application. Please mark each

application as ‘‘original’’ or ‘‘copy’’. No

grant may be awarded unless a

completed application has been

received.

For Applications and General

Information Contact

Requests for applications and general

information should be addressed to the

Grants and Contracts Services Team,

600 Independence Avenue, SW, room

3317, Switzer Building, Washington, DC

20202–2641. The preferred method for

requesting information is to FAX your

request to: (202) 205–8717. Telephone:

(202) 260–9182. Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

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

205–8953.

Individuals with disabilities may

obtain a copy of this notice or the

application packages referred to in this

notice in an alternate format (e.g.

Braille, large print, audiotape, or

computer diskette) by contacting the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27413

Department as listed above. However,

the Department is not able to reproduce

in an alternate format the standard

forms included in the application

package.

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 previous 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 a document is

the document published in the Federal

Register.

Dated: May 13, 1998.

Judith E. Heumann,

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services.

Instructions for Estimated Public

Reporting Burden

According to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are

required to respond to a collection of

information unless it displays a valid

OMB control number. The valid OMB

control number for this information

collection is OMB No. 1820-0620. The

time required to complete this

information collection is estimated to

average between 50–130 hours per

response, including the time to review

instructions, search existing data

resources, gather the data needed, and

complete and review the information

collection. If you have any comments

concerning the accuracy of the time

estimate or suggestions for improving

this form, please write to: U.S.

Department of Education, Washington,

D.C. 20202–4651. If you have any

comments or concerns regarding the

status of your individual submission of

this form, write directly to: Office of

Special Education Programs, U.S.

Department of Education, 600

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20202–2641.

Application Narrative

The narrative should address fully all

aspects of the selection criteria in the

order listed and should give detailed

information regarding each criterion. Do

not simply paraphrase the criteria.

Provide position descriptions, not

resumes.

Budget

Budget line items must support the

goals and objectives of the proposed

project and be directly applicable to the

program design and all other project

components.

Final Application Preparation

Use the above checklist to verify that

all items are addressed. Prepare one

original with an original signature, and

include six additional copies. Do not

use elaborate bindings or covers. The

application must be mailed to the

Application Control Center (ACC) and

postmarked by the deadline date of

October 1, 1998.

Notice to All Applicants

Thank you for your interest in this

program. The purpose of this enclosure

is to inform you about a new provision

in the Department of Education’s

General Education Provisions Act

(GEPA) that applies to applicants for

new grant awards under Department

programs.

This provision is Section 427 of

GEPA, enacted as part of the Improving

America’s Schools Act of 1994 (Pub. L.

103–382).

To Whom Does This Provision Apply?

Section 427 of GEPA affects

applicants for new discretionary grant

awards under this program.

All applicants for new awards must

include information in their applications to

address this new provision in order to

receive funding under this program.

What Does This Provision Require?

Section 427 requires each applicant

for funds (other than an individual

person) to include in its application a

description of the steps the applicant

proposes to take to ensure equitable

access to, and participation in, its

Federally-assisted program for students,

teachers, and other program

beneficiaries with special needs.

This section allows applicants

discretion in developing the required

description. The statute highlights six

types of barriers that can impede

equitable access or participation that

you may address: gender, race, national

origin, color, disability, or age. Based on

local circumstances, you can determine

whether these or other barriers may

prevent your students, teachers, etc.

from equitable access or participation.

Your description need not be lengthy;

you may provide a clear and succinct

description of how you plan to address

those barriers that are applicable to your

circumstances. In addition, the

information may be provided in a single

narrative, or, if appropriate, may be

discussed in connection with related

topics in the application.

Section 427 is not intended to

duplicate the requirements of civil

rights statutes, but rather to ensure that,

in designing their projects, applicants

for Federal funds address equity

concerns that may affect the ability of

certain potential beneficiaries to fully

participate in the project and to achieve

to high standards. Consistent with

program requirements and its approved

application, an applicant may use the

Federal funds awarded to it to eliminate

barriers it identifies.

What Are Examples of How an

Applicant Might Satisfy the

Requirements of This Provision?

The following examples may help

illustrate how an applicant may comply

with Section 427.

(1) An applicant that proposes to

carry out an adult literacy project

serving, among others, adults with

limited English proficiency, might

describe in its application how it

intends to distribute a brochure about

the proposed project to such potential

participants in their native language.

(2) An applicant that proposes to

develop instructional materials for

classroom use might describe how it

will make the materials available on

audio tape or in braille for students who

are blind.

(3) An applicant that proposes to

carry out a model science program for

secondary students and is concerned

that girls may be less likely than boys

to enroll in the course, might indicate

how its intends to conduct ‘‘outreach’’

efforts to girls, to encourage their

enrollment.

We recognize that many applicants

may already be implementing effective

steps to ensure equity of access and

participation in their grant programs,

and we appreciate your cooperation in

responding to the requirements of this

provision.

Estimated Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are

required to respond to a collection of

information unless it displays a valid

OMB control number. The valid OMB

control number for this information

collection is 1820–0620 (Exp. 10/31/98).
27414 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

1Unless otherwise noted, the term ‘‘state’’ refers

to the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the outlying

areas (United States Virgin Islands, Guam,

American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the

Northern Mariana Islands).

The time required to complete this

information collection is estimated to

vary from 1 to 3 hours per response,

with an average of 1.5 hours, including

the time to review instructions, search

existing data sources, gather and

maintain the data needed, and complete

and review the information collection. If

you have any comments concerning the

accuracy of the time estimate(s) or

suggestions for improving this form,

please write to: U.S. Department of

Education, Washington, DC 20202–

4651.

Questions and Answers

Following is a series of questions and

answers that will serve as guidance for

State Educational Agency in completing

the grant application for a State

Improvement Grant (SIG) as authorized

by the Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act (IDEA). The questions

were chosen to provide additional

insight into the statutory requirements

contained in the grant application. The

questions were generated from a number

of sources including parents of students

with disabilities, Regional Resource

Centers, the Federal Resource Center,

State Directors of Special Education,

State Educational Agency staff and staff

from the Office of Special Education

Programs.

Eligible Applicants

1. Who May Apply for a State

Improvement Grant?

A State Educational Agency of one of

the 50 States, the District of Columbia,

or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or

an outlying area (United States Virgin

Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and

the Commonwealth of the Northern

Mariana Islands).1 (Sections 602(18),

602(27), 652(a), and 655(a)(1)(2)).

2. Can Two or More SEAs Apply Jointly

for a SIG?

No. A State applying for a State

Improvement Grant shall submit an

individual application. However,

included in the application will be a

description of how: (1) the State will

work to develop collaborative

agreements with other States for the

joint support and development of

programs to prepare personnel for

which there is not sufficient demand

within a single State to justify support

or development of such a program of

preparation; and (2) the State will work

in collaboration with other States,

particularly neighboring States, to

address the lack of uniformity and

reciprocity in the credentialing of

teachers and other personnel (Section

653(c)(3)(D)(iv) and (v)).

Partners

3. With Whom Is the State Supposed To

Form Partnerships and How Are Such

Partnerships Structured?

Part D Subpart 1—State Program

Improvement Grants for Children with

Disabilities, Section 652 (b) describes

three types of State partners. In order to

be considered for a State Improvement

Grant, a State educational agency must

establish a partnership with individuals

and organizations considered ‘‘Required

Partners.’’ Required partners are made

up of two subsets of partners—those

called ‘‘Contractual partners’’ and those

called ‘‘Other partners.’’ The SEA’s

contractual partners are local

educational agencies and other State

agencies involved in, or concerned with,

the education of children with

disabilities. These partners are called

contractual because they must be parties

to a formal ‘‘partnership agreement’’

that is explained further below in

question four. The ‘‘other partners’’ are

individuals and organizations involved

in, and concerned with, the education of

children with disabilities, with whom

the SEA must work in partnership to

implement the State improvement grant.

Other partners may be, but the SEA is

not required to make them, parties to

the formal partnership agreement. Those

‘‘other partners’’ must include the

Governor; parents of children with

disabilities; parents of nondisabled

children; individuals with disabilities;

organizations representing individuals

with disabilities and their parents, such

as parent training and information

centers; community-based and other

nonprofit organizations involved in the

education and employment of

individuals with disabilities; the lead

State agency for Part C; general and

special education teachers, and early

intervention personnel; the State

advisory panel established under Part B;

the State interagency coordinating

council established under Part C; and

institutions of higher education within

the State.

In addition to required partners, the

SEA, at its option, may include as

partners individuals and organizations

called ‘‘Optional Partners.’’ The SEA

may include ‘‘optional partners’’ as

parties to the formal partnership

agreement or work in partnership with

them, without them being parties to the

partnership agreement. Those optional

partners may include individuals

knowledgeable about vocational

education, the State agency for higher

education, the State vocational

rehabilitation agency, public agencies

with jurisdiction in the areas of health,

mental health, social services, and

juvenile justice and other individuals.

4. What is the Partnership Agreement

and What Must It Include?

Each State Improvement Plan

submitted with the State’s application

shall include a description of the

partnership agreement entered into by

the SEA with its contractual partners

and with any ‘‘other’’ and ‘‘optional’’

partners who will be parties to the

partnership agreement. As specified in

the grant application package, the

partnership agreement must specify the

nature and extent of the partnership

among the SEA, the LEAs, and other

State agencies involved in, or concerned

with, the education of children with

disabilities. It must specify the

respective roles of each member of the

partnership in the implementation of

the State improvement plan. The

partnership agreement must also specify

how the SEA, LEAs, and other State

agencies identified above, will work in

partnership with other persons and

organizations involved in, and

concerned with, the education of

children with disabilities (these would

be the ‘‘other partners’’ and any

‘‘optional partners’’), and must specify

the respective roles of each of these

persons and organizations (Section

653(c)(1)(B)).

The partnership agreement must

indicate that it is in effect for the period

of the grant. The terms of the

partnership agreement will determine

whether the SEA will award subgrants

or contracts to any of the partners listed

in Section 654(a)(2)(A).

5. What Is the Connection Between the

Partnership Agreement and the SEA’s

Use of Funds?

The SEA shall, as appropriate, award

contracts or subgrants to LEAs, IHEs,

and parent training and information

centers identified in the partnership

agreement to carry out the State

improvement plan. To carry out the

State improvement plan, the SEA may

also award contracts and subgrants to

other public and private entities,

including the lead agency under Part C

and other agencies that are partners, as

well as public and private entities that

are not partners. It is anticipated that an

SEA will need and desire the resources

of other individuals and organizations

to develop and implement all of the

systemic change, technical assistance,

in-service and pre-service training,
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27415

dissemination and assessment activities

designated in the State improvement

plan. There is, however, no required

amount of funds that must be used for

contracts or subgrants (Section

654(a)(2)).

Funding availability and levels

6. What Are the Grant Amounts to

States?

The Secretary shall make a grant to

each State educational agency whose

application the Secretary has selected

for funding under this subpart in an

amount for each fiscal year that is: (1)

not less than $500,000, nor more than

$2,000,000, in the case of the 50 States,

the District of Columbia, and the

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and (2)

not less than $80,000, in the case of an

outlying area (United States Virgin

Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana

Islands (Section 655(a)).

Beginning with fiscal year 1999, the

Secretary may increase the maximum

amount under (1) to account for

inflation.

7. How Will Decisions Be Made

Regarding the Amount of Funds That

States Will Receive if Approved for a

State Improvement Grant?

The Secretary will set the amount of

each grant, within the limits outlined in

the response to question 6, after

considering: (1) the relative population

of the State; (2) the types of activities

proposed by the State; and (3) the

amount of funds available for making

the grants (Section 655(c)).

8. How Will the Connection Between

Grant Amounts and ‘‘Need’’ Be

Determined?

As previously stated in the response

to question 7, the Secretary shall set the

amount of each grant after considering:

(1) the relative population of the State;

(2) the types of activities proposed by

the State or outlying area; and (3) the

amount of funds available for making

the grants. ‘‘Need’’ will be determined

through the quality of the needs

assessment performed under Section

653(b) including: (i) an analysis of all

information, reasonably available to the

State educational agency, on the

performance of children with

disabilities in the State; (ii) an analysis

of State and local needs for professional

development for personnel to serve

children with disabilities; (iii) an

analysis of the major findings of the

Secretary’s most recent reviews of State

compliance, as they relate to improving

results for children with disabilities;

and (iv) an analysis of other

information, for example, findings made

by the Secretary’s Office for Civil Rights,

reasonably available to the State, on the

effectiveness of the State’s systems of

early intervention, special education,

and general education in meeting the

needs of children with disabilities.

9. What Will the Secretary Consider in

Making an Award on a Competitive

Basis?

Using the selection criteria identified

elsewhere in this application package,

the Secretary expects to select for

funding applications from States that

demonstrate a need for improvement

and effective strategies to meet those

State needs. The application should

show how the State plans to fulfill the

purpose of the State Improvement

Grant, which is to assist State

educational agencies and their partners

in reforming and improving their

systems for providing educational, early

intervention, and transitional services,

including their systems for professional

development, technical assistance, and

dissemination of knowledge about best

practices, to improve results for

children with disabilities. The Secretary

may give priority to applications on the

basis of need, as indicated by such

information as the findings of Federal

compliance reviews (Section 653(d)).

10. When Will Funds Be Available?

First year funds to support the State

Improvement Grant will become

available for obligation by the Federal

Government on July 1, 1998 and must

be obligated by the Federal Government

by September 30, 1999.

Improvement Strategies and Use of

Funds

11. Can Funds From the State

Improvement Grants be Distributed to

LEAs on a Competitive Basis?

Yes. The statute does not provide a

particular method for States to use when

distributing State Improvement Grant

funds to LEAs or other entities. When

awarding and administering subgrants,

under 34 CFR § 80.37(a), the State must

follow state law and procedures. As

long as the SEA’s plan to contract or

subgrant SIG funds is consistent with

the partnership agreement and the funds

are used to support the activities

specified in the approved grant

application, there is no statutory

prohibition against the funds being

distributed to LEAs on a competitive

basis.

12. Can Charter Schools Be Involved as

Partners in the State Improvement

Grant?

Yes. Charter schools are schools

under contract—or charter—between a

public agency and groups of parents,

teachers, community leaders or others

who want to create alternatives and

choice within the public school system.

Charter schools can be involved as

partners in the State Improvement

Grant, either as an LEA or as part of an

existing LEA, consistent with the State

charter schools law.

13. Does the ‘‘Service Obligation’’ Apply

to the Use of State Improvement Grant

Funds if They Are Being Used for

Scholarships?

No. The ‘‘service obligation’’

contained under the Personnel

Preparation discretionary grant program

provides that a recipient of a

scholarship funded by the Personnel

Preparation program under Section

673(b), (c), (e), and to the extent

appropriate (d), shall subsequently

perform work in the field in which they

were trained or repay the cost of the

financial assistance. The service

obligation only applies to scholarships

awarded under the Personnel

Preparation program.

14. Can Funds Be Used To Prepare Early

Intervention Personnel?

Yes, but only in limited

circumstances. Under Section 654(b)(1)

a State educational agency that receives

a grant shall use not less than 75 percent

of the funds it receives under the grant

for any fiscal year to work with other

States on common certification criteria

or to ensure that there are sufficient

regular education, special education,

and related services personnel who have

the skills and knowledge necessary to

meet the needs of children with

disabilities and developmental goals of

young children. This Section ensures

that based on the needs assessment, the

State focuses at least 75% of the funds

received under the State Improvement

Grant on the professional development

and training of regular education,

special education, or related services

personnel. Only 50% of the funds must

be used on professional development if

the State can demonstrate to the

Secretary that it has sufficient

personnel. Training that prepares

personnel to deliver early intervention

services that could not also be

considered regular education, special

education, or related services would not

be a permissible use of the 75%, or 50%

as the case may be, of the funds.

However, it would be permissible for

early intervention personnel to

participate in training in those areas of
27416 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

special education and related services

that would be useful to them, even if the

training is funded using the 75% of the

funds. There is no limitation on the use

of the remaining 25% of the funds

received under the SIG; it can be used

to train personnel to provide early

intervention services or for any other

activity in an approved SIG plan.

15. What Is the Relationship of the SIG

to the State Set Aside Under Part B?

In order to carry out the activities

proposed in the State’s SIG application,

a State may choose to supplement the

State Improvement Grant award with

funds from the IDEA Part B State set

aside (i.e., the portion of the IDEA, Part

B grant awards retained for use by the

SEA under Sections 611(f) and 619(d) of

the Act for discretionary purposes).

16. Can Funds From Sources Other

Than the SIG Be Used to Support the

Required Activities for Awards Under

This Program?

Yes. In addition to the SIG award,

funds from other sources (e.g., other

IDEA discretionary grants, Part B State

set aside funds, preschool grants) may

be used, so long as those activities are

permissible under the funding statute

and regulations to carry out any

activities described in the State’s SIG

application. States may also use funds

from private sources (e.g., foundations)

to carry out activities described in the

State’s application. In its State

Improvement Plan, the State must

describe the amount and nature of funds

from any other sources, including the

Part B funds retained for use under

Sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act

and Part D discretionary funds that will

be committed to the SIG program.

17. Can SIG Funds Be Used for Direct

Services to Children With Disabilities?

Yes. The statute does not forbid the

use of SIG funds for direct services to

children with disabilities; however,

funding for these services must come

from the 25% or 50% of the grant

award, as the case may be, not obligated

by statute to fund professional

development activities or to work with

other States on common certification

criteria. In addition, the need for direct

services must be one of the critical

aspects of early intervention, general

education and special education

identified in the State’s needs

assessment. The direct services

improvement strategy must be described

in the State’s application and be

consistent with the purpose of the grant,

which is to assist State educational

agencies and their partners in reforming

and improving their systems for

providing educational, early

intervention, and transitional services,

including their systems for professional

development, technical assistance, and

dissemination of knowledge about best

practices, to improve results for

children with disabilities.

Strategies Used To Address Identified

Needs

18. Is interstate Personnel Preparation

Mandatory?

No. The State is required to describe

how it will work to develop

collaborative agreements with other

States for the joint support and

development of programs to prepare

personnel for which there is not

sufficient demand within the State to

justify support or development of such

a program of preparation (Section

653(c)(3)(D)(iv)). If the State

demonstrates, through its needs

assessment, that there is sufficient

demand within the State to support its

own personnel preparation programs,

then interstate collaborative agreements

are not required.

19. Is Training of General Education

Personnel Required?

Yes. In its application, the State is

required to include a description of how

the State will prepare general as well as

special education personnel with the

content knowledge and collaborative

skills needed to meet the needs of

children with disabilities (Section

653(c)(3)(D)(i)).

20. Is Training of Parents Required?

Yes. In its application, the State is

required to include a description of how

the State will provide for the joint

training of parents and special

education, related services, and general

education personnel (Section

653(c)(3)(D)(x)).

Role of Regional Resource Center/

Technical Assistance and

Dissemination Projects

21. What Role Can the Regional

Resource Center (RRC) Play in the

Development of the State Improvement

Plan and Grant Application?

The RRC is encouraged to provide

general technical assistance to States in

the development of their State

Improvement Plans. An RRC is funded

to provide technical assistance and

resources to all states within its region

and must do so on an equitable basis

across those States. Helping States

improve their special education

programs is the central mission of the

RRCs and many State activities related

to the State Improvement Grant program

will be crucial in these improvement

efforts. It would be inappropriate,

however, for an RRC to help a State in

drafting its grant application or even to

provide technical assistance on

strategies to improve the

competitiveness of a State’s application

because it could be viewed as providing

a competitive advantage to one potential

applicant over another. On the other

hand, helping States, for example, with

data analyses, needs assessments, and

facilitating meetings concerning

planning the States’ improvement

activities could be, except as noted

above, a part of the RRC’s technical

assistance activities to the States in their

region. RRCs can also assist States in

their implementation of a State

Improvement Grant once those grants

are awarded.

22. Can the State Use SIG Funds to

Subcontract or Contract With the

University or Entity in Which the RRC

is Located To Carry Out SIG Activities?

Yes. The State can use SIG funds to

subgrant or contract with the University

or entity in which the RRC is located to

carry out SIG activities. However, the

University or other entity would need to

ensure that personnel time and other

resources covered by the RRC’s

cooperative agreement with the

Department are not used to work on SIG

activities performed under such a

subgrant or contract and that work done

under such other subcontract or contract

is not represented as being performed as

part of the cooperative agreement with

the Department of Education.

23. Can Technical Assistance and

Dissemination (TA&D) Projects Funded

by OSEP Play a Role in SIG Activities?

Similar to RRCs, TA&D projects

funded by OSEP must ensure that the

services they provide are fairly and

evenhandedly available to their

respective audience (under the terms of

their OSEP funding agreement/grant/

contract) in all States, that the proposed

SIG activity is permissible under the

terms of the particular Project’s funding

agreement/grant/contract/with OSEP

and that Projects do not accept SIG

funds under contract or grant with an

SEA for activities they are currently

receiving Federal funds to provide. In

addition, TA&D projects, like the RRCs,

should not engage in activities that

could be seen as providing a

competitive advantage to any one State

over others in the SIG competition.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27417

Relationship Between State

Improvement Plan and other Federal

statutes and requirements

24. What is the Link Between the

Comprehensive System of Personnel

Development (CSPD) and the SIG? What

Are the Similarities and Differences?

The requirements for a CSPD as

amended by IDEA 97 must be

implemented by July 1, 1998 regardless

of whether or not a State receives a SIG.

Under Section 612(a)(14) of IDEA, in

order to be eligible for funding under

Part B, a State must have in effect a

comprehensive system of personnel

development that is designed to ensure

an adequate supply of qualified special

education, regular education, related

services, and early intervention

personnel and that meets the

requirements contained in the personnel

development sections of the State

Improvement Plan addressing needs

assessment and improvement strategies.

It is intended that the CSPD meet the

SIG personnel development

requirements so that it may serve as the

framework for the State’s personnel

development part of a SIG grant

application.

25. To What Extent Does This Plan Have

To Be Linked to the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act of 1965

(ESEA) and the Rehabilitation Act of

1973?

To the ‘‘maximum extent possible’’

State Improvement Plans must be linked

to State plans under ESEA and the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The IDEA

Amendments of 1997 emphasize that

children with disabilities have access to

the general curriculum and general

educational reforms. Although the

legislation does not mention integration

with any other state plans under any

other Federal statute, because the State

Improvement Plan is focused on

systems change for students with

disabilities, integration with relevant

state plans or projects would be

beneficial (Section 653(a)(2)(A)).

26. What Is the Relationship Between

the Performance Goals and Indicators a

State Must Have to be Eligible for Part

B and the State Improvement Plan?

Under Part B (612(a)(16)), in order to

be eligible to receive financial assistance

under Part B, the State must have in

place by July 1, 1998 performance goals

for children with disabilities that must

promote the purposes of the IDEA and

be consistent, to the maximum extent

appropriate, with other goals and

standards developed for children

established by the State and

performance indicators to assess

progress toward achieving those goals.

A State must have developed those

performance goals and indicators in

order to apply for a State Improvement

Grant because in conducting the needs

assessment required as part of its

application, the State shall identify

those critical aspects of early

intervention, general education, and

special education programs that must be

improved to enable children with

disabilities to meet the performance

goals and indicators established by the

State for the performance of children

with disabilities under Section

612(a)(16). In submitting the required

SIG performance reports to the Secretary

under Section 653(f), the State shall

describe the progress of the State in

meeting the performance goals

established under section 612(a)(16),

analyze the effectiveness of the State’s

strategies in meeting those goals, and

identify any changes in the strategies

needed to improve its performance.

Monitoring and Corrective Action Plans

27. How Is the State Improvement Grant

Aligned With Federal Compliance

Reviews?

There are three areas in which the

State Improvement Grant aligns with

Federal compliance reviews. First, the

State improvement plan must include

an analysis of the major findings of the

Secretary’s most recent reviews of State

compliance, as they relate to improving

results for children with disabilities

(Section 653(b)(2)(C). The second is that

the State improvement plan must

include a description of strategies that

will address systemic problems

identified in Federal compliance

reviews, including shortages of qualified

personnel (Section 653(c)(3)(E). The

third area of alignment with monitoring

is that in determining competitive

awards the Secretary may give priority

to applications on the basis of need, as

indicated by such information as the

findings of Federal compliance reviews

(Section 653(d)(2)).

28. Can the State Improvement Grant

Funds be Used To Address Deficiencies

Identified in Federal Compliance

Reviews?

Yes, if the activities to address the

deficiencies are consistent with the

purposes of the grant and described in

the State’s application. If, for example,

a Federal compliance review identified

that a personnel shortage impacted on

the provision of a free appropriate

public education to students with

disabilities, then it would be consistent

with the purposes of the grant to use

grant funds to address the personnel

shortage.

Applications, Length of Awards, and

Reapplication

29. Can the First Grant be Written as a

Planning Grant?

No. The purpose of the SIG program

is to assist State educational agencies,

and their partners referred to in Section

652(b), in reforming and improving their

systems for providing educational, early

intervention, and transitional services,

including their systems for professional

development, technical assistance, and

dissemination of knowledge about best

practices, to improve results for

children with disabilities. In order to be

funded a State must include in its

application improvement strategies that

were developed to address State and

local needs identified in the State needs

assessment. The purpose of the needs

assessment is to provide the necessary

information to facilitate the

development of a State improvement

plan that identifies those critical aspects

of early intervention, general education,

and special education programs that

must be improved to enable children

with disabilities to meet the goals

established by the State under Section

612(a)(16). In conjunction with the

needs assessment, the improvement

strategies (Section 653(c)) subsumed in

the State Improvement Plan constitute

the State’s plan for the use of SIG funds.

30. Is There a Page Limitation for the

Application?

No. There is no page limitation for

first year applications. However, in

order to facilitate the peer review

process, applicants are advised to

submit applications that address all of

the requirements of the application and

are well written, organized, succinct,

and address each of the selection

criteria. It is also suggested that the

requirements be addressed in the order

in which they appear in the application

package.

31. What Grant Period Can a State

Request in its Initial Application?

A state may request a grant of from

one to five years. However, the

Secretary may award a grant that is

shorter than the state requests, but not

less than one year, if the state’s

application does not sufficiently justify

the full requested duration.

32. If a Project is Funded for Less Than

Five Years, can it Be Extended Later?

No, with the exception of relatively

short ‘‘no-cost’’ extensions that are

sometimes given to allow the

completion of project activities. These
27418 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

extensions do not award new funds or

approve new activities.

33. After a State Completes One State

Program Improvement Grant, Can it

Apply for Another? If so, Will it

Compete Against all Applicants or Only

Against Other States That Have

Received Previous Grants?

Yes, a state can apply for another SIG

after it completes one. It will be in

competition with all applicants, not just

those with previous grants. The

Secretary may give priority to

applications on the basis of need

(Section 653(d)(2)).

34. If a State Applies Unsuccessfully in

One Year, Will It Be Able To Apply

Again?

Yes.

35. Will a Project Be Approved and

Funded All at Once or a Year at a Time?

At the time of the initial grant award,

the project duration of one to five years

will be determined and budgets for all

years of the grant will be established.

However, funds can only be awarded

one year at a time. States receiving

multi-year grants will submit annual

performance reports to demonstrate that

their grants are making ‘‘substantial

progress.’’ Funding for project years

after the first will be based, in part, on

these reports. This is not part of the

competitive process of awarding funds,

and it is expected that funding will be

continued each year for the duration of

the project, provided that substantial

progress is demonstrated and that

Congress continues to fund the program.

36. Does Funding Have To Be the Same

for All Years of the Project?

No.

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27419
27420 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27421
27422 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27423
27424 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27425
27426 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27427
27428 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27429
27430 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

BILLING CODE 4000–01–C
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices 27431

State Single Points of Contact (as of

December 2, 1997)

Note: In accordance with Executive Order

12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal

Programs, this listing represents the

designated State Single Points of Contact

(SPOCs). Because participation is voluntary,

some States and territories no longer

participate in the process. These include:

Alabama, Alaska, American Samoa,

Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho,

Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts,

Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey,

Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania,

South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia,

and Washington.

The jurisdictions not listed no longer

participate in the process. However, an

applicant is still eligible to apply for a grant

or grants even if its respective State,

Territory, Commonwealth, etc. does not have

a SPOC.

Arizona

Joni, Saad, Arizona State Clearinghouse,

3800 N. Central Avenue, Fourteenth

Floor, Phoenix, Arizona 85012,

Telephone: (602) 280–1315, FAX:

(602) 280–8144

Arkansas

Mr. Tracy L. Copeland, Manager, State

Clearinghouse, Office of

Intergovernmental Services,

Department of Finance and

Administration, 1515 W. 7th Street,

room 412, Little Rock, Arkansas

72203, Telephone: (501) 682–1074,

FAX: (501) 682–5206

California

Grants Coordinator, Office of Planning

and Research, 1600 Ninth Street,

room 250, Sacramento, California

95814, Telephone: (916) 323–7480,

FAX: (916) 323–3018

Block Grants only that pertain to Mental

Health Substance Abuse

PATH

Delaware

Francine Booth, State Single Point of

Contact, Executive Department, Office

of the Budget, Thomas Collins

Building, P.O. Box 1401, Dover,

Delaware 19903, Telephone: (302)

739–3326, FAX: (302) 739–5661

District of Columbia

Charles Nichols, State Single Point of

Contact, Office of Grants Management

& Development, 717 14th Street, NW.,

suite 400, Washington D.C. 20005,

Telephone: (202) 727–6554, FAX:

(202) 727–1617

Florida

Florida State Clearinghouse, Department

of Community Affairs, 2740

Centerview Drive, Tallahassee,

Florida 32399–2100, Telephone: (904)

922–5438, FAX: (904–487–2899

Georgia

Tom L. Reid, III, Coordinator, Georgia

State Clearinghouse, 270 Washington

Street, S.W.—8th Floor, Atlanta, GA

30334, Telephone: (404) 656–3855,

FAX: (404) 656–3828

Illinois

Ms. Virginia Bova, Single Point of

Contact, Illinois Department of

Commerce and Community Affairs,

James R. Thompson Center, 100 West

Randolph, Suite 3–400, Chicago, IL

60601, Telephone: (312) 814–6028,

FAX: (312) 814–1800

Indiana

Frances Williams, State Budget Agency,

212 State House, Indianapolis,

Indiana 46204–2796, Telephone: (317)

232–5619, FAX: (317) 239–3323

Iowa

Steven R. McCann, Division for

Community Assistance, Iowa

Department of Economic

Development, 200 East Grand

Avenue, Des Monies, Iowa 50309,

Telephone: (515) 242–4719, FAX:

(515) 242–4809

Kentucky

Kevin J. Goldsmith, Director, John-Mark

Hack, Deputy Director, Sandra

Brewer, Executive Secretary,

Intergovernmental Affairs, Office of

the Governor, 700 Capitol Avenue,

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601,

Telephone: (502) 564–2611, FAX:

(502) 564–2849

Maine

Joyce Benson, State Planning Office, 184

State Street, 38 State House Station,

Augusta, Maine 04333, Telephone:

(207) 287–3261, FAX: (207) 287–6489

Maryland

William G. Carroll, Manager, Plan &

Project Review, Maryland Office of

Planning, 301 W. Preston Street, room

1104, Baltimore, Maryland 21201–

2365, Staff Contact: Linda Janey,

Telephone: (410) 767–4490, FAX:

(410) 767–4480

Michigan

Richard Pfaff, Southeast Michigan

Council of Governments, 660 Plaza

Drive, suite 1900, Detroit, Michigan

48226, Telephone: (313) 961–4266,

FAX: (313) 961–4869

Mississippi

Cathy Mallette, Clearinghouse Officer,

Department of Finance and

Administration, 455 North Lamar

Street, Jackson, Mississippi 39302–

3087, Telephone: (601) 359–6762,

FAX: (601) 359–6764

Missouri

Lois Pohl, Federal Assistance

Clearinghouse, Office of

Administration, P.O. Box 809, Room

760, Truman Building, Jefferson City,

Missouri 65102, Telephone: (314)

751–4834, FAX: (314) 751–7819

Nevada

Department of Administration, State

Clearinghouse, Capitol Complex,

Carson City, Nevada 89710,

Telephone: (702) 687–4065, FAX:

(702) 687–3983

New Hampshire

Jeffrey H. Taylor, Director, New

Hampshire Office of State Planning,

Attn: Mike Blake, Intergovernmental

Review Process, 21⁄2 Beacon Street,

Concord, New Hampshire 03301,

Telephone: (603) 271–2155, FAX:

(603) 271–1728

New Mexico

Robert Peters, State Budget Division,

Room 190, Bataan Memorial Building,

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503,

Telephone: (505) 827–3640

New York

New York State Clearinghouse, Division

of the Budget, State Capitol, Albany,

New York 12224, Telephone: (518)

474–1605, FAX: (518) 486–5617

North Carolina

Chrys Baggett, Director, N.C. State

Clearinghouse, Office of the Secretary

of Admin., 116 West Jones Street,

suite 5106, Raleigh, North Carolina

27603–8003, Telephone: (919) 733–

7232, FAX: (919) 733–9571

North Dakota

North Dakota Single Point of Contact,

Office of Intergovernmental

Assistance, 600 East Boulevard

Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota

58505–0170, Telephone: (701) 224–

2094, FAX: (701) 224–2308

Rhode Island

Kevin Nelson, Review Coordinator,

Department of Administration,

Division of Planning, One Capitol

Hill, 4th floor, Providence, Rhode

Island 02908–5870, Telephone: (401)

277–2656, FAX: (401) 277–2083

South Carolina

Rodney Grizzle, State Single Point of

Contact, Grant Services, Office of the

Governor, 1205 Pendleton Street,

room 331, Columbia, South Carolina
27432 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 95 / Monday, May 18, 1998 / Notices

29201, Telephone: (803) 734–0494,

FAX: (803) 734–0356

Texas

Tom Adams, Governors Office, Director,

Intergovernmental Coordination, P.O.

Box 12428, Austin, Texas 78711,

Telephone: (512) 463–1771, FAX:

(512) 463–1880

Utah

Carolyn Wright, Utah State

Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and

Budget, Room 116, State Capitol, Salt

Lake City, Utah 84114, Telephone:

(801) 538–1535, FAX: (801) 538–1547

West Virginia

Fred Cutlip, Director, Community

Development Division, W. Virginia

Development Office, Building #6,

room 553, Charleston, West Virginia

25305, Telephone: (304) 558–4010,

FAX: (304) 558–3248

Wisconsin

Jeff Smith, Section Chief, State/Federal

Relations, Wisconsin Department of

Administration, 101 East Wilson

Street, 6th floor, P.O. Box 7868,

Madison, Wisconsin 53707,

Telephone: (608) 266–0267, FAX:

(608) 267–6931

Wyoming

Matthew Jones, State Single Point of

Contact, Office of the Governor, 200

West 24th Street, State Capitol, room

124, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002,

Telephone: (307) 777–7446, FAX:

(307) 632–3909.

Territories

Guam

Mr. Giovanni T. Sgambelluri, Director,

Bureau of Budget and Management

Research, Office of the Governor, P.O.

Box 2950, Agana, Guam 96910,

Telephone: 011–671–472–2285, FAX:

011–671–472–2825.

Puerto Rico

Norma Burgos/Jose E. Caro,

Chairwoman/Director, Puerto Rico

Planning Board, Federal Proposals

Review Office, Minillas Government

Center, P.O. Box 41119, San Juan,

Puerto Rico 00940–1119, Telephone:

(809) 727–4444; (809) 723–6190, FAX:

(809) 724–3270; (809) 724–3103.

North Mariana Islands

Mr. Alvaro A. Santos, Executive Officer,

Office of Management and Budget,

Office of the Governor, Saipan, MP

96950, Telephone: (670) 664–2256,

FAX: (670) 664–2272, Contact person:

Ms. Jacoba T. Seman, Federal

Programs Coordinator, Telephone:

(670) 664–2289, FAX: (670) 664–2272.

Virgin Islands

Nellon Bowry, Director, Office of

Management and Budget, #41

Norregade Emancipation Garden

Station, Second Floor, Saint Thomas,

Virgin Islands 00802. Please direct all

questions and correspondence about

intergovernmental review to: Linda

Clarke, Telephone: (809) 774–0750,

FAX: (809) 776–0069.

Note: This list is based on the most current

information provided by the States.

Information on any changes or apparent

errors should be provided to Donna Rivelli

(Telephone: (202) 395–5858) at the Office of

Management and Budget and to the State in

question. Changes to the list will only be

made upon formal notification by the State.

The list is updated every six months and is

also published biannually in the Catalogue of

Federal Domestic Assistance. The last

changes made were Kentucky (12–2–97) and

California telephone and FAX numbers (1–

29–98).

[FR Doc. 98–13160 Filed 5–15–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P