33500 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[CFDA Nos.: 84.133F, 84.133G, and 84.133P]

Office of Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services; National

Institute on Disability and

Rehabilitation Research Notice Inviting

Applications for New Awards Under

Certain Programs for Fiscal Year 1999

Note to Applicants: This notice is a

complete application package. Together

with the statute authorizing the

programs and applicable regulations

governing the programs, including the

Education Department General

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR),

this notice contains information,

application forms, and instructions

needed to apply for a grant under these

competitions.

These programs support the National

Education Goal that calls for all

Americans to possess the knowledge

and skills necessary to compete in a

global economy and exercise the rights

and responsibilities of citizenship.

The estimated funding levels in this

notice do not bind the Department of

Education to make awards in any of

these categories, or to any specific

number of awards or funding levels,

unless otherwise specified in statute.

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: The

Education Department General

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR),

34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 82, 85,

and 86; and the following program

regulations:

Research Fellowships—34 CFR part

356.

Field-Initiated Projects—34 CFR part

350.

Advanced Rehabilitation Research

Training Projects—34 CFR part 350.

Program Title: Research Fellowships.

CFDA Number: 84.133F.

Purpose: The purpose of the Research

Fellowship program is to build research

capacity by providing support to highly

qualified individuals, including those

who are individuals with disabilities, to

perform research on the rehabilitation of

individuals with disabilities. Fellows

may conduct original research in any

area authorized by section 204 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

Fellows may address problems

encountered by persons with disabilities

in their daily lives that are due to the

presence of a disabling condition,

problems associated with the provision

of rehabilitation services to individuals

with disabilities, and problems

connected with the conduct of disability

research.

The program provides two categories

of Fellowships: Merit Fellowships and

Distinguished Fellowships. To be

eligible for a Distinguished Fellowship,

an individual must have seven or more

years of research experience in subject

areas, methods, or techniques relevant

to rehabilitation research and must have

a doctorate, other terminal degree, or

comparable academic qualifications. To

be eligible for a Merit Fellowship, an

individual must have either advanced

professional training or experience in

independent study in an area which is

directly pertinent to disability and

rehabilitation.

The Fellowship awards are for twelve

months and include a fixed stipend and

a flat rate allowance for research and

research-related expenses including

travel expenses. Applicants are not

required to submit budget proposals.

Selection Criteria: The Secretary

evaluates applications for Fellowships

according to the following criteria in 34

CFR 356.30.

(a) Quality and level of formal

education, previous work experience,

and recommendations of present or

former supervisors or colleagues that

include an indication of the applicant’s

ability to work creatively in scientific

research; and

(b) The quality of a research proposal

of no more than 12 pages containing the

following information:

(1) The importance of the problem to

be investigated to the purpose of the Act

and the mission of NIDRR.

(2) The research hypotheses or related

objectives and the methodology and

design to be followed.

(3) Assurance of the availability of

any necessary data resources,

equipment, or institutional support,

including technical consultation and

support where appropriate, required to

carry out the proposed activity.

Eligible Applicants: Only individuals

are eligible to be recipients of

Fellowships. Institutions are not eligible

to be recipients of Fellowships.

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 761a(d).

APPLICATION NOTICE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS, CFDA NO. 84.133F

Funding priority Deadline for transmittal of

applications

Estimated

number of

awards

Maximum award amount (per year)*

Project

period

(months)

Research Fellowships ....................... September 30, 1998 ......................... 10 Merit: $45,000 Distinguished:

$55,000.

12

NOTE: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project funding level that exceeds the stated

maximum award amount (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).

Program Title: Field-Initiated Projects.

CFDA Number: 84.133G.

Purpose: Field-Initiated (FI) projects

must further one or more of the

following purposes: Develop methods,

procedures, and rehabilitation

technology, that maximize the full

inclusion and integration into society,

employment, independent living, family

support, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with

disabilities, especially individuals with

the most severe disabilities; and

improve the effectiveness of services

authorized under the Act. FieldInitiated projects carry out either

research activities or development

activities.

In carrying out a research activity, a

grantee must identify one or more

hypotheses, and based on the

hypotheses identified, perform an

intensive systematic study directed

toward new or full scientific knowledge,

or understanding of the subject or

problem studied.

In carrying out a development

activity, a grantee must use knowledge

and understanding gained from research

to create materials, devices, systems, or

methods beneficial to the target

population, including design and

development of prototypes and

processes. Target population means the

group of individuals, organizations, or

other entities expected to be affected by

the project. More than one group may be

involved since a project may affect those

who receive services, provide services,

or administer services.

There are two different sets of

selection criteria for FI projects: one set

to evaluate applications proposing to

carry out research activities, and a

second set to evaluate applications

proposing to carry out development

activities. The set of FI selection criteria

that will be used to evaluate an
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33501

application will be based on the

applicant’s designation of the type of

activity that the application proposes to

carry out.

AN APPLICANT FOR A FIELDINITIATED PROJECT SHOULD

CLEARLY IDENTIFY ON THE COVER

PAGE OF THE APPLICATION

WHETHER THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A

RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT.

Invitational Priorities:

The Secretary is particularly

interested in applications that address

one of the following invitational

priorities. However, under 34 CFR

75.105(c)(1) an application that meets

an invitational priority does not receive

competitive or absolute preference over

other applications. The invitational

priorities are: (1) The marketing of

disability-related products, services, and

publications; (2) issues related to the

implementation of the Americans with

Disabilities Act on individuals with

disabilities from minority backgrounds,

especially Asian-Americans; (3) the

needs of individuals with a combination

of significant physical and speech

disabilities; and (4) issues related to the

effectiveness of alternative

rehabilitation treatments such as

acupuncture, exercise, and therapeutic

massage.

Selection Criteria: Research Project.

The Secretary uses the following

criteria to evaluate a Field-Initiated

Project application that proposes to

carry out research activities.

(a) Importance of the problem (15

points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

importance of the problem.

(2) In determining the importance of

the problem, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant

clearly describes the need and target

population (5 points).

(ii) The extent to which the proposed

activities further the purposes of the Act

(4 points).

(iii) The extent to which the proposed

project will have beneficial impact on

the target population (6 points).

(b) Design of research activities (40

points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the extent

to which the design of research

activities is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project.

(2) In determining the extent to which

the design is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the research

activities constitute a coherent,

sustained approach to research in the

field, including a substantial addition to

the state-of-the-art (10 points).

(ii) The extent to which the

methodology of each proposed research

activity is meritorious, including

consideration of the extent to which—

(A) The proposed design includes a

comprehensive and informed review of

the current literature, demonstrating

knowledge of the state-of-the-art (5

points);

(B) Each research hypothesis is

theoretically sound and based on

current knowledge (5 points);

(C) Each sample population is

appropriate and of sufficient size (5

points);

(D) The data collection and

measurement techniques are

appropriate and likely to be effective (4

points); and

(E) The data analysis methods are

appropriate (4 points).

(iii) The extent to which anticipated

research results are likely to satisfy the

original hypotheses and could be used

for planning additional research,

including generation of new hypotheses

where applicable (7 points).

(c) Design of dissemination activities

(5 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the extent

to which the design of dissemination

activities is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project.

(2) In determining the extent to which

the design is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the materials

to be disseminated are likely to be

effective and usable, including

consideration of their quality, clarity,

variety, and format (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which the materials

and information to be disseminated and

the methods for dissemination are

appropriate to the target population,

including consideration of the

familiarity of the target population with

the subject matter, format of the

information, and subject matter (2

points).

(iii) The extent to which the

information to be disseminated will be

accessible to individuals with

disabilities (1 point).

(d) Plan of operation (6 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of operation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of operation, the Secretary

considers the adequacy of the plan of

operation to achieve the objectives of

the proposed project on time and within

budget, including clearly defined

responsibilities, and timelines for

accomplishing project tasks (6 points).

(e) Adequacy and reasonableness of

the budget (4 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and the reasonableness of the

proposed budget.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

the reasonableness of the proposed

budget, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the costs are

reasonable in relation to the proposed

project activities (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which the budget for

the project, including any subcontracts,

is adequately justified to support the

proposed project activities (2 points).

(f) Plan of evaluation (10 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of evaluation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of evaluation, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of progress toward—

(A) Implementing the plan of

operation (3 points); and

(B) Achieving the project’s intended

outcomes and expected impacts (2

points).

(ii) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of a project’s progress that is

based on identified performance

measures that—

(A) Are clearly related to the intended

outcomes of the project and expected

impacts on the target population (3

points); and

(B) Are objective, and quantifiable or

qualitative, as appropriate (2 points).

(g) Project staff (15 total points).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the project staff.

(2) In determining the quality of the

project staff, 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

(2 points).

(3) In addition, the Secretary

considers the following:

(i) The extent to which the key

personnel and other key staff have

appropriate training and experience in

disciplines required to conduct all

proposed activities (5 points).

(ii) The extent to which the

commitment of staff time is adequate to

accomplish all the proposed activities of

the project (3 points).

(iii) The extent to which the key

personnel are knowledgeable about the

methodology and literature of pertinent

subject areas (5 points).
33502 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices

(h) Adequacy and accessibility of

resources (5 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and accessibility of the

applicant’s resources to implement the

proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

accessibility of resources, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant

is committed to provide adequate

facilities, equipment, other resources,

including administrative support, and

laboratories, if appropriate (3 points).

(ii) The extent to which the facilities,

equipment, and other resources are

appropriately accessible to individuals

with disabilities who may use the

facilities, equipment, and other

resources of the project (2 points).

Selection Criteria: Development

Project.

The Secretary uses the following

criteria to evaluate a Field-Initiated

Project application that proposes to

carry out development activities.

(a) Importance of the problem (15

points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

importance of the problem.

(2) In determining the importance of

the problem, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant

clearly describes the need and target

population (5 points).

(ii) The extent to which the proposed

activities further the purposes of the Act

(4 points).

(iii) The extent to which the proposed

project will have beneficial impact on

the target population (6 points).

(b) Design of development activities

(40 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the extent

to which the design of development

activities is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project.

(2) In determining the extent to which

the design is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the plan for

development, clinical testing, and

evaluation of new devices and

technology is likely to yield significant

products or techniques, including

consideration of the extent to which—

(A) The proposed project will use the

most effective and appropriate

technology available in developing the

new device or technique (6 points);

(B) The proposed development is

based on a sound conceptual model that

demonstrates an awareness of the stateof-the-art in technology (9 points);

(C) The new device or technique will

be developed and tested in an

appropriate environment (6 points);

(D) The new device or technique is

likely to be cost-effective and useful (5

points);

(E) The new device or technique has

the potential for commercial or private

manufacture, marketing, and

distribution of the product (9 points);

and

(F) The proposed development efforts

include adequate quality controls and,

as appropriate, repeated testing of

products (5 points).

(c) Design of dissemination activities

(5 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the extent

to which the design of dissemination

activities is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project.

(2) In determining the extent to which

the design is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the materials

to be disseminated are likely to be

effective and usable, including

consideration of their quality, clarity,

variety, and format (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which the materials

and information to be disseminated and

the methods for dissemination are

appropriate to the target population,

including consideration of the

familiarity of the target population with

the subject matter, format of the

information, and subject matter (2

points).

(iii) The extent to which the

information to be disseminated will be

accessible to individuals with

disabilities (1 point).

(d) Plan of operation (6 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of operation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of operation, the Secretary

considers the adequacy of the plan of

operation to achieve the objectives of

the proposed project on time and within

budget, including clearly defined

responsibilities, and timelines for

accomplishing project tasks (6 points).

(e) Adequacy and reasonableness of

the budget (4 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and the reasonableness of the

proposed budget.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

the reasonableness of the proposed

budget, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the costs are

reasonable in relation to the proposed

project activities (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which the budget for

the project, including any subcontracts,

is adequately justified to support the

proposed project activities (2 points).

(f) Plan of evaluation (10 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of evaluation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of evaluation, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of progress toward—

(A) Implementing the plan of

operation (3 points); and

(B) Achieving the project’s intended

outcomes and expected impacts (2

points).

(ii) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of a project’s progress that is

based on identified performance

measures that—

(A) Are clearly related to the intended

outcomes of the project and expected

impacts on the target population (3

points); and

(B) Are objective, and quantifiable or

qualitative, as appropriate (2 points).

(g) Project staff (15 total points).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the project staff.

(2) In determining the quality of the

project staff, 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

(2 points).

(3) In addition, the Secretary

considers the following:

(i) The extent to which the key

personnel and other key staff have

appropriate training and experience in

disciplines required to conduct all

proposed activities (5 points).

(ii) The extent to which the

commitment of staff time is adequate to

accomplish all the proposed activities of

the project (3 points).

(iii) The extent to which the key

personnel are knowledgeable about the

methodology and literature of pertinent

subject areas (5 points).

(h) Adequacy and accessibility of

resources (5 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and accessibility of the

applicant’s resources to implement the

proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

accessibility of resources, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant

is committed to provide adequate

facilities, equipment, other resources,

including administrative support, and

laboratories, if appropriate (3 points).

(ii) The extent to which the facilities,

equipment, and other resources are
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33503

appropriately accessible to individuals

with disabilities who may use the

facilities, equipment, and other

resources of the project (2 points).

Eligible Applicants: Public and

private organizations, including

institutions of higher education and

Indian tribes and tribal organizations,

are eligible to apply for awards under

this program.

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762.

APPLICATION NOTICE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 FIELD-INITIATED PROJECTS, CFDA NO. 84.133G

Funding priority Deadline for transmittal of applications

Estimated

number of

awards

Maximum

award

amount

(per year)*

Project period

(months)

Field-Initiated Projects .......................................... September 30, 1998 ............................................. 30 $150,000 36

NOTE: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project funding level that exceeds the stated

maximum award amount (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).

Program Title: Advanced

Rehabilitation Research Training

Projects.

CFDA Number: 84.133P.

Purpose: Advanced Rehabilitation

Research Training (ARRT) Projects must

provide research training and

experience at an advanced level to

individuals with doctorates or similar

advanced degrees who have clinical or

other relevant experience. ARRT

Projects train rehabilitation researchers,

including individuals with disabilities,

with particular attention to research

areas that support the implementation

and objectives of the Rehabilitation Act

and that improve the effectiveness of

services authorized under the Act.

ARRT Projects must carry out all of

the following activities: recruit and

select candidates for advanced research

training; provide a training program that

includes didactic and classroom

instruction, is multidisciplinary, and

emphasizes scientific methodology, and

may involve collaboration among

institutions; provide research

experience, laboratory experience or its

equivalent in a community-based

research setting, and a practicum that

involve each individual in clinical

research and in practical activities with

organizations representing individuals

with disabilities; provide academic

mentorship or guidance, and

opportunities for scientific collaboration

with qualified researchers at the host

university and other appropriate

institutions; and provide opportunities

for participation in the development of

professional presentations and

publications, and for attendance at

professional conferences and meetings

as appropriate for the individual’s field

of study and level of experience.

Selection Criteria: Advanced

Rehabilitation Research Training

Projects

The Secretary uses the following

criteria to evaluate an Advanced

Rehabilitation Research Training Project

application.

(a) Importance of the problem (10

points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

importance of the problem.

(2) In determining the importance of

the problem, the Secretary considers the

extent to which the applicant proposes

to provide training in a rehabilitation

discipline or area of study in which

there is a shortage of qualified

researchers, or to a trainee population in

which there is a need for more qualified

researchers (10 points).

(b) Design of training activities (40

points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the extent

to which the design of training activities

is likely to be effective in accomplishing

the objectives of the project.

(2) In determining the extent to which

the design is likely to be effective in

accomplishing the objectives of the

project, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the proposed

training methods are of sufficient

quality, intensity, and duration (5

points).

(ii) The extent to which the proposed

training materials and methods are

accessible to individuals with

disabilities (6 points).

(iii) The extent to which the

applicant’s proposed recruitment

program is likely to be effective in

recruiting highly qualified trainees,

including those who are individuals

with disabilities (7 points).

(iv) The extent to which the proposed

didactic and classroom training

programs emphasize scientific

methodology and are likely to develop

highly qualified researchers (6 points).

(v) The extent to which the quality

and extent of the academic mentorship,

guidance, and supervision to be

provided to each individual trainee are

of a high level and are likely to develop

highly qualified researchers (6 points).

(vi) The extent to which the type,

extent, and quality of the proposed

clinical and laboratory research

experience, including the opportunity to

participate in advanced-level research,

are likely to develop highly qualified

researchers (5 points).

(vii) The extent to which the

opportunities for collegial and

collaborative activities, exposure to

outstanding scientists in the field, and

opportunities to participate in the

preparation of scholarly or scientific

publications and presentations are

extensive and appropriate (5 points).

(c) Plan of operation (10 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of operation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of operation, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the plan of

operation to achieve the objectives of

the proposed project on time and within

budget, including clearly defined

responsibilities, and timelines for

accomplishing project tasks (5 points).

(ii) The adequacy of the plan of

operation to provide for using resources,

equipment, and personnel to achieve

each objective (5 points).

(d) Collaboration (5 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of collaboration.

(2) In determining the quality of

collaboration, the Secretary considers

one or more of the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant’s

proposed collaboration with one or

more agencies, organizations, or

institutions is likely to be effective in

achieving the relevant proposed

activities of the project (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which agencies,

organizations, or institutions

demonstrate a commitment to

collaborate with the applicant (2

points).

(iii) The extent to which agencies,

organizations, or institutions that

commit to collaborate with the

applicant have the capacity to carry out

collaborative activities (1 point).

(e) Adequacy and reasonableness of

the budget (10 points).
33504 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and the reasonableness of the

proposed budget.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

the reasonableness of the proposed

budget, the Secretary considers the

following factors:

(i) The extent to which the costs are

reasonable in relation to the proposed

project activities (4 points).

(ii) The extent to which the budget for

the project, including any subcontracts,

is adequately justified to support the

proposed project activities (3 points).

(iii) The extent to which the applicant

is of sufficient size, scope, and quality

to effectively carry out the activities in

an efficient manner (3 points).

(f) Plan of evaluation (10 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the plan of evaluation.

(2) In determining the quality of the

plan of evaluation, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of progress toward—

(A) Implementing the plan of

operation (2 points); and

(B) Achieving the project’s intended

outcomes and expected impacts (2

points).

(ii) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation will be used to improve the

performance of the project through the

feedback generated by its periodic

assessments (2 points).

(iii) The extent to which the plan of

evaluation provides for periodic

assessment of a project’s progress that is

based on identified performance

measures that—

(A) Are clearly related to the intended

outcomes of the project and expected

impacts on the target population (2

points); and

(B) Are objective, and quantifiable or

qualitative, as appropriate (2 points).

(g) Project staff (10 points total).

(1) The Secretary considers the

quality of the project staff.

(2) In determining the quality of the

project staff, 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

(2 points).

(3) In addition, the Secretary

considers the following:

(i) The extent to which the key

personnel and other key staff have

appropriate training and experience in

disciplines required to conduct all

proposed activities (2 points).

(ii) The extent to which the

commitment of staff time is adequate to

accomplish all the proposed activities of

the project (2 points).

(iii) The extent to which the key

personnel are knowledgeable about the

methodology and literature of pertinent

subject areas (2 points).

(iv) The extent to which the project

staff includes outstanding scientists in

the field (1 point).

(v) The extent to which key personnel

have up-to-date knowledge from

research or effective practice in the

subject area covered in the priority (1

point).

(h) Adequacy and accessibility of

resources (5 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the

adequacy and accessibility of the

applicant’s resources to implement the

proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy and

accessibility of resources, the Secretary

considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the applicant

is committed to provide adequate

facilities, equipment, other resources,

including administrative support, and

laboratories, if appropriate (2 points).

(ii) The quality of an applicant’s past

performance in carrying out a grant (1

point).

(iii) The extent to which the applicant

has appropriate access to clinical

populations and organizations

representing individuals with

disabilities to support advanced clinical

rehabilitation research (1 point).

(iv) The extent to which the facilities,

equipment, and other resources are

appropriately accessible to individuals

with disabilities who may use the

facilities, equipment, and other

resources of the project (1 point).

Eligible Applicants: Institutions of

higher education are eligible to receive

awards under this program.

Program Authority: 29. U.S.C. 761a(k).

APPLICATION NOTICE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 ADVANCED REHABILITATION RESEARCH TRAINING PROJECTS, CFDA NO.

84.133P

Funding priority Deadline for transmittal of applications

Estimated

number of

awards

Maximum

award

amount (per

year)*

Project period

(months)

Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training

Projects.

September 30, 1998 ............................................. 5 $150,000 60

NOTE: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project funding level that exceeds the stated

maximum award amount (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).

Instructions for Application Narrative

Recommended Page Limits: FieldInitiated and Advanced Rehabilitation

Research Projects

The Secretary strongly recommends

that applicants for FI or ARRT projects:

(1) Include a one-page abstract in their

application;

(2) Limit Part III—Application

Narrative to no more than 50 doublespaced 81⁄2′′ x 11′′ pages (on one side

only) with one inch margins (top,

bottom, and sides);

(3) Double-space (no more than 3

lines per vertical inch) all sections of

text in the application narrative; and

(4) Use no smaller than a 12-point

font, and an average character density

no greater than 14 characters per inch.

The recommended application

narrative page limit does not apply to:

Part I—the electronically scannable

form; Part II—the budget section

(including the narrative budget

justification); and Part IV—the

assurances and certifications. Also, the

one-page abstract, resume(s),

bibliography, or letters of support, while

considered part of the application, are

not subject to the recommended page

limitation. Applicants should note that

reviewers are not required to review any

information provided in addition to the

application information listed above.

The recommendations for doublespacing and font do not apply within

charts, tables, figures, and graphs, but

the information presented in those

formats should be easily readable.

AN APPLICANT FOR A FIELDINITIATED PROJECT SHOULD

CLEARLY IDENTIFY ON THE COVER

PAGE OF THE APPLICATION
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33505

WHETHER THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A

RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT.

Strict Page Limits: Research

Fellowships

The research proposal for a

Fellowship application must be limited

to no more than 12 pages.

Note: The Secretary will reject without

consideration or evaluation any application

for a Research Fellowship that does not

adhere to the 12-page limit.

Instructions for Transmittal of

Applications

(a) If an applicant wants to apply for

a grant, the applicant shall—

(1) Mail the original and two copies

of the application on or before the

deadline date to: U.S. Department of

Education, Application Control Center,

Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must

insert number and letter]), Washington,

D.C. 20202–4725, or

(2) Hand deliver the original and two

copies of the application by 4:30 p.m.

[Washington, D.C. time] on the deadline

date to: U.S. Department of Education,

Application Control Center, Attention:

(CFDA # (Applicant must insert

number and letter)), Room #3633,

Regional Office Building ι3, 7th and D

Streets, S.W., 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) An applicant wishing to know that its

application has been received by the

Department must include with the

application a stamped self-addressed

postcard containing the CFDA number and

title of this program.

(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 letter, if any—of the

competition under which the application is

being submitted.

Application Forms and Instructions

The appendix to this application is

divided into four parts. These parts are

organized in the same manner that the

submitted application should be

organized. These parts are as follows:

Part I: Application for Federal

Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev. 4–

88)) and instructions.

Part II: Budget Form—NonConstruction Programs (Standard Form

524A) and instructions.

Part III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials

Estimated Public Reporting Burden.

Assurances—Non-Construction

Programs (Standard Form 424B).

Certification Regarding Lobbying,

Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters: and Drug-Free

Work-Place Requirements (ED Form 80–

0013).

Certification Regarding Debarment,

Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary

Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered

Transactions (ED Form 80–0014) and

instructions.

(Note: ED Form GCS–014 is intended

for the use of primary participants and

should not be transmitted to the

Department.

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

(Standard Form LLL (if applicable) and

instructions; and Disclosure Lobbying

Activities Continuation Sheet (Standard

Form LLL-A).

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. No grant may be

awarded unless a completed application

form has been received.

FOR APPLICATIONS CONTACT: The

Grants and Contracts Service Team,

Department of Education, 600

Independence Avenue S.W., Switzer

Building, 3317, Washington, D.C. 20202,

or call (202) 205–8207. Individuals who

use a telecommunications device for the

deaf (TDD) may call the TDD number at

(202) 205–9860. The preferred method

for requesting information is to FAX

your request to (202) 205–8717.

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 at (202)

512–1530 or, 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.

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760–762.

Dated: June 10, 1998.

Curtis L. Richards,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Special

Education and Rehabilitative Services.

Appendix

Application Forms and Instructions

Applicants are advised to reproduce and

complete the application forms in this

Section. Applicants are required to submit an

original and two copies of each application

as provided in this Section.

FREQUENT QUESTIONS

1. CAN I GET AN EXTENSION OF THE

DUE DATE?

No! On rare occasions the Department of

Education may extend a closing date for all

applicants. If that occurs, a notice of the

revised due date is published in the Federal

Register. However, there are no extensions or

exceptions to the due date made for

individual applicants.

2. WHAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE

APPLICATION?

The application should include a project

narrative, vitae of key personnel, and a

budget, as well as the Assurances forms

included in this package. Vitae of staff or

consultants should include the individual’s

title and role in the proposed project, and

other information that is specifically

pertinent to this proposed project. The

budgets for both the first year and all

subsequent project years should be included.

If collaboration with another organization

is involved in the proposed activity, the

application should include assurances of

participation by the other parties, including

written agreements or assurances of

cooperation. It is not useful to include

general letters of support or endorsement in

the application.

If the applicant proposes to use unique

tests or other measurement instruments that

are not widely known in the field, it would

be helpful to include the instrument in the

application.
33506 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices

Many applications contain voluminous

appendices that are not helpful and in many

cases cannot even be mailed to the reviewers.

It is generally not helpful to include such

things as brochures, general capability

statements of collaborating organizations,

maps, copies of publications, or descriptions

of other projects completed by the applicant.

3. WHAT FORMAT SHOULD BE USED

FOR THE APPLICATION?

NIDRR generally advises applicants that

they may organize the application to follow

the selection criteria that will be used. The

specific review criteria vary according to the

specific program, and are contained in this

Consolidated Application Package.

4. MAY I SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO

MORE THAN ONE NIDRR PROGRAM

COMPETITION OR MORE THAN ONE

APPLICATION TO A PROGRAM?

Yes, you may submit applications to any

program for which they are responsive to the

program requirements. You may submit the

same application to as many competitions as

you believe appropriate. You may also

submit more than one application in any

given competition.

5. WHAT IS THE ALLOWABLE INDIRECT

COST RATE?

The limits on indirect costs vary according

to the program and the type of application.

Applicants for an Advanced Rehabilitation

Research Training project must limit indirect

charges to 8 percent. Applicants for a FieldInitiated project program should limit

indirect charges to the organization’s

approved rate. If the organization does not

have an approved rate, the application

should include an estimated actual rate.

Fellowship awards are made to individuals,

therefore indirect cost rates do not apply.

6. CAN PROFITMAKING BUSINESSES

APPLY FOR GRANTS?

Yes. However, for-profit organizations will

not be able to collect a fee or profit on the

grant, and in some programs will be required

to share in the costs of the project.

7. CAN INDIVIDUALS APPLY FOR

GRANTS?

No. Only organizations are eligible to apply

for grants under NIDRR programs. However,

individuals are the only entities eligible to

apply for fellowships.

8. CAN NIDRR STAFF ADVISE ME

WHETHER MY PROJECT IS OF INTEREST

TO NIDRR OR LIKELY TO BE FUNDED?

No. NIDRR staff can advise you of the

requirements of the program in which you

propose to submit your application.

However, staff cannot advise you of whether

your subject area or proposed approach is

likely to receive approval.

9. HOW DO I ASSURE THAT MY

APPLICATION WILL BE REFERRED TO THE

MOST APPROPRIATE PANEL FOR

REVIEW?

Applicants should be sure that their

applications are referred to the correct

competition by clearly including the

competition title and CFDA number,

including alphabetical code, on the Standard

Form 424, and including a project title that

describes the project.

10. HOW SOON AFTER SUBMITTING MY

APPLICATION CAN I FIND OUT IF IT WILL

BE FUNDED?

The time from closing date to grant award

date varies from program to program.

Generally speaking, NIDRR endeavors to

have awards made within five to six months

of the closing date.

Unsuccessful applicants generally will be

notified within that time frame as well. For

the purpose of estimating a project start date,

the applicant should estimate approximately

six months from the closing date, but no later

than the following September 30.

11. CAN I CALL NIDRR TO FIND OUT IF

MY APPLICATION IS BEING FUNDED?

No. When NIDRR is able to release

information on the status of grant

applications, it will notify applicants by

letter. The results of the peer review cannot

be released except through this formal

notification.

12. IF MY APPLICATION IS

SUCCESSFUL, CAN I ASSUME I WILL GET

THE REQUESTED BUDGET AMOUNT IN

SUBSEQUENT YEARS?

No. Funding in subsequent years is subject

to availability of funds and project

performance.

13. WILL ALL APPROVED

APPLICATIONS BE FUNDED?

No. It often happens that the peer review

panels approve for funding more applications

than NIDRR can fund within available

resources. Applicants who are approved but

not funded are encouraged to consider

submitting similar applications in future

competitions.

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33507
33508 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33509
33510 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33511
33512 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33513
33514 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33515
33516 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33517
33518 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33519
33520 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices 33521
33522 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 117 /Thursday, June 18, 1998 / Notices

[FR Doc. 98–16180 Filed 6–17–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P