41298 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 

1The Center is named in remembrance of Rhonda 

Weiss, who was a senior attorney with the U.S. 

Department of Education, a staunch advocate for 

disability rights, and a champion for ensuring 

equity and accessibility for persons with 

disabilities. For more information on Rhonda and 

her work to ensure equity and accessibility for 

persons with disabilities please see 

www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/12/13/ 

blind-government-lawyer-disabilities-rights/. 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; 

Technical Assistance on State Data 

Collection—The Rhonda Weiss 

National Technical Assistance Center 

To Improve State Capacity To Collect, 

Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate 

IDEA Data in Accessible Formats 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education 

(Department) is issuing a notice inviting 

applications for new awards for fiscal 

year (FY) 2022 for The Rhonda Weiss 

National Technical Assistance Center to 

Improve State Capacity to Collect, 

Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate 

IDEA Data in Accessible Formats, 

Assistance Listing Number 84.373Q. 

This notice relates to the approved 

information collection under OMB 

control number 1820–0028. 

DATES:

Applications available: July 12, 2022. 

Deadline for transmittal of 

Applications: August 22, 2022. 

Pre-Application webinar information: 

No later than July 18, 2022, the Office 

of Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services (OSERS) will post pre-recorded 

informational webinars designed to 

provide technical assistance (TA) to 

interested applicants. The webinars may 

be found at www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/ 

apply/osep/new-osep-grants.html. 

ADDRESSES: For the addresses for 

obtaining and submitting an 

application, please refer to our Common 

Instructions for Applicants to 

Department of Education Discretionary 

Grant Programs, published in the 

Federal Register on December 27, 2021 

(86 FR 73264) and available at 

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

Please note that these Common 

Instructions supersede the version 

published on February 13, 2019, and, in 

part, describe the transition from the 

requirement to register in SAM.gov a 

Data Universal Numbering System 

(DUNS) number to the implementation 

of the Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). 

More information on the phase-out of 

DUNS numbers is available at https://

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rebecca Smith, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 5038B, Potomac Center Plaza, 

Washington, DC 20202–5076. 

Telephone: (202) 258–9436. Email: 

rebecca.smith@ed.gov. 

If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or 

have a speech disability and wish to 

access telecommunications relay 

services, please dial 7–1–1. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Technical Assistance on State Data 

Collection program is to improve the 

capacity of States to meet the data 

collection and reporting requirements 

under Part B and Part C of the 

Individuals with Disabilities Education 

Act (IDEA). Funding for the program is 

authorized under section 611(c)(1) of 

IDEA. This section gives the Secretary 

authority to reserve not more than 1⁄2 of 

1 percent of the amounts appropriated 

under Part B for each fiscal year to 

provide technical assistance (TA) 

activities authorized under section 

616(i) of IDEA to improve the capacity 

of States to meet the data collection and 

reporting requirements under Parts B 

and C of IDEA. The maximum amount 

the Secretary may reserve under this setaside for any fiscal year is $25,000,000, 

cumulatively adjusted by the rate of 

inflation. For FY 2022, the inflation 

adjusted amount is $37,300,000. Section 

616(i) of IDEA requires the Secretary to 

review the data collection and analysis 

capacity of States to ensure that data 

and information determined necessary 

for implementation of section 616 of 

IDEA are collected, analyzed, and 

accurately reported to the Secretary. It 

also requires the Secretary to provide 

TA, where needed, to improve the 

capacity of States to meet the IDEA Part 

B and Part C data collection 

requirements, which include the data 

collection and reporting requirements in 

sections 616 and 618 of IDEA. In 

addition, the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 

116–260, gives the Secretary authority 

to use funds reserved under section 

611(c) of IDEA to provide TA to States 

to improve their capacity to administer 

and carry out other services and 

activities to improve data collection, 

coordination, quality, and use under 

Parts B and C of IDEA. 

Priority: This competition includes 

one absolute priority. This priority is 

from the notice of final priority and 

requirements published elsewhere in 

this issue of the Federal Register (NFP). 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2022 and 

any subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition, this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only 

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

Technical Assistance on State Data 

Collection—The Rhonda Weiss 1

National Technical Assistance Center to 

Improve State Capacity to Collect, 

Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate 

IDEA Data in Accessible Formats. 

Background: 

According to the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s 2019 American Community 

Survey, 12.7 percent of the U.S. 

population experiences disability (more 

than 1 in 8 people). Approximately 2.3 

percent, or over 7.4 million, U.S. 

citizens have a visual disability and 5.2 

percent, or close to 16 million U.S. 

citizens, have a cognitive disability. 

Disability impacts people of all ages, 

races, ethnicities, geographies, and 

socioeconomic groups. 

The purpose of the Rhonda Weiss 

National Technical Assistance Center to 

Improve State Capacity to Collect, 

Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate 

IDEA Data in Accessible Formats 

(Accessible Data Center) is to improve 

State capacity to accurately collect, 

report, analyze, and use the IDEA Part 

B and Part C data reported under IDEA 

sections 616 and 618 in accessible 

formats for persons with disabilities, 

particularly those with blindness, visual 

impairments, motor impairments, and 

intellectual disabilities. 

Under the authority of IDEA sections 

616 and 618, States are required to 

collect and analyze data on infants, 

toddlers, and children with disabilities 

and report on the data to the 

Department and the public. Section 504 

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended (Rehabilitation Act), requires 

States to publish data in a manner that 

provides the same access and usability 

to persons with and without disabilities. 

Currently, States struggle to report data 

in accessible formats that also are 

dynamic and usable by data consumers 

with limited statistical knowledge. To 

meet the demands of both statutes, 

States generally rely on static data 

portrayals rather than dynamic 

visualizations. The lack of available 

software to develop accessible, 

dynamic, and manipulatable data 

products creates inequitable access for 

persons with disabilities, particularly 

those with blindness, visual 

impairments, motor impairments, and 

intellectual disabilities. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 41299 

The Accessible Data Center will 

increase the capacity of States to collect, 

report, analyze, and use the IDEA Part 

B and Part C data reported under IDEA 

sections 616 and 618 in accessible 

formats by: (1) developing an openly 

licensed software program that allows 

States to report and publish data 

products that are accessible, usable, and 

manipulatable by persons with 

disabilities, particularly those with 

blindness, visual impairments, motor 

impairments, and intellectual 

disabilities, as well as by those persons 

without disabilities; and (2) providing 

TA on accessible data reporting and 

publication. By developing an 

accessible and usable data reporting 

platform and supporting States as they 

revise their data collection tools and 

publish accessible data, both internal 

and external users will be better 

positioned to analyze and use the data. 

Hazen et al. (2017) note that both data 

analysis and data use by both internal 

and external users can be integrated into 

the data quality process and used as a 

tool for improving data quality. By 

increasing the capacity of States to 

report their data in formats that are both 

accessible and useable, the Accessible 

Data Center will aid in the improvement 

of data quality across the States and 

ensure equitable access to IDEA data for 

all stakeholders. 

Federal agencies have increasingly 

used open licensing to expand the 

impact and reach of materials developed 

with Federal funds, enable innovative 

use of those materials, and ensure that 

those materials and resources are 

available to the public (U.S Department 

of State, 2017). Open licensing gives 

permission to the public to use 

materials created under the terms of the 

license and attribute to the creator 

under copyright law. Pfenninger et al. 

(2017) note that open licensing allows 

the burden of the work to be distributed 

more broadly, avoids unnecessary 

duplication, supports learning from one 

another to get to solutions more quickly, 

and allows for research to be seen and 

used. Additionally, open licensing helps 

to improve educational research 

opportunities and systems, given the 

rapid pace of technological change and 

ongoing advances. 

Data visualizations can be difficult to 

access for persons with disabilities. This 

difficulty is not limited to persons who 

are blind and/or visually impaired, but 

also impacts those with cognitive and 

learning disabilities, and those with 

visual or motor disabilities who do not 

access their computers with a mouse or 

touchscreen. These barriers have been 

amplified by the growing interest in, 

and use of, infographics and interactive 

data displays and dashboards on 

websites and in social media. In 

addition to difficulty with use, persons 

with disabilities are often excluded as 

potential authors and designers of data 

visualizations due to the inaccessibility 

of the computer-based tools used to 

create and publish data displays. 

Despite legislation, including sections 

504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, 

and Title III of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, potential data authors 

and consumers with disabilities 

continue to be excluded from the data 

sharing necessary for equal access and 

participation in civic conversations, 

education, advocacy, and employment. 

To extend the benefits and 

opportunities of data visualization 

equitably and inclusively to all people, 

new tools must be developed that 

prioritize access and usability for 

everyone. Developers and designers 

should engage with people with 

disabilities (including developers and 

designers with disabilities) to identify 

and integrate accessibility solutions. 

Accessibly designed software and data 

visualizations will increase access for 

those who have traditionally been 

excluded and increase opportunities for 

all consumers and authors to interact 

with data in new and preferred ways. 

Following the principles of universal 

design, everyone benefits when we 

expand the ability of people with 

disabilities to use and access 

information, products, programs, and 

spaces with greater convenience and 

enjoyment. 

In addition to equitable access and 

data availability, data reporters face a 

growing problem of how to 

meaningfully publish large datasets. 

Consumers need easy tools for 

conducting simple analyses, comparing 

variables, and searching for data-based 

answers to unique and changing 

questions. Interactive data 

visualizations increase confidence in 

data reliability and provide stakeholders 

with opportunities to look at data in 

new ways (Kirk, 2016). 

Modern, web-based data 

visualizations include the ability to 

select, link, filter, and reorganize data, 

as well as the delivery of 3–D/ 

multidimensional data representations 

that can be accessed from multiple 

perspectives (Cota et al., 2017). 

Challenges to producing interactive data 

visualizations include managing visual 

noise, fitting large amounts of data onto 

limited screen sizes, and satisfying the 

high-performance computation 

requirements behind dynamic 

visualizations (Hajirahimova & 

Ismayilova, 2018). Innovative data 

interactivity and manipulation solutions 

can also solve accessibility challenges. 

Accessibility solutions for static images 

(which usually involve written 

descriptions embedded in alt-tags in 

computer code) should become standard 

practice, while simultaneously being 

reimagined to accommodate responsive 

and animated representations of data. 

Priority: 

Under this priority, the Department 

provides funding for a cooperative 

agreement to establish and operate the 

Rhonda Weiss National Technical 

Assistance Center to Improve State 

Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, 

and Use Accurate IDEA Data in 

Accessible Formats (Accessible Data 

Center). 

The Accessible Data Center will 

provide TA to help States better meet 

current and future IDEA Part B and Part 

C data collection and reporting 

requirements, improve data quality, and 

analyze and use the data reported to 

provide equitable access and 

visualizations to persons with 

disabilities. The Accessible Data 

Center’s work will comply with the 

privacy and confidentiality protections 

in the IDEA Part B and C regulations, 

which incorporate provisions in the 

Family Educational Rights and Privacy 

Act (FERPA) and include IDEA-specific 

provisions and will not provide the 

Department with access to child-level 

data. The Accessible Data Center must 

achieve, at a minimum, the following 

expected outcomes: 

(a) Improved accessibility of the IDEA 

Part B and Part C data reported and 

published under IDEA sections 616 and 

618; 

(b) Increased capacity of States to 

collect, report, analyze, and use highquality IDEA Part B and Part C data in 

accessible formats; 

(c) Development of an open license, 

accessible software program, for the 

publication of dynamic data products 

(consistent with the open licensing 

requirement in 2 CFR 3474.20); and 

(d) Development and documentation 

of a knowledge base related to the 

accessible reporting and dynamic 

presentation of data. 

In addition, the Accessible Data 

Center must provide a range of targeted 

and general TA products and services 

for improving States’ capacity to 

accurately collect, report, analyze, and 

use IDEA section 616 and section 618 

data in accessible formats for persons 

with disabilities, particularly those with 

blindness, visual impairments, motor 

impairments, and intellectual 

disabilities. Such TA must include, at a 

minimum— 

(a) Working with the Department to 

develop open-source electronic tools to 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
41300 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 

2For purposes of these requirements, ‘‘evidencebased practices’’ (EBPs) means, at a minimum, 

demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR 

77.1) based on high-quality research findings or 

positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or 

intervention is likely to improve student outcomes 

or other relevant outcomes. 

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

information provided to independent users through 

their own initiative, resulting in minimal 

interaction with Accessible Data Center staff and 

including one-time, invited or offered conference 

presentations by Accessible Data Center staff. This 

category of TA also includes information or 

products, such as newsletters, guidebooks, or 

research syntheses, downloaded from the 

Accessible Data Center’s website by independent 

users. Brief communications by Accessible Data 

Center staff with recipients, either by telephone or 

email, are also considered universal, general TA. 

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

based on needs common to multiple recipients and 

not extensively individualized. A relationship is 

established between the TA recipient and one or 

more Accessible Data Center staff. This category of 

TA includes one-time, labor-intensive events, such 

assist States in reporting their IDEA data 

in accessible formats that allow for 

dynamic visualizations that can be 

manipulated for persons with and 

without disabilities. The tools must 

utilize accessibility best practices, 

exceed all Federal accessibility 

requirements, and be designed to 

accommodate continued enhancements 

to meet States’ changing needs and 

updates in accessibility best practice; 

(b) Developing a plan to maintain 

appropriate functionality of the opensource electronic tools described in 

paragraph (a) as changes are made to 

data collections, reporting requirements, 

accessibility best practices, and 

accessibility requirements; 

(c) Developing universal TA products, 

including a user manual and 

instructions, and conducting training 

with State staff on use of the opensource electronic tools; and 

(d) Developing white papers and 

presentations that include tools and 

solutions to challenges in the collection, 

reporting, analysis, and use of IDEA 

data in accessible formats. 

In addition to these programmatic 

requirements, to be considered for 

funding under this priority, applicants 

must meet the application and 

administrative requirements in this 

priority, which are: 

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Significance of the Project,’’ how the 

proposed project will— 

(1) Address State challenges in 

collecting, analyzing, reporting, and 

using the IDEA Part B and Part C data 

reported under IDEA sections 616 and 

618 in formats that are both accessible 

to persons with visual impairments and/ 

or other disabilities and also dynamic, 

to promote enhanced data use that will 

improve data quality and identify 

programmatic strengths and areas for 

improvement. To meet this requirement 

the applicant must— 

(i) Demonstrate knowledge of IDEA 

data collections, including data required 

under IDEA sections 616 and 618; 

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of 

accessible reporting and dynamic 

visualization, and document areas for 

further knowledge development; 

(iii) Present information about the 

difficulties State educational agencies 

(SEAs), State lead agencies (LAs), local 

educational agencies (LEAs), early 

intervention service (EIS) providers, and 

schools have encountered in meeting 

the requirements of section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act when reporting IDEA 

data; and 

(iv) Present information about the 

difficulties SEAs, State LAs, LEAs, EIS 

providers, and schools have in 

developing dynamic data visualizations 

for public use; and 

(2) Improve outcomes in collecting, 

analyzing, reporting, and using the 

IDEA Part B and Part C data in formats 

that are accessible to persons with 

visual impairments and/or other 

disabilities. 

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of project services,’’ how the 

proposed project will— 

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment 

for members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe how it will— 

(i) Identify the needs of the intended 

recipients and end users for TA and 

information; and 

(ii) Ensure that products and services 

meet the needs of the intended TA 

recipients and end users; 

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and 

intended outcomes. To meet this 

requirement, the applicant must 

provide— 

(i) Measurable intended project 

outcomes; and 

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model 

(as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) by which 

the proposed project will achieve its 

intended outcomes that depicts, at a 

minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, 

and intended outcomes of the proposed 

project; 

(3) Use a conceptual framework (and 

provide a copy in Appendix A) to 

develop project plans and activities, 

describing any underlying concepts, 

assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or 

theories, as well as the presumed 

relationships or linkages among these 

variables, and any empirical support for 

this framework; 

Note: The following websites provide 

more information on logic models and 

conceptual frameworks: https://

osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/ 

files/2021-12/ConceptualFramework_

Updated.pdf and 

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

(4) Be based on current research and 

use evidence-based practices (EBPs).2

To meet this requirement, the applicant 

must describe— 

(i) The current research on the 

capacity of SEAs, State LAs, LEAs, and 

EIS providers to report and use data, 

specifically section 616 and section 618 

data, in a manner that allows persons 

with vision and/or other disabilities, as 

well as those without, to access and 

dynamically manipulate data, as both a 

means of improving data quality and 

identifying strengths and areas for 

improvement; 

(ii) How it will analyze and 

incorporate the views of end users 

regarding the accessibility of tools 

currently available for data collection, 

reporting, analysis, and use. 

Specifically, how it will assess the 

overall accessibility, data 

manipulability, and the accessibility of 

dynamic data visualizations for persons 

with and without disabilities; and 

(iii) How the proposed project will 

incorporate current research, EBPs, and 

the needs of end users in the 

development and delivery of its 

products and services; 

(5) How it will develop products and 

provide services that are of high quality 

and sufficient intensity and duration to 

achieve the intended outcomes of the 

proposed project. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe— 

(i) How it proposes to identify or 

develop the knowledge base on the 

capacity needs of SEAs, State LAs, 

LEAs, and EIS programs/EIS providers 

to meet IDEA data collection and 

reporting requirements, data analysis, 

and use of the IDEA Part B and Part C 

data reported under IDEA sections 616 

and 618 in a manner that allows 

individuals with vision and/or other 

disabilities, as well as those without, to 

access and dynamically manipulate 

data; 

(ii) Its proposed approach to 

universal, general TA,3 which must 

identify the intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services under this approach; 

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, 

specialized TA,4 which must identify— 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 41301 

as facilitating strategic planning or hosting regional 

or national conferences. It can also include 

episodic, less labor-intensive events that extend 

over a period of time, such as facilitating a series 

of conference calls on single or multiple topics that 

are designed around the needs of the recipients. 

Facilitating communities of practice can also be 

considered targeted, specialized TA. 

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

often provided on-site and requiring a stable, 

ongoing relationship between Accessible Data 

Center staff and the TA recipient. ‘‘TA services’’ are 

defined as negotiated series of activities designed to 

reach a valued outcome. This category of TA should 

result in changes to policy, program, practice, or 

operations that support increased recipient capacity 

or improved outcomes at one or more systems 

levels. 

6A ‘‘third-party’’ evaluator is an independent and 

impartial program evaluator who is contracted by 

the grantee to conduct an objective evaluation of the 

project. This evaluator must not have participated 

in the development or implementation of any 

project activities, except for the evaluation 

activities, or have any financial interest in the 

outcome of the evaluation. 

(A) The intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services under this approach; and 

(B) Its proposed approach to measure 

the readiness of potential TA recipients 

to work with the project, assessing, at a 

minimum, their current infrastructure, 

available resources, and ability to build 

capacity at the local level; and 

(iv) Its proposed approach to 

intensive, sustained TA,5 which must 

identify— 

(A) The intended recipients, 

including the type and number of 

recipients, that will receive the products 

and services under this approach; 

(B) Its proposed approach to measure 

the readiness of SEA, State LAs, LEA, 

and EIS program/provider personnel to 

work with the project, including their 

commitment to the initiative, alignment 

of the initiative to their needs, current 

infrastructure, available resources, and 

ability to build capacity at the SEA, 

State LA, LEA, and EIS program/ 

provider levels; 

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting 

SEAs and State LAs (and LEAs, in 

conjunction with SEAs and EIS 

programs/providers, in conjunction 

with State LAs) to build or enhance 

training systems to meet IDEA Part B 

and Part C data collection and reporting 

requirements in a manner that allows 

individuals with vision and/or other 

disabilities, as well as those without, to 

access and dynamically manipulate 

data. This includes professional 

development based on adult learning 

principles and coaching; 

(D) Its proposed plan for working with 

appropriate levels of the education 

system (e.g., SEAs, State LAs, regional 

TA providers, LEAs, EIS providers, 

schools, and families) to ensure there is 

communication between each level and 

there are systems in place to support the 

capacity needs of SEAs, State LAs, 

LEAs, and EIS providers to meet IDEA 

data collection and reporting 

requirements, as well as support data 

analysis and the use of IDEA Part B and 

Part C data, in a manner that allows 

individuals with vision and/or other 

disabilities, as well as those without, to 

access and dynamically manipulate 

data; and 

(E) Its proposed plan for collaborating 

and coordinating with Departmentfunded projects, including those 

providing data-related support to States, 

where appropriate, to align 

complementary work and jointly 

develop and implement products and 

services to meet the purposes of this 

priority. Such Department-funded 

projects include the IDEA Data Center 

(IDC), the Center for IDEA Early 

Childhood Data Systems (DaSy), the 

Center for IDEA Fiscal Reporting (CIFR), 

the Center for the Integration of IDEA 

Data (CIID), EdFacts, and the research 

and development investments of the 

Institute of Education Sciences/National 

Center for Education Statistics; and 

(6) Its proposed plan to develop 

products and implement services that 

maximize efficiency. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe— 

(i) How the proposed project will use 

technology to achieve the intended 

project outcomes; 

(ii) With whom the proposed project 

will collaborate and the intended 

outcomes of this collaboration; and 

(iii) How the proposed project will 

use non-project resources to achieve the 

intended project outcomes. 

(c) In the narrative section of the 

application under ‘‘Quality of the 

project evaluation,’’ include an 

evaluation plan for the project 

developed in consultation with and 

implemented by a third-party 

evaluator.6 The evaluation plan must— 

(1) Articulate formative and 

summative evaluation questions, 

including important process and 

outcome evaluation questions. These 

questions should be related to the 

project’s proposed logic model required 

in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of these 

requirements; 

(2) Describe how progress in and 

fidelity of implementation, as well as 

project outcomes, will be measured to 

answer the evaluation questions. 

Specify the measures and associated 

instruments or sources for data 

appropriate to the evaluation questions. 

Include information regarding reliability 

and validity of measures where 

appropriate; 

(3) Describe strategies for analyzing 

data and how data collected as part of 

this plan will be used to inform and 

improve service delivery over the course 

of the project and to refine the proposed 

logic model and evaluation plan, 

including subsequent data collection; 

(4) Provide a timeline for conducting 

the evaluation and include staff 

assignments for completing the plan. 

The timeline must indicate that the data 

will be available annually for the annual 

performance report and at the end of 

Year 2 for the review process; and 

(5) Dedicate sufficient funds in each 

budget year to cover the costs of 

developing or refining the evaluation 

plan in consultation with a third-party 

evaluator, as well as the costs associated 

with the implementation of the 

evaluation plan by the third-party 

evaluator. 

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Adequacy of resources,’’ how— 

(1) The proposed project will 

encourage applications for employment 

from persons who are members of 

groups that have traditionally been 

underrepresented based on race, color, 

national origin, gender, age, or 

disability, as appropriate; 

(2) The proposed key project 

personnel, consultants, and 

subcontractors have the qualifications 

and experience to carry out the 

proposed activities and achieve the 

project’s intended outcomes; 

(3) The applicant and any key 

partners have adequate resources to 

carry out the proposed activities; and 

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable 

in relation to the anticipated results and 

benefits, and funds will be spent in a 

way that increases their efficiency and 

cost-effectiveness, including by 

reducing waste or achieving better 

outcomes. 

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative 

section of the application under 

‘‘Quality of the management plan,’’ 

how— 

(1) The proposed management plan 

will ensure that the project’s intended 

outcomes will be achieved on time and 

within budget. To address this 

requirement, the applicant must 

describe— 

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for 

key project personnel, consultants, and 

subcontractors, as applicable; and 

(ii) Timelines and milestones for 

accomplishing the project tasks; 

(2) Key project personnel and any 

consultants and subcontractors will be 

allocated and how these allocations are 

appropriate and adequate to achieve the 

project’s intended outcomes; 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
41302 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 

(3) The proposed management plan 

will ensure that the products and 

services provided are of high quality, 

relevant, and useful to recipients; and 

(4) The proposed project will benefit 

from a diversity of perspectives, 

including those of families, educators, 

TA providers, researchers, and policy 

makers, among others, in its 

development and operation. 

(f) Address the following application 

requirements: 

(1) Include, in Appendix A, 

personnel-loading charts and timelines, 

as applicable, to illustrate the 

management plan described in the 

narrative; 

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance 

at the following: 

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

meeting in Washington, DC, or virtually, 

after receipt of the award, and an annual 

planning meeting in Washington, DC, or 

virtually, with the Office of Special 

Education Programs (OSEP) project 

officer and other relevant staff during 

each subsequent year of the project 

period. 

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the 

award, a post-award teleconference 

must be held between the OSEP project 

officer and the grantee’s project director 

or other authorized representative; 

(ii) A two- and one-half day project 

directors’ conference in Washington, 

DC, or virtually, during each year of the 

project period; and 

(iii) Three annual two-day trips, or 

virtually, to attend Department 

briefings, Department-sponsored 

conferences, and other meetings, as 

requested by OSEP; 

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

for an annual set-aside of 5 percent of 

the grant amount to support emerging 

needs that are consistent with the 

proposed project’s intended outcomes, 

as those needs are identified in 

consultation with, and approved by, the 

OSEP project officer. With approval 

from the OSEP project officer, the 

project must reallocate any remaining 

funds from this annual set-aside no later 

than the end of the third quarter of each 

budget period; 

(4) Maintain a high-quality website, 

with an easy-to-navigate design, that 

meets government or industryrecognized standards for accessibility; 

and 

(5) Include, in Appendix A, an 

assurance to assist OSEP with the 

transfer of pertinent resources and 

products and to maintain the continuity 

of services to States during the 

transition to this new award period and 

at the end of this award period, as 

appropriate. 

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project: 

In deciding whether to continue 

funding the project for the fourth and 

fifth years, the Secretary will consider 

the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), 

including— 

(a) The timeliness with which, and 

how well, the requirements of the 

negotiated cooperative agreement have 

been or are being met by the project; and 

(b) The quality, relevance, and 

usefulness of the project’s products and 

services and the extent to which the 

project’s products and services are 

aligned with the project’s objectives and 

likely to result in the project achieving 

its intended outcomes. 

Under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary 

may reduce continuation awards or 

discontinue awards in any year of the 

project period for excessive carryover 

balances or a failure to make substantial 

progress. The Department intends to 

closely monitor unobligated balances 

and substantial progress under this 

program and may reduce or discontinue 

funding accordingly. 

References: 

Cota, M.P., Rodrı ́guez, M.D., Gonza ́lez-Castro, 

M.R. & Gonc ̧alves, R.M.M. (2017). 

Analysis of current visualization 

techniques and main challenges for the 

future. Journal of Information Systems 

Engineering & Management, 2(3), 19. 

https://doi.org/10.20897/jisem.201719. 

Hajirahimova, M.S., & Ismayilova, M.I. 

(2018). Big data visualization: Existing 

approaches and problems. Problems of 

Information Technology, 1, 65–74. 

Hazen, B.T., Weigel, F.K., Ezell, J.D., 

Boehmke, B.C., & Bradley, R.V. (2017). 

Toward understanding outcomes 

associated with data quality 

improvement. International Journal of 

Production Economics, 193, 737–747. 

Kirk, A. (2016). Data visualization: A 

handbook for data driven design. Sage 

Publications. 

Pfenninger, S., DeCarolis, J., Hirth, L. 

Quoilin, S., & Staffell, I. (2017). The 

importance of open data and software: Is 

energy research lagging behind? Energy 

Policy, 101, 211–215. https://doi.org/ 

10.1016/j.enpol.2016.11.046. 

U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). 2019 American 

Community Survey. https://

data.census.gov/cedsci/ 

table?t=Disability&

tid=ACSST1Y2019.S1810&

hidePreview=true. 

U.S. Department of State. (2017). Federal 

Open Licensing Playbook. https://

eca.state.gov/files/bureau/open_

licensing_playbook_final.pdf. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c), 

1416(i), 1418(c), 1442; and the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, 

Pub. L. 116–260, 134 Stat. 1182, 1601. 

Note: Projects will be awarded and 

must be operated in a manner consistent 

with the nondiscrimination 

requirements contained in Federal civil 

rights laws. 

Applicable Regulations: (a) The 

Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR 

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

and 99. (b) The Office of Management 

and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on 

Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR 

part 180, as adopted and amended as 

regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3485. (c) The Uniform 

Administrative Requirements, Cost 

Principles, and Audit Requirements for 

Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as 

adopted and amended as regulations of 

the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) 

The NFP. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

79 apply to all applicants except 

federally recognized Indian Tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 

86 apply to institutions of higher 

education (IHEs) only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

agreement. 

Estimated Available Funds: 

$3,000,000. 

Contingent upon the availability of 

funds and the quality of applications, 

we may make additional awards in FY 

2023 from the list of unfunded 

applications from this competition. 

Maximum Award: We will not make 

an award exceeding $3,000,000 for a 

single budget period of 12 months. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 1. 

Note: The Department is not bound by 

any estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 60 months. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State 

LAs under Part C of the IDEA; LEAs, 

including public charter schools that are 

considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; 

other public agencies; private nonprofit 

organizations; freely associated States 

and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or 

Tribal organizations; and for-profit 

organizations. 

2. a. Cost Sharing or Matching: This 

competition does not require cost 

sharing or matching. 

b. Indirect Cost Rate Information: This 

program uses an unrestricted indirect 

cost rate. For more information 

regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a 

negotiated indirect cost rate, please see 

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

intro.html. 

c. Administrative Cost Limitation: 

This program does not include any 

program-specific limitation on 

administrative expenses. All 

administrative expenses must be 

reasonable and necessary and conform 

to Cost Principles described in 2 CFR 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 41303 

part 200, subpart E, of the Uniform 

Guidance. 

3. Subgrantees: A grantee under this 

competition may not award subgrants to 

entities to directly carry out project 

activities described in its application. 

Under 34 CFR 75.708(e), a grantee may 

contract for supplies, equipment, and 

other services in accordance with 2 CFR 

part 200. 

4. Other General Requirements: 

(a) Recipients of funding under this 

competition must make positive efforts 

to employ and advance in employment 

qualified individuals with disabilities 

(see section 606 of IDEA). 

(b) Applicants for, and recipients of, 

funding must, with respect to the 

aspects of their proposed project 

relating to the absolute priority, involve 

individuals with disabilities, or parents 

of individuals with disabilities ages 

birth through 26, in planning, 

implementing, and evaluating the 

project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of 

IDEA). 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Application Submission 

Instructions: Applicants are required to 

follow the Common Instructions for 

Applicants to Department of Education 

Discretionary Grant Programs, 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 27, 2021 (86 FR 73264), and 

available at www.federalregister.gov/d/ 

2021–27979, which contain 

requirements and information on how to 

submit an application. Please note that 

these Common Instructions supersede 

the version published on February 13, 

2019, and, in part, describe the 

transition from the requirement to 

register in SAM.gov a DUNS number to 

the implementation of the UEI. More 

information on the phase-out of DUNS 

numbers is available at https://

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

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

2. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. However, under 34 CFR 

79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental 

review in order to timely make an 

award. 

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference 

regulations outlining funding 

restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

4. Recommended Page Limit: The 

application narrative is where you, the 

applicant, address the selection criteria 

that reviewers use to evaluate your 

application. We recommend that you (1) 

limit the application narrative to no 

more than 70 pages and (2) use the 

following standards: 

• A ‘‘page’’ is 8.5′′ x 11′′, on one side 

only, with 1′′ margins at the top, bottom, 

and both sides. 

• Double-space (no more than three 

lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application narrative, including titles, 

headings, footnotes, quotations, 

reference citations, and captions, as well 

as all text in charts, tables, figures, 

graphs, and screen shots. 

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger. 

• Use one of the following fonts: 

Times New Roman, Courier, Courier 

New, or Arial. 

The recommended page limit does not 

apply to the cover sheet; the budget 

section, including the narrative budget 

justification; the assurances and 

certifications; or the abstract (follow the 

guidance provided in the application 

package for completing the abstract), the 

table of contents, the list of priority 

requirements, the resumes, the reference 

list, the letters of support, or the 

appendices. However, the 

recommended page limit does apply to 

all of the application narrative, 

including all text in charts, tables, 

figures, graphs, and screen shots. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this competition are from 34 

CFR 75.210 and are listed below: 

(a) Significance and need for project 

(10 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

significance of and need for the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the significance of 

and need for the proposed project, the 

Secretary considers the following 

factors: 

(i) The extent to which specific gaps 

or weaknesses in services, 

infrastructure, or opportunities have 

been identified and will be addressed by 

the proposed project, including the 

nature and magnitude of those gaps or 

weaknesses. 

(ii) The importance or magnitude of 

the results or outcomes likely to be 

attained by the proposed project. 

(b) Quality of project services and 

design (35 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the services to be provided by, 

and the quality of the design of, the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

services to be provided by the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

quality and sufficiency of strategies for 

ensuring equal access and treatment for 

eligible project participants who are 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. 

(3) In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the goals, 

objectives, and outcomes to be achieved 

by the proposed project are clearly 

specified and measurable. 

(ii) The extent to which there is a 

conceptual framework underlying the 

proposed research or demonstration 

activities and the quality of that 

framework. 

(iii) The extent to which the services 

to be provided by the proposed project 

reflect up-to-date knowledge from 

research and effective practice. 

(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 TA 

services to be provided by the proposed 

project involve the use of efficient 

strategies, including the use of 

technology, as appropriate, and the 

leveraging of non-project resources. 

(c) Quality of the project evaluation 

(15 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the evaluation to be 

conducted of the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

evaluation, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and 

appropriate to the goals, objectives, and 

outcomes of the proposed project. 

(ii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation provide for examining the 

effectiveness of project implementation 

strategies. 

(iii) The extent to which the methods 

of evaluation will provide performance 

feedback and permit periodic 

assessment of progress toward achieving 

intended outcomes. 

(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 

quantitative and qualitative data to the 

extent possible. 

(d) Adequacy of resources and quality 

of project personnel (15 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

adequacy of resources for the proposed 

project and the quality of the personnel 

who will carry out the proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of 

project personnel, the Secretary 

considers the extent to which the 

applicant encourages applications for 

employment from persons who are 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
41304 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 

members of groups that have 

traditionally been underrepresented 

based on race, color, national origin, 

gender, age, or disability. 

(3) In addition, the Secretary 

considers the following factors: 

(i) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of the 

project director or principal 

investigator. 

(ii) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of key 

project personnel. 

(iii) The qualifications, including 

relevant training and experience, of 

project consultants or subcontractors. 

(iv) The qualifications, including 

relevant training, experience, and 

independence, of the evaluator. 

(v) The adequacy of support, 

including facilities, equipment, 

supplies, and other resources, from the 

applicant organization or the lead 

applicant organization. 

(vi) The relevance and demonstrated 

commitment of each partner in the 

proposed project to the implementation 

and success of the project. 

(vii) The extent to which the budget 

is adequate to support the proposed 

project. 

(viii) The extent to which the costs are 

reasonable in relation to the objectives, 

design, and potential significance of the 

proposed project. 

(e) Quality of the management plan 

(25 points). 

(1) The Secretary considers the 

quality of the management plan for the 

proposed project. 

(2) In determining the quality of the 

management plan for the proposed 

project, the Secretary considers the 

following factors: 

(i) The adequacy of the management 

plan to achieve the objectives of the 

proposed project on time and within 

budget, including clearly defined 

responsibilities, timelines, and 

milestones for accomplishing project 

tasks. 

(ii) The extent to which the time 

commitments of the project director and 

principal investigator and other key 

project personnel are appropriate and 

adequate to meet the objectives of the 

proposed project. 

(iii) 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 is 

brought to bear in the operation of the 

proposed project, including those of 

parents, teachers, the business 

community, a variety of disciplinary 

and professional fields, recipients or 

beneficiaries of services, or others, as 

appropriate. 

2. Review and Selection Process: We 

remind potential applicants that in 

reviewing applications in any 

discretionary grant competition, the 

Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 

75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the 

applicant in carrying out a previous 

award, such as the applicant’s use of 

funds, achievement of project 

objectives, and compliance with grant 

conditions. The Secretary may also 

consider whether the applicant failed to 

submit a timely performance report or 

submitted a report of unacceptable 

quality. 

In addition, in making a competitive 

grant award, the Secretary requires 

various assurances, including those 

applicable to Federal civil rights laws 

that prohibit discrimination in programs 

or activities receiving Federal financial 

assistance from the Department (34 CFR 

100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

3. Additional Review and Selection 

Process Factors: In the past, the 

Department has had difficulty finding 

peer reviewers for certain competitions 

because so many individuals who are 

eligible to serve as peer reviewers have 

conflicts of interest. The standing panel 

requirements under section 682(b) of 

IDEA also have placed additional 

constraints on the availability of 

reviewers. Therefore, the Department 

has determined that for some 

discretionary grant competitions, 

applications may be separated into two 

or more groups and ranked and selected 

for funding within specific groups. This 

procedure will make it easier for the 

Department to find peer reviewers by 

ensuring that greater numbers of 

individuals who are eligible to serve as 

reviewers for any particular group of 

applicants will not have conflicts of 

interest. It also will increase the quality, 

independence, and fairness of the 

review process, while permitting panel 

members to review applications under 

discretionary grant competitions for 

which they also have submitted 

applications. 

4. Risk Assessment and Specific 

Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 

200.206, before awarding grants under 

this competition the Department 

conducts a review of the risks posed by 

applicants. Under 2 CFR 200.208, the 

Secretary may impose specific 

conditions, and under 2 CFR 3474.10, in 

appropriate circumstances, high-risk 

conditions on a grant if the applicant or 

grantee is not financially stable; has a 

history of unsatisfactory performance; 

has a financial or other management 

system that does not meet the standards 

in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not 

fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; 

or is otherwise not responsible. 

5. Integrity and Performance System: 

If you are selected under this 

competition to receive an award that 

over the course of the project period 

may exceed the simplified acquisition 

threshold (currently $250,000), under 2 

CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a 

judgment about your integrity, business 

ethics, and record of performance under 

Federal awards—that is, the risk posed 

by you as an applicant—before we make 

an award. In doing so, we must consider 

any information about you that is in the 

integrity and performance system 

(currently referred to as the Federal 

Awardee Performance and Integrity 

Information System (FAPIIS)), 

accessible through the System for 

Award Management. You may review 

and comment on any information about 

yourself that a Federal agency 

previously entered and that is currently 

in FAPIIS. 

Please note that, if the total value of 

your currently active grants, cooperative 

agreements, and procurement contracts 

from the Federal Government exceeds 

$10,000,000, the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 200, appendix XII, require 

you to report certain integrity 

information to FAPIIS semiannually. 

Please review the requirements in 2 CFR 

part 200, appendix XII, if this grant plus 

all the other Federal funds you receive 

exceed $10,000,000. 

6. In General: In accordance with the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

guidance located at 2 CFR part 200, all 

applicable Federal laws, and relevant 

Executive guidance, the Department 

will review and consider applications 

for funding pursuant to this notice 

inviting applications in accordance 

with— 

(a) Selecting recipients most likely to 

be successful in delivering results based 

on the program objectives through an 

objective process of evaluating Federal 

award applications (2 CFR 200.205); 

(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain 

telecommunication and video 

surveillance services or equipment in 

alignment with section 889 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act of 

2019 (Pub. L. 115–232) (2 CFR 200.216); 

(c) Providing a preference, to the 

extent permitted by law, to maximize 

use of goods, products, and materials 

produced in the United States (2 CFR 

200.322); and 

(d) Terminating agreements in whole 

or in part to the greatest extent 

authorized by law if an award no longer 

effectuates the program goals or agency 

priorities (2 CFR 200.340). 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 12, 2022 / Notices 41305 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notification 

(GAN); or we may send you an email 

containing a link to access an electronic 

version of your GAN. We may notify 

you informally, also. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

3. Open Licensing Requirements: 

Unless an exception applies, if you are 

awarded a grant under this competition, 

you will be required to openly license 

to the public grant deliverables created 

in whole, or in part, with Department 

grant funds. When the deliverable 

consists of modifications to pre-existing 

works, the license extends only to those 

modifications that can be separately 

identified and only to the extent that 

open licensing is permitted under the 

terms of any licenses or other legal 

restrictions on the use of pre-existing 

works. Additionally, a grantee that is 

awarded competitive grant funds must 

have a plan to disseminate these public 

grant deliverables. This dissemination 

plan can be developed and submitted 

after your application has been 

reviewed and selected for funding. For 

additional information on the open 

licensing requirements please refer to 2 

CFR 3474.20. 

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

grant under this competition, you must 

ensure that you have in place the 

necessary processes and systems to 

comply with the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive 

funding under the competition. This 

does not apply if you have an exception 

under 2 CFR 170.110(b). 

(b) At the end of your project period, 

you must submit a final performance 

report, including financial information, 

as directed by the Secretary. If you 

receive a multiyear award, you must 

submit an annual performance report 

that provides the most current 

performance and financial expenditure 

information as directed by the Secretary 

under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary 

may also require more frequent 

performance reports under 34 CFR 

75.720(c). For specific requirements on 

reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/ 

fund/grant/apply/appforms/ 

appforms.html. 

5. Performance Measures: For the 

purposes of Department reporting under 

34 CFR 75.110, we have established a 

set of performance measures that are 

designed to yield information on 

various aspects of the effectiveness and 

quality of the Technical Assistance on 

State Data Collection program. These 

measures are: 

• Program Performance Measure #1: 

The percentage of TA and dissemination 

products and services deemed to be of 

high quality by an independent review 

panel of experts qualified or individuals 

with appropriate expertise to review the 

substantive content of the products and 

services. 

• Program Performance Measure #2: 

The percentage of TA and dissemination 

products and services deemed by an 

independent review panel of qualified 

experts or members of the target 

audiences to be of high relevance to 

educational and early intervention 

policy or practice. 

• Program Performance Measure #3: 

The percentage of all TA and 

dissemination products and services 

deemed by an independent review 

panel of qualified experts or members of 

the target audiences to be useful in 

improving educational or early 

intervention policy or practice. 

• Program Performance Measure #4: 

The cost efficiency of the Technical 

Assistance on State Data Collection 

Program includes the percentage of 

milestones achieved in the current 

annual performance report period and 

the percentage of funds spent during the 

current fiscal year. 

The measures apply to projects 

funded under this competition, and 

grantees are required to submit data on 

these measures as directed by OSEP. 

Grantees will be required to report 

information on their project’s 

performance in annual and final 

performance reports to the Department 

(34 CFR 75.590). 

The Department will also closely 

monitor the extent to which the 

products and services provided by the 

Accessible Data Center meet needs 

identified by stakeholders and may 

require the Accessible Data Center to 

report on such alignment in its annual 

and final performance reports. 

6. Continuation Awards: In making a 

continuation award under 34 CFR 

75.253, the Secretary considers, among 

other things: whether a grantee has 

made substantial progress in achieving 

the goals and objectives of the project; 

whether the grantee has expended funds 

in a manner that is consistent with its 

approved application and budget; and, 

if the Secretary has established 

performance measurement 

requirements, whether the grantee has 

made substantial progress in achieving 

the performance targets in the grantee’s 

approved application. 

In making a continuation award, the 

Secretary also considers whether the 

grantee is operating in compliance with 

the assurances in its approved 

application, including those applicable 

to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination in programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance 

from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 

104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

VII. Other Information 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

program contact person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

individuals with disabilities can obtain 

this document and a copy of the 

application package in an accessible 

format. The Department will provide the 

requestor with an accessible format that 

may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or 

text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 

file, Braille, large print, audiotape, or 

compact disc, or other accessible format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Katherine Neas, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, delegated the 

authority to perform the functions and duties 

of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services. 

[FR Doc. 2022–14853 Filed 7–8–22; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1