[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 4, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28436-28443]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13910]




[[Page 28435]]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part VI





Department of Education





_______________________________________________________________________



National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notices

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 4, 1996 / 
Notices

[[Page 28436]]



DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; 
Final Funding Priorities for Fiscal Year 1996-1997

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of Final Funding Priorities for Fiscal Years 1996-1997 
for a Research and Demonstration Project, Rehabilitation Research and 
Training Centers, and a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final funding priorities for the 
Research and Demonstration Project (R&D) Program, Rehabilitation 
Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program, and Rehabilitation 
Engineering Research Center (RERC) Program under the National Institute 
on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) for fiscal years 
1996-1997. The Secretary takes this action to focus research attention 
on areas of national need. These priorities are intended to improve 
rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on July 5, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Esquith, U.S. Department of 
Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Switzer Building, Room 3424, 
Washington, D.C. 20202-2601. Telephone: (202) 205-8801. Individuals who 
use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD 
number at (202) 205-8133. Internet: David--E<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2a595b5f435e426a4f4e044d455c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="097a787c607d61496c6d276e667f">[email protected]</span></a>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains final priorities to 
establish: one R&D project for research on emerging disability 
populations, two RRTCs for research related to vocational 
rehabilitation services to individuals who are blind or visually 
impaired and vocational rehabilitation services to individuals who are 
deaf or hard of hearing; and one RERC for research on technology for 
older persons with disabilities.
    NIDRR is in the process of developing a revised long-range plan. 
The final priorities in this notice are consistent with the long-range 
planning process. These final priorities 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.

    Note: This notice of final priorities does not solicit 
applications. A notice inviting applications under these 
competitions is published in a separate notice in this issue of the 
Federal Register.

    On March 25, 1996, the Secretary published three separate notices 
of proposed priorities in the Federal Register (61 FR 12062-12068). The 
Department of Education received 13 letters commenting on the three 
notices of proposed priorities by the deadline date. Three additional 
comments were received after the deadline date and were not considered 
in this response. Technical and other minor changes--and suggested 
changes the Secretary is not legally authorized to make under statutory 
authority--are not addressed.

Analysis of Comments and Changes--Research and Demonstration Projects 
Program

    This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes 
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed 
priorities.

Priority: Emerging Disability Populations

    Comment: One commenter recommended that individuals with 
tuberculosis be included among the emerging disability populations. 
Discussion: The Secretary believes that an applicant could propose to 
include individuals with tuberculosis as part of the universe of 
individuals who will be addressed by the project. However, the 
Secretary believes that applicants should have the discretion to define 
and characterize the emerging universe of disability.
    Changes: None.

Analysis of Comments and Changes--Rehabilitation Research and Training 
Centers (RRTCs)

    This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes 
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed 
priorities.

Priority 1: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are 
Blind or Visually Impaired

    Comment: One commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to conduct 
``a survey and analysis of the long-term efficacy, and employment 
results, of education for print-disabled students which includes 
reliance on taped texts.''
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that studying the effectiveness 
and impact of the education provided to print-disabled students is 
outside the scope of the priority.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to address 
barriers in transportation and information management.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that barriers in transportation 
and information management can have a significant impact on the 
employment status of individuals with disabilities. The Secretary 
believes that an applicant could propose to study the effect of 
vocational rehabilitation services on those barriers. However, the 
Secretary prefers to provide applicants with the discretion to propose 
specific topics for investigation.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC on individuals who 
are blind or visually impaired address computer-related technological 
advancements and issues of accessibility to the information 
superhighway and develop methods of improving access to these vital 
areas.
    Discussion: The Secretary points out that a NIDRR grantee, the 
Trace Center at the University of Wisconsin, currently addresses a wide 
range of computer and information systems issues related to persons 
with disabilities. The Secretary does not believe that research on 
computer-related technological advancements and issues of accessibility 
to the information superhighway is within the scope of this priority. 
However, the Secretary does believe that an applicant for this RRTC 
could propose to train or provide technical assistance to 
rehabilitation professionals on pertinent issues related to computer-
related technological advancements and the information superhighway.
    Changes: None.

Other Changes

    Discussion: The Secretary believes that training State vocational 
rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology for 
individuals who are blind or visually impaired is an important function 
for the RRTC to perform.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to require the RRTC to 
conduct at least three conferences to train State vocational 
rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology for 
individuals who are blind or visually impaired.

Priority 2: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are 
Deaf or Hard of Hearing

    Comment: One commenter recommended identifying new accommodation 
strategies that utilize advanced technology.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that new accommodation strategies 
that utilize advanced technology are needed. The Secretary points out 
that the RRTC

[[Page 28437]]

is required to identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques 
or reasonable accommodations that address barriers to entering or 
maintaining employment, including those using emerging assistive 
technology such as assistive listening devices, telecommunications 
equipment, and remote access technology. The Secretary does not believe 
any further requirements are necessary in order to address the 
commenter's recommendation.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: The same commenter recommended that the RRTC study States' 
policies on the provision of accommodations for communication, such as 
assistive listening devices and realtime captioning in addition to sign 
language interpreting services. Discussion: The Secretary believes that 
an applicant could propose to investigate how States' policies on the 
provision of communication accommodations affect the vocational 
rehabilitation services provided to persons who are deaf or hard of 
hearing. However, the Secretary prefers to provide applicants with the 
discretion to propose specific topics for investigation.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: The same commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to train 
consumers and employers on accommodations in addition to rehabilitation 
professionals. The commenter also recommended expanding the target 
audience of the national information and resource referral data base to 
consumers and employers. A second commenter stressed the need for the 
development and dissemination of consumer-oriented materials and 
recommended the development of print and media materials that can be 
used by consumers, as well as employers and rehabilitation 
professionals.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the RRTC should develop and 
disseminate materials that can be used by consumers. The Secretary 
agrees that requiring the RRTC to train consumers and employers on 
accommodations would be worthwhile as long as it did not diminish the 
training that the RRTC provides to rehabilitation professionals. 
Similarly, the Secretary agrees consumers and employers could benefit 
from access to the national information and resource referral data 
base.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to include, as appropriate, 
consumers and employers in the training provided to rehabilitation 
professionals on accommodations. In addition, the priority has been 
revised to require the RRTC to develop and disseminate consumer-
oriented materials, and include consumers and employers as part of the 
target audience for the national information and resource referral data 
base.
    Comment: Three commenters addressed the inclusion of low-
functioning individuals who are deaf in the priority. The commenters 
questioned the ability of the RRTC to address the wide range of needs 
evidenced by persons who are deaf, late-deafened, hard of hearing, or 
low-functioning deaf.
    Discussion: The Secretary recognizes that the persons who are deaf, 
late-deafened, hard of hearing, or low-functioning deaf have a wide 
range of vocational rehabilitation needs. The Secretary expects the 
RRTC to include staff with expertise in all of these areas. The 
Secretary believes one Center, using a holistic approach, is best 
suited to address the unique and common needs of persons who are deaf 
or hard of hearing.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: Two commenters expressed a concern that the priority 
simply repeated the current priority and would not advance the field. 
The commenters indicated that a sufficient body of knowledge existed on 
the employment status of individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing. 
The commenters recommended that the RRTC build on the work that has 
been completed by the current RRTC in this area and focus on the 
development and verification of intervention strategies.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the RRTC should utilize 
existing information and build upon the work of the current RRTC in 
this area. If valid and reliable information exists regarding the 
employment status on individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, the 
Secretary expects the RRTC to update this information as necessary. In 
addition, the Secretary believes that the priority requires the RRTC to 
develop a level of detail that does not currently exist regarding the 
employment status of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. The 
Secretary believes that applicants should have the discretion to 
propose how they will fulfill the purposes of the RRTC.
    Regarding the intervention strategies, the Secretary agrees that 
the RRTC should develop and verify intervention strategies. The 
Secretary points out that the second purpose of the RRTC is, in part, 
to develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or reasonable 
accommodations that address barriers to employment. The Secretary does 
not believe any further requirements are necessary in order to 
accomplish the commenters' recommendation.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC address literacy 
skills development.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that literacy skills development 
is a critical programming area that should be emphasized in the 
priority.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to require the RRTC to 
identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or reasonable 
accommodations that address literacy skills development.
    Comment: The same commenter indicated that the third and fourth 
purposes of the priority should not be presented as separate 
activities, but should apply to all of the purposes in the priority.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the training and data base 
development purposes of the priority are discrete activities that do 
not apply to all of the purposes of the priority.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: The same commenter recommended emphasizing the inclusion 
of low-functioning deaf individuals in the requirement to solicit and 
utilize input from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in the 
planning, development, and implementation of the grant.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the priority should be 
revised to ensure that the RRTC solicits and utilizes input from low-
functioning deaf individuals.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to emphasize the inclusion 
of low-functioning deaf individuals in the planning, development, and 
implementation of the grant.
    Comment: One commenter recommended broadening the coordination 
requirement to include grantees from RSA and the Office of Special 
Education Programs (OSEP), such as the Regional Centers on 
Postsecondary Education.
    Discussion: The Secretary agrees that it would be beneficial for 
the RRTC to expand its coordination efforts to include grantees from 
OSEP and RSA.
    Changes: The priority has been revised to broaden the RRTC's 
research coordination requirements to include grantees from OSEP and 
RSA.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC emphasize the 
needs of deaf individuals with mental illness.
    Discussion: The Secretary recognizes the unique needs of deaf 
individuals with mental illness. The Secretary believes that an 
applicant could propose to emphasize the needs of deaf

[[Page 28438]]

individuals with mental illness. However, the Secretary prefers to 
provide applicants with the discretion to propose areas of emphasis.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC for individuals 
who are deaf or hard of hearing address computer-related technological 
advancements and issues of accessibility to the information 
superhighway and develop methods of improving access to these vital 
areas.
    Discussion: One commenter points out that a NIDRR grantee, the 
Trace Center at the University of Wisconsin, currently addresses a wide 
range of computer and information systems issues related to persons 
with disabilities. The Secretary does not believe that research on 
computer-related technological advancements and issues of accessibility 
to the information superhighway is within the scope of this priority. 
However, the Secretary does believe that an applicant for this RRTC 
could propose to train or provide technical assistance to 
rehabilitation professionals on pertinent issues related to computer-
related technological advancements and the information superhighway.
    Changes: None.

Analysis of Comments and Changes--Rehabilitation Engineering Research 
Center (RERC)

    This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes 
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed 
priorities.

Priority: Assistive Technology for Older Persons With Disabilities

    Comment: One commenter recommended targeting older persons and 
their caregivers for dissemination activities.
    Discussion: The Secretary points out that the priority requires the 
RERC to target its dissemination initiative to disability and elderly 
organizations as well as assistive technology service providers 
activities. The Secretary believes that older persons with disabilities 
and their caregivers will receive information from the RERC through the 
dissemination activities of the organizations and service providers. 
The Secretary does not believe any further requirements are necessary 
in order for older persons with disabilities and their caregivers to 
receive information from the RERC.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RERC's research include 
those ``at risk'' to develop severe disabilities. The same commenter 
recommended that the RERC conduct general studies on effects of 
assistive technology on physiological function in the elderly.
    Discussion: The Secretary believes that the only ``at-risk'' 
populations that are within the scope of the priority are those 
individuals with disabilities who are at-risk of developing secondary 
disabilities or aggravating their current disability. The Secretary 
does not believe that elderly persons who do not have disabilities, but 
who are ``at-risk'' of developing a disability, are within the scope of 
the priority. Similarly, the Secretary believes that the RERC may 
pursue general studies on the effects of assistive technology on 
physiological function for elderly persons who have disabilities, but 
may not pursue such studies for elderly persons who do not have 
disabilities.
    Changes: None.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that the RERC's testing of 
assistive devices should include quantitative assessment of outcomes.
    Discussion: The Secretary points out that the testing of prototype 
devices is a general requirement of the RERC. The Secretary believes 
that applicants may propose to include quantitative assessment of 
outcomes. However, the Secretary believes that applicants should have 
the discretion to propose specific testing methodologies.
    Changes: None.

Research and Demonstration Projects

    Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public agencies 
and private agencies and organizations, including institutions of 
higher education, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations. This program 
is designed to assist in the development of solutions to the problems 
encountered by individuals with handicaps in their daily activities, 
especially problems related to employment (see 34 CFR 351.1). Under the 
regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 351.32), the Secretary may 
establish research priorities by reserving funds to support the 
research activities listed in 34 CFR 351.10.

Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The 
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet 
this absolute priority:

Priority: Emerging Disability Populations

Background
    Demographic and social trends indicate that the prevalence and 
distribution of various types of disability are changing, and that new 
populations of individuals are emerging to create unique demands on 
social policy and service systems. These new populations frequently 
result from such factors as: (1) Changing etiologies for existing 
disabilities; (2) growth in segments of the population with higher 
prevalence rates for certain disabilities, including the aging of the 
population in general and the population of individuals with 
disabilities in particular; (3) the unintended consequences of changes 
in public policy; or (4) the introduction of new disabilities.
    The first category includes, for example, mental retardation that 
results from high-risk births, (President's Committee on Mental 
Retardation, The New Morbidity, 1993) or spinal cord injury resulting 
from interpersonal violence (Stover, unpublished communique to NIDRR, 
1994). The second category is exemplified by higher incidence and 
prevalence of activity limitations due to impairments typically 
correlated with increased age. (LaPlante, 1995). Examples include the 
onset of sensory loss in older persons, or certain strength-limiting 
musculoskeletal or neuromuscular diseases. A subset of this category is 
represented by the acquisition of secondary disabilities or new 
exacerbations of existing disabilities among individuals with 
disabilities as they age, for example post-polio syndrome or 
deterioration of stressed joints. The third category of emerging 
disabilities may have iatrogenic causes or may result from 
inappropriate societal interventions such as institutionalization or 
segregation during which the acquisition of social skills and learning 
opportunities are forfeited. Social policies such as 
deinstitutionalization into inadequately supportive environments, while 
not necessarily creating new disabilities, have led to different 
manifestations of problems associated with long-term mental illness, 
including homelessness, abuse, involvement in the criminal justice 
system, and the acquisition of additional disabilities and health 
problems. Other disabilities, particularly secondary disabilities, may 
result from policy decisions that result in inadequate preventive 
services. The final category includes persons with newly emergent 
disabilities, most

[[Page 28439]]

clearly illustrated by persons living with HIV disease and AIDS, and by 
environmental or workplace disabilities such as repetitive motion 
syndrome, environmental allergies, and various hidden disabilities.
    The causes of each of these categories of disabilities are such 
that emergent disabilities tend to be differentially distributed 
throughout the population in ways that are not typical of other common 
disabilities. While there is a strong correlation between disability 
and poverty generally, (LaPlante, 1995; The New Morbidity, 1993; 
McNeil, 1995; Aday, 1993) these emergent disabilities appear to be 
inordinately concentrated among the poor, minorities, youth, the aged, 
the poorly educated, and those who already have other disabilities.
    The underlying causes of these emergent disabilities may be socio-
behavioral, environmental, or socio-economic, but are most often a 
combination of these elements. Among the most important factors 
creating this ``emerging universe of disability'' are interpersonal 
violence, such as shootings, battery, or child abuse; low-birthweight 
and other high-risk births, often to mothers who are young teenagers, 
substance abusers, HIV-positive, or with poor prenatal care; aging, 
with or without prior existing disabilities; high risk behaviors 
involving substance abuse or sexual activities; and secondary 
conditions, often resulting from inadequate acute or long-term care.
    The nation lacks a clear understanding of the existence of these 
disabilities, which are closely related to an individual's position in 
the social structure, and certainly does not comprehend the possible 
consequences for the disability service systems of a new population of 
disabled persons from among what one author calls ``the vulnerable.'' 
(Aday, 1993). There are many gaps in the knowledge base about risk 
factors associated with the emergence of disability, as there are no 
comprehensive surveillance systems or epidemiological studies.
Priority
    The Secretary will establish a research and demonstration project 
to: (1) Define and characterize the emerging universe of disability; 
(2) assess the incidence and prevalence of these ``new universe'' 
disabilities; (3) identify etiologies associated with these 
disabilities; and (4) evaluate the implications of these emerging 
disabilities for service systems and social policy. In addition to 
activities proposed by the applicant to carry out these purposes, the 
proposed R&D project shall carry out the following activities:
    <bullet> Determine and test methods, using a range of existing 
databases, to estimate and describe the emerging universe of disability 
both for the present and in the future, and assess the feasibility of 
using existing, or establishing new, surveillance systems to predict 
and characterize future emerging disabilities;
    <bullet> Assess the particular needs of the emerging universe, both 
now and for the future, for vocational rehabilitation, special 
education, medical and psychosocial rehabilitation, independent living 
services, and assistive technology services, as well as for community-
based supports, income supports, and medical assistance;
    <bullet> Analyze the implications for the selection, preparation, 
and training of personnel, including professionals and peers, to 
provide services to the emerging universe, and for the ways in which 
services should be delivered;
    <bullet> Design a practical and prioritized agenda for a future 
research program to develop interventions and policy approaches to 
address the disability-related problems of various segments of the 
emerging universe; and
    <bullet> Convene a conference of individuals both within and 
outside of the disability field to discuss the Center's findings and 
their implications.

APPLICABLE PROGRAM REGULATIONS: 34 CFR parts 350 and 351.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.

Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTCs)

    Authority for the RRTC program of NIDRR is contained in section 
204(b)(2) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760-
762). Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public and 
private organizations, including institutions of higher education and 
Indian tribes or tribal organizations, for coordinated research and 
training activities. These entities must be of sufficient size, scope, 
and quality to effectively carry out the activities of the Center in an 
efficient manner consistent with appropriate State and Federal laws. 
They must demonstrate the ability to carry out the training activities 
either directly or through another entity that can provide such 
training.
    The Secretary may make awards for up to 60 months through grants or 
cooperative agreements. The purpose of the awards is for planning and 
conducting research, training, demonstrations, and related activities 
leading to the development of methods, procedures, and devices that 
will benefit individuals with disabilities, especially those with the 
most severe disabilities.
    Under the regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 352.32) the 
Secretary may establish research priorities by reserving funds to 
support particular research activities.

Description of the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center Program

    RRTCs are operated in collaboration with institutions of higher 
education or providers of rehabilitation services or other appropriate 
services. RRTCs serve as centers of national excellence and national or 
regional resources for providers and individuals with disabilities and 
the parents, family members, guardians, advocates or authorized 
representatives of the individuals.
    RRTCs conduct coordinated and advanced programs of research in 
rehabilitation targeted toward the production of new knowledge to 
improve rehabilitation methodology and service delivery systems, 
alleviate or stabilize disabling conditions, and promote maximum social 
and economic independence of individuals with disabilities.
    RRTCs provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to assist individuals to more effectively provide 
rehabilitation services. They also provide training, including 
graduate, pre-service, and in-service training, for rehabilitation 
research personnel and other rehabilitation personnel.
    RRTCs serve as informational and technical assistance resources to 
providers, individuals with disabilities, and the parents, family 
members, guardians, advocates, or authorized representatives of these 
individuals through conferences, workshops, public education programs, 
in-service training programs and similar activities.
    NIDRR encourages all Centers to involve individuals with 
disabilities and minorities as recipients in research training, as well 
as clinical training.
    Applicants have considerable latitude in proposing the specific 
research and related projects they will undertake to achieve the 
designated outcomes; however, the regulatory selection criteria for the 
program (34 CFR 352.31) state that the Secretary reviews the extent to 
which applicants justify their choice of research projects in terms of 
the relevance to the priority and to the needs of individuals with 
disabilities. The Secretary also reviews the extent to which applicants 
present a scientific methodology that includes reasonable

[[Page 28440]]

hypotheses, methods of data collection and analysis, and a means to 
evaluate the extent to which project objectives have been achieved.
    The Department is particularly interested in ensuring that the 
expenditure of public funds is justified by the execution of intended 
activities and the advancement of knowledge and, thus, has built this 
accountability into the selection criteria. Not later than three years 
after the establishment of any RRTC, NIDRR will conduct one or more 
reviews of the activities and achievements of the Center. In accordance 
with the provisions of 34 CFR 75.253(a), continued funding depends at 
all times on satisfactory performance and accomplishment.

General

    The following requirements apply to these RRTCs pursuant to the 
priorities unless noted otherwise:
    Each RRTC must conduct an integrated program of research to develop 
solutions to problems confronted by individuals with disabilities.
    Each RRTC must conduct a coordinated and advanced program of 
training in rehabilitation research, including training in research 
methodology and applied research experience, that will contribute to 
the number of qualified researchers working in the area of 
rehabilitation research.
    Each Center must disseminate and encourage the use of new 
rehabilitation knowledge. They must publish all materials for 
dissemination or training in alternate formats to make them accessible 
to individuals with a range of disabling conditions.
    Each RRTC must involve individuals with disabilities and, if 
appropriate, their family members, as well as rehabilitation service 
providers in planning and implementing the research and training 
programs, in interpreting and disseminating the research findings, and 
in evaluating the Center.

Priorities

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet one of the following priorities. 
The Secretary will fund under these competitions only applications that 
meet one of these absolute priorities:

Priority 1: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who Are 
Blind or Visually Impaired

Background
    In 1990, approximately 17 out of every 1,000 persons in the 
civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States were 
unable to see to read ordinary newspaper print even when wearing 
glasses. Of these 4.3 million individuals approximately 515,000 were 
blind in both eyes (K.A. Nelson and E. Dimitrova, Severe Visual 
Impairment in the United States and in Each State, 1990, Journal of 
Visual Impairment and Blindness, March 1993, 80). The number of persons 
with a visual impairment that substantially limits one or more major 
life activity is estimated to be 1.3 million (M. Laplante and D. 
Carlson, Disability in the United States: Prevalence and Causes, 1992, 
Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training Center, 
University of California, San Francisco, October, 1995). These 
individuals are the primary target audience for this RRTC.
    For the years 1991 and 1992, of the 4.57 million persons 21 to 64 
years old who had some functional limitation seeing words or letters, 
2.086 million individuals or 45.6 percent were employed, while 144,000 
individuals, or 25.6 percent of those who were totally unable to see 
words or letters, were employed. By comparison, for the same age group, 
80.5 percent of all individuals without a disability were employed (J. 
McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992, Household Economic 
Studies, P70-33, December 1993). Among the cases closed by State 
vocational rehabilitation agencies as non-rehabilitated or 
rehabilitated in 1993, 25,488 individuals were blind or visually 
impaired. Of those individuals, 18,273 or 71.7 percent, were 
rehabilitated (Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), Caseload 
Services data, 1993).
    In order to improve the employment status of individuals who are 
blind and visually impaired, there is a need to identify barriers to 
achieving employment outcomes and to develop new and improved 
rehabilitation techniques that rehabilitation service providers can use 
to address these barriers. In addition, rehabilitation service 
providers and employers must be knowledgeable about job accommodations. 
Rehabilitation service providers and employers should have the ability 
to assist individuals who are blind or visually impaired to overcome 
not only physical barriers, but also technological barriers to the 
emerging electronic information infrastructure.
    Computer technology is changing rapidly. Rehabilitation 
professionals must have up-to-date knowledge of accessible computer 
technology for individuals who are blind or visually impaired. RSA has 
determined that State vocational rehabilitation agency staff need 
training on state-of-the-art computer technology for individuals who 
are blind or visually impaired. To address this need, RSA is 
collaborating with NIDRR to support the training of State VR agency 
staff through this RRTC, using a train the trainer model.
    Since 1936 the Randolph-Sheppard Act program has been a source of 
employment for individuals who are blind. The program enables 
individuals who are blind to become licensed facility managers and 
operate vending facilities on Federal property. According to RSA, in 
fiscal year 1994, 3,524 blind vendors operated 3,419 vending facilities 
under the Randolph-Sheppard Act program. The program generated $401 
million in gross earnings with vendors averaging an annual income of 
$26,478.
    In order to ensure that the vending facilities are competitive, an 
assessment should be undertaken to identify areas of the program that 
may be improved by training State Business Enterprise program 
counselors and licensed facility managers.

Priority 1

    The Secretary will establish an RRTC on vocational rehabilitation 
services for individuals who are blind or visually impaired that will: 
(1) Investigate and document the employment status of individuals who 
are blind or visually impaired; (2) identify the barriers to employment 
that can be addressed by rehabilitation service providers or employers, 
and develop or identify rehabilitation techniques or reasonable 
accommodations that address these barriers; (3) train rehabilitation 
professionals on new and effective rehabilitation techniques and 
accommodations; (4) develop a national information and resource 
referral data base for rehabilitation professionals and employers; and 
(5) identify the training needs of State Business Enterprise program 
counselors and licensed facility managers that will enable the vending 
facilities to be competitive, develop and deliver training programs to 
meet the identified needs, and evaluate the efficacy of the training.
    In carrying out the purposes of the priority, the RRTC shall:
    <bullet> Conduct at least three conferences to train State 
vocational rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology 
for individuals who are blind or visually impaired;
    <bullet> Solicit and utilize input from individuals who are blind 
or severely visually impaired in the planning, development, and 
implementation of the activities of the RRTC as much as possible; and

[[Page 28441]]

    <bullet> Coordinate its research efforts with other NIDRR grantees 
that address vocational rehabilitation in general, as well as those 
that address the needs of individuals who are blind or visually 
impaired.

Priority 2: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are 
Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Background
    In 1991-1992 there were approximately 10.9 million persons age 15 
and older with a ``functional limitation hearing normal conversation'' 
and an additional 924,000 persons who were ``unable to hear normal 
conversation'' (J. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992, 
Household Economic Studies, P70-33, December 1993). The number of 
persons with a hearing impairment that substantially limits one or more 
major life activity is estimated to be 1.2 million (M. Laplante and D. 
Carlson, Disability in the United States: Prevalence and Causes, 1992, 
Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training Center, 
University of California, San Francisco, October, 1995). These 
individuals are the primary target audience for this RRTC.
    For the years 1991 and 1992, of all persons 21 to 64 years old who 
had some functional limitation hearing normal conversation, 3,335,000 
individuals or 63.6 percent were employed, while 189,000 individuals, 
or 58.2 percent of those who were totally unable to hear normal 
conversation, were employed. By comparison, for the same age group, 
80.5 percent of all individuals without a disability were employed (J. 
McNeil, 1993). Among the cases closed by State vocational 
rehabilitation agencies as non-rehabilitated or rehabilitated in 1993, 
21,888 individuals were deaf or hard of hearing. Of those individuals, 
15,901, or 72.6 percent, were rehabilitated (Rehabilitation Services 
Administration (RSA), Caseload Services data, 1993). Although the 
Federal vocational rehabilitation system successfully serves and 
rehabilitates significant numbers of individuals who are deaf or hard 
of hearing, new knowledge is needed to address the vocational 
rehabilitation needs of specific subgroups within this population such 
as late-deafened adults, individuals who have limited English 
proficiency, individuals who are functionally illiterate, and 
individuals with co-existing disabilities, including psychiatric 
disabilities and mental retardation.
    ``Low-functioning'' deaf individuals often do not have 
comprehensive rehabilitation training and related services accessible 
and available to them. This segment of the deaf population--sometimes 
called ``low achieving,'' ``multiply disabled deaf,'' or 
``traditionally underserved deaf''--requires long-term and intensive 
habilitative and rehabilitative services. These individuals exhibit 
deficits in vocational skills, independent living skills, manual and 
oral communication skills, social skills, and academic skills, and many 
have significant secondary disabilities. Many are from 
socioeconomically and culturally disadvantaged backgrounds, and many 
are from ethnic or linguistic minorities. Services to this population 
are scarce and fragmented. In addition to understanding the social, 
vocational, and educational implications of the disability, vocational 
rehabilitation service providers must also be able to communicate with 
the individuals, often through less than optimal means, such as 
rudimentary sign language.
    The application of emerging technology is expected to play a 
pivotal role in improving the vocational rehabilitation and employment 
status of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. This new technology 
will address a wide-range of workplace accommodation issues including, 
but not limited to, communication, safety, and literacy.

Priority 2

    The Secretary will establish an RRTC on the vocational 
rehabilitation of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing that 
will: (1) Investigate and document the employment status of individuals 
who are deaf or hard of hearing by age, gender, ethnic or linguistic 
background, education, level of impairment, age at on-set of impairment 
(particularly late-deafened adults), and co-existing conditions; (2) 
identify the barriers to entering or maintaining employment that can be 
addressed by vocational rehabilitation service providers or employers, 
and identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or 
reasonable accommodations that address these barriers, including those 
related to literacy skills and those using emerging assistive 
technology such as assistive listening devices, telecommunications 
equipment, and remote access technology; (3) train rehabilitation 
professionals, including peer advocates, on new and effective 
rehabilitation techniques and accommodations, and as appropriate 
include consumers and employers in the training on accommodations; (4) 
develop and disseminate consumer-oriented materials and develop a 
national information and resource referral data base for rehabilitation 
professionals and employers; and (5) identify the range of vocational 
rehabilitation services and service resources required to meet the 
needs of low-functioning deaf individuals.
    In carrying out the purposes of the priority, the RRTC shall:
    <bullet> Examine patterns of vocational rehabilitation service 
usage by low-functioning deaf individuals with specific attention to 
those from diverse cultural backgrounds;
    <bullet> Solicit and utilize input from individuals who are deaf or 
hard of hearing, including low-functioning deaf individuals, in the 
planning, development, and implementation of the activities of the 
grant as much as possible; and
    <bullet> Coordinate its research efforts with grantees from NIDRR, 
OSEP, and RSA that address vocational rehabilitation in general, as 
well as those that address the needs of individuals who are deaf or 
hard of hearing.

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR parts 350 and 352.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.

Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC)

    Authority for the RERC program of NIDRR is contained in section 
204(b)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760-
762). Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public and 
private agencies and organizations, including institutions of higher 
education, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations, to conduct 
research, demonstration, and training activities regarding 
rehabilitation technology in order to enhance opportunities for meeting 
the needs of, and addressing the barriers confronted by, individuals 
with disabilities in all aspects of their lives. An RERC must be 
operated by or in collaboration with an institution of higher education 
or a nonprofit organization.
    Under the regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 353.32) the 
Secretary may establish research priorities by reserving funds to 
support particular research activities.

Description of the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Program

    RERCs carry out research or demonstration activities by: (1) 
Developing and disseminating innovative methods of applying advanced 
technology, scientific achievement, and psychological and social 
knowledge to (a) solve

[[Page 28442]]

rehabilitation problems and remove environmental barriers, and (b) 
study new or emerging technologies, products, or environments; (2) 
demonstrating and disseminating (a) innovative models for the delivery 
of cost-effective rehabilitation technology services to rural and urban 
areas, and (b) other scientific research to assist in meeting the 
employment and independent living needs of individuals with severe 
disabilities; or (3) facilitating service delivery systems change 
through (a) the development, evaluation, and dissemination of consumer-
responsive and individual and family-centered innovative models for the 
delivery to both rural and urban areas of innovative cost-effective 
rehabilitation technology services, and (b) other scientific research 
to assist in meeting the employment and independent needs of 
individuals with severe disabilities.
    Each RERC must provide training opportunities to individuals, 
including individuals with disabilities, to become researchers of 
rehabilitation technology and practitioners of rehabilitation 
technology in conjunction with institutions of higher education and 
nonprofit organizations.

General

    The following requirements apply to this RERC pursuant to this 
absolute priority unless noted otherwise:
    The RERC must have the capability to design, build, and test 
prototype devices and assist in the transfer of successful solutions to 
the marketplace. The RERC must evaluate the efficacy and safety of its 
new products, instrumentation, or assistive devices.
    The RERC must provide graduate-level research training to build 
capacity for engineering research in the rehabilitation field and to 
provide training in the applications of new technology to service 
providers and to individuals with disabilities and their families.
    The RERC must develop all training materials in formats that will 
be accessible to individuals with various types of disabilities and 
communication modes, and widely disseminate findings and products to 
individuals with disabilities and their families and representatives, 
service providers, manufacturers and distributors, and other 
appropriate target populations.
    The RERC must involve individuals with disabilities and, if 
appropriate, their family members in planning and implementing the 
research, development, and training programs, in interpreting and 
disseminating the research findings, and in evaluating the Center.
    The RERC must share information and data, and, as appropriate, 
collaborate on research and training with other NIDRR-supported 
grantees including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities 
Act (ADA) Disability and Business Technical Assistance Centers and 
other related RERCs and RRTCs. The RERC must work closely with the RERC 
on Technology Evaluation and Transfer at the State University of New 
York at Buffalo.

Priority

    Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute 
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The 
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet 
this absolute priority:

Priority: Assistive Technology for Older Persons With Disabilities

Background
    In 1991-1992, of 30.68 million persons who were 65 years old and 
over, 16.54 million or 53.9 percent had a disability. Of those 16.54 
million with a disability, 15.21 million persons had a ``functional 
limitation'' performing activities such as seeing, hearing, reaching, 
or walking (J. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992, 
Household Economic Studies, P70-33, December 1993). The prevalence of 
medical, neurological and orthopedic impairments increases with the age 
of the population. It is estimated that over half of all Americans over 
seventy years of age have one or more disabilities (McNeil, 1993). 
Also, as a result of improved life-long health care and expanded 
employment and educational opportunities, increased numbers of persons 
with severe disabilities will become part of our elderly population and 
experience new or changed assistive technology needs.
    While assistive technology has been used in rehabilitation to help 
reduce the adverse effects of disability, it is only beginning to be 
used effectively to address problems in geriatric rehabilitation. An 
RERC on assistive technology for older persons with disabilities will 
address the application of technology to meet the special needs of 
older persons with disabilities and their caregivers.
    Many devices or techniques aimed at ameliorating specific 
disabilities are designed to augment or take advantage of compensatory 
abilities. However, multiple and gradual changes related to aging may 
leave older persons without one or more areas of strength with which to 
compensate for other functional losses. For example, an older person 
requiring a wheelchair, because of gradual loss of muscle mass, may not 
have, or may not be able to develop, the requisite arm strength to use 
grab bars to assist them in transferring in and out of their 
wheelchair.
    Efforts to develop and disseminate technological aids to older 
persons with functional limitations must be conducted in the context of 
using effective information dissemination strategies to reach older 
persons. It is also necessary to deliver effective training in the use 
and maintenance of the technology that is prescribed. It is 
particularly important to make information on assistive technology for 
older persons with disabilities available in relation to the major 
activities of work, personal and health care, and leisure.
    Assistive technology can address the physical stress that is 
problematic for caregivers of older persons with disabilities. Many of 
these caregivers are spouses who are elderly themselves. Premature 
admission to institutional care is commonly caused by a crisis of the 
caregiver rather than by a sudden deterioration in the health or 
abilities of the older persons with a disability. Typically, the 
caregiver becomes injured or sick and finds it impossible to continue 
to do the lifting and other demanding physical tasks. Assistive 
technology that can assist the caregiver can have a major impact on 
eliminating the need or delaying the time for institutional placement 
of an older person with a disability.

Priority

    The Secretary will establish an RERC on assistive technology for 
older persons with disabilities for the purposes of: (1) Identifying 
the needs for assistive technology by older persons with disabilities; 
(2) developing design modifications to existing assistive technology 
devices and disseminating these modifications to developers of 
assistive technology; (3) developing and evaluating unique assistive 
technology devices that otherwise will not be developed by the field; 
(4) identifying the problems of assistive technology service delivery 
utilization, including maintenance, and developing and testing service 
delivery models to address those problems; and (5) developing and 
delivering training and technical assistance to rehabilitation service 
providers, providers of general services to older persons, and 
consumers, on sources and uses of assistive technology for older 
persons with disabilities and caregivers.

[[Page 28443]]

    In addition to activities proposed by the applicant to carry out 
these purposes, the RERC shall:
    <bullet> Develop and implement an information dissemination 
initiative to address utilization problems, including targeting 
disability and elderly organizations as well as assistive technology 
service providers;
    <bullet> Coordinate and share information with NIDRR-funded RRTCs 
on Rehabilitation and Aging, and with programs funded under the 
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 
1988; and
    <bullet> Establish a collaborative relationship with the RERC on 
Technology Evaluation and Transfer and the RERC on Accessible Housing 
and Universal Design.

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR Parts 350 and 353.

    Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 84.133A, Research 
and Demonstration Projects, 84.133B, Rehabilitation Research and 
Training Center Program, 84.133E, Rehabilitation Engineering and 
Research Center Program)

    Dated: May 29, 1996.
Andrew Pepin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative 
Services.
[FR Doc. 96-13910 Filed 6-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>