34692 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices

appropriate FY 1996 funds for this

program until April 26, 1996. The

Secretary must make new awards no

later than September 30, 1996.

Moreover, the Safe and Drug-Free

Schools and Communities National

Programs statute is designed to address

emergency needs in drug and violence

prevention. Programs need to be

implemented as early as possible in the

1996–97 school year. Due to the delay

in the appropriation of FY 1996 funds,

it is now impracticable to receive public

comments and still allow FY 1996

awards to be made by September 30,

1996.

Intergovernmental Review

This program is subject to the

requirements of Executive Order 12372

(Intergovernmental Review of Federal

Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR

Part 79.

The objective of the Executive order is

to foster an intergovernmental

partnership and to strengthen

federalism by relying on processes

developed by State and local

governments for coordination and

review of proposed Federal financial

assistance.

In accordance with the order, this

document is intended to provide early

notification of the Department’s specific

plans and actions for this program.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131.

Dated: June 26, 1996.

Gerald N. Tirozzi,

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and

Secondary Education.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Number 84.184D Safe and Drug-Free

Schools and Communities Act Federal

Activities Grants Program)

Appendix—Empowerment Zones and

Enterprise Communities

Empowerment Zones (EZ)

Georgia: Atlanta

Illinois: Chicago

Kentucky: Kentucky Highlands*

Maryland: Baltimore

Michigan: Detroit

Mississippi: Mid Delta*

New York: Harlem, Bronx

Pennsylvania/New Jersey: Philadelphia,

Camden

Texas: Rio Grande Valley*

Supplemental Empowerment Zones (SEZ)

California: Los Angeles

Ohio: Cleveland

Enterprise Communities (EC)

Alabama: Birmingham

Alabama: Chambers County*

Alabama: Greene, Sumter Counties*

Arizona: Phoenix

Arizona: Arizona Border*

Arkansas: East Central*

Arkansas: Mississippi County*

Arkansas: Pulaski County

California: Imperial County*

California: Los Angeles, Huntington Park

California: San Diego

California: San Francisco, Bayview, Hunter’s

Point

California: Watsonville*

Colorado: Denver

Connecticut: Bridgeport

Connecticut: New Haven

Delaware: Wilmington

District of Columbia: Washington

Florida: Jackson County*

Florida: Tampa

Florida: Miami, Dade County

Georgia: Albany

Georgia: Central Savannah*

Georgia: Crisp, Dooley Counties*

Illinois: East St. Louis

Illinois: Springfield

Indiana: Indianapolis

Iowa: Des Moines

Kentucky: Louisville

Louisiana: Northeast Delta*

Louisiana: Macon Ridge*

Louisiana: New Orleans

Louisiana: Ouachita Parish

Massachusetts: Lowell

Massachusetts: Springfield

Michigan: Five Cap*

Michigan: Flint

Michigan: Muskegon

Minnesota: Minneapolis

Minnesota: St. Paul

Mississippi: Jackson

Mississippi: North Delta*

Missouri: East Prairie*

Missouri: St. Louis

Nebraska: Omaha

Nevada: Clarke County, Las Vegas

New Hampshire: Manchester

New Jersey: Newark

New Mexico: Albuquerque

New Mexico: Moro, Rico Arriba, Taos

Counties*

New York: Albany, Schenectady, Troy

New York: Buffalo

New York: Newburgh, Kingston

New York: Rochester

North Carolina: Charlotte

North Carolina: Halifax, Edgecombe, Wilson

Counties*

North Carolina: Robeson County*

Ohio: Akron

Ohio: Columbus

Ohio: Greater Portsmouth*

Oklahoma: Choctaw, McCurtain Counties*

Oklahoma: Oklahoma City

Oregon: Josephine*

Oregon: Portland

Pennsylvania: Harrisburg

Pennsylvania: Lock Haven*

Pennsylvania: Pittsburg

Rhode Island: Providence

South Carolina: Charleston

South Carolina: Williamsburg County*

South Dakota: Beadle, Spink Counties*

Tennessee: Fayette, Haywood Counties*

Tennessee: Memphis

Tennessee: Nashville

Tennessee/Kentucky: Scott, McCreary

Counties*

Texas: Dallas

Texas: El Paso

Texas: San Antonio

Texas: Watch

Utah: Ogden

Vermont: Burlington

Virginia: Accomack*

Virginia: Norfolk

Washington: Lower Yakima*

Washington: Seattle

Washington: Tacoma

West Virginia: West Central*

West Virginia: Huntington

West Virginia: McDowell*

Wisconsin: Milwaukee

*Denotes rural designee.

Enhanced Enterprise Communities (EEC)

California: Oakland

Massachusetts: Boston

Missouri/Kansas: Kansas City, Kansas City

Texas: Houston

[FR Doc. 96–16837 Filed 6–28–96; 9:01 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

[CFDA No.: 84.184D]

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities Federal Activities Grants

Program (Drug and Violence

Prevention); Notice Inviting

Applications for New Awards for Fiscal

Year (FY) 1996

Note to Applicants

This notice is a complete application

package. Together with the statute

authorizing the program and applicable

regulations governing the program,

including the Education Department

General Administrative Regulations

(EDGAR), the notice contains all of the

information, application forms, and

instructions needed to apply for a grant

under this competition.

Purpose of Program

To fund projects that develop and

implement, expand, or enhance

innovative programs designed to

accomplish one or more of the

following: (1) infuse research-based

knowledge about ‘‘what works’’ into the

design, development, and

implementation of school-based

strategies to prevent drug use among

youth; (2) remove firearms and other

weapons from schools; (3) prevent

truancy and address the needs of youth

who are out of the education

mainstream, or (4) prevent violent,

aggressive, intimidating, or other

disruptive behavior arising out of

bullying, sexual harassment, or other

cause.

Eligible Applicants: Public and

private nonprofit organizations and

individuals.

Deadline for Transmittal of

Applications: August 2, 1996.

Deadline for Intergovernmental

Review: September 2, 1996.

Available Funds: $10,000,000.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34693

Estimated Range of Awards:

$300,000–$500,000.

Estimated Average Size of Awards:

$400,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 25.

Note: The Department is not bound by any

estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 24 months.

Applicable Regulations

(a) The Education Department General

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) as

follows:

(1) 34 CFR Part 74 (Administration of

Grants to Institutions of Higher

Education, Hospitals, and Nonprofit

Organizations).

(2) 34 CFR Part 75 (Direct Grant

Programs).

(3) 34 CFR Part 77 (Definitions that

Apply to Department Regulations).

(4) 34 CFR Part 79 (Intergovernmental

Review of Department of Education

Programs and Activities).

(5) 34 CFR Part 80 (Uniform

Administrative Requirements for Grants

and Cooperative Agreements to State

and Local Governments).

(6) 34 CFR Part 81 (General Education

Provisions Act—Enforcement).

(7) 34 CFR Part 82 (New Restrictions

on Lobbying).

(8) 34 CFR Part 85 (Governmentwide

Debarment and Suspension

(Nonprocurement) and

Governmentwide Requirements for

Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)).

(9) 34 CFR Part 86 (Drug-Free Schools

and Campuses).

(Note: As of July 1, 1995, Part 86 of EDGAR

no longer applies to SEAs and LEAs. It

continues to apply to IHEs. This change

results from the Improving America’s

Schools Act of 1994, Pub.L. 103–382.)

Description of Program

The seventh National Education Goal

provides that, by the year 2000, all

schools in America will be free of drugs

and violence and the unauthorized

presence of firearms and alcohol and

offer a disciplined environment that is

conducive to learning. The State grant

portion of the Safe and Drug-Free

Schools and Communities Act

(SDFSCA) provides funding to 97

percent of school districts in the nation

to assist them in preventing violence in

and around schools, promoting safety

and discipline for students, and

preventing the illegal use of alcohol,

tobacco, and other drugs. The Safe and

Drug Free Schools Federal Activities

Grants Program reinforces that effort by

supporting the development of

innovative programs that (1)

demonstrate effective new methods of

ensuring safe and drug-free schools and

communities, and (2) ultimately will

provide models of proven effective

practice that will assist schools and

communities around the nation to

improve their programs under the

SDFSCA.

Public and private nonprofit

organizations and individuals receiving

funds under this program may not use

funds for construction (except for minor

remodeling needed to carry out the

activities described in the application)

and medical services, drug treatment or

rehabilitation, except for pupil services

or referral to treatment for students who

are victims of or witnesses to crime or

who use alcohol, tobacco, or drugs.

The term ‘nonprofit’, as applied to a

school, agency, organization, or

institution means a school, agency,

organization, or institution owned and

operated by one or more nonprofit

corporations or associations, no part of

the net earnings of which inures, or may

lawfully inure, to the benefit of any

private shareholder or individual.

In making awards under this grant

program, the Secretary may take into

consideration the geographic

distribution and diversity of activities

addressed by the projects, in addition to

the rank order of applications.

Background

Creating safe, disciplined, and drugfree learning environments for all

students is essential to those students

achieving to high academic standards

and schools promoting educational

excellence. It is clear, however, that in

too many of our schools, students,

teachers, and staff feel threatened, are

abused, or are victims of violent acts. In

addition, drug use among young people

threatens their health and their ability to

master new information. This

announcement addresses four priorities

designed to create safe, disciplined, and

drug-free learning environments for all

students.

Priority 1 seeks to infuse researchbased knowledge about ‘‘what works’’

into the design, development and

implementation of school-based

strategies to prevent drug use among

youth. This priority supports

collaboration between local educational

agencies and research institutions,

including institutions of higher

education, to develop and implement

effective research-based programs and

strategies to prevent youth drug use.

Drug use by adolescents has increased

significantly in each of the last several

years, reversing downward trends noted

between 1979 and 1991. The 1995

‘‘Monitoring the Future’’ study

conducted by the Institute for Social

Research at the University of Michigan

documented the fourth consecutive year

of increases in drug use among 8th

graders and the third consecutive year

of increases among 10th and 12th

graders.

Equally alarming, two important

determinants of drug use, perceived

harmfulness of drugs and peer

disapproval of drug use, are moving in

the wrong direction. The proportion of

students seeing drugs as dangerous

continued to decline in 1995, while the

norms against using illicit drugs

generally have been softening in recent

years. These trends have lead Dr. Lloyd

Johnston, principal investigator for the

Monitoring the Future survey, to suggest

that we are in a ‘‘relapse’’ phase in the

longer-term epidemic of youth drug use.

Among the reasons that may account for

this relapse are (1) decreased national

attention to drug use among youth, and

(2) failure to design and implement drug

prevention programs of demonstrated

effectiveness based on findings from

research.

This priority directs funds to the

development and implementation of

innovative, research-based drug

prevention strategies for effectively

dealing with alcohol and other drug

problems identified by schools and

school districts. Strategies to be

employed by applicants could vary from

implementing or enhancing prevention

curricula to integrating drug and alcohol

prevention activities into the overall

operation of the school and redesigning

professional development, but should

be based upon current, up-to-date

research.

Examples of prevention approaches

that research has demonstrated as

effective, and that applicants might

propose to develop and implement, are

social influence approaches that include

resistance skills training, and

approaches that focus on personal and

social skills training. Gilbert Botvin,

Director of the Institute for Prevention

Research at the New York HospitalCornell Medical Center, in a 1992 article

entitled ‘‘School-Based and CommunityBased Prevention Approaches,’’ notes

that resistance skills approaches

‘‘generally teach students how to

recognize situations in which they will

have a high likelihood of experiencing

peer pressure to smoke, drink, or use

drugs so that these high-risk situations

can be avoided. In addition, students are

taught how to handle situations in

which they might experience peer

pressure to engage in substance use.’’

Personal and Social Skills training

models tend to be more comprehensive

than other approaches. According to

Botvin, they are based on ‘‘social

learning’’ theory and ‘‘problem
34694 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices

behavior’’ theory. ‘‘Substance abuse is

conceptualized as a socially learned and

functional behavior, resulting from the

interplay of social and personal factors.

Substance use behavior is learned

through modeling and reinforcement

and is influenced by cognitions,

attitudes, and beliefs * * *. The intent

of these programs is to teach the kind of

generic skills for coping with life that

will have a relatively broad application

* * * in contrast to the resistance skills

training approaches which are designed

to teach skills with a problem-specific

focus.’’

Priority 2 invites applications for

innovative, research-based strategies to

remove firearms and other weapons

from schools. A small but growing

number of students find bringing a

weapon to school acceptable. A Centers

for Disease Control study reports that, in

1990, 1 in 24 students carried a gun to

school in the 30 days before the study,

and by 1993 the incidence had risen to

1 in 12 students. A 1993 Louis Harris

poll showed that 35 percent of children

aged 6 to 12 fear their lives will be cut

short by gun violence. Knives or other

devices used to inflict intentional injury

also are increasingly evident in schools.

The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994

requires States that receive funds under

the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to have

in effect a law requiring local

educational agencies to expel from

school for a period of not less than one

year students who are determined to

have brought a weapon to school. Local

educational agencies that receive ESEA

funds are required to refer to the

criminal justice or juvenile delinquency

system any student who brings a firearm

or weapon to school. Under the GunFree Schools Act, ‘‘weapon’’ means a

firearm. For purposes of this grant

program, however, a weapon may also

be a knife, club, or other device used to

inflict intentional injury.

Priority 3 encourages innovative,

research-based programs to prevent

truancy and address the needs of youth

who are out of the education

mainstream. For too many of our young

people, regular school attendance and

high school graduation are no longer the

norm. In addition to truants, youth out

of the education mainstream include

dropouts, children who are afraid to go

to school, children who have been

suspended or expelled, and children in

the juvenile justice system who need to

maintain or enhance their educational

status and be reintegrated into the

school system upon their release from

residential placement. Among the

reasons for truancy that have been

identified are student drug use, violence

in or near the school, association with

friends who are truant or absent, lack of

family support for regular school

attendance, and inability to keep pace

with academic requirements.

The social and personal costs of

failure to attend school are clear.

Truancy and dropping out of school are

significant risk factors for delinquency

and eventual adult criminality. In 1992,

on a national basis, juveniles accounted

for 18 percent of all violent crime arrests

and 33 percent of all serious property

crime reports. Many of the arrests occur

between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday

through Friday when these juveniles

should be in school.

Priority 4 addresses innovative,

research-based approaches to preventing

violent, aggressive, intimidating, or

other disruptive behavior arising from

bullying, sexual harassment, or other

cause. Creating a safe and disciplined

school environment that is conducive to

learning is critical to achieving high

standards for all students and

developing a highly skilled and

motivated workforce able to compete in

a global economy.

When violent, aggressive,

intimidating, or other disruptive

behavior occurs in classrooms, on

school grounds, or in the community,

teachers are diverted from their primary

task of teaching, students are unable to

achieve to their full potential, and

parents may fear to send their children

to school. Bullying behavior, which may

manifest itself at an early age, presents

an important challenge for educators

and other youth-serving professionals.

Evidence suggests that schoolyard

bullies who are not taught how to

behave and cope with frustration are

very likely headed for a lifetime of

failure and involvement in the justice

system. Research shows that a

disproportionately high number of these

children underachieve in school or drop

out, perform below potential throughout

their careers, land in prison for

committing adult crimes, and become

abusive spouses and parents. The earlier

young people begin to exhibit problem

behaviors, the greater the risk that they

will become serious chronic delinquents

and substance-abusing or alcoholic

individuals. Victimization also is a

serious problem because it can be a

major distraction from the whole

educational process. Bullying affects

school attendance and the overall

campus climate and safety. Victims

understandably fear school itself and

the abuse they know awaits them there.

Violent, aggressive, intimidating, or

other disruptive behavior arising out of

sexual harassment undermines the

ability of schools to provide a safe and

equitable learning or workplace

environment. According to a 1993

survey by the American Association of

University Women (‘‘Hostile

Hallways’’), 85 percent of girls and 76

percent of boys surveyed say they have

experienced unwanted and unwelcome

sexual behavior that interferes with

their lives. Among the outcomes of

sexual harassment are not wanting to

attend school, decreased class

participation, greater difficulty paying

attention in school, lower grades, and

feeling afraid or scared.

Priorities

The priorities in the notice of final

priorities for this program, as published

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal

Register and repeated below, apply to

this competition.

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

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities Act of 1994, the Secretary

gives an absolute preference to

applications that meet one or more of

the following priorities. The Secretary

funds under this competition only

applications that meet one or more of

these absolute priorities.

Note: The purpose of these priorities is to

give applicants flexibility to develop and

implement programs that are most responsive

to local school districts’ identified needs for

drug and violence prevention activities.

Applicants must address at least one of the

following priorities and may address more

than one.

Absolute Priority 1—Infusing

research-based knowledge about ‘‘what

works’’ into the design, development

and implementation of school-based

strategies to prevent drug use among

youth.

Applicants proposing a project under

this priority must—

(1) Describe the activities that will be

implemented and explain how they are

based on research and best practices,

how they will lead to sustained

improvements in student results and the

school environment, and how they will

be cost-effective and replicable;

(2) Identify the age groups to be

served and describe how the proposed

activities are appropriate for the target

population;

(3) Provide evidence of collaboration

between a local educational agency

(LEA) and a research institution in the

design and implementation of activities,

including a description of the roles and

responsibilities of each; and

(4) Identify performance goals for the

project and provide a description of

how progress toward achieving goals

will be measured.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34695

Absolute Priority 2—Removing

Firearms and other Weapons from

School.

Applicants proposing a project under

this priority must—

(1) Describe the activities that will be

implemented and explain how they are

based on research and best practices,

how they will lead to sustained

improvements in student results and the

school environment, and how they will

be cost-effective and replicable;

(2) Describe techniques the applicant

will use to identify and remove firearms

and other weapons that are brought into

school;

(3) Provide information that

demonstrates the extent to which the

applicant has involved local, State, and/

or Federal law enforcement agencies, as

appropriate, in the development and

implementation of innovative strategies

to prevent firearms and other weapons

from coming into school;

(4) Describe how the applicant will

provide for referrals to the juvenile

justice system of youths who are found

to possess a firearm, consistent with the

provisions of the Gun-Free Schools Act;

and

(5) Identify performance goals for the

project and provide a description of

how progress toward achieving goals

will be measured.

Absolute Priority 3—Preventing

Truancy and Addressing the Needs of

Youth Who are Out of the Education

Mainstream.

Applicants proposing a project under

this priority must—

(1) Describe the activities that will be

implemented and explain how they are

based on research and best practices,

how they will lead to sustained

improvements in student results and the

school environment, and how they will

be cost-effective and replicable;

(2) Describe the problem that will be

addressed including an assessment of

the number of students who will benefit

from the project;

(3) Indicate how the activities are

appropriate for returning truant and

other youth who are out of the

education mainstream to the classroom

and ensuring their educational progress;

(4) Provide information on the extent

to which the following will be involved

in the development and implementation

of activities funded by this grant:

parents, students, local law enforcement

officials, including, as appropriate,

juvenile justice authorities, and other

youth-serving organizations in the

community; and

(5) Identify performance goals for the

project and provide a description of

how progress toward achieving goals

will be measured.

Absolute Priority 4: Preventing

Violent, Aggressive, Intimidating or

Other Disruptive Behavior Arising from

Bullying, Sexual Harassment or Other

Cause.

Applicants proposing a project under

this priority must—

(1) Describe the activities that will be

implemented and explain how they are

based on research and best practices,

how they will lead to sustained

improvements in student results and the

school environment, and how they will

be cost-effective and replicable;

(2) Describe the behaviors that the

program seeks to correct, including an

assessment of the types and frequency

of violent, aggressive, intimidating, or

other disruptive behavior among youth

to be served;

(3) Identify the child development

framework used to identify appropriate

strategies for intervening in violent,

aggressive, intimidating, or other

disruptive behavior;

(4) Provide information on the extent

to which educators, law enforcement

officials, parents, and students have

been involved in the development and

implementation of interventions for

youths who engage in violent,

aggressive, intimidating, or other

disruptive behaviors and for youths who

are victims of such behaviors; and

(5) Identify performance goals for the

project and provide a description of

how progress toward achieving goals

will be measured.

Competitive Preference Priority

Within the absolute priorities

specified in this notice, the Secretary,

under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) and the

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities Act, gives preference to

applications that meet the following

competitive priority. The Secretary

awards five (5) points to an application

that meets this competitive priority.

These points are in addition to any

points the application earns under the

evaluation criteria for the program.

(Note: The total number of points an

application may earn is 105):

Projects in an Empowerment Zone or

Enterprise Community

In order to meet the competitive

preference priority, applicants must—

(1) Propose projects that meet one or

more of the four absolute priorities for

this competition;

(2) Demonstrate that the project will

be carried out in an Empowerment Zone

(EZ) or Enterprise Community (EC)

designated in accordance with Section

1391 of the Internal Revenue Code

(IRC), as amended by Title XIII of the

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act

(OBRA) of 1993 or that it will primarily

serve students who reside in an EZ or

EC; and

(3) Describe how the proposed project

is linked to the EZ/EC strategic plan and

will be an integral part of the

Empowerment Zone or Enterprise

Community Program.

Selection Criteria

(a)(1) The Secretary uses the following

selection criteria to evaluate

applications for new grants under this

competition.

(2) The maximum score for all of

these criteria is 100 points.

(3) The maximum score for each

criterion is indicated in parentheses.

(b) The criteria.— (1) Meeting the

purposes of the authorizing statute. (30

Points) the Secretary reviews each

application to determine how well the

project will meet the purpose of the Safe

and Drug-Free Schools and

Communities Act of 1994 including

consideration of—

(i) The objectives of the project; and

(ii) How the objectives of the project

further the purposes of the Safe and

Drug-Free Schools and Communities

Act of 1994.

(2) Extent of need for the project. (30

points) The Secretary reviews each

application to determine the extent to

which the project meets specific needs

recognized in the Safe and Drug-Free

Schools and Communities Act of 1994,

including consideration of—

(i) The needs addressed by the

project;

(ii) How the applicant identified those

needs;

(iii) How those needs will be met by

the project; and

(iv) The benefits to be gained by

meeting those needs.

(3) Plan of Operation. (20 points) The

Secretary reviews each application to

determine the quality of the plan of

operation for the project, including—

(i) The quality of the design of the

project;

(ii) The extent to which the plan of

management is effective and ensures

proper and efficient administration of

the project;

(iii) How well the objectives of the

project relate to the purpose of the

program;

(iv) The quality of the applicant’s plan

to use its resources and personnel to

achieve each objective; and

(v) How the applicant will ensure that

project participants who are otherwise

eligible to participate are selected

without regard to race, color, national

origin, gender, age, or handicapping

condition.

(4) Quality of key personnel. (7

points)
34696 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices

(i) The Secretary reviews each

application to determine the quality of

key personnel the applicant plans to use

on the project, including—

(A) The qualifications of the project

director (if one is to be used);

(B) The qualifications of each of the

other key personnel to be used in the

project;

(C) The time that each person referred

to in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) (A) and (B) will

commit to the project; and

(D) How the applicant, as part of its

nondiscriminatory employment

practices, will ensure that its personnel

are selected for employment without

regard to race, color, national origin,

gender, age, or handicapping condition.

(ii) To determine personnel

qualifications under paragraphs (b)(4)(i)

(A) and (B), the Secretary considers—

(A) Experience and training in fields

related to the objectives of the project;

and

(B) Any other qualifications that

pertain to the quality of the project.

(5) Budget and cost effectiveness. (5

points) The Secretary reviews each

application to determine the extent to

which—

(i) The budget is adequate to support

the project; and

(ii) Costs are reasonable in relation to

the objectives of the project.

(6) Evaluation plan. (5 points) The

Secretary reviews each application to

determine the quality of the evaluation

plan for the project, including the extent

to which the applicant’s methods of

evaluation—

(i) Are appropriate to the project; and

(ii) To the extent possible, are

objective and produce data that are

quantifiable.

(Cross-reference: See 34 CFR 75.590

Evaluation by the grantee.)

(7) Adequacy of resources. (3 points)

The Secretary reviews each application

to determine the adequacy of the

resources that the applicant plans to

devote to the project, including

facilities, equipment, and supplies.

Intergovernmental Review of Federal

Programs

This program is subject to the

requirements of Executive Order 12372

(Intergovernmental Review of Federal

Programs) and the regulations in 34 CFR

Part 79.

The objective of the Executive order is

to foster an intergovernmental

partnership and to strengthen

federalism by relying on State and local

processes for State and local

government coordination and review of

proposed Federal financial assistance.

Applicants must contact the

appropriate State Single Point of

Contact to find out about, and to comply

with, the State’s process under

Executive Order 12372. Applicants

proposing to perform activities in more

than one State should immediately

contact the Single Point of Contact for

each of those States and follow the

procedure established in each State

under the Executive order. If you want

to know the name and address of any

State Single Point of Contact, see the list

published in the Federal Register on

August 10, 1995 (60 FR 40980 and

40981).

In States that have not established a

process or chosen a program for review,

State, areawide, regional, and local

entities may submit comments directly

to the Department.

Any State Process Recommendation

and other comments submitted by a

State Single Point of Contact and any

comments from State, areawide,

regional, and local entities must be

received by the date indicated in this

notice at the following address: The

Secretary, E.O.12372—CFDA # 84.184D,

U.S. Department of Education, Room

6213, 600 Independence Ave., SW,

Washington, D.C. 20202–0125.

Recommendations or comments may

be hand-delivered until 4:30 p.m.

(Washington, D.C. time) on the date

indicated in this notice.

Please note that the above address is not

the same address as the one to which the

applicant submits its completed application.

Do not send applications to the above

address.

Instructions for transmittal and receipt

of applications

(a) If an applicant wants to apply for

a grant, the applicant shall—

(1) Mail the original and two copies

of the application to: U.S. Department of

Education, Application Control Center,

Attention: (CFDA # 84.184D),

Washington, D.C. 20202–4725.

Note: All applications must be received by

August 2, 1996. Applications received after

that time will not be eligible for funding.

Postmarked dates will not be accepted.

(2) Hand deliver the original and two

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

(Washington, D.C. time) on the deadline

date to: U.S. Department of Education,

Application Control Center, Attention:

(CFDA# 84.184D), Room #3633,

Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D

Streets, S.W., Washington, D.C.

Notes

(1) The Application Control Center

will mail a Grant Application Receipt

Acknowledgement to each applicant. If

an applicant fails to receive the

notification of application receipt

within 15 days from the date of mailing

the application, the applicant should

call the U.S. Department of Education

Application Control Center at (202)

708–9494.

(2) The applicant must indicate on the

envelope and—if not provided by the

Department—in Item 10 of the

Application for Federal Assistance

(Standard Form 424) the CFDA

number—and suffix letter, if any—of the

competition under which the

application is being submitted.

Application Instructions and Forms

The appendix to this application is

divided into three parts plus a statement

regarding estimated public reporting

burden and various assurances and

certifications. These parts and

additional materials are organized in the

same manner that the submitted

application should be organized. The

parts and additional materials are as

follows:

Part I: Application for Federal

Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev. 4–

88)) and instructions.

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

524) and instructions.

Part III: Application Narrative.

Additional Materials:

Estimated Public Reporting Burden.

Assurances—Non-Construction

Programs (Standard Form 424B).

Certifications regarding Lobbying;

Debarment, Suspension, and Other

Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free

Workplace Requirements (ED 80–0013).

Certification regarding Debarment,

Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary

Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered

Transactions (ED 80–0014, 9/90) and

instructions.

Note: ED 80–0014 is intended for the use

of grantees and should not be transmitted to

the Department.

Disclosure of Lobbying Activities

(Standard Form LLL) (if applicable) and

instructions. This document has been

marked to reflect statutory changes. See

the notice published by the Office of

Management and Budget at 61 FR 1413

(January 19, 1996).

Notice to All Applicants.

An applicant may submit information

on a photostatic copy of the application

and budget forms, the assurances, and

the certifications. However, the

application form, the assurances, and

the certifications must each have an

original signature. No grant may be

awarded unless a completed application

form has been received.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charlotte D. Gillespie, U.S. Department

of Education, 600 Independence Ave.,

SW, Room 604 Portals, Washington,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34697

D.C. 20202–6123. Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD) may call the Federal Information

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time,

Monday through Friday.

Information about the Department’s

funding opportunities, including copies

of application notices for discretionary

grant competitions, can be viewed on

the Department’s electronic bulletin

board (ED Board), telephone (202) 260–

9950; or on the Internet Gopher Server

at GOPHER.ED.GOV (under

Announcements, Bulletins and Press

Releases); or on the World Wide Web at

(http://www/ed/gov/money.html).

However, the official application notice

for a discretionary grant competition is

the notice published in the Federal

Register.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131.

Dated: June 26, 1996.

Gerald N. Tirozzi,

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and

Secondary Education.

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
34698 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34699
34700 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34701
34702 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices

BILLING CODE 4000–01–C
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34703

Part III—Application Narrative

Instructions for Part III—Application

Narrative

Before preparing the Application

Narrative an applicant should read

carefully the description of the program,

the information regarding priorities, and

the selection criteria the Secretary uses

to evaluate applications.

The narrative should encompass each

function or activity for which funds are

being required and should—

1. Begin with an Abstract; that is, a

summary of the proposed project;

2. Describe the proposed project in

light of each of the selection criteria in

the order in which the criteria are listed

in this application package; and

3. Include any other pertinent

information that might assist the

Secretary in reviewing the application.

The Secretary strongly requests the

applicant to limit the Application

Narrative to no more than 25 doublespaced, typed pages (on one side only),

although the Secretary will consider

applications of greater length.

Instructions for Estimated Public

Reporting Burden

According to the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are

required to respond to a collection of

information unless it displays a valid

OMB control number. The valid OMB

control number for this information

collection is OMB No. 1810–0551, Exp.

Date: 9/11/96. The time required to

complete this information collection is

estimated to average 28 hours per

response, including the time to review

instructions, search existing data

resources, gather the data needed, and

complete and review the information

collection. If you have any comments

concerning the accuracy of the time

estimate or suggestions for improving

this form, please write to: U.S.

Department of Education, Washington,

D.C. 20202–4651. If you have comments

or concerns regarding the status of your

individual submission of this form, write

directly to: Charlotte D. Gillespie, Safe

and Drug-Free Schools Program, Office

of Elementary and Secondary

Education, U.S. Department of

Education, 600 Independence Ave.,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202–6123.

BILLING CODE 4000–01–M
34704 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34705
34706 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34707
34708 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34709
34710 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices

BILLING CODE 4000–01–C
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 2, 1996 / Notices 34711

Notice to All Applicants

Thank you for your interest in this

program. The purpose of this enclosure is to

inform you about a new provision in the

Department of Education’s General Education

Provisions Act (GEPA) that applies to

applicants for new grant awards under

Department programs. This provision is

section 427 of GEPA, enacted as part of the

Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994

(Pub. L. 103–382).

To Whom Does This Provision Apply?

Section 427 of GEPA affects applicants for

new discretionary grant awards under this

program. ALL APPLICANTS FOR NEW

AWARDS MUST INCLUDE INFORMATION

IN THEIR APPLICATIONS TO ADDRESS

THIS NEW PROVISION IN ORDER TO

RECEIVE FUNDING UNDER THIS

PROGRAM.

What Does This Provision Require?

Section 427 requires each applicant for

funds (other than an individual person) to

include in its application a description of the

steps the applicant proposes to take to ensure

equitable access to, and participation in, its

federally-assisted program for students,

teachers, and other program beneficiaries

with special needs.

This section allows applicants discretion

in developing the required description. The

statute highlights six types of barriers that

can impede equitable access or participation

that you may address: gender, race, national

origin, color, disability, or age. Based on local

circumstances, you can determine whether

these or other barriers may prevent your

students, teachers, etc. from equitable access

or participation. Your description need not

be lengthy; you may provide a clear and

succinct description of how you plan to

address those barriers that are applicable to

your circumstances. In addition, the

information may be provided in a single

narrative, or, if appropriate, may be

discussed in connection with related topics

in the application.

Section 427 is not intended to duplicate

the requirements of civil rights statutes, but

rather to ensure that, in designing their

projects, applicants for Federal funds address

equity concerns that may affect the ability of

certain potential beneficiaries to fully

participate in the project and to achieve to

high standards. Consistent with program

requirements and its approved application,

an applicant may use the Federal funds

awarded to it to eliminate barriers it

identifies.

What are Examples of How an Applicant

Might Satisfy the Requirement of This

Provision?

The following examples may help illustrate

how an applicant may comply with section

427.

(1) An applicant that proposes to carry out

an adult literacy project serving, among

others, adults with limited English

proficiency, might describe in its application

how it intends to distribute a brochure about

the proposed project to such potential

participants in their native language.

(2) An applicant that proposes to develop

instructional materials for classroom use

might describe how it will make the

materials available on audio tape or in braille

for students who are blind.

(3) An applicant that proposes to carry out

a model science program for secondary

students and is concerned that girls may be

less likely than boys to enroll in the course,

might indicate how it tends to conduct

‘‘outreach’’ efforts to girls, to encourage their

enrollment.

We recognize that many applicants may

already be implementing effective steps to

ensure equity of access and participation in

their grant programs, and we appreciate your

cooperation in responding to the

requirements of this provision.

Estimated Burden Statement

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995, no persons are required to respond

to a collection of information unless it

displays a valid OMB control number. The

valid OMB control number for this

information collection is 1801–0004 (Exp. 8/

31/98). The time required to complete this

information collection is estimated to vary

from 1 to 3 hours per response, with an

average of 1.5 hours, including the time to

review instructions, search existing data

resources, gather and maintain the data

needed, and complete and review the

information collection. If you have any

comments concerning the accuracy of the

time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving

this form, please write to: U.S. Department of

Education, Washington, DC 20202–4651.

[FR Doc. 96–16838 Filed 6–28–96; 9:01 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–M