69442 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

1For the purposes of this priority, the definition 

of ‘‘evidence-based’’ consists of the following 

definitions in 34 CFR 77.1: Large sample means an 

analytic sample of 350 or more students (or other 

single analysis units) who were randomly assigned 

to a treatment or control group or 50 or more groups 

(such as classrooms or schools) that contain 10 or 

more students (or other single analysis units) and 

that were randomly assigned to a treatment or 

control group. Moderate evidence of effectiveness 

means one of the following conditions is met: 

(i) There is at least one study of the effectiveness 

of the process, product, strategy, or practice being 

proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse 

Evidence Standards without reservations [What 

Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards 

Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which 

can currently be found at the following link: http:// 

ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], 

found a statistically significant favorable impact on 

a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant 

and overriding unfavorable impacts on that 

outcome for relevant populations in the study or in 

other studies of the intervention reviewed by and 

reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), and 

includes a sample that overlaps with the 

populations or settings proposed to receive the 

process, product, strategy, or practice. 

(ii) There is at least one study of the effectiveness 

of the process, product, strategy, or practice being 

proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse 

Evidence Standards with reservations [What Works 

Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards Handbook 

(Version 2.1, September 2011), which can currently 

be found at the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/

ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a 

statistically significant favorable impact on a 

relevant outcome (with no statistically significant 

and overriding unfavorable impacts on that 

outcome for relevant populations in the study or in 

other studies of the intervention reviewed by and 

reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), 

includes a sample that overlaps with the 

populations or settings proposed to receive the 

process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes 

a large sample and a multi-site sample (Note: 

Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large 

and multi-site sample requirements as long as each 

study meets the other requirements in this 

paragraph). 

Multi-site sample means more than one site, 

where site can be defined as an LEA, locality, or 

State. 

Relevant outcome means the student outcome or 

outcomes (or the ultimate outcome if not related to 

students) that the proposed process, product, 

strategy, or practice is designed to improve, 

consistent with the specific goals of a program. 

Strong evidence of effectiveness means that one of 

the following conditions is met: 

(i) There is at least one study of the effectiveness 

of the process, product, strategy, or practice being 

proposed that meets the What Works Clearinghouse 

Evidence Standards without reservations [What 

Works Clearinghouse Procedures and Standards 

Handbook (Version 2.1, September 2011), which 

can currently be found at the following link: http:// 

ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], 

found a statistically significant favorable impact on 

a relevant outcome (with no statistically significant 

and overriding unfavorable impacts on that 

outcome for relevant populations in the study or in 

other studies of the intervention reviewed by and 

reported on by the What Works Clearinghouse), 

includes a sample that overlaps with the 

populations and settings proposed to receive the 

process, product, strategy, or practice, and includes 

a large sample and a multi-site sample (Note: 

Multiple studies can cumulatively meet the large 

and multi-site sample requirements as long as each 

study meets the other requirements in this 

paragraph). 

(ii) There are at least two studies of the 

effectiveness of the process, product, strategy, or 

practice being proposed, each of which: Meets the 

What Works Clearinghouse Evidence Standards 

with reservations [What Works Clearinghouse 

Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 2.1, 

September 2011), which can currently be found at 

the following link: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

DocumentSum.aspx?sid=19], found a statistically 

significant favorable impact on a relevant outcome 

(with no statistically significant and overriding 

unfavorable impacts on that outcome for relevant 

populations in the studies or in other studies of the 

intervention reviewed by and reported on by the 

What Works Clearinghouse), includes a sample that 

overlaps with the populations and settings 

proposed to receive the process, product, strategy, 

or practice, and includes a large sample and a 

multi-site sample. 

2For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘technology 

tools’’ may include, but are not limited to, digital 

math text readers for students with visual 

authorized for release and export to the 

Government of Australia. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27605 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Termination of Department of Defense 

Federal Advisory Committees 

AGENCY: DoD. 

ACTION: Termination of Federal 

Advisory Committee. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is 

publishing this notice to announce that 

it is terminating the Department of 

Defense Task Force on the Care, 

Management, and Transition of 

Recovering Wounded, Ill, and Injured 

Members of the Armed Forces (‘‘the 

Task Force’’). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Freeman, Advisory Committee 

Management Officer for the Department 

of Defense, 703–692–5952. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

committee is being terminated in 

accordance with section 724 of Public 

Law 111–84(f) and under the provisions 

of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 

of 1972 (5 U.S.C. Appendix), 41 CFR 

102–3.55, and the Government in the 

Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b), 

effective October 27, 2014. 

Dated: November 18, 2014. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27593 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; 

Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals With 

Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology 

Implementation 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Notice. 

Overview Information 

Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology 

Implementation. 

Notice inviting applications for new 

awards for fiscal year (FY) 2015. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

(CFDA) Number: 84.327S. 

DATES: Applications Available: 

November 21, 2014. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: January 20, 2015. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: March 23, 2015. 

Full Text of Announcement 

I. Funding Opportunity Description 

Purpose of Program: The purposes of 

the Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities Program are to: (1) Improve 

results for students with disabilities by 

promoting the development, 

demonstration, and use of technology; 

(2) support educational activities 

designed to be of educational value in 

the classroom for students with 

disabilities; (3) provide support for 

captioning and video description that is 

appropriate for use in the classroom; 

and (4) provide accessible educational 

materials to students with disabilities in 

a timely manner. 

Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 

75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from 

allowable activities specified in the 

statute (see sections 674 and 681(d) of 

the Individuals with Disabilities 

Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1400 et 

seq.)). 

Absolute Priority: For FY 2015 and 

any subsequent year in which we make 

awards from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition, this 

priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 

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

applications that meet this priority. 

This priority is: 

Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities—Stepping-up Technology 

Implementation. 

Background: The purpose of this 

priority is to fund cooperative 

agreements to: (a) Identify strategies 

needed to effectively implement 

evidence-based 1 technology 

tools 2 that benefit students with 

disabilities; and (b) develop and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69443 

impairment, reading software to improve literacy 

and communication development, and text-tospeech software to improve reading performance. 

These tools must assist or otherwise benefit 

students with disabilities. 3For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘products’’ 

may include, but are not limited to, instruction 

manuals, lesson plans, demonstration videos, 

ancillary instructional materials, and professional 

development modules such as collaborative groups, 

coaching, mentoring, or online supports. 4For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘resources’’ 

include, but are not limited to, school leadership 

support, professional development support to 

school staff, and a plan for integrating technology 

into the classroom curriculum. 

5 In this context, ‘‘effective implementation’’ 

means ‘‘making better use of research findings in 

typical service settings through the use of processes 

and activities (such as accountable implementation 

teams) that are purposeful and described in 

sufficient detail such that independent observers 

can detect the presence and strength of these 

processes and activities’’ (Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, 

Friedman, & Wallace, 2005). 

6For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘settings’’ 

include general education classrooms, special 

education classrooms or any place where schoolbased instruction occurs. 

disseminate products 3 that will help a 

broad range of schools to effectively 

implement these technology tools. As 

Congress recognized in IDEA, ‘‘almost 

30 years of research and experience has 

demonstrated that the education of 

children with disabilities can be made 

more effective by . . . supporting the 

development and use of technology, 

including assistive technology devices 

and assistive technology services, to 

maximize accessibility for children with 

disabilities’’ (section 601(c)(5)(H) of 

IDEA). 

The use of technology, including 

assistive technology devices and 

assistive technology services, enhances 

instruction and access to the general 

education curriculum. Technology can 

be the great equalizer in a classroom for 

students with disabilities. Whereas 

teachers can find it difficult to 

differentiate instruction for a large 

number of students in one class, all with 

different needs and abilities, technology 

tools that benefit students with 

disabilities can often help teachers 

personalize lessons and skill building 

for each child. ‘‘Most students with 

disabilities can and do benefit from 

technology in the classroom. 

Incorporating technology increases 

students’ motivation to learn and 

personalizes lessons to a student’s 

individual needs’’ (Zorigian & Job, 

2008). Furthermore, technologies offer 

opportunities to support State 

educational agency (SEA) and local 

educational agency (LEA) Elementary 

and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 

flexibility plans by: (a) Improving 

student learning and engagement; (b) 

accommodating the special needs of 

students; (c) facilitating student and 

teacher access to digital content and 

resources; 4 and (d) improving the 

quality of instruction through 

personalized learning and data (Duffey 

& Fox, 2012; Fletcher, Schaffhauser, & 

Levi, 2012; U.S. Department of 

Education, 2010). 

Employing products and resources 

designed to assist with the 

implementation of evidence-based 

technology tools is critical to ensuring 

that these tools will be effectively used 

to improve early childhood outcomes, 

academic achievement, and college- and 

career-readiness of children with 

disabilities. Data from a survey of more 

than 1,000 kindergarten through grade 

12 (K–12) teachers, principals, and 

assistant principals indicated that 

simply providing teachers with 

technology does not ensure that it will 

be used. The survey also indicated that 

while newer teachers may use 

technology in their personal lives more 

often than veteran teachers, they do not 

use it more frequently in their 

classrooms than veteran teachers do. 

The survey also revealed that the more 

often teachers use technology to 

improve students’ daily classroom 

engagement, the more likely teachers are 

to recognize the benefits to 

understanding different student learning 

styles (Grunwald Associates, 2010). 

Additionally, Perlman and Redding 

(2011) found that in order to be used 

most effectively, technology must be 

implemented in ways that align with 

curricular and teacher goals and must 

offer students opportunities to use these 

tools in their learning. While for years 

there has been a vast improvement in 

the infrastructure to support the 

implementation of technology in 

educational institutions, the integration 

of technology at all levels still remains 

surprisingly low (Lu & Overbaugh, 

2009). For example, even as many 

systems have recently been deployed to 

deliver coursework online and the 

number of students involved in online 

learning has grown precipitously, many 

of these online learning technologies 

have not been designed to be accessible 

to students with disabilities (Center on 

Online Learning and Students with 

Disabilities, 2012). These findings 

demonstrate a need for products and 

resources that can ensure technology 

tools for students with disabilities are 

implemented effectively. 

Since 1998, the Office of Special 

Education Programs (OSEP) has 

supported technology and media service 

projects through the Steppingstones of 

Technology Innovation for Children 

with Disabilities (Steppingstones) 

program. The projects funded under the 

Steppingstones program developed and 

evaluated numerous innovative 

technology tools designed to improve 

results for children with disabilities. 

Examples of such tools include: Webbased learning and assessment 

materials, instructional software, 

assistive technology devices, methods 

for using off-the-shelf hardware and 

software to improve learning, and 

methods for integrating technology into 

instruction. In addition, the 

Department’s Institute of Education 

Sciences (IES) now supports projects to 

develop and evaluate innovative 

technology tools. The Stepping-up 

Technology Implementation program is 

building on these technology 

development efforts by identifying, 

developing, and disseminating products 

and resources that promote the effective 

implementation 5 of evidence-based 

instructional and assistive technology 

tools in early childhood or K–12 

settings.6

Priority: The purpose of this priority 

is to fund cooperative agreements to: (a) 

Identify strategies needed to effectively 

implement evidence-based technology 

tools that benefit students with 

disabilities; and (b) develop and 

disseminate products (e.g., instruction 

manuals, lesson plans, demonstration 

videos, ancillary instructional materials) 

that will help early childhood or K–12 

settings to effectively implement these 

technology tools. 

To be considered for funding under 

this absolute priority, applicants must 

meet the application requirements. Any 

project funded under this absolute 

priority must also meet the 

programmatic and administrative 

requirements specified in the priority. 

Application Requirements: An 

applicant must include in its 

application— 

(a) A logic model or conceptual 

framework that depicts at a minimum, 

the goals, activities, outputs, and 

outcomes of the proposed project. A 

logic model communicates how a 

project will achieve its outcomes and 

provides a framework for both formative 

and summative evaluations of the 

project; 

Note: The following Web sites provide 

more information on logic models: 

www.researchutilization.org/matrix/

logicmodel_resource3c.html and 

www.tadnet.org/pages/589. 

(b) A plan to implement the activities 

described in the Project Activities 

section of this priority; 

(c) A plan, linked to the proposed 

project’s logic model, for a formative 

evaluation of the proposed project’s 

activities. The plan must describe how 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

69444 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

7For the purposes of this priority, ‘‘iterative 

development’’ refers to a process of testing, 

systematically securing feedback, and then revising 

the educational intervention that leads to revisions 

in the intervention to increase the likelihood that 

it will be implemented with fidelity (Diamond & 

Powell, 2011). 

8The term ‘‘persistently lowest-achieving 

schools’’ means, as determined by the State— 

(a)(1) Any Title I school in improvement, 

corrective action, or restructuring that— 

(i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of 

Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or 

restructuring or the lowest-achieving five Title I 

schools in improvement, corrective action, or 

restructuring in the State, whichever number of 

schools is greater; or 

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate 

as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 

percent over a number of years; and 

(2) Any secondary school that is eligible for, but 

does not receive, Title I funds that— 

(i) Is among the lowest-achieving five percent of 

secondary schools or the lowest-achieving five 

secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, 

but do not receive, Title I funds, whichever number 

of schools is greater; or 

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate 

as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 

percent over a number of years. 

(b) To identify the persistently lowest-achieving 

schools, a State must take into account both— 

(i) The academic achievement of the ‘‘all 

students’’ group in a school in terms of proficiency 

on the State’s assessments under section 1111(b)(3) 

of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965, as amended (ESEA) in reading/language arts 

and mathematics combined; and 

(ii) The school’s lack of progress on those 

assessments over a number of years in the ‘‘all 

students’’ group. 

For the purposes of this priority, the Department 

considers schools that are identified as Tier I or Tier 

II schools under the School Improvement Grants 

Program (see 75 FR 66363) as part of a State’s 

approved FY 2009, FY 2010, FY 2011, or FY 2012 

application to be persistently lowest-achieving 

schools. A list of these Tier I and Tier II schools 

can be found on the Department’s Web site at 

www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html. 

9The term ‘‘priority school’’ means a school that 

has been identified by the State as a priority school 

pursuant to the State’s approved request for ESEA 

flexibility. 

the formative evaluation will use clear 

performance objectives to ensure 

continuous improvement in the 

operation of the proposed project, 

including objective measures of progress 

in implementing the project and 

ensuring the quality of products and 

services; 

(d) A plan for recruiting and selecting 

the following: 

(1) Three development schools. 

Development schools are the sites in 

which iterative development 7 of the 

implementation of technology tools and 

products will occur. The project must 

start implementing the technology tool 

with one development school in year 

one of the project period and two 

additional development schools in year 

two. 

(2) Four pilot schools. Pilot schools 

are the sites in which try-out, formative 

evaluation, and refinement of 

technology tools and products will 

occur. The project must work with the 

four pilot schools during years three and 

four of the project period. 

(3) Ten dissemination schools. 

Dissemination schools will be selected 

if the project is extended for a fifth year. 

Dissemination schools will be used to 

conduct the final test of the 

effectiveness of the products and the 

final opportunity for the project to 

refine the products for use by teachers, 

but will receive less technical assistance 

(TA) from the project than the 

development or pilot schools. Also, at 

this stage, dissemination schools will 

extend the benefits of the technology 

tool to additional students. To be 

selected as a dissemination school, 

eligible schools and LEAs must commit 

to working with the project to 

implement the evidence-based 

technology tool. A school may not serve 

in more than one category (i.e., 

development, pilot, dissemination). 

(e) Information (e.g., early childhood 

setting; elementary, middle, or high 

school; persistently lowest-achieving 

school; 8 priority school 9) about the 

diversity of the development, pilot, and 

dissemination schools; their 

demographics (e.g., student race or 

ethnicity, percentage of students eligible 

for free or reduced-price lunch); and 

other pertinent data. 

(f) Documentation that the technology 

tool is evidence-based (as defined in 

this notice) and that it can be 

implemented to improve early 

childhood outcomes, academic 

achievement, and college- and careerreadiness. 

(g) A budget for attendance at the 

following: 

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

meeting to be held in Washington, DC, 

after receipt of the award, and an annual 

planning meeting held in Washington, 

DC, with the OSEP project officer and 

other relevant staff during each 

subsequent year of the project period. 

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the 

award, a post-award teleconference must be 

held between the OSEP project officer and 

the grantee’s project director or other 

authorized representative. 

(2) A three-day project directors’ 

conference in Washington, DC, during 

each year of the project period. 

(3) Two two-day trips annually to 

attend Department briefings, 

Department-sponsored conferences, and 

other meetings, as requested by OSEP. 

Project Activities. To meet the 

requirements of this priority, the 

project, at a minimum, must conduct 

the following activities: 

(a) Recruit a minimum of three 

development schools in one LEA and 

four pilot schools across at least two 

LEAs in accordance with the plan 

proposed under paragraph (d) of the 

Application Requirements section of 

this notice. 

Note: Final site selection will be 

determined in consultation with the OSEP 

project officer following the kick-off meeting. 

(b) Identify resources and develop 

products to support sustained 

implementation of the selected 

technology tool. Development of the 

products must be an interactive process 

beginning in a single development 

school and continuing through iterative 

cycles of development and refinement 

in the other development schools, 

followed by a formative evaluation and 

refinement in the pilot schools. The 

products must include, at a minimum, 

the following components to support 

implementation of the technology tool: 

(1) An instrument or method for 

assessing (i) the need for the technology 

tool, and (ii) readiness to implement it. 

Instruments and methods may include 

resource inventory checklists, school 

self-study guides, surveys of teacher 

interest, detailed descriptions of the 

technology tool for review by school 

staff, and similar approaches used 

singly or in combination. 

(2) Methods and manuals to support 

the implementation of the technology 

tool. 

(3) Professional development 

activities necessary for teachers to 

implement the technology tool with 

fidelity and integrate it into the 

curriculum. 

(c) Collect and analyze data on the 

effect of the technology tool on 

academic achievement and college- and 

career-readiness. 

(d) Collect formative and summative 

evaluation data from the development 

schools and pilot schools to refine and 

evaluate the products. 

(e) If the project is extended to a fifth 

year, provide the products and the 

technology tool to no fewer than 10 

dissemination schools that are not the 

same schools used as development and 

pilot schools. 

(f) Collect summative data about the 

success of the products in supporting 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69445 

10 ‘‘Privacy requirements’’ means the 

requirements of the Family Educational Rights and 

Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232g, and its 

implementing regulations in 34 CFR part 99, the 

Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, as well as all applicable 

Federal, State and local requirements regarding 

privacy. 

implementation of the technology tool 

in the dissemination schools; and 

(g) By the end of the project period, 

projects must provide information on: 

(1) The products and resources that 

will enable other schools to implement 

and sustain implementation of the 

technology tool. 

(2) How the technology tool has 

improved early childhood, academic 

achievement, or college- and careerreadiness for children with disabilities. 

(3) A strategy for disseminating the 

technology tool and accompanying 

products beyond the schools directly 

involved in the project. 

Cohort Collaboration and Support. 

OSEP Project Officer(s) will provide 

coordination support among the 

projects. Each project funded under this 

priority must— 

(a) Participate in bi-monthly 

conference call discussions to share and 

collaborate around implementation and 

specific project issues, 

(b) Provide information bi-annually 

using a template that captures 

descriptive data on project site 

selection, processes for installation of 

technology, and the use of technology 

and sustainability (i.e., the process of 

technology implementation). 

Note: The following Web site provides 

more information about implementation 

research: http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu/learnimplementation. 

Fifth Year of the Project: The 

Secretary may extend a project one year 

beyond 48 months to work with 

dissemination schools if the grantee is 

achieving the intended outcomes and 

making a positive contribution to the 

implementation of an evidence-based 

technology tool in the development and 

pilot schools. Each applicant must 

include in its application a plan for the 

full 60-month award. In deciding 

whether to continue funding the project 

for the fifth year, the Secretary will 

consider the requirements of 34 CFR 

75.253(a), and in addition— 

(a) The recommendation of a review 

team consisting of the OSEP project 

officer and other experts selected by the 

Secretary. This review will be held 

during the last half of the third year of 

the project period; 

(b) The timeliness and effectiveness 

with which all requirements of the 

negotiated cooperative agreement have 

been or are being met by the project; and 

(c) Evidence of the degree to which 

the project’s activities have contributed 

to changed practices and improved early 

childhood outcomes, academic 

achievement, or college- and careerreadiness for students with disabilities. 

Competitive Preference Priority: 

Within this absolute priority, we give 

competitive preference to applications 

that meet the following priority. For FY 

2015 and any subsequent year in which 

we make awards from the list of 

unfunded applicants from this 

competition, this priority is a 

competitive preference priority. 

This priority is from the notice of 

final supplemental priorities and 

definitions for discretionary grant 

programs, published in the Federal 

Register on December 15, 2010 (75 FR 

78486), and corrected on May 12, 2011 

(76 FR 27637). 

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we 

award an additional five points to an 

application that meets this priority. 

This priority is: 

Enabling More Data-Based DecisionMaking. 

Projects that are designed to collect 

(or obtain), analyze, and use highquality and timely data, including data 

on program participant outcomes, in 

accordance with privacy 

requirements,10 in one or more of the 

following priority areas: 

(a) Improving instructional practices, 

policies, and child outcomes in early 

learning settings. 

(b) Improving instructional practices, 

policies, and student outcomes in 

elementary or secondary schools. 

(c) Improving postsecondary student 

outcomes relating to enrollment, 

persistence, and completion and leading 

to career success. 

(d) Providing reliable and 

comprehensive information on the 

implementation of Department of 

Education programs, and participant 

outcomes in these programs by using 

data from State longitudinal data 

systems or by obtaining data from 

reliable third-party sources. 

References 

Center for Online Learning and Students 

with Disabilities (COLSD). (2012). The 

foundation of online learning for 

students with disabilities (COLSD White 

Paper). Lawrence, KS: Author. Retrieved 

from http://centerononlinelearning.org/

wp-content/uploads/Foundation_7_

2012.pdf. 

Diamond, K.E., & Powell, D.R. (2011). An 

iterative approach to the development of 

a professional development intervention 

for head start teachers. Journal of Early 

Intervention, 33(1), 75–93. 

Duffey, D., & Fox, C. (2012). National 

Educational Technology Trends 2012: 

State Leadership Empower Educators, 

Transforming Teaching and Learning. 

Washington, DC: State Educational 

Technology Directors Association 

(SEDTA). Retrieved from 

www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED536746.pdf. 

Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., 

Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). 

Implementation research: A synthesis of 

the literature. Tampa, FL: University of 

South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida 

Mental Health Institute, The National 

Implementation Research Network. 

Fletcher, G., Schaffhauser, D. & Levi, D. 

(2012). Out of print: Reimaging the K–12 

textbook in a digital age. Washington, 

DC: State Educational Technology 

Directors Association (SEDTA). 

Retrieved from www.setda.org/c/

document_library/get_

file?folderId=321&name=DLFE-1587.pdf. 

Grunwald Associates. (2010). Educators, 

technology, and 21st century skills: 

Dispelling five myths. Minneapolis, MN: 

Walden University, Richard W. Riley 

College of Education. Retrieved from 

www.WaldenU.edu/fivemyths. 

Lu, R., & Overbaugh, R.C. (2009). School 

environment and technology 

implementation in K–12 classrooms. 

Computers in the Schools, 26(2), 89–106. 

Perlman, C.L., & Redding, S. (Eds.). (2011). 

Choosing and implementing technology 

wisely. Handbook on Effective 

Implementation of School Improvement 

Grants. Lincoln, IL: Academic 

Development Institute. Retrieved from 

www.centerii.org/handbook. 

U.S. Department of Education, Office of 

Educational Technology. (2010). 

Transforming American Education: 

Learning Powered by Technology. 

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from 

www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/

netp2010.pdf. 

Zorigian, K., & Job, J. (2008). How do special 

education students benefit from 

technology? Retrieved from 

www.learnnc.org. 

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: 

Under the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department 

generally offers interested parties the 

opportunity to comment on proposed 

priorities and requirements. Section 

681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the 

public comment requirements of the 

APA inapplicable to the priorities in 

this notice. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 

1481. 

Applicable Regulations: This 

application notice (also referred to as a 

notice inviting applications (NIA)) is 

being published before the Department 

adopts the Uniform Administrative 

Requirements, Cost Principles, and 

Audit Requirements in 2 CFR part 200. 

We expect to publish interim final 

regulations that would adopt those 

requirements before December 26, 2014, 

and make those regulations effective on 

that date. Because grants awarded under 

this NIA will likely be made after the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

69446 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

Department adopts the requirements in 

2 CFR part 200, we list as applicable 

regulations both those that are currently 

effective and those that will be effective 

at the time the Department makes 

grants. 

The current regulations follow: (a) 

The Education Department General 

Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 

34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 

84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The OMB 

Guidelines to Agencies on 

Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR 

part 180, as adopted and amended as 

regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3485. 

At the time we award grants under 

this NIA, the following regulations will 

apply: (a) EDGAR in 34 CFR parts 75, 

77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) 

The OMB Guidelines to Agencies on 

Governmentwide Debarment and 

Suspension (Nonprocurement)in 2 CFR 

part 180, as adopted and amended as 

regulations of the Department in 2 CFR 

part 3485, and the Uniform 

Administrative Requirements, Cost 

Principles, and Audit Requirements for 

Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as 

adopted and amended in 2 CFR part 

3474. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 

apply to all applicants except federally 

recognized Indian tribes. 

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 

apply to institutions of higher education 

(IHEs) only. 

II. Award Information 

Type of Award: Cooperative 

Agreements. 

Estimated Available Funds: The 

Administration has requested 

$28,047,000 for the Educational 

Technology, Media, and Materials for 

Individuals with Disabilities program 

for FY 2015, of which we intend to use 

an estimated $1,000,000 for this 

competition. The actual level of 

funding, if any, depends on final 

congressional action. However, we are 

inviting applications to allow enough 

time to complete the grant process if 

Congress appropriates funds for this 

program. 

Contingent upon the availability of 

funds and the quality of applications, 

we may make additional awards in FY 

2016 from the list of unfunded 

applicants from this competition. 

Estimated Range of Awards: $475,000 

to $500,000 per year. 

Estimated Average Size of Awards: 

$500,000 per year. 

Maximum Award: We will reject any 

application that proposes a budget 

exceeding $500,000 for a single budget 

period of 12 months. The Assistant 

Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services may change the 

maximum amount through a notice 

published in the Federal Register. 

Estimated Number of Awards: 2. 

Note: The Department is not bound by any 

estimates in this notice. 

Project Period: Up to 48 months with 

an optional additional 12 months based 

on performance. Applications must 

include plans for both the 48 month 

award and the 12 month extension. 

III. Eligibility Information 

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, 

including public charter schools that are 

considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; 

other public agencies; private nonprofit 

organizations; outlying areas; freely 

associated States; Indian tribes or tribal 

organizations; and for-profit 

organizations. 

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This 

program does not require cost sharing or 

matching. 

3. Other General Requirements: 

(a) Recipients of funding under this 

program must make positive efforts to 

employ and advance in employment 

qualified individuals with disabilities 

(see section 606 of IDEA). 

(b) Each applicant for, and recipient 

of, funding under this competition must 

involve individuals with disabilities, or 

parents of individuals with disabilities 

ages birth through 26, in planning, 

implementing, and evaluating the 

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

IDEA). 

IV. Application and Submission 

Information 

1. Address to Request Application 

Package: You can obtain an application 

package via the Internet or from the 

Education Publications Center (ED 

Pubs). To obtain a copy via the Internet, 

use the following address: www.ed.gov/ 

fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html. 

To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write, 

fax, or call the following: ED Pubs, U.S. 

Department of Education, P.O. Box 

22207, Alexandria, VA 22304. 

Telephone, toll free: 1–877–433–7827. 

FAX: (703) 605–6794. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call, 

toll free: 1–877–576–7734. 

You can contact ED Pubs at its Web 

site, also: www.EDPubs.gov or at its 

email address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov. 

If you request an application from ED 

Pubs, be sure to identify this 

competition as follows: CFDA number 

84.327S. 

Individuals with disabilities can 

obtain a copy of the application package 

in an accessible format (e.g., braille, 

large print, audiotape, or compact disc) 

by contacting the person or team listed 

under Accessible Format in section VIII 

of this notice. 

2. Content and Form of Application 

Submission: Requirements concerning 

the content of an application, together 

with the forms you must submit, are in 

the application package for this 

competition. 

Page Limit: The application narrative 

(Part III of the application) is where you, 

the applicant, address the selection 

criteria that reviewers use to evaluate 

your application. You must limit Part III 

to no more than 50 pages, using the 

following standards: 

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

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

and both sides. 

• Double-space (no more than three 

lines per vertical inch) all text in the 

application narrative, including titles, 

headings, footnotes, quotations, 

reference citations, and captions, as well 

as all text in charts, tables, figures, 

graphs, and screen shots. 

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger. 

• Use one of the following fonts: 

Times New Roman, Courier, Courier 

New, or Arial. An application submitted 

in any other font (including Times 

Roman or Arial Narrow) will not be 

accepted. 

The page limit and double-spacing 

does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; 

Part II, the budget section, including the 

narrative budget justification; Part IV, 

the assurances and certifications; or the 

abstract (follow the guidance provided 

in the application package for 

completing the abstract), the table of 

contents, the list of priority 

requirements, the resumes, the reference 

list, the letters of support, or the 

appendices. However, the page limit 

and double-spacing does apply to all of 

Part III, the application narrative, 

including all text in charts, tables, 

figures, graphs, and screen shots. 

We will reject your application if you 

exceed the page limit in the application 

narrative section; or if you apply 

standards other than those specified in 

the application package. 

3. Submission Dates and Times: 

Applications Available: November 21, 

2014. 

Deadline for Transmittal of 

Applications: January 20, 2015. 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically using the Grants.gov 

Apply site (Grants.gov). For information 

(including dates and times) about how 

to submit your application 

electronically, or in paper format by 

mail or hand delivery if you qualify for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69447 

an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement, please refer to 

section IV. 7. Other Submission 

Requirements of this notice. 

We do not consider an application 

that does not comply with the deadline 

requirements. 

Individuals with disabilities who 

need an accommodation or auxiliary aid 

in connection with the application 

process should contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT in section VII of this notice. If 

the Department provides an 

accommodation or auxiliary aid to an 

individual with a disability in 

connection with the application 

process, the individual’s application 

remains subject to all other 

requirements and limitations in this 

notice. 

Deadline for Intergovernmental 

Review: March 23, 2015. 

4. Intergovernmental Review: This 

competition is subject to Executive 

Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 

CFR part 79. Information about 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs under Executive Order 12372 

is in the application package for this 

competition. 

5. Funding Restrictions: We reference 

regulations outlining funding 

restrictions in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

6. Data Universal Numbering System 

Number, Taxpayer Identification 

Number, and System for Award 

Management: To do business with the 

Department of Education, you must— 

a. Have a Data Universal Numbering 

System (DUNS) number and a Taxpayer 

Identification Number (TIN); 

b. Register both your DUNS number 

and TIN with the System for Award 

Management (SAM) (formerly the 

Central Contractor Registry (CCR)), the 

Government’s primary registrant 

database; 

c. Provide your DUNS number and 

TIN on your application; and 

d. Maintain an active SAM 

registration with current information 

while your application is under review 

by the Department and, if you are 

awarded a grant, during the project 

period. 

You can obtain a DUNS number from 

Dun and Bradstreet. A DUNS number 

can be created within one-to-two 

business days. 

If you are a corporate entity, agency, 

institution, or organization, you can 

obtain a TIN from the Internal Revenue 

Service. If you are an individual, you 

can obtain a TIN from the Internal 

Revenue Service or the Social Security 

Administration. If you need a new TIN, 

please allow 2–5 weeks for your TIN to 

become active. 

The SAM registration process can take 

approximately seven business days, but 

may take upwards of several weeks, 

depending on the completeness and 

accuracy of the data entered into the 

SAM database by an entity. Thus, if you 

think you might want to apply for 

Federal financial assistance under a 

program administered by the 

Department, please allow sufficient time 

to obtain and register your DUNS 

number and TIN. We strongly 

recommend that you register early. 

Note: Once your SAM registration is active, 

you will need to allow 24 to 48 hours for the 

information to be available in Grants.gov and 

before you can submit an application through 

Grants.gov. 

If you are currently registered with 

SAM, you may not need to make any 

changes. However, please make certain 

that the TIN associated with your DUNS 

number is correct. Also note that you 

will need to update your registration 

annually. This may take three or more 

business days. 

Information about SAM is available at 

www.SAM.gov. To further assist you 

with obtaining and registering your 

DUNS number and TIN in SAM or 

updating your existing SAM account, 

we have prepared a SAM.gov Tip Sheet, 

which you can find at: http://www2.ed.

gov/fund/grant/apply/sam-faqs.html. 

In addition, if you are submitting your 

application via Grants.gov, you must (1) 

be designated by your organization as an 

Authorized Organization Representative 

(AOR); and (2) register yourself with 

Grants.gov as an AOR. Details on these 

steps are outlined at the following 

Grants.gov Web page: www.grants.gov/

web/grants/register.html. 

7. Other Submission Requirements: 

Applications for grants under this 

competition must be submitted 

electronically unless you qualify for an 

exception to this requirement in 

accordance with the instructions in this 

section. 

a. Electronic Submission of 

Applications. 

Applications for grants under the 

Stepping-up Technology 

Implementation competition, CFDA 

number 84.327S, must be submitted 

electronically using the 

Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site 

at www.Grants.gov. Through this site, 

you will be able to download a copy of 

the application package, complete it 

offline, and then upload and submit 

your application. You may not email an 

electronic copy of a grant application to 

us. 

We will reject your application if you 

submit it in paper format unless, as 

described elsewhere in this section, you 

qualify for one of the exceptions to the 

electronic submission requirement and 

submit, no later than two weeks before 

the application deadline date, a written 

statement to the Department that you 

qualify for one of these exceptions. 

Further information regarding 

calculation of the date that is two weeks 

before the application deadline date is 

provided later in this section under 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement. 

You may access the electronic grant 

application for the Stepping-up 

Technology Implementation 

competition at www.Grants.gov. You 

must search for the downloadable 

application package for this competition 

by the CFDA number. Do not include 

the CFDA number’s alpha suffix in your 

search (e.g., search for 84.327, not 

84.327S). 

Please note the following: 

• When you enter the Grants.gov site, 

you will find information about 

submitting an application electronically 

through the site, as well as the hours of 

operation. 

• Applications received by Grants.gov 

are date and time stamped. Your 

application must be fully uploaded and 

submitted and must be date and time 

stamped by the Grants.gov system no 

later than 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC 

time, on the application deadline date. 

Except as otherwise noted in this 

section, we will not accept your 

application if it is received—that is, date 

and time stamped by the Grants.gov 

system—after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, on the application deadline 

date. We do not consider an application 

that does not comply with the deadline 

requirements. When we retrieve your 

application from Grants.gov, we will 

notify you if we are rejecting your 

application because it was date and time 

stamped by the Grants.gov system after 

4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the application deadline date. 

• The amount of time it can take to 

upload an application will vary 

depending on a variety of factors, 

including the size of the application and 

the speed of your Internet connection. 

Therefore, we strongly recommend that 

you do not wait until the application 

deadline date to begin the submission 

process through Grants.gov. 

• You should review and follow the 

Education Submission Procedures for 

submitting an application through 

Grants.gov that are included in the 

application package for this competition 

to ensure that you submit your 

application in a timely manner to the 

Grants.gov system. You can also find the 

Education Submission Procedures 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

69448 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

pertaining to Grants.gov under News 

and Events on the Department’s G5 

system home page at www.G5.gov. 

• You will not receive additional 

point value because you submit your 

application in electronic format, nor 

will we penalize you if you qualify for 

an exception to the electronic 

submission requirement, as described 

elsewhere in this section, and submit 

your application in paper format. 

• You must submit all documents 

electronically, including all information 

you typically provide on the following 

forms: The Application for Federal 

Assistance (SF 424), the Department of 

Education Supplemental Information for 

SF 424, Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (ED 524), and all 

necessary assurances and certifications. 

• You must upload any narrative 

sections and all other attachments to 

your application as files in a PDF 

(Portable Document) read-only, nonmodifiable format. Do not upload an 

interactive or fillable PDF file. If you 

upload a file type other than a readonly, non-modifiable PDF or submit a 

password-protected file, we will not 

review that material. Additional, 

detailed information on how to attach 

files is in the application instructions. 

• Your electronic application must 

comply with any page-limit 

requirements described in this notice. 

• After you electronically submit 

your application, you will receive from 

Grants.gov an automatic notification of 

receipt that contains a Grants.gov 

tracking number. (This notification 

indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not 

receipt by the Department.) The 

Department then will retrieve your 

application from Grants.gov and send a 

second notification to you by email. 

This second notification indicates that 

the Department has received your 

application and has assigned your 

application a PR/Award number (an EDspecified identifying number unique to 

your application). 

• We may request that you provide us 

original signatures on forms at a later 

date. 

Application Deadline Date Extension 

in Case of Technical Issues with the 

Grants.gov System: If you are 

experiencing problems submitting your 

application through Grants.gov, please 

contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, 

toll free, at 1–800–518–4726. You must 

obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case 

Number and must keep a record of it. 

If you are prevented from 

electronically submitting your 

application on the application deadline 

date because of technical problems with 

the Grants.gov system, we will grant you 

an extension until 4:30:00 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, the following 

business day to enable you to transmit 

your application electronically or by 

hand delivery. You also may mail your 

application by following the mailing 

instructions described elsewhere in this 

notice. 

If you submit an application after 

4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on 

the application deadline date, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in 

section VII of this notice and provide an 

explanation of the technical problem 

you experienced with Grants.gov, along 

with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case 

Number. We will accept your 

application if we can confirm that a 

technical problem occurred with the 

Grants.gov system and that that problem 

affected your ability to submit your 

application by 4:30:00 p.m., 

Washington, DC time, on the 

application deadline date. The 

Department will contact you after a 

determination is made on whether your 

application will be accepted. 

Note: The extensions to which we refer in 

this section apply only to the unavailability 

of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov 

system. We will not grant you an extension 

if you failed to fully register to submit your 

application to Grants.gov before the 

application deadline date and time or if the 

technical problem you experienced is 

unrelated to the Grants.gov system. 

Exception to Electronic Submission 

Requirement: You qualify for an 

exception to the electronic submission 

requirement, and may submit your 

application in paper format, if you are 

unable to submit an application through 

the Grants.gov system because— 

• You do not have access to the 

Internet; or 

• You do not have the capacity to 

upload large documents to the 

Grants.gov system; 

and 

• No later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date (14 calendar 

days or, if the fourteenth calendar day 

before the application deadline date 

falls on a Federal holiday, the next 

business day following the Federal 

holiday), you mail or fax a written 

statement to the Department, explaining 

which of the two grounds for an 

exception prevent you from using the 

Internet to submit your application. 

If you mail your written statement to 

the Department, it must be postmarked 

no later than two weeks before the 

application deadline date. If you fax 

your written statement to the 

Department, we must receive the faxed 

statement no later than two weeks 

before the application deadline date. 

Address and mail or fax your 

statement to: Terry Jackson, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., Room 4081, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 

20202–2600. FAX: (202) 245–7617. 

Your paper application must be 

submitted in accordance with the mail 

or hand delivery instructions described 

in this notice. 

b. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Mail. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

may mail (through the U.S. Postal 

Service or a commercial carrier) your 

application to the Department. You 

must mail the original and two copies 

of your application, on or before the 

application deadline date, to the 

Department at the following address: 

U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

(CFDA Number 84.327S), LBJ Basement 

Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

You must show proof of mailing 

consisting of one of the following: 

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

postmark. 

(2) A legible mail receipt with the 

date of mailing stamped by the U.S. 

Postal Service. 

(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or 

receipt from a commercial carrier. 

(4) Any other proof of mailing 

acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. 

Department of Education. 

If you mail your application through 

the U.S. Postal Service, we do not 

accept either of the following as proof 

of mailing: 

(1) A private metered postmark. 

(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by 

the U.S. Postal Service. 

If your application is postmarked after 

the application deadline date, we will 

not consider your application. 

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not 

uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before 

relying on this method, you should check 

with your local post office. 

c. Submission of Paper Applications 

by Hand Delivery. 

If you qualify for an exception to the 

electronic submission requirement, you 

(or a courier service) may deliver your 

paper application to the Department by 

hand. You must deliver the original and 

two copies of your application by hand, 

on or before the application deadline 

date, to the Department at the following 

address: U.S. Department of Education, 

Application Control Center, Attention: 

(CFDA Number 84.327S), 550 12th 

Street SW., Room 7039, Potomac Center 

Plaza, Washington, DC 20202–4260. 

The Application Control Center 

accepts hand deliveries daily between 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69449 

8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, 

and Federal holidays. 

Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper 

Applications: If you mail or hand deliver 

your application to the Department— 

(1) You must indicate on the envelope 

and—if not provided by the Department—in 

Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, 

including suffix letter, if any, of the 

competition under which you are submitting 

your application; and 

(2) The Application Control Center will 

mail to you a notification of receipt of your 

grant application. If you do not receive this 

notification within 15 business days from the 

application deadline date, you should call 

the U.S. Department of Education 

Application Control Center at (202) 245– 

6288. 

V. Application Review Information 

1. Selection Criteria: The selection 

criteria for this program are from 34 CFR 

75.210 and are listed in the application 

package. 

2. Review and Selection Process: We 

remind potential applicants that in 

reviewing applications in any 

discretionary grant competition, the 

Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 

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

applicant in carrying out a previous 

award, such as the applicant’s use of 

funds, achievement of project 

objectives, and compliance with grant 

conditions. The Secretary may also 

consider whether the applicant failed to 

submit a timely performance report or 

submitted a report of unacceptable 

quality. 

In addition, in making a competitive 

grant award, the Secretary also requires 

various assurances including those 

applicable to Federal civil rights laws 

that prohibit discrimination in programs 

or activities receiving Federal financial 

assistance from the Department of 

Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 

108.8, and 110.23). 

3. Additional Review and Selection 

Process Factors: In the past, the 

Department has had difficulty finding 

peer reviewers for certain competitions 

because so many individuals who are 

eligible to serve as peer reviewers have 

conflicts of interest. The standing panel 

requirements under section 682(b) of 

IDEA also have placed additional 

constraints on the availability of 

reviewers. Therefore, the Department 

has determined that for some 

discretionary grant competitions, 

applications may be separated into two 

or more groups and ranked and selected 

for funding within specific groups. This 

procedure will make it easier for the 

Department to find peer reviewers by 

ensuring that greater numbers of 

individuals who are eligible to serve as 

reviewers for any particular group of 

applicants will not have conflicts of 

interest. It also will increase the quality, 

independence, and fairness of the 

review process, while permitting panel 

members to review applications under 

discretionary grant competitions for 

which they also have submitted 

applications. However, if the 

Department decides to select an equal 

number of applications in each group 

for funding, this may result in different 

cut-off points for fundable applications 

in each group. 

4. Special Conditions: Under current 

34 CFR 74.14 and 80.12 and, when 

grants are made under this NIA, 2 CFR 

3474.10, the Secretary may impose 

special conditions and, in appropriate 

circumstances, high-risk conditions on a 

grant if the applicant or grantee is not 

financially stable; has a history of 

unsatisfactory performance; has a 

financial or other management system 

that does not meet the standards in 34 

CFR parts 74 or 80, as applicable or, 

when grants are awarded, the standards 

in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not 

fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; 

or is otherwise not responsible. 

VI. Award Administration Information 

1. Award Notices: If your application 

is successful, we notify your U.S. 

Representative and U.S. Senators and 

send you a Grant Award Notification 

(GAN); or we may send you an email 

containing a link to access an electronic 

version of your GAN. We may notify 

you informally, also. 

If your application is not evaluated or 

not selected for funding, we notify you. 

2. Administrative and National Policy 

Requirements: We identify 

administrative and national policy 

requirements in the application package 

and reference these and other 

requirements in the Applicable 

Regulations section of this notice. 

We reference the regulations outlining 

the terms and conditions of an award in 

the Applicable Regulations section of 

this notice and include these and other 

specific conditions in the GAN. The 

GAN also incorporates your approved 

application as part of your binding 

commitments under the grant. 

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

grant under this competition, you must 

ensure that you have in place the 

necessary processes and systems to 

comply with the reporting requirements 

in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive 

funding under the competition. This 

does not apply if you have an exception 

under 2 CFR 170.110(b). 

(b) At the end of your project period, 

you must submit a final performance 

report, including financial information, 

as directed by the Secretary. If you 

receive a multi-year award, you must 

submit an annual performance report 

that provides the most current 

performance and financial expenditure 

information as directed by the Secretary 

under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary 

may also require more frequent 

performance reports under 34 CFR 

75.720(c). For specific requirements on 

reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/

fund/grant/apply/appforms/

appforms.html. 

4. Performance Measures: Under the 

Government Performance and Results 

Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has 

established a set of performance 

measures, including long-term 

measures, that are designed to yield 

information on various aspects of the 

effectiveness and quality of the 

Educational Technology, Media, and 

Materials for Individuals with 

Disabilities program. These measures 

are included in the application package 

and focus on the extent to which 

projects are of high quality, are relevant 

to improving outcomes of children with 

disabilities, contribute to improving 

outcomes for children with disabilities, 

and generate evidence of validity and 

availability to appropriate populations. 

Projects funded under this competition 

are required to submit data on these 

measures as directed by OSEP: 

Program Performance Measure #1: 

The percentage of educational 

technology, media, and materials 

projects judged to be of high quality. 

Program Performance Measure #2: 

The percentage of educational 

technology, media, and materials 

projects judged to be of high relevance 

to improving outcomes of infants, 

toddlers, children, and youth with 

disabilities. 

Program Performance Measure #3: 

The percentage of educational 

technology, media, and materials 

projects that produce findings, products, 

and other services that contribute to 

improving results for infants, toddlers, 

children, and youth with disabilities. 

Program Performance Measure #4: 

The percentage of educational 

technology, media, and materials 

projects that validate their products and 

services. 

Program Performance Measure #5: 

The percentage of educational 

technology, media, and materials 

projects that make validated 

technologies available for widespread 

use. 

Grantees will be required to report 

information on their project’s 

performance in annual performance 

reports and additional performance data 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

69450 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

1Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109–58, 

Title XII, Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (2005), 16 

U.S.C. 824o. 

2 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3). 

3Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric 

Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the 

Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of 

Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, order on reh’g, Order No. 

672–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006). 

4 Mandatory Reliability Standard for Nuclear 

Plant Interface Coordination, Order No. 716, 125 

FERC ¶ 61,065, at P 189 & n.90 (2008), order on 

reh’g, Order No. 716–A, 126 FERC ¶ 61,122 (2009). 

5North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 

130 FERC ¶ 61,051 (2010). When the revised 

to the Department (34 CFR 75.590 and 

75.591). 

5. Continuation Awards: In making a 

continuation award under 34 CFR 

75.253, the Secretary considers, among 

other things: Whether a grantee has 

made substantial progress in achieving 

the goals and objectives of the project; 

whether the grantee has expended funds 

in a manner that is consistent with its 

approved application and budget; and, 

if the Secretary has established 

performance measurement 

requirements, the performance targets in 

the grantee’s approved application. In 

making a continuation grant, the 

Secretary also considers whether the 

grantee is operating in compliance with 

the assurances in its approved 

application, including those applicable 

to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit 

discrimination in programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance 

from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 

104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23). 

VII. Agency Contact 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Terry Jackson, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 4081, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2600. Telephone: (202) 245– 

6039. 

If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the 

Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 

1–800–877–8339. 

VIII. Other Information 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document 

and a copy of the application package in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) by 

contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call 

the FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: November 17, 2104. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27516 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. RD14–13–000] 

Commission Information Collection 

Activities (FERC–725F); Comment 

Request; Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection 

and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission or 

FERC) is soliciting public comment on 

the currently approved information 

collection, FERC–725F (Mandatory 

Reliability Standard for Nuclear Plant 

Interface Coordination: Reliability 

Standard NUC–001–3). 

DATES: Comments on the collection of 

information are due January 20, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

(identified by Docket No. RD14–13–000) 

by either of the following methods: 

• eFiling at Commission’s Web site: 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/

efiling.asp 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

Instructions: All submissions must be 

formatted and filed in accordance with 

submission guidelines at: http://www.

ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For 

user assistance contact FERC Online 

Support by email at ferconlinesupport@

ferc.gov, or by phone at: (866) 208–3676 

(toll-free), or (202) 502–8659 for TTY. 

Docket: Users interested in receiving 

automatic notification of activity in this 

docket or in viewing/downloading 

comments and issuances in this docket 

may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docsfiling/docs-filing.asp. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Brown may be reached by email 

at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone 

at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– 

0873. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: FERC–725F (Mandatory 

Reliability Standard for Nuclear Plant 

Interface Coordination: Reliability 

Standard NUC–001–3). 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0249. 

Type of Request: Three-year extension 

of the FERC–725F information 

collection requirements with no changes 

to the current reporting requirements. 

Abstract: The Commission requires 

the information collected by the FERC– 

725F to implement the statutory 

provisions of section 215 of the Federal 

Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824o). On 

August 8, 2005, the Electricity 

Modernization Act of 2005, which is 

Title XII, Subtitle A, of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), was 

enacted into law.1 EPAct 2005 added a 

new section 215 to the FPA, which 

required a Commission-certified Electric 

Reliability Organization (ERO) to 

develop mandatory and enforceable 

Reliability Standards, which are subject 

to Commission review and approval. 

Once approved, the Reliability 

Standards may be enforced by the ERO 

subject to Commission oversight, or the 

Commission can independently enforce 

Reliability Standards.2

On February 3, 2006, the Commission 

issued Order No. 672, implementing 

section 215 of the FPA.3 Pursuant to 

Order No. 672, the Commission certified 

one organization, North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), 

as the ERO. The Reliability Standards 

developed by the ERO and approved by 

the Commission apply to users, owners 

and operators of the Bulk-Power System 

as set forth in each Reliability Standard. 

On November 19, 2007, NERC filed its 

petition for Commission approval of the 

Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination 

Reliability Standard, designated NUC– 

001–1. In Order No. 716 the 

Commission approved the standard 

while also directing certain revisions.4

Reliability Standard, NUC–001–2, was 

approved by the Commission January 

21, 2010.5 Revised Reliability Standard, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES