Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/04/28/00-10610/office-of-special-education-and-rehabilitative-services-grant-applications-under-part-d-subpart-2-of
Timestamp: 2018-02-24 23:59:27
Document Index: 680500560

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 74', 'arts 74', 'arts 74', 'arts 74', 'arts 74', 'art 1', 'art 79']

25155-25170 (16 pages)
Absolute Priority—Model Demonstration Projects for Children With Disabilities (84.324T)
Project Periods and Associated Funding Levels
Special Requirements Under This Focus Area
Focus 2—K-3 Behavior and Reading Intervention Models
Absolute Priority 1—Training Center in Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers Who Have Visual Impairments, Including Blindness (84.325B)
Absolute Priority 2—Training Center in Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers Who Have Hearing Impairments, Including Deafness (84.325C)
Absolute Priority 4—Center To Inform Personnel Preparation Policy and Practice in Special Education (84.325Q)
Absolute Priority 1—Research Institute on the Use of Assistive Technology In Education (CFDA 84.327G)
Absolute Priority 2—Technology Research-To-Practice (84.327M)
Special Education—Training and Information for Parents of Children With Disabilities [CFDA 84.328]
Absolute Priority—An Evaluation of the State Program Improvement Grant (SIG) Program (CFDA 84.329A)
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/00-10610 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/00-10610
Start Preamble Start Printed Page 25156
This notice provides closing dates and other information regarding the transmittal of applications for FY 2000 competitions under five programs authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended. The five programs are: (1) Special Education—Research and Innovation to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities (one priority); (2) Special Education—Personnel Preparation to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities (four priorities); (3) Special Education—Technology and Media Services for Individuals with Disabilities (two priorities); (4) Special Education—Training and Information for Parents of Children with Disabilities (one priority); and (5) Special Education—Studies and Evaluations Program (one priority).
This notice supports the National Education Goals by helping to improve results for children with disabilities.
In most instances the Assistant Secretary is required to offer interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. However, section 661(e)(2) of IDEA makes the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) inapplicable to the priorities in this notice.
(a) Projects funded under this notice must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities in project activities (see Section 606 of IDEA).
(e) Part III of each application submitted under a priority in this notice, the application narrative, is where an applicant addresses the selection criteria that are used by reviewers in evaluating the application. You must limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than the number of pages listed in the “Page Limits” section under the applicable priority in this notice using the following standards:
Information collection resulting from this notice has been submitted to OMB for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act and has been approved under control number 1820-0028, expiration date July 31, 2000.
Purpose of Program: To produce, and advance the use of, knowledge to: (1) Improve services provided under IDEA, including the practices of professionals and others involved in providing those services to children with disabilities; and (2) Improve educational and early intervention results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.
Eligible Applicants: For focus 2 eligible applicants are Local educational agencies (LEAs), or consortia of local educational agencies, and institutions of higher education (IHEs). For focus 2 eligible applicants are LEAs or IHEs or consortia of LEAs and IHEs.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 82, 85, 97, 98, and 99; (b) The selection criteria for the priorities under this program are drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The specific selection criteria for this priority are included in the funding application packet for this competition.
Under section 672 of the Act and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet the following priority:
This priority supports model demonstration projects that develop, implement, evaluate, and disseminate new or improved approaches for providing special education and related services to children with disabilities. Projects supported under this priority are expected to be major contributors of models or components of models for service providers and for outreach projects funded under IDEA.
Under this absolute priority, the Assistant Secretary will fund projects only in the focus areas listed below.
(a) Use rigorous quantitative or qualitative research and evaluation methods and data and research-based strategies and practices;
(d) Communicate with appropriate audiences through means such as, special education technical assistance providers and disseminators, refereed journal publications and other publications, conference presentations, and a web site.
In addition to the annual two-day Project Directors' meeting in Washington, DC mentioned in the General Requirements section of this notice, projects must budget for another Start Printed Page 25157annual meeting in Washington, DC to collaborate with the Federal project officer and the other projects funded under this priority, to share information and discuss model development, evaluation, and project implementation issues.
The reauthorization of IDEA in 1997 (Public Law 105-17) encouraged “incentives for whole-school approaches and pre-referral intervention to reduce the need to label children as disabled in order to address their learning needs” (section 601(5)(F)) and authorized: (1) IDEA support for school-wide programs under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (section 613(a)(2)(D)); (2) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children (section 613(a)(4)(A)); (3) Integrated and coordinated service systems (section 613(a)(4)(B) and 613(f)); and (4) School-based improvement plans (section 613(g)).
This priority supports model projects that demonstrate how promising and proven research based practices and strategies can be used to develop whole-school approaches that benefit all students, including students with disabilities, and fully implement all other requirements of the law. For example, it is essential that students with disabilities are provided with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) that address their unique needs and provide for the services and supports, including intensive interventions when necessary, that will optimize their achievement. Applicants must demonstrate how they will improve results for students with disabilities.
Specifically, applicants must describe activities to ensure that students with disabilities have access to and succeed in the regular curriculum; receive positive behavioral interventions, supports, and services when appropriate; and are included in State and local assessments.
Flexibility and innovation are encouraged in the design of the models, but every model must involve regular and special education staff in early childhood and prevention services; provide for parent participation; and make available a continuum of services, aids, and supports to meet the needs of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment. It is expected that models funded under this priority will build upon other models, strategies, and practices including those supported under IDEA national activities.
Local educational agencies or consortia of LEAs or institutions of higher education are invited to apply for these grants to foster whole-school projects at (a) primary and elementary school, (b) middle and junior high school, or (c) high school levels. Applicants are encouraged to address at least two of these grade ranges, unless only one grade range is served in the LEA. Regardless of who the project applicant is, a partnership between an LEA and IHE must be demonstrated and maintained throughout the duration of the project. Applicants are required to collaborate with existing OSEP technical assistance centers and evaluation efforts throughout the course of the project.
Projects will be funded for up to 48 months. During the first two funding years, projects may request $150,000 per year. During the third and fourth years of funding, the projects may request up to $75,000 per year.
The Assistant Secretary intends to make approximately 15 awards under this priority. Each of the three grade ranges will be represented in the awards with at least three awards at each level.
Applicants must specify at least one school building, at each grade range addressed in the project, that will participate in the model demonstration project throughout the duration of the grant. Further, the LEA or consortia of LEAs or IHEs must agree to share evaluation data (with protections for anonymity of subjects) on student achievement and project effectiveness with OSEP-sponsored activities, which will synthesize research and evaluation information across the grantees. In addition projects must ensure and demonstrate how they will monitor and document challenges and progress throughout the project.
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $150,000 (exclusive of any matching funds) during the first two 12-month funding periods, or proposes a budget exceeding $75,000 (exclusive of any matching funds) during the final two 12-month funding periods. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.
Effective strategies that intervene early in a child's development are well recognized in improving results for children with disabilities. Unfortunately, approximately sixty percent of the children currently being served under IDEA are typically identified too late to receive full benefit from those interventions. This problem is most prominent with two specific populations of children—those identified for special education and related services under the categories “emotional disturbance” (ED) and “specific learning disabilities” (LD), particularly the 80 percent of LD children who have their primary deficit in reading. These children are often not identified as being eligible for special education and related services until after their disabilities have reached severe proportions. These are children who, very early in their education, experience marked difficulties learning to read or exhibit behaviors that lead to discipline problems as they get older.
There currently exists a substantial and compelling body of research describing these children and telling us how to assess, identify, and help them. For instance, research indicates that both populations of children:
(1) Can be assessed and identified early and with relative ease and accuracy; (2) based on the nature of their disabilities, are at high risk for dropping out of school, becoming discipline problems, and failing in school; (3) often fall behind because they do not receive appropriate interventions earlier; (4) can make tremendous gains when provided with effective services during early childhood; and (5) may need individually tailored interventions because one approach may not fit all children.
A key feature of promising school-wide programs is their emphasis on the inclusion of all students in the school. Effective support for reading and behavior begins by attending to all students. Providing such support, in turn, requires understanding the range of reading difficulties and behavioral challenges students present to schools and a knowledge of the research-based strategies and practices for addressing those difficulties and challenges. To meet these varied needs, intervention systems are often organized into three groups, representing three levels of Start Printed Page 25158means to intervene with difficulties in reading and behavior problems:
(a) Primary prevention involves universal instruction and intervention efforts to avert the onset of problem behaviors and reading deficits such as research-based school-wide reading and behavior programs.
(c) Tertiary prevention involves more intense, specialized interventions, such as one on one interventions, for individual students who despite previous efforts experience chronic problem behavior or marked difficulties in learning to read.
(c) Scaffolding or support in all curriculum areas for children in K-3 with reading and behavior difficulties while providing support for specialized or intensive interventions in reading or behavior;
(d) Continuous assessment to determine and predict progress; and
(e) Simultaneous reading and behavior interventions to target the interdependence of the two.
The purpose of this priority is to support demonstrations of school-based models of effective programs and practices to serve children grades K-3 who are identified as having a marked difficulty learning to read or who exhibit serious behaviors that lead to discipline problems as they get older.
(a) Identify students to participate who have a marked difficulty learning to read or who exhibit serious behaviors that lead to discipline problems later.
(b) Provide evidence of an existing school-wide focus that includes setting and reaching high expectations in reading or behavior and that reflects proven research-based model practices in reading or behavior for all children—
(1) For a school-wide focus on reading, projects must address, if applicable, support from Title I of the Improving America's Schools Act, the Reading Excellence Act, or other Federal or State programs by explicitly stating how those efforts will be coordinated with the activities and budgets of these projects for students with disabilities or developmental delays;
(2) For a school-wide focus on behavior, projects must include or be working toward including the following components—
(vi) Procedures for record keeping and evaluation; and
(3) All projects must demonstrate a commitment of the faculty to address behavior or reading as a school-wide priority.
(c) Demonstrate ongoing linkages, partnerships, and collaboration between local educational agencies (LEAs) and research and training programs at institutions of higher education (IHEs) in the design, implementation and evaluation of the project.
(d) Designate an implementation coordinator and establish a committee, including the principal in each school, to support the project.
(e) Collaborate and link with OSEP supported researchers and technical assistance providers.
(f) Describe how their evaluations will address the following—
(1) Provide information about how children at highest risk are identified;
(2) Monitor each child's progress on a frequent basis, including both formative and summative evaluations;
(3) Establish criteria for a successful program; and
(4) Cooperate with the other OSEP projects and OSEP evaluation efforts throughout the project period to determine core measures and instruments to use for assessment across projects, collect data on project challenges and progress throughout the project, and comply with established data collection procedures.
(g) For reading projects—
(1) Describe the social, environmental, and cultural characteristics of each child; and
(2) Develop comprehensive case studies of each child to determine what is impacting risk, how they perform in other areas, how they performed in pre-school, characteristics related to reading (e.g., pre-reading development; language, speech and articulation; primary and secondary language).
(h) For behavior projects—
(1) Describe the social, environmental and cultural characteristics of participating groups of children or individual children; and
(2) Develop comprehensive case studies of participating groups of children or individual children to determine what is impacting risk, how they perform in other areas, how they performed in pre-school, and characteristics related to behavior.
(i) Establish a school and family link related to reading or behavior.
(j) Describe how an effective model will be sustained when the grant ends and describe how the LEA and IHEs will disseminate the model to other schools and LEAs.
(k) Describe the relationship between the size of the schools where the project will be implemented, number of target students, and amount of money requested.
Projects funded under this priority must schedule one trip, annually to Washington, DC (as specified in the “General Requirements” section of this notice), one trip, annually to Washington, DC (as specified in the “Requirements for All Demonstration Projects” section of this notice), and an additional meeting to take place by the end of the first month of the project.
The Assistant Secretary intends to make up to 5 awards under reading, 5 awards under behavior, and 4 awards under reading and behavior for this focus area. At least one award in each area will be made in high poverty rural or inner city areas based on the submission of credible information by the applicant.
Resource Packet: A resource packet providing information on research-based practices and strategies in reading and behavior is available to assist applicants in choosing research-based models and strategies to implement as part of their model programs. Applicants are encouraged to make use of this information. See the ERIC Clearinghouse web site at http://ericec.org/​osep-sp.htm or call 800-328-0272 (phone/TTY).
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $130,000 for one component or $180,000 for two components (exclusive of any matching funds) for any single budget period of 12 months. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum Start Printed Page 25159amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.
Project Period. Up to 48 months.
Page Limits: The maximum page limits for this focus are 50 double-spaced pages for one component (reading or behavior) and 80 double-spaced pages for two components (reading and behavior).
For this competitive preference, applicants can be awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum total of 110 points.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99; (b) The selection criteria for these priorities are drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The specific selection criteria for these priorities are included in the funding application packet for this competition.
Under section 673(d) of the Act and 34 CFR 75.105 (c)(3), we consider only those applications that meet the following priority:
Services for infants and toddlers with visual impairments, including blindness, and their families are required under Part C of IDEA. Vision specialists and orientation and mobility instructors are key personnel in providing these services.
Most training programs for vision specialists and orientation and mobility instructors focus on the development of professional skills and competencies needed to work with preschool and school-aged learners. A program of study specifically focused on the developmental, conceptual, etiological, and technological needs of infants and toddlers with visual impairments, including blindness, is needed to ensure that professionals have the skills and competencies to meet these unique needs and to assist and support families to enhance the development of their young children.
The purpose of this priority is to support the development of a Center designed to assist training institutions in building their capacity to train early intervention professionals, particularly vision specialists and orientation and mobility instructors, to provide appropriate, effective services to infants and toddlers who have visual impairments, including blindness, and to their families.
The Assistant Secretary establishes an absolute priority to support a training center to carry out a coordinated, integrated, and advanced project to develop, field-test, and disseminate empirically-based pre-service training program modules for personnel in the area of early intervention for infants and toddlers with visual impairment, including blindness, and their families. The program modules must incorporate:
(a) Relevant, research-based curricular content and pedagogical practices designed to meet the unique needs of infants and toddlers with visual impairments, including blindness, and their families in the following areas—
(1) Screening and early identification;
(2) Developmental assessment and evaluation;
(3) Development as it relates to etiological aspects of visual impairments, including blindness;
(4) Intervention practices;
(5) Concept development; and
(6) Knowledge and application of current technologies for use in enhancing growth and development.
(b) Effective practices for working with families of infants and toddlers with visual impairments, including blindness, to enhance the development of their children including—
(1) Partnering with families in Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) development;
(2) Working and communicating with parents of children with visual impairments, including blindness, using effective strategies for teaching adults; and
(3) Assisting and supporting families to identify their strengths, concerns, and priorities.
(a) Partner with Part C lead agencies; the medical community; parent training and information centers and community parent resource centers supported under Part D of IDEA; professional and advocacy organizations; IHEs, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs); and other agencies and organizations involved in providing services to infants and toddlers with visual impairments, including blindness, and their families, in developing and field testing its training program;
(b) Provide training and research opportunities for a limited number of graduate students;
(c) Meet with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) project officer in the first three months of the project to review the proposed project activities;
(d) Prepare and disseminate the products and training modules from the Center in formats that are useful for appropriate audiences;
(e) Conduct research and development activities, using rigorous research methodologies; and
(f) Provide information through a web site. Documents must be in an accessible form.
Project Period: Under this priority, the Assistant Secretary will make one award for a cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 60 months Start Printed Page 25160subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards. During the second year of the project, the Assistant Secretary will determine whether to continue the Center for the fourth and fifth years of the project period and will consider in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a):
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $500,000 for any 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.
Traditionally, university programs preparing personnel to work with hearing impaired children have trained professionals to work with the pre-school through high school population. Despite well-trained personnel in the classroom, academic achievement results for these students have been disappointing. These poor results have been attributed to the fact that, generally, the critical period for language development is from birth to three years of age. Yet, with hearing screening for newborns and infants becoming increasingly routine, hearing impairments are now being diagnosed with greater frequency during the first few months of life, rather than at age two or three, as had been the case previously. Moreover, recent advances in the technology of cochlear implants and digital hearing aids provide the potential for enhanced language development at a much earlier age.
Thus, a program of study specifically focused on the developmental, communication, conceptual, medical, and technological needs of infants and toddlers with hearing impairments, including deafness, is essential to ensure that professionals are equipped with the skills and competencies to meet these unique needs and to assist and support families to enhance the development of their child.
The Assistant Secretary establishes an absolute priority to support a training center to carry out a coordinated and integrated project that will develop, field-test, and disseminate empirically-based pre-service training program modules for students in the area of early intervention for infants and toddlers with hearing impairments, including deafness, and their families.
The model training modules must include—
(a) Relevant, research-based curricular content and pedagogical practices designed to meet the unique needs of infants and toddlers with hearing impairments, including deafness, and their families in the following areas—
(1) Developmental assessment and evaluation;
(2) Medical aspects of hearing impairments as they relate to the developmental needs;
(3) General growth and development of infants and toddlers;
(4) Concept development;
(5) The full range of communication approaches from oral and aural through American Sign Language (ASL); and
(6) Knowledge and application of current technologies for use in enhancing the growth and development of the target population, including cochlear implants and digital hearing aid technology.
(b) Effective practices for working with families of infants and toddlers with hearing impairments, including deafness, to enhance the development of their children including—
(2) Working and communicating with parents of children with hearing impairments including deafness using effective strategies for teaching adults; and
(a) Partner with Part C lead agencies; the medical community; parent training and information centers and community parent resource centers supported under Part D of IDEA; professional and advocacy organizations; IHEs, including HBCUs; and other agencies and organizations involved in providing services to infants and toddlers with hearing impairments, including deafness, and their families, in developing and field testing its training program;
(b) Provide training opportunities for a limited number of graduate students;
Project Period: Under this priority, the Assistant Secretary will make one award for a cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 60 months subject to the requirements of 34 CFR Start Printed Page 2516175.253(a) for continuation awards. During the second year of the project, the Assistant Secretary will determine whether to continue the Center for the fourth and fifth years of the project period and will consider in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a):
(a) Identify needs. Identify knowledge and skill enhancement needs of IHE faculty in each of the targeted training programs (i.e., school administration; regular education teacher training; school counseling; and school nursing) that are most critical to ensuring that trainees in these programs are well prepared to carry out their respective roles and responsibilities in serving children with disabilities in school settings. This need identification process must be guided by a comprehensive review of the extant literature base and supplemented with methodologically sound investigative activities to enhance the current knowledge base where gaps are identified. Informants to this process should include recent program graduates and parents of children with disabilities.
In designing and carrying out the required activities of this National Center, the project must collaborate with individuals and groups of individuals such as deans, IHE faculty, practicing professionals in the targeted training fields and in special education, module design technology experts, dissemination and training entities, and Start Printed Page 25162evaluation experts. Collaborators must include appropriate professional organizations and associations, federally supported technical assistance providers, and federally supported higher education projects, as appropriate.
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not accept an application that proposes a budget exceeding $850,000 for any 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.
Ensuring that children with disabilities are served by an adequate number of highly qualified personnel is the cornerstone of successful implementation of the IDEA Amendments of 1997. Concerns regarding the current and future supply of quality service providers are at the forefront of the national dialogue. There is widespread agreement that ensuring an adequate supply of well-trained, highly qualified service providers into the next decade and beyond will demand informed, targeted, proactive efforts by policy makers at the National, State, and local levels. To be successful, these efforts must be guided by a knowledge base that is comprehensive, meaningful, and accessible. There is a critical need for a comprehensive, coordinated effort to accumulate the extant knowledge base and to address identified gaps in that knowledge base.
Under this priority, the Assistant Secretary will support a Center to inform personnel preparation policy and practice in special education by examining issues and recommending actions relevant to ensuring an adequate supply of well qualified personnel to serve children with disabilities. These personnel include, early interventionists, early childhood service providers, special education teachers, related service providers, regular education teachers, and paraprofessionals, as appropriate to specific priority requirements. The Center must:
(a) Conduct a comprehensive review of the extant literature base in the following areas:
(1) Licensure and certification standards and requirements for personnel serving children with disabilities. This review must include, at a minimum, available information, across all States and for each type of personnel, on:
(i) Current licensure and certification standards and requirements including alternative certification options;
(ii) Motivations for changes in, and resulting modifications to licensure standards and requirements; and
(iii) Intended vs. actual impacts of these changes on personnel quantity and quality;
(2) Pre-service preparation for personnel to serve children with disabilities. The purpose of this review is to develop a profile of the current status of training programs for all types of personnel who serve children with disabilities. This profile should be designed to provide rich descriptions of training programs at the institutional, State, and National levels. This review must include, at a minimum, available information on:
(i) Program entry mechanisms such as admissions criteria and recruitment strategies;
(ii) Program structural features such as program level (associate, undergraduate, graduate), trainee and faculty ratios, tenure track and adjunct faculty ratios, internal and external sources of support (including State support and OSEP and other Federal support), training emphasis (categorical, multi-categorical, noncategorical), and program history;
(iii) Program content features such as alignment with the principles and requirements of IDEA, alignment with current licensure and certification standards, extent to which program content reflects research-based knowledge and practice, depth and breadth of practicum opportunities, cross-disciplinary arrangements with other relevant programs (particularly regular education), and collaborative relationships with LEAs to provide induction support;
(iv) Student demographic characteristics such as age, prior training and experience, racial and cultural diversity, and disability;
(v) Program quality assurance features such as program quality indicators and procedures for assessing program quality (including on-the-job performance of program completers); and Start Printed Page 25163
(vi) Program outcome features such as the number of students completing the program; entrance into, and retention in, relevant positions for program completers; and the extent to which program completers assume positions in proximity to, or distant from, the training program location.
(3) Current and projected supply of, and demand for, personnel to serve children with disabilities. This review must include, at a minimum, available information, at the National, State and local level, on:
(ii) The extent to which identified supply and demand discrepancies vary by personnel type and locality; and
(iii) Factors that influence supply and demand discrepancies such as salary and wage structures, economic climate, population demographics, licensure and certification standards and requirements, and proximity to relevant training programs.
(b) Identify critical gaps in the current knowledge base and design and conduct a program of study to address these gaps. The project must identify the most critical gaps in the current knowledge base on the basis of the comprehensive review conducted in paragraph (a) and design and conduct a program of study to address the identified critical gaps. The program of study must be guided by a conceptual framework that integrates the most pressing needs for expanded knowledge and that will directly inform needed changes in policies and practices at all levels (Federal, State, and local and in institutions of higher education). The program of study must employ a rigorous research and evaluation methodology and must be reviewed and accepted by panels of content, research, and evaluation experts. Panels of experts must be identified in collaboration with OSEP staff and convened by the applicant. The program of study must be designed to enhance, not duplicate, any current research and evaluation efforts, including those supported by OSEP and other Federal agencies.
(c) Identify and disseminate policy and practice recommendations. On the basis of the comprehensive literature review conducted under paragraph (a), and the results of the program of study designed and conducted under paragraph (b), the project must identify emerging policy and practice recommendations related to: meeting current and projected demand; establishing meaningful licensure and certification standards and requirements; and providing effective training programs that produce highly qualified personnel to serve children with disabilities. Policy and practice recommendations must be reviewed and accepted by panels of experts in the identified topics. Panel members must be identified in collaboration with OSEP staff and convened by the project. Dissemination activities must be designed and carried out in collaboration with special education technical assistance providers and disseminators and with organizations and associations that represent policy maker audiences at the Federal, State, and local levels. Dissemination activities must also incorporate the use of state of the art communications technology and include information that is available and accessible through a web site. Documents must be in an accessible form.
The project must collaborate with OSEP staff in strategic planning throughout the term of the project. A face-to-face meeting must be scheduled to occur within one month of the project award date to review the proposed project activities.
Costs associated with convening panels of experts as identified under paragraphs (b) and (c) must also be included in the project budget.
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $850,000 for any 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.
(c) The degree to which the project's design and technical strategies result in the dissemination of significant new knowledge.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to promote the development, demonstration, utilization of technology and to support educational media activities designed to be of educational value to children with disabilities. This program also provides support for eligible captioning, video description, and cultural activities.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Start Printed Page 25164Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99; (b) The selection criteria for the priorities under this program are drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The specific selection criteria for each of these priorities are included in the funding application packet for the applicable competition.
Eligible Applicants: State and local educational agencies; institutions of higher education; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated States; Indian tribes or tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations. Eligible applicants for Absolute Priority 2 are limited to local educational agencies as defined in IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1401).
Technology has enhanced the lives of children with disabilities by providing them with access to the classroom and to learning. The Congress recognized this in passing the IDEA Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17. These amendments introduced a provision requiring that teams responsible for developing an individualized education program (IEP) for a child with a disability “consider whether the child requires assistive technology devices and services.”
Section 602(1) of IDEA defines an assistive technology (AT) device as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability.” According to Section 602(2), an AT service means, “any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology device * * *”. The definition further describes an AT service as including such services as evaluation, purchasing, selection, coordination with other interventions, and training for the child and family as well as training or technical assistance for professionals.
Data on children's use of AT are sparse. The statistics that do exist tend to focus on AT devices that provide physical or sensory access such as hearing aids, Braille, or wheelchairs. Less is known about the use of assistive technologies that can be used to support learning needs such as word-processing software, spellcheckers, or calculators.
There is little argument that low, medium, and high technology devices can help individuals with disabilities perform functions that foster independence. Low-technology devices are simple, nonelectrical aids such as head pointers, adaptive eating utensils, or communication boards. Medium technology devices are aids that might use electricity, but are not computer driven, such as talking calculators or electronic organizers. High technology devices are computer based, such as multimedia databases or voice recognition systems.
While these devices foster access to the classroom and to learning, there also are factors that may limit their widespread use. One factor is awareness. School districts may not have access to the latest information about technology or may not know where to go to get that information. A second factor is financial. Purchasing materials requires knowledge, trained personnel, time, money, and planning. Without such elements in place students may not gain timely access to AT devices. Training is another factor, not just for the child using the technology, but for practitioners who need to understand how to use a full continuum of technology in the classroom. School districts are still learning how best to provide students with the technology they need and are seeking alternative and cost-effective means to gain access to key technologies.
The Assistant Secretary establishes an absolute priority for a research institute to study the use of AT to improve the provision of a free appropriate public education for children with disabilities.
The Institute must study a range of school districts, reflecting diverse demographics in size, locale, and socio-economic conditions. Methodologies employed by the Institute may include but need not be limited to: interviews; case studies; focus groups; reviews of records; observations; and policy analyses.
The Institute must consider what factors enhance or impede decisionmaking, planning, acquisition, maintenance, training, and instruction in the use of AT. At a minimum, the Institute must answer the following research questions:
(a) Prevalence:
What percentage of children with disabilities require various type of AT devices and services? What functions do these devices and services need to perform for the individual child?
(b) School District Policy and Resources:
What policies or guidelines and processes are in place to help the IEP team make decisions about AT devices and services? What resources are in place to finance AT devices and services (e.g., medicaid)? How do districts acquire AT? How is the technology managed and maintained?
(c) IEP Practices:
How are the individual's needs for the technology evaluated? How does the IEP team, including the student and family, determine when an AT device or service is appropriate? How is the appropriate technology selected, designed, or adapted to the individual child?
(d) Training and Support:
What training and technical assistance is available for teachers, other service providers, families, students, employers, and other appropriate individuals regarding AT? Are structures in place to promote collaboration between regular and special education teachers? What coordination is there with other agencies or service providers?
(e) Instruction:
What policies and practices are in place to support the use of AT in the learning environment? How is the technology integrated into classroom curriculum and instruction? Are evaluation measures in place to ensure that individual student's access and academic needs are being appropriately met by the technology?
(f) Student Outcomes:
How do AT devices and services affect student academic, social, and functional outcomes? How do AT devices and services affect school and classroom environments?
The Institute must design and implement a dissemination approach that promotes the use of current knowledge and ongoing research findings. This approach must:
(a) Develop links with appropriate Education Department technical assistance providers to communicate research findings and distribute products;
(b) Collaborate as appropriate with other research institutes supported under the IDEA, other experts and researchers in related subject matter and methodological fields, and other related agencies such as the National Institute Start Printed Page 25165on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) and the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA).
(c) Develop an accessible website to link participating school districts and to provide up-to-date information on findings;
(d) Prepare the research findings in formats that are useful for specific audiences, such as regular and special education practitioners, administrators, and policy makers;
(e) Fund at least three graduate students per year as research assistants who have concentrations in disability issues and technology;
(f) Meet with the OSEP project officer and appropriate OSEP staff in the first three months of the project to review the strategic work plan and the approach to dissemination; and
(g) Budget three trips annually to Washington, DC (two trips to meet and collaborate with U.S. Department of Education officials and one trip, as specified in the “General Requirements” for all projects section of this notice, to attend the two-day Office of Special Education Programs Project Directors' Conference).
Project Period: Under this priority, the Assistant Secretary will make one award for a cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 48 months with an option to extend the project for six months for dissemination activities subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards.
In determining whether to award the third and fourth year of the project, during the second year, the Assistant Secretary will consider in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a):
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts selected by the Assistant Secretary. The services of the review team, including a two-day site visit to the project, are to be performed in the sixth month of the project's second year and may be included in that year's evaluation required under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the services to be performed by the review team must also be included in the project's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be approximately $6,000;
(c) The degree to which the Institute's design and technical strategies demonstrate the potential for disseminating significant new knowledge.
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $700,000 for any single budget period of 12 months. The Assistant Secretary of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.
For further information or clarification see the World Wide Web at: http://www.air.org/​TECHIDEAS
A number of recent research and development efforts, many with Federal support, have focused on using technology to improve educational and early intervention results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities. These efforts have spanned a range of technologies, curriculum areas, student ages, and special needs. In some cases, these efforts have developed and tested new technology devices or products. Examples include devices that provide access to educational and early intervention for children with sensory or physical impairments, and instructional software for children with special learning needs. Other efforts have focused on using already-available products or technologies to meet special educational and early intervention needs. Examples include new methods for using the World Wide Web or commercially available software to address the needs of children with disabilities.
The results of these research and development efforts are not applied in practice as widely as they should be. In part, this is because the adoption of new technology approaches in education or early intervention can be a demanding process, requiring a sustained commitment from the school and district, and often requiring guidance and assistance from outside sources. The 1995 Office of Technology document entitled Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection (available on the World Wide Web at http://www.wws.princeton.edu/​~ota/​disk1/​1995/​9541.html), and Office of Special Education (OSEP) documents (available on the World Wide Web at http://www.air.org/​TECHIDEAS) delineate a number of factors and approaches related to the implementation of technology in education and early intervention. Important factors include leadership and planning, access to appropriate technology, training, ongoing technical support and coaching, collaboration, and adequate teacher time. Careful consideration of factors, such as these, is essential for the sustained and effective implementation of new approaches to using technology to improve educational and early intervention results for infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities.
This priority supports local school systems or early intervention providers in implementing research-based approaches for using technology to improve educational or early intervention results for infants, toddlers, or children with disabilities. Projects must:
(a) Describe and implement an approach for using technology to improve results for one or more of the following levels: early intervention, preschool, elementary, middle school, or high school. Projects may use technology in a way that benefits children without disabilities, as long as the benefits for children with disabilities are clear and documented. The Assistant Secretary intends to fund at least two projects at each of the following levels: early intervention, preschool, elementary school, middle school, and high school;
(b) Provide credible prior research evidence of the effectiveness of the approach for improving educational and Start Printed Page 25166early intervention results. Some resources for identifying research-based approaches are available on the World Wide Web at http://www.air.org/​TECHIDEAS. Approaches not referenced on this web site may also be used if there is research evidence of their effectiveness with infants, toddlers, or children with disabilities;
(c) Describe and carry out a process for implementing and sustaining the approach in one or more schools, including a process for continued implementation of the approach after the Federal funding awarded under this priority ends;
(d) Describe and carry out a rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of the approach in improving educational or early intervention results for infants, toddlers, or children with disabilities;
(e) Post quarterly updates on project progress on a World Wide Web site designated by OSEP, and participate in topical discussions on the World Wide Web site; and
(f) Spend no more than 25 percent of the 36-month total of funds awarded under this priority for technology equipment and software.
Within this absolute priority, we will give the following competitive preference under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), to applications that are otherwise eligible for funding under this priority:
Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which an application demonstrates that participating schools are in high poverty rural or inner city areas.
We will also give the following competitive preference under section 606 of IDEA and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), to applications that are otherwise eligible for funding under this priority:
For purposes of these competitive preferences, applicants can be awarded up to a total of 20 points in addition to those awarded under the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum total of 120 points.
Maximum Award: We will reject and will not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding $170,000 for any 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.
Under section 682(e) of IDEA, the Assistant Secretary is required to: (a) Make at least one award to a parent organization in each State, unless the Assistant Secretary does not receive an application from such an organization in each State of sufficient quality to warrant approval; and (b) select among applications submitted by parent organizations in a State in a manner that ensures the most effective assistance to parents, including parents in urban and rural areas, in the State.
(b) Has a membership that represents the interest of individuals with disabilities and must establish a special governing board meeting the requirements for a board of directors in paragraph (a) and develops a memorandum of understanding between this special governing board and the board of directors of the organization that clearly outlines the relationship between the board and the committee and the decisionmaking responsibilities and authority of each.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 97, 98, and 99; (b) The selection criteria for this priority are drawn from the EDGAR general selection criteria menu. The specific selection criteria for this priority are included in the funding application packet for this competition.
Under section 682 of the Act and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), the Assistant Secretary gives an absolute preference to applications that meet the following priority. The Assistant Secretary funds under this competition only those applications that meet this priority:
The IDEA Amendments of 1997 strengthen the role of parents and increase their involvement in decisions about their children's education. In order to allocate resources more equitably, create a unified system of service delivery, and provide the broadest coverage for the parents and families in every State, the Department is making awards in five (5)-year cycles for each State. In fiscal year 2000, applications for 5-year awards will be accepted for the following States: Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and West Virginia.
In addition to the above State awards, the Assistant Secretary intends to fund one award in the Virgin Islands and one award in American Samoa.
Applications will be accepted for FY 2000 interim competitions in the State of New York. The Assistant Secretary intends to fund two awards for one year each for the following:
(a) One Center in the State of New York that will serve one or more underserved populations in a metropolitan area. This award will be for $185,000; and
(b) One Center in the State of New York that will serve a metropolitan area with an emphasis on outreach to unserved or underserved populations. This award will be for $154,800.
The Assistant Secretary proposes to establish an absolute priority to support Start Printed Page 25167Parent Training and Information Centers that—
(e) Contract with the State education agency, if the State elects to contract with the Parent Training and Information Center, for the purpose of meeting with parents who choose not to use the mediation process to encourage the use, and explain the benefits, of mediation consistent with section 615(e)(2)(B) and (D) of IDEA;
(1) The number of parents to whom Parent Training and Information Centers provided information and training in the most recently concluded fiscal year, and
(i) If there is more than one parent center in a particular State, coordinate their activities to ensure the most effective assistance to parents in that State.
In order to demonstrate eligibility to receive a grant, an applicant must describe how its board or special governing committee meets the criteria for a parent organization in section 682(g) of IDEA. In addition, any parent organization that establishes a special governing committee under section 682(g)(2) of IDEA must demonstrate that the by-laws of its organization allows the governing committee to be responsible for operating the project (consistent with existing fiscal policies of its organization).
Current funding levels, population of school age children, and the relative proportion of children living in poverty will be considered in determining funding levels for grants.
Estimated Project Awards: Project award amounts are for a single budget period of 12 months. The FY 2000 State awards, including Virgin Islands and American Samoa, and interim State awards, are listed below:
Hawaii—$160,680
Idaho—$158,780
Louisiana—$257,100
New Hampshire—$158,600
North Carolina—$311,700
Oklahoma—$198,180
Pennsylvania—$469,750
Rhode Island—$159,400
Tennessee—$279,800
West Virginia—$160,680
Virgin Islands—$107,820
American Samoa—$107,120
New York (Interim Awards)—$339,800
Purpose of Program: To assess progress in implementing IDEA, including State and local efforts to provide free appropriate public education to children with disabilities, and early intervention services to infants and toddlers with disabilities.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Start Printed Page 25168Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99;
(b) The selection criteria for the priority under this program are drawn from the EDGAR general selection menu. The specific selection criteria for this priority are included in the funding application packet for the applicable competition.
Eligible Applicants: State and local educational agencies; institutions of higher education; other public agencies; for-profit organizations; private nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated States; and Indian tribes or tribal organizations.
Under section 674 of IDEA and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet the following priority:
A new discretionary program became part of IDEA during the 1997 reauthorization. Part D, Subpart 1—State Program Improvement Grants for Children with Disabilities—was added for the purpose of assisting State educational agencies and their partners in reforming and improving their educational, early intervention, and transitional service systems, including their systems for professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about best practices to improve results for children with disabilities.
Beginning in FY 1999, SIGs were awarded to State educational agencies on a competitive basis for five years at amounts of $500,000 to $1,800,000 per year depending on the relative population of the States, amount of funds available, and the types of activities proposed. Specific grant activities were based on State improvement plans that were developed based on assessments of State and local needs and by authorizing legislation. Eighteen States received grant awards in FY 1999 [1] and approximately seven additional awards will be made in FY 2000.
The evaluation study to be awarded under this priority will be largely formative in nature; that is, the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs will use the data collected in this evaluation to:
(a) Inform the reauthorization of this program in 2002;
(b) Suggest related or supportive priorities for discretionary funding;
(c) Improve future SIG competitions; and
(d) Improve SIG project management at the Federal level.
The purpose of this priority is to fund one five-year cooperative agreement that will evaluate the SIG program, as implemented by States receiving grants under this competition (CFDA 84.323A).
(a) The evaluation must provide—
(1) Information and recommendations regarding the extent to which this program is meeting, and is likely to meet in the future, three fundamental goals of the program:
(i) To implement systemic improvements in the provision of educational, early intervention, and transitional services to infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities, including systems for professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of best practice;
(ii) To use professional development and technical assistance activities as a means to achieving systemic improvements; and
(iii) To improve results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities as an outcome of systemic change.
(2) Information on the extent to which the requirements in the Act applicable to SIGs contribute to the achievement of program goals in paragraph (1).
(b) At a minimum, this project must—
(i) A description of the overall approach or type of evaluation to be conducted;
(ii) An initial set of evaluation questions based on the purposes of the evaluation as stated previously.
(iii) A matrix of potential sources of evaluation data for SIG projects receiving funds during the five-year term of this cooperative agreement, the methods of data collection, the instruments to be used, and other measurement issues related to each of the evaluation questions. Qualitative or quantitative data collection methods may be proposed; however, the methods chosen must:
(A) Allow data to be collected with precision; and
(B) Maximize validity and reliability; and
(iv) An analysis plan that outlines the type of data to be gathered and the specific analyses to be conducted, including appropriate statistical or valuational criteria to be applied to these data. The plan should also indicate how best to communicate the results of the analyses to Congress, OSEP, and other interested parties.
(2) Propose a timeline for implementing the design over the five-year project period that allows for refining the evaluation design in the first year, establishing contacts with the SIG grantees, developing and pilot testing instruments and executing the OMB forms clearance process;
(3) Propose a communication plan with OSEP that describes:
(i) Methods for providing consistent and timely updates regarding the progress of this project and for identifying any constraints or barriers that arise in implementing the final evaluation design, budget changes, preliminary findings, and reports. The communication plan should include the annual Grant Performance Report for Continuation Funding and, at minimum, one meeting annually with OSEP staff in Washington, DC (in conjunction with the meeting described in the “General Requirements” section of this notice) to discuss project implementation issues and preliminary findings. This annual meeting is in addition to the meeting described in paragraph (4);
(ii) A series of interim reports containing study findings relative to the research questions and consistent with the timeline for implementing the design. At least one of these interim reports must be developed prior to the expiration of the authorization for the SIG program in September 2002; and
(iii) A final technical report of the evaluation (due 60 months following the start date of the project) that contains, at minimum, the following sections:
(B) Background information on the SIG program;
(F) Conclusions, Recommendations, and Options.
A detailed outline of the final report shall be submitted for review by the project officer 56 months after the start date of the project. In addition, the project officer shall have an opportunity to provide input on a draft version of the final report due 57 months after the start date of the project;
(4) Meet with the OSEP project officer and other OSEP staff within three weeks Start Printed Page 25169of the start date for the project to review and revise, if necessary, the proposed evaluation design (including the evaluation questions and analysis plan), the timeline and communication plan. The final versions of these documents, including any changes resulting from this meeting, will be incorporated into the requirements of the cooperative agreement; and
(5) Implement the evaluation consistent with the design, timeline, and communication plan.
Project Period: Under this priority, the Assistant Secretary will make one award for a cooperative agreement with a project period of 60 months subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation awards.
In deciding whether to continue this project for the fourth and fifth years, the Assistant Secretary, will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and in addition—
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts selected by the Assistant Secretary. The services of the review team, including a two-day site visit to the grantee, are to be performed during the last half of the project's second year and may be included in that year's evaluation required under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the services to be performed by the review team must also be included in the project's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be approximately $6,000;
(c) The extent to which the project's design and methodology is likely to yield findings that may be utilized by other appropriate agencies and organizations.
Within this absolute priority, we will give the following competitive preferences under section 606 of IDEA and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), to applications that are otherwise eligible for funding under this priority:
Up to ten (10) points based on the effectiveness of the applicant's strategies for employing and advancing in employment qualified individuals with disabilities in project activities as required under paragraph (a) of the “General Requirements” section of this notice. In determining the effectiveness of those strategies, the Assistant Secretary can consider the applicant's success in pursuit of this goal.
Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which the applicant can demonstrate previous success in preparing and submitting a forms clearance package for OMB approval and participating in the forms clearance process as part of a previous project funded by the Department of Education.
Within these competitive preferences, applicants can be awarded up to a total of 20 points in addition to those awarded under the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an applicant meeting both these competitive preferences could earn a maximum total of 120 points.
For Further Information Contact: Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, room 3317, Switzer Building, Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 260-9182.
All programs in this notice (except for Research and Innovation 84.324T) are subject to the requirements of Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. The objective of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism by relying on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2000
84.324T Model Demonstration Projects 05/05/00 06/16/00 N/A Up to 48 mos 50 15
Focus Area 1: First two 12-month funding periods $150,000
Focus Area 2 180,000 50/80 14
84.325B Training Center In Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers Who Have Visual Impairments Including Blindness 05/05/00 06/16/00 08/15/00 500,000 Up to 60 mos 70 1
84.325C Training Center In Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers Who Have Hearing Impairments Including Deafness 05/05/00 06/16/00 08/15/00 500,000 Up to 60 mos 70 1
84.325F National IHE Faculty Enhancement Center to Improve Results for Children with Disabilities in School 05/05/00 06/16/00 08/15/00 850,000 Up to 60 mos 70 1
84.325Q Center to Inform Personnel Preparation Policy and Practice in Special Education 05/05/00 06/16/00 08/15/00 850,000 Up to 60 mos 70 1
84.327G Research Institute on the Use of Assistive Technology in Education 05/05/00 06/23/00 08/22/00 700,000 Up to 48 mos 70 1
84.327M Technology Research to Practice 05/05/00 06/30/00 08/29/00 170,000 36 months 50 1
84.328M Parent Training and Information Centers 05/05/00 06/23/00 08/22/00 Up to 60 mos 50 10
Hawaii 160,680
Idaho 158,780
Louisiana 257,100
New Hampshire 158,600
North Carolina 311,700
Oklahoma 198,180
Pennsylvania 469,750
Rhode Island 159,400
Tennessee 279,800
West Virginia 160,680
Virgin Islands 107,820
American Samoa 107,120
New York (Interim) 339,800 Up to 12 mos 50 2
84.329A An Evaluation of the State Improvement Grant Program 05/05/00 06/30/00 08/29/00 500,000 60 months 70 1
1 The Assistant Secretary rejects and does not consider an application that proposes a budget exceeding the amount listed for each priority for any single budget period of 12 months.
2 Applicants must limit the Application Narrative, Part III of the Application, to the page limits noted above. Please refer to the “Page Limit” requirements included under each priority description and in the “General Requirements” section of this notice. The Assistant Secretary rejects and does not consider an application that does not adhere to this requirement.
1. Detailed information on the FY 1999 SIG projects is available from the Federal Resource Center web site (http:/www.dssc.org/​frc/​sigres.htm).
[FR Doc. 00-10610 Filed 4-27-00; 8:45 am]