[Federal Register: March 30, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 61)]
[Notices]
[Page 15126-15129]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30mr07-67]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Technical Assistance on Data Collection--General Supervision
Enhancement Grants
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed priorities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services proposes three funding priorities under the
Technical Assistance on State Data Collection program. The Assistant
Secretary may use these priorities for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2007 and later years. We take this action to focus attention on an
identified national need to provide technical assistance to improve the
capacity of States to meet data collection requirements relating to
their State academic assessment systems.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before June 13, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about these proposed priorities to
Larry Wexler, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 4053, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20204-2700. If you
prefer to send your comments through the Internet, use the following
address: larry.wexler@ed.gov.
You must include the term ``Data Collection Priorities'' in the
subject line of your electronic message.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Wexler. Telephone: (202) 245-
7571.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation To Comment
We invite you to submit comments regarding these proposed
priorities. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in
developing the notice of final priorities, we urge you to identify
clearly the specific proposed priority that each comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirement of
reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed
priorities. Please let us know of any further opportunities we should
take to reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while
preserving the effective and efficient administration of the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about these proposed priorities in room 4019, 550 12th Street,
SW., Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30
a.m. and 4 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday of each week
except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking
Record
On request, we will supply an appropriate aid, such as a reader or
print magnifier, to an individual with a disability who needs
assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public
rulemaking
[[Page 15127]]
record for these proposed priorities. If you want to schedule an
appointment for this type of aid, please contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
We will announce the final priorities in a notice in the Federal
Register. We will determine the final priorities after considering
responses to this notice and other information available to the
Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing or funding
additional priorities, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking
requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use any of these proposed priorities, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting
applications we designate the priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational. The effect of each type of priority
follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by either
(1) awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent
to which the application meets the competitive preference priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets
the competitive preference priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the invitational
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over
other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Note: The Secretary is proposing three separate funding
priorities addressing data collected under Part B and Part C of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as amended (IDEA).
Although these are being proposed in one notice, we anticipate these
priorities would be funded through separate competitions. Eligible
entities must submit separate applications under each of the
priorities for which they wish to apply.
Priorities
Background of Proposed Priority A--Modified Academic Achievement
Standards
On December 15, 2005, the Secretary published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register (70 FR 74624) requesting public
comment on proposed regulations under the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001. The proposed regulations would provide States with flexibility
regarding State, local educational agency (LEA), and school
accountability for the achievement of a group of students with
disabilities who can make significant progress, but may not reach
grade-level achievement standards within the same time frame as other
students.
The proposed regulations would permit States to develop modified
academic achievement standards (and assessments that measure
achievement based on those standards) that are aligned with grade-level
content standards. States and LEAs would be permitted to include the
proficient and advanced scores from assessments based on modified
academic achievement standards in adequate yearly progress (AYP)
determinations, subject to a cap of 2.0 percent at the district and
State levels based on the total number of students in the grades
assessed.
The Secretary anticipates issuing final regulations in the near
future. We further anticipate that, once these regulations become
effective, many States will need support in developing, enhancing, or
redesigning their assessment systems to include assessments that are
aligned with modified academic achievement standards.
Proposed Priority A--Modified Academic Achievement Standards
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for grants to support States with one or
more of the following activities: (1) Development of modified academic
achievement standards which must be based on the State's academic
content standards for the grade in which a student is enrolled; (2)
development of State assessments based on modified academic achievement
standards; and (3) development of clear and appropriate guidelines for
individualized education program (IEP) Teams to use in determining
which students should be assessed based on modified academic
achievement standards, and the development and implementation of
training on those guidelines.
Assessments based on modified academic achievement standards must
be designed to generate valid scores that can be used for AYP
accountability purposes under the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(NCLB). These data also will be part of the data required by the Part B
State Performance Plans and Annual Performance Reports on the
performance and participation of children with disabilities on State
assessments under section 616 of the Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act.
Applicants must include information in their application on how
they will work with experts in large-scale assessment and special
education to ensure that they are designing modified academic
achievement standards, and assessments based on those standards, that:
(1) Address the needs of students with disabilities; (2) validly,
reliably, and accurately measure student performance; and (3) result in
high quality data for use in evaluating the performance of schools,
districts, and States. The experts selected should represent the range
of skills needed to develop assessments based on modified academic
achievement standards for students with disabilities that will meet the
peer review guidelines for assessments published by the Department in
the spring of 2004 that are available at http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/saaprguidance.pdf.
Skill sets for experts must include
experience with one or more of the following: (1) Large scale
assessment; (2) standards-setting techniques; (3) assessment and
measurement of children with disabilities; (4) accommodations and
supports to assess grade-level content; (5) working with States to
develop assessments; (6) development of criterion referenced tests and
instruments; (7) psychometric evaluation; (8) conducting studies of the
technical adequacy of assessment instruments; and (9) research and
publishing in the area of assessment and psychometrics.
Projects funded under this priority also must--
(a) Budget to attend a three-day Project Directors' meeting;
(b) If the project maintains a Web site, include relevant
information and documents in a format that meets a government or
industry-recognized standard for accessibility; and
(c) Provide a written assurance that the State's Assessment Office
(e.g., the office that addresses accountability under the ESEA, as
amended by the NCLB) was given the opportunity to contribute to the
formulation of the application.
Background of Proposed Priority B--Alternate Academic Achievement
Standards
The Department's Title I regulations in 34 CFR part 200 regarding
children with the most significant cognitive disabilities permit a
State to develop alternate academic achievement standards for students
with the most significant cognitive disabilities and to include those
students' proficient and advanced scores on alternate assessments based
on alternate
[[Page 15128]]
achievement standards in measuring adequate yearly progress (AYP) at
the State and district levels, subject to a cap of 1.0 percent of the
total number of students in the grades assessed. Alternate assessments
based on alternate achievement standards, as permitted by the Title I
regulations, also are recognized as an appropriate assessment method in
section 612(a)(16) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA).
Alternate assessments that are used by States and local educational
agencies (LEAs) under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(NCLB), must be designed to generate valid data that can be used for
purposes of determining AYP. Alternate assessments also must meet the
requirements in 34 CFR 200.2 (State Responsibilities for Assessment)
and 34 CFR 200.3 (Designing State Academic Assessment Systems),
including the requirements relating to validity, reliability, and high
technical quality; and fit coherently in the State's overall assessment
system under 34 CFR 200.2. The alternate assessment must, among other
things: (1) Be valid and reliable for the purposes for which the
assessment system is used; (2) be consistent with relevant, nationally-
recognized professional and technical standards; and (3) be supported
by evidence from test publishers or other relevant sources that the
assessment system is of adequate technical quality for each purpose
required under the ESEA, as amended by NCLB. States must include
alternate assessment data in their State Performance Plan and Annual
Performance Reports relative to performance and participation of
children with disabilities on State assessments under the IDEA.
The Department proposes the following priority because many States
need assistance in: (1) Developing alternate academic achievement
standards aligned with the State's academic content standards; (2)
developing high-quality alternate assessments that measure the
achievement of students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities based on those standards; and (3) reporting on the
participation and performance of students with disabilities on
alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement
standards.
Proposed Priority B--Alternate Academic Achievement Standards
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for grants to support States with one or
more of the following activities: (1) Develop alternate academic
achievement standards aligned with the State's academic content
standards; (2) develop high-quality alternate assessments that measure
the achievement of students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities based on those standards; and (3) report on the
participation and performance of students with disabilities on
alternate assessments based on alternate academic achievement
standards.
Applicants must include information in their applications on how
they will work with experts in large-scale assessment and special
education to ensure that they are designing alternate academic
achievement standards, and assessments based on those standards, that:
(1) Address the needs of students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities; (2) validly, reliably, and accurately measure student
performance; and (3) result in high quality data for use in evaluating
the performance of schools, districts, and States. The experts selected
should represent the range of skills needed to develop assessments
based on alternate academic achievement standards for students with the
most significant cognitive disabilities that will meet the peer review
guidelines for assessments published by the Department in the spring of
2004 that are available at http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/saaprguidance.pdf.
Skill sets for experts must include experience with
one or more of the following: (1) Large scale assessment; (2)
standards-setting techniques; (3) assessment and measurement of
children with disabilities; (4) accommodations and supports to assess
grade-level content; (5) working with States to develop assessments;
(6) development of criterion-referenced tests and instruments; (7)
psychometric evaluation; (8) conducting studies of the technical
adequacy of assessment instruments; and (9) research and publishing in
the area of assessment and psychometrics.
Projects funded under this priority also must--
(a) Budget to attend a three-day Project Directors' meeting;
(b) If the project maintains a Web site, include relevant
information and documents in a format that meets a government or
industry-recognized standard for accessibility; and
(c) Provide a written assurance that the State's Assessment Office
(e.g., the office that addresses accountability under the ESEA, as
amended by the NCLB) was given the opportunity to contribute to the
formulation of the application.
Background of Proposed Priority C--Outcome Measures
The cornerstone of any accountability system is the development of
outcome indicators against which progress can be measured. State
performance reports, self-assessments, and other extant data show that
most States and Lead Agencies as defined under Part C of the IDEA
(Section 635(a)(10)), as well as their local educational agencies and
Early Intervention Service programs, do not have well developed systems
for measuring the progress of infants, toddlers, and young children
with disabilities and their families served under Part B and Part C of
IDEA or methods to collect and analyze Part B and Part C outcome
indicator data. Therefore, most States lack the capacity to collect
sufficient data to determine the impact of early intervention and
special education services for these children.
Proposed Priority C--Outcome Measures
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services proposes a priority for projects that address the needs of
States for technical assistance to improve their capacity to meet
Federal data collection requirements in one or both of two focus areas.
Focus Area One. This Focus Area supports the development or
enhancement of Part B State systems for collecting, analyzing, and
reporting preschool outcome indicator data. Projects funded under this
Focus Area must focus on improving the capacity of the State to provide
information that could be used to determine the following:
(a) The outcomes associated with preschool children with
disabilities participating in State Part B programs.
(b) If the State has standards for preschool disability outcomes,
whether preschool children with disabilities are meeting those
standards.
(c) Trend data on outcomes associated with preschool children with
disabilities and the extent to which preschool children with
disabilities are meeting State standards.
Focus Area Two. This Focus Area supports the development or
enhancement of Part C systems for collecting, analyzing, and reporting
outcome indicator data. Projects funded under this Focus Area must
focus on improving the capacity of the State to provide information
that could be used to determine the following:
[[Page 15129]]
(a) The outcomes associated with infants and toddlers with
disabilities and their families participating in State Part C programs.
(b) If the State has standards for early intervention outcomes,
whether infants and toddlers with disabilities are meeting those
standards.
(c) Trend data on outcomes associated with infants and toddlers
with disabilities and their families and the extent to which infants
and toddlers with disabilities are meeting State standards.
Projects funded under this priority also must--
(a) Budget to attend a three-day Project Directors' meeting;
(b) If the project maintains a Web site, include relevant
information and documents in a format that meets a government or
industry-recognized standard for accessibility; and
(c) Provide a written assurance that the State's Assessment Office
(e.g., the office that addresses accountability under the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001) was given the opportunity to contribute to the
formulation of the application.
Executive Order 12866
This notice of proposed priorities has been reviewed in accordance
with Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have
assessed the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with this regulatory action are
those resulting from statutory and regulatory requirements and those we
have determined as necessary for administering this program effectively
and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this regulatory action, we have determined that the
benefits of the proposed regulatory action justify the costs.
We have also determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive
Order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened
federalism. The Executive Order relies on processes developed by State
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal
financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: 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 on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.htm
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.373X Technical
Assistance on Data Collection--IDEA General Supervision Enhancement
Grant)
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c) and 1416(i)(2).
Dated: March 26, 2007.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. E7-5930 Filed 3-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P