FR Doc 04-6195
[Federal Register: March 18, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 53)]
[Notices]
[Page 12841-12845]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18mr04-42]
Download: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
RIN 1865-ZA02
Safe Schools/Healthy Students
AGENCY: Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed priority, selection criteria, requirements,
and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Departments of Education (ED), Health and Human Services
(HHS), and Justice (DOJ) issue this notice to propose a priority,
selection criteria, requirements, and definitions for the Safe Schools/
Healthy Students Initiative (SS/HS). We propose this action to focus
Federal financial assistance on safe, disciplined and drug-free
learning environments and healthy childhood development. We intend the
priority to support the implementation and enhancement of integrated,
comprehensive community-wide plans that create safe and drug-free
schools and promote healthy childhood development. The Associate Deputy
Under Secretary may use this priority, selection criteria, requirements
and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2004 and later
years.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before April 19, 2004.
[[Page 12842]]
ADDRESSES: Address all comments about this proposed priority, selection
criteria, requirements, and definitions to Karen Dorsey, U.S.
Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E347,
Washington, DC 20202-6450. If you prefer to send your comments through
the Internet, use the following address: Karen.Dorsey@ed.gov. Please
include the following in the subject line of all e-mails, "Comments on
SS/HS NPP."
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Dorsey. Telephone (202) 708-4674
or via Internet: Karen.Dorsey@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) 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 the proposed priority,
selection criteria, requirements and definitions. To ensure that your
comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final
priority, selection criteria, requirements, and definitions, we urge
you to identify clearly the specific proposed priority, selection
criterion, requirement or definition your comment addresses.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Order 12866 and its overall requirements of
reducing regulatory burden that might result from the proposed
priority, selection criteria, requirements and definitions. 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 this proposed priority in room 3E316 at 400 Maryland
Avenue, SW., 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
printer magnifier, to an individual with a disability who needs
assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public
rulemaking record for this proposed priority, selection criteria,
requirements and definitions. 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 priority, selection criteria,
requirements, and definitions in a notice in the Federal Register. We
will determine the final priority, selection criteria, requirements,
and definitions 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, other selection
criteria, or other requirements, or changing definitions, subject to
meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, we will 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 priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or
(2) selecting an application that meets the competitive 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)).
Discussion of Proposed Priority
Background
The SS/HS grant program draws on the best practices of the
education, justice, social service, and mental health systems to
promote enhanced resources for prevention programs and prosocial
services for youth. The SS/HS grant program is based on evidence that a
comprehensive, integrated community-wide approach is an effective way
to promote healthy child development and address the problems of school
violence and alcohol and other drug abuse. Key to the grant program is
the creation and implementation of a comprehensive plan that addresses
violence and alcohol and other drug abuse and promotes prosocial skills
and healthy child development for youth.
A critical feature of SS/HS is the linking and integration of
existing and new services and activities into a comprehensive approach
to violence prevention and healthy child development that reflects an
overall vision for the community, not the isolated objectives of a
single activity, particularly the reliance on security devices alone.
The primary objectives of a community's SS/HS plan should be to present
a thoughtful, well-coordinated strategy that will unify and enhance
existing programs and services and to develop a systematic approach for
sustaining those activities, curricula, programs, and services that
prove to be effective.
Proposed Priority
This proposed priority would support the projects of local
educational agencies proposing to implement an integrated,
comprehensive community-wide plan designed to create safe and drug-free
schools and promote prosocial skills and healthy childhood development
in youth. Plans must focus activities, curricula, programs, and
services in a manner that responds to all of the following six
elements:
Element One--Safe school environment--Note: We
propose that no more than 10 percent of the total budget for each year
may be used to support costs associated with (1) security equipment and
personnel, and (2) minor remodeling of school facilities to improve
school safety;
Element Two--Alcohol and other drugs and
violence prevention and early intervention programs;
Element Three--School and community mental
health preventive and treatment intervention services;
Element Four--Early childhood psychosocial and
emotional development programs;
Element Five--Supporting and connecting schools
and communities; and
Element Six--Safe school policies.
Discussion of Proposed Selection Criteria
Background
The SS/HS grant program was established in 1999 with the award of
54 grants. The SS/HS grant program was created to provide Federal
financial
[[Page 12843]]
assistance to school districts and communities to promote ongoing
partnerships as a way of enhancing and expanding their existing
activities relating to youth violence prevention and healthy child
development. Since the original competition in 1999 two additional
competitions have been held (FY 2001 and FY 2002). Our experience with
competitions, peer reviewers, applicants, and funded grantees
demonstrates the need to develop selection criteria that more
adequately represent the qualities of successful SS/HS grantees. For
example, selection criteria used in previous competitions may have
unintentionally limited the opportunity for reviewers to evaluate the
existence of an applicant's partnership and its capacity to use Federal
financial assistance efficiently and effectively to enhance and expand
current activities.
To improve the program we held focus groups with current grantees
and other professionals with a working knowledge of the SS/HS program
to identify key qualities of successful SS/HS grantees and gathered
related input from the Federal program staff who monitor SS/HS grants.
All of these factors were used to develop the following proposed
selection criteria.
Proposed Selection Criteria
We propose the following selection criteria for this program:
1. Community Assessment
(a) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, opportunities, and/or resources have been identified
and will be addressed by the proposed project and the nature and
magnitude of those gaps and weaknesses are based on quantitative and
qualitative data for the district, students, families and the
community. An example of the kinds of problems that might be identified
and addressed would be a high number of truant students, in relation to
comparable jurisdictions, and a lack of truancy officers and programs.
(b) The extent to which existing services, infrastructure,
opportunities and resources are described and integrated with the
proposed project. An example citing existing services would be the
number of after school programs available to students that would be
improved by adding supplemental services and staff through the proposed
project.
(c) The extent to which the applicant will serve the entire school
district or the extent to which sufficient rationale is provided for
selecting particular schools and/or areas and why a district-wide
approach is not feasible or appropriate.
(d) The extent to which the target population is clearly identified
and defined in terms of the number of students/families/staff to be
served.
2. Goals, Objectives and Performance Indicators
(a) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and performance
indicators for the project are related to data provided in the
``Community Assessment'' section.
(b) The extent to which the applicant includes at least one
measurable and attainable performance indicator for each of the six
elements in the priority and at least one performance indicator for the
SS/HS partnership, for a total of at least seven performance
indicators.
(c) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and performance
indicators are reflected in proposed programs, curricula, and other
activities.
(d) The extent to which the applicant includes baseline data and a
source of data for the periodic measuring of progress of project-
specific performance indicators and for required Government Performance
and Results Act (GPRA) performance indicators.
3. Project Design
(a) The extent to which the project design builds upon community
assessment data, and/or identified gaps or weaknesses in existing
services, infrastructure, opportunities, and resources.
(b) The extent to which the applicant can demonstrate that
programs, training, curriculum, and other activities selected for the
project reflect current research and use evidence-based and effective
practices and that they are responsive to the targeted population to be
served, including meeting cultural and linguistic needs.
(c) The extent to which the proposed short- and long-term
strategies will promote healthy child development and school
environments that are safe, disciplined, and drug-free.
(d) The extent to which the proposed short- and long-term
strategies allow for systematic development of infrastructure that
builds organizational, community, and individual capacity to sustain
outcomes beyond the life of the grant.
(e) The extent to which the project design addresses the six
elements of the priority, integrating existing and new services into a
comprehensive approach to violence prevention and healthy childhood
development.
4. Partnership and Community Readiness
(a) The extent to which the applicant has demonstrated the
existence of an active school-community partnership prior to planning
and submitting its SS/HS application. Examples of how to demonstrate
the existing partnership can include a description of the history of
the partnership, including the circumstances around its creation and
accomplishments to date.
(b) The extent to which the applicant will engage multiple and
diverse sectors of the community in its strategic planning process.
Examples of possible community participants include but are not limited
to nonprofit community groups, faith-based organizations, private
schools, teachers, youth, parents, and supervisory and line staff of
social service agencies.
(c) The extent to which the applicant's memorandum of agreement for
SS/HS Partners includes: A mission statement for the SS/HS partnership;
a delineation of the roles and responsibilities of each partner; a
process for communicating and sharing resources; and other pertinent
information to evaluate the partnership's likelihood of successfully
implementing the project.
(d) The extent to which the applicant's memorandum of agreement for
mental health services demonstrates the willingness of the mental
health authority to provide administrative oversight of mental health
services. This agreement describes a process for securing mental health
providers and procedures to be used for referral, treatment, and
follow-up for children and adolescents with serious mental health
problems. This agreement provides evidence that there will be
integration, coordination, and resource sharing with mental health and
social service providers by schools and other community-based programs.
5. Evaluation
(a) The extent to which the applicant describes an appropriate
evaluation design--using both quantitative and qualitative methods,
including: (1) What types of data will be collected; (2) when various
types of data will be collected; (3) what evaluation methods will be
used and why; (4) what instruments will be developed and when; (5) how
the data will be analyzed; (6) when reports of results and outcomes
will be available; (7) how data and other information will be used for
strategic planning, measuring progress, making programmatic
adjustments, and keeping the proposed strategy focused on its
[[Page 12844]]
overall objective of promoting healthy childhood development and
preventing violence and alcohol and other drug abuse; and (8) how the
applicant will use the information collected through the evaluation to
support SS/HS GPRA indicators.
(b) The extent to which the individual or organization that has
been selected or will be sought to serve as the local evaluator has
adequate qualifications and experience to conduct the local evaluation.
(c) The extent to which the applicant allocates an appropriate and
reasonable level of resources to local project evaluation. Please note:
Consistent with funding restrictions established for the program, a
minimum of 7 percent of the total budget must be designated for local
evaluation activities.
6. Program Management
(a) The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of key
staff, including the full-time project director, and partners are
defined.
(b) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time, including clearly defined timelines
with reasonable dates for implementing and accomplishing project tasks.
(c) The adequacy of procedures for communicating and sharing
information among all partners, to ensure feedback and continuous
improvement in the operation of the project.
7. Budget
(a) The extent to which the proposed budget and narrative
correspond to the project design and provide adequate documentation and
justification for how funds will be used and how costs were calculated.
(b) The extent to which the applicant demonstrates current fiscal
control and accounting procedures to ensure prudent use, proper and
timely disbursement, and accurate accounting of funds received under
the grant.
Additional Selection Factors
We propose to consider the following two factors in selecting an
application for an award: (1) Geographic distribution and diversity of
activities addressed by the projects; and (2) equitable distribution of
funds among urban, suburban and rural local educational agencies.
Discussion of Proposed Requirements
Background
SS/HS applicants from prior competitions have suggested that we
clarify certain of the SS/HS application and other requirements. These
include: Eligibility requirements; requirements that must be met for an
application to be forwarded to peer review; the maximum funding that
may be requested; and the limits on the amount of funds that may be
used for certain grant activities. Accordingly we propose the following
requirements:
Proposed Requirements
Application and Eligibility. We propose that, before we will submit
an SS/HS application for peer review, the applicant must meet the
following requirements:
(1) The local educational agency/applicant must not have received
funds or services under the SS/HS initiative under any previous fiscal
years.
(2) The applicant's request for funding must not exceed the maximum
amount established for its defined urbancity. The maximum request for
SS/HS funds is $3 million for urban schools for a 12-month period; $2
million for suburban schools for a 12-month period; and $1 million for
rural and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools for a 12-month period.
To determine urbancity and the maximum amount they are eligible to
apply for, all applicants except BIA schools must use the district
locale code on the National Public School and School District Locator
website and the definitions established for rural, suburban and urban
to determine urbanicity. A BIA school's request must not exceed $1
million.
(3) The applicant must include in its application two memoranda of
agreement demonstrating the commitment of the required SS/HS partners.
Two agreements must be signed by the required partners (as described
below) and dated no earlier than six months prior to the SS/HS
application deadline. Applicants must also include information in the
application that supports the selection of the identified local law
enforcement and juvenile justice partner and describe how those
partners' activities will support and be integrated in the SS/HS
strategy. Applicants must contact their State Department of Mental
Health to identify the relevant local public mental health authority.
Mental health entities that have no legal authority in the
administrative oversight of the delivery of mental health services are
not acceptable as the sole mental health partner. Each SS/HS
application must include the local public mental health authority (as
defined elsewhere in this notice) as a partner. (The local public
mental health authority is not required to provide mental health
services to the target population but must provide administrative
control or oversight of the delivery of mental health services.)
(a) The first of these two agreements is the Memorandum of
Agreement for the SS/HS Partners. This agreement must contain the
signatures of the school superintendent and authorized representatives
for the local public mental health authority and local law enforcement
and juvenile justice agencies. This agreement must include the
following information: A mission statement for the SS/HS partnership;
the goals and objectives of the partnership; desired outcomes for the
partnership; a description of how information will be shared among
partners; and a description of the roles and responsibilities of each
partner. Applicants submitting as a consortium of LEAs must demonstrate
partnership with the relevant local law enforcement agency (or
agencies), public mental heath authority (or authorities) and juvenile
justice agency (or agencies) for each of the participating LEAs in the
consortium. Applicants must indicate those instances where a local law
enforcement agency, public mental health authority, or juvenile justice
agency has authority or jurisdiction for one or more of the
participating LEAs in the consortium.
(b) The second of these two agreements is the Memorandum of
Agreement for Mental Health Services. This agreement must contain the
signatures of the school superintendent and the authorized
representative of the local public mental health authority. The local
public mental health authority must agree to provide administrative
control and/or oversight of the delivery of mental health services.
This agreement also must state procedures to be used for referral,
treatment, and follow-up for children and adolescents with serious
mental health problems. Applicants submitting as a consortium of LEAs
must demonstrate partnership with the relevant public mental health
authority (or authorities) for each of the participating LEAs in the
consortium. Applicants must indicate those instances where a local
public mental health authority has authority/jurisdiction for one or
more of the participating LEAs in the consortium.
Proposed Funding Restrictions
We propose that no less than 7 percent of a grantee's budget for
each year may be used to support costs associated with local evaluation
activities.
Proposed Definitions
Several important terms associated with this competition are not
defined in
[[Page 12845]]
the statute. We propose the following definitions:
1. Authorized representative--We propose defining the term
authorized representative as the official within an organization with
the legal authority to give assurances, make commitments, enter into
contracts, and execute such documents on behalf of the organization as
may be required by the Department of Education (the Department),
including certification that commitments made on grant proposals will
be honored and that the applicant agrees to comply with the
Department's regulations, guidelines, and policies.
2. Local law enforcement agency--We propose defining the term local
law enforcement agency as the agency (or agencies) that has law
enforcement authority for the LEA. Examples of local law enforcement
agencies include: municipal, county, and state police; tribal police
and councils; and sheriffs' departments.
3. Local public mental health authority--We propose defining the
term local public mental health authority as the entity legally
constituted (directly or through contract with the State mental health
authority) to provide administrative control or oversight of mental
health services delivery within the community.
4. Local juvenile justice agency--We propose defining the term
local juvenile justice agency as an agency or entity at the local level
that is officially recognized by state or local government to address
juvenile justice system issues in the communities to be served by the
grant. Examples of juvenile justice agencies include: Juvenile justice
task forces; juvenile justice centers; juvenile or family courts;
juvenile probation agencies; and juvenile corrections agencies.
5. Urban districts--We propose defining the term urban districts as
those with a designated locale code of Large Central City (1) or Mid-
Size Central City (2) using the National Center for Education
Statistics' National Public School and School District Locator
(available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).
6. Suburban districts--We propose defining the term suburban
districts as those with a designated local code of Urban Fringe of
Large City (3) or Urban Fringe of Mid-Size City (4) using the National
Center for Education Statistics' National Public School and School
District Locator (available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).
7. Rural districts--We propose defining the term rural districts as
those with a designated local code of Large Town (5), Small Town (6) or
Rural, outside MSA (7), or Rural, inside MSA (8) using the National
Center for Education Statistics' National Public School and School
District Locator (available online at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/).
Executive Order 12866
This notice of proposed priority, selection criteria, requirements
and definitions 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 the notice of proposed
priority, selection criteria, requirements and definitions are those
resulting from statutory 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 notice of proposed priority, selection
criteria, requirements and definitions we have determined that the
benefits of the proposed priority 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.
Summary of potential costs and benefits: The potential costs
associated with this proposed priority, selection criteria,
requirements, and definitions are minimal while the benefits are
significant. Grantees may anticipate costs with completing the
application process in terms of staff and partner time, copying, and
mailing or delivery.
The benefit of this proposed priority, selection criteria,
requirements, and definitions is that grantees that develop a
comprehensive, community-wide SS/HS plan may receive significant
Federal assistance to support the implementation and enhancement of
prevention and intervention activities, programs and services that
create safe and drug-free schools and promote healthy childhood
development.
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 strengthened
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State
and local governments for coordination and review of the proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
action for this program.
Applicable Program Regulations
The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR)
in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 98, 99, and 299.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as 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.html.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 84.184L Safe
Schools/Healthy Students.)
Program Authority: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
Act (20 U.S.C. 7131); Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa);
and Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (42 U.S.C.
5614(b)(4)(e) and 5781 et seq.).
Dated: March 16, 2004.
Deborah Price,
Deputy Under Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools.
[FR Doc. 04-6195 Filed 3-17-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P