[Federal Register: June 4, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 28435-28443]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[[Page 28435]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Department of Education
_______________________________________________________________________
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notices
[[Page 28436]]
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research;
Final Funding Priorities for Fiscal Year 1996-1997
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of Final Funding Priorities for Fiscal Years 1996-1997
for a Research and Demonstration Project, Rehabilitation Research and
Training Centers, and a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final funding priorities for the
Research and Demonstration Project (R&D) Program, Rehabilitation
Research and Training Center (RRTC) Program, and Rehabilitation
Engineering Research Center (RERC) Program under the National Institute
on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) for fiscal years
1996-1997. The Secretary takes this action to focus research attention
on areas of national need. These priorities are intended to improve
rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on July 5, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Esquith, U.S. Department of
Education, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Switzer Building, Room 3424,
Washington, D.C. 20202-2601. Telephone: (202) 205-8801. Individuals who
use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD
number at (202) 205-8133. Internet: David--Esquith@ed.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains final priorities to
establish: one R&D project for research on emerging disability
populations, two RRTCs for research related to vocational
rehabilitation services to individuals who are blind or visually
impaired and vocational rehabilitation services to individuals who are
deaf or hard of hearing; and one RERC for research on technology for
older persons with disabilities.
NIDRR is in the process of developing a revised long-range plan.
The final priorities in this notice are consistent with the long-range
planning process. These final priorities support the National Education
Goal that calls for all Americans to possess the knowledge and skills
necessary to compete in a global economy and exercise the rights and
responsibilities of citizenship.
Note: This notice of final priorities does not solicit
applications. A notice inviting applications under these
competitions is published in a separate notice in this issue of the
Federal Register.
On March 25, 1996, the Secretary published three separate notices
of proposed priorities in the Federal Register (61 FR 12062-12068). The
Department of Education received 13 letters commenting on the three
notices of proposed priorities by the deadline date. Three additional
comments were received after the deadline date and were not considered
in this response. Technical and other minor changes--and suggested
changes the Secretary is not legally authorized to make under statutory
authority--are not addressed.
Analysis of Comments and Changes--Research and Demonstration Projects
Program
This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed
priorities.
Priority: Emerging Disability Populations
Comment: One commenter recommended that individuals with
tuberculosis be included among the emerging disability populations.
Discussion: The Secretary believes that an applicant could propose to
include individuals with tuberculosis as part of the universe of
individuals who will be addressed by the project. However, the
Secretary believes that applicants should have the discretion to define
and characterize the emerging universe of disability.
Changes: None.
Analysis of Comments and Changes--Rehabilitation Research and Training
Centers (RRTCs)
This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed
priorities.
Priority 1: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are
Blind or Visually Impaired
Comment: One commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to conduct
``a survey and analysis of the long-term efficacy, and employment
results, of education for print-disabled students which includes
reliance on taped texts.''
Discussion: The Secretary believes that studying the effectiveness
and impact of the education provided to print-disabled students is
outside the scope of the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to address
barriers in transportation and information management.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that barriers in transportation
and information management can have a significant impact on the
employment status of individuals with disabilities. The Secretary
believes that an applicant could propose to study the effect of
vocational rehabilitation services on those barriers. However, the
Secretary prefers to provide applicants with the discretion to propose
specific topics for investigation.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC on individuals who
are blind or visually impaired address computer-related technological
advancements and issues of accessibility to the information
superhighway and develop methods of improving access to these vital
areas.
Discussion: The Secretary points out that a NIDRR grantee, the
Trace Center at the University of Wisconsin, currently addresses a wide
range of computer and information systems issues related to persons
with disabilities. The Secretary does not believe that research on
computer-related technological advancements and issues of accessibility
to the information superhighway is within the scope of this priority.
However, the Secretary does believe that an applicant for this RRTC
could propose to train or provide technical assistance to
rehabilitation professionals on pertinent issues related to computer-
related technological advancements and the information superhighway.
Changes: None.
Other Changes
Discussion: The Secretary believes that training State vocational
rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology for
individuals who are blind or visually impaired is an important function
for the RRTC to perform.
Changes: The priority has been revised to require the RRTC to
conduct at least three conferences to train State vocational
rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology for
individuals who are blind or visually impaired.
Priority 2: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are
Deaf or Hard of Hearing
Comment: One commenter recommended identifying new accommodation
strategies that utilize advanced technology.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that new accommodation strategies
that utilize advanced technology are needed. The Secretary points out
that the RRTC
[[Page 28437]]
is required to identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques
or reasonable accommodations that address barriers to entering or
maintaining employment, including those using emerging assistive
technology such as assistive listening devices, telecommunications
equipment, and remote access technology. The Secretary does not believe
any further requirements are necessary in order to address the
commenter's recommendation.
Changes: None.
Comment: The same commenter recommended that the RRTC study States'
policies on the provision of accommodations for communication, such as
assistive listening devices and realtime captioning in addition to sign
language interpreting services. Discussion: The Secretary believes that
an applicant could propose to investigate how States' policies on the
provision of communication accommodations affect the vocational
rehabilitation services provided to persons who are deaf or hard of
hearing. However, the Secretary prefers to provide applicants with the
discretion to propose specific topics for investigation.
Changes: None.
Comment: The same commenter recommended requiring the RRTC to train
consumers and employers on accommodations in addition to rehabilitation
professionals. The commenter also recommended expanding the target
audience of the national information and resource referral data base to
consumers and employers. A second commenter stressed the need for the
development and dissemination of consumer-oriented materials and
recommended the development of print and media materials that can be
used by consumers, as well as employers and rehabilitation
professionals.
Discussion: The Secretary believes that the RRTC should develop and
disseminate materials that can be used by consumers. The Secretary
agrees that requiring the RRTC to train consumers and employers on
accommodations would be worthwhile as long as it did not diminish the
training that the RRTC provides to rehabilitation professionals.
Similarly, the Secretary agrees consumers and employers could benefit
from access to the national information and resource referral data
base.
Changes: The priority has been revised to include, as appropriate,
consumers and employers in the training provided to rehabilitation
professionals on accommodations. In addition, the priority has been
revised to require the RRTC to develop and disseminate consumer-
oriented materials, and include consumers and employers as part of the
target audience for the national information and resource referral data
base.
Comment: Three commenters addressed the inclusion of low-
functioning individuals who are deaf in the priority. The commenters
questioned the ability of the RRTC to address the wide range of needs
evidenced by persons who are deaf, late-deafened, hard of hearing, or
low-functioning deaf.
Discussion: The Secretary recognizes that the persons who are deaf,
late-deafened, hard of hearing, or low-functioning deaf have a wide
range of vocational rehabilitation needs. The Secretary expects the
RRTC to include staff with expertise in all of these areas. The
Secretary believes one Center, using a holistic approach, is best
suited to address the unique and common needs of persons who are deaf
or hard of hearing.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters expressed a concern that the priority
simply repeated the current priority and would not advance the field.
The commenters indicated that a sufficient body of knowledge existed on
the employment status of individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing.
The commenters recommended that the RRTC build on the work that has
been completed by the current RRTC in this area and focus on the
development and verification of intervention strategies.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the RRTC should utilize
existing information and build upon the work of the current RRTC in
this area. If valid and reliable information exists regarding the
employment status on individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, the
Secretary expects the RRTC to update this information as necessary. In
addition, the Secretary believes that the priority requires the RRTC to
develop a level of detail that does not currently exist regarding the
employment status of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. The
Secretary believes that applicants should have the discretion to
propose how they will fulfill the purposes of the RRTC.
Regarding the intervention strategies, the Secretary agrees that
the RRTC should develop and verify intervention strategies. The
Secretary points out that the second purpose of the RRTC is, in part,
to develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or reasonable
accommodations that address barriers to employment. The Secretary does
not believe any further requirements are necessary in order to
accomplish the commenters' recommendation.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC address literacy
skills development.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that literacy skills development
is a critical programming area that should be emphasized in the
priority.
Changes: The priority has been revised to require the RRTC to
identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or reasonable
accommodations that address literacy skills development.
Comment: The same commenter indicated that the third and fourth
purposes of the priority should not be presented as separate
activities, but should apply to all of the purposes in the priority.
Discussion: The Secretary believes that the training and data base
development purposes of the priority are discrete activities that do
not apply to all of the purposes of the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: The same commenter recommended emphasizing the inclusion
of low-functioning deaf individuals in the requirement to solicit and
utilize input from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in the
planning, development, and implementation of the grant.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the priority should be
revised to ensure that the RRTC solicits and utilizes input from low-
functioning deaf individuals.
Changes: The priority has been revised to emphasize the inclusion
of low-functioning deaf individuals in the planning, development, and
implementation of the grant.
Comment: One commenter recommended broadening the coordination
requirement to include grantees from RSA and the Office of Special
Education Programs (OSEP), such as the Regional Centers on
Postsecondary Education.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that it would be beneficial for
the RRTC to expand its coordination efforts to include grantees from
OSEP and RSA.
Changes: The priority has been revised to broaden the RRTC's
research coordination requirements to include grantees from OSEP and
RSA.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC emphasize the
needs of deaf individuals with mental illness.
Discussion: The Secretary recognizes the unique needs of deaf
individuals with mental illness. The Secretary believes that an
applicant could propose to emphasize the needs of deaf
[[Page 28438]]
individuals with mental illness. However, the Secretary prefers to
provide applicants with the discretion to propose areas of emphasis.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RRTC for individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing address computer-related technological
advancements and issues of accessibility to the information
superhighway and develop methods of improving access to these vital
areas.
Discussion: One commenter points out that a NIDRR grantee, the
Trace Center at the University of Wisconsin, currently addresses a wide
range of computer and information systems issues related to persons
with disabilities. The Secretary does not believe that research on
computer-related technological advancements and issues of accessibility
to the information superhighway is within the scope of this priority.
However, the Secretary does believe that an applicant for this RRTC
could propose to train or provide technical assistance to
rehabilitation professionals on pertinent issues related to computer-
related technological advancements and the information superhighway.
Changes: None.
Analysis of Comments and Changes--Rehabilitation Engineering Research
Center (RERC)
This section contains an analysis of the comments and the changes
in the priorities since the publication of the notice of proposed
priorities.
Priority: Assistive Technology for Older Persons With Disabilities
Comment: One commenter recommended targeting older persons and
their caregivers for dissemination activities.
Discussion: The Secretary points out that the priority requires the
RERC to target its dissemination initiative to disability and elderly
organizations as well as assistive technology service providers
activities. The Secretary believes that older persons with disabilities
and their caregivers will receive information from the RERC through the
dissemination activities of the organizations and service providers.
The Secretary does not believe any further requirements are necessary
in order for older persons with disabilities and their caregivers to
receive information from the RERC.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RERC's research include
those ``at risk'' to develop severe disabilities. The same commenter
recommended that the RERC conduct general studies on effects of
assistive technology on physiological function in the elderly.
Discussion: The Secretary believes that the only ``at-risk''
populations that are within the scope of the priority are those
individuals with disabilities who are at-risk of developing secondary
disabilities or aggravating their current disability. The Secretary
does not believe that elderly persons who do not have disabilities, but
who are ``at-risk'' of developing a disability, are within the scope of
the priority. Similarly, the Secretary believes that the RERC may
pursue general studies on the effects of assistive technology on
physiological function for elderly persons who have disabilities, but
may not pursue such studies for elderly persons who do not have
disabilities.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the RERC's testing of
assistive devices should include quantitative assessment of outcomes.
Discussion: The Secretary points out that the testing of prototype
devices is a general requirement of the RERC. The Secretary believes
that applicants may propose to include quantitative assessment of
outcomes. However, the Secretary believes that applicants should have
the discretion to propose specific testing methodologies.
Changes: None.
Research and Demonstration Projects
Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public agencies
and private agencies and organizations, including institutions of
higher education, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations. This program
is designed to assist in the development of solutions to the problems
encountered by individuals with handicaps in their daily activities,
especially problems related to employment (see 34 CFR 351.1). Under the
regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 351.32), the Secretary may
establish research priorities by reserving funds to support the
research activities listed in 34 CFR 351.10.
Priority
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet
this absolute priority:
Priority: Emerging Disability Populations
Background
Demographic and social trends indicate that the prevalence and
distribution of various types of disability are changing, and that new
populations of individuals are emerging to create unique demands on
social policy and service systems. These new populations frequently
result from such factors as: (1) Changing etiologies for existing
disabilities; (2) growth in segments of the population with higher
prevalence rates for certain disabilities, including the aging of the
population in general and the population of individuals with
disabilities in particular; (3) the unintended consequences of changes
in public policy; or (4) the introduction of new disabilities.
The first category includes, for example, mental retardation that
results from high-risk births, (President's Committee on Mental
Retardation, The New Morbidity, 1993) or spinal cord injury resulting
from interpersonal violence (Stover, unpublished communique to NIDRR,
1994). The second category is exemplified by higher incidence and
prevalence of activity limitations due to impairments typically
correlated with increased age. (LaPlante, 1995). Examples include the
onset of sensory loss in older persons, or certain strength-limiting
musculoskeletal or neuromuscular diseases. A subset of this category is
represented by the acquisition of secondary disabilities or new
exacerbations of existing disabilities among individuals with
disabilities as they age, for example post-polio syndrome or
deterioration of stressed joints. The third category of emerging
disabilities may have iatrogenic causes or may result from
inappropriate societal interventions such as institutionalization or
segregation during which the acquisition of social skills and learning
opportunities are forfeited. Social policies such as
deinstitutionalization into inadequately supportive environments, while
not necessarily creating new disabilities, have led to different
manifestations of problems associated with long-term mental illness,
including homelessness, abuse, involvement in the criminal justice
system, and the acquisition of additional disabilities and health
problems. Other disabilities, particularly secondary disabilities, may
result from policy decisions that result in inadequate preventive
services. The final category includes persons with newly emergent
disabilities, most
[[Page 28439]]
clearly illustrated by persons living with HIV disease and AIDS, and by
environmental or workplace disabilities such as repetitive motion
syndrome, environmental allergies, and various hidden disabilities.
The causes of each of these categories of disabilities are such
that emergent disabilities tend to be differentially distributed
throughout the population in ways that are not typical of other common
disabilities. While there is a strong correlation between disability
and poverty generally, (LaPlante, 1995; The New Morbidity, 1993;
McNeil, 1995; Aday, 1993) these emergent disabilities appear to be
inordinately concentrated among the poor, minorities, youth, the aged,
the poorly educated, and those who already have other disabilities.
The underlying causes of these emergent disabilities may be socio-
behavioral, environmental, or socio-economic, but are most often a
combination of these elements. Among the most important factors
creating this ``emerging universe of disability'' are interpersonal
violence, such as shootings, battery, or child abuse; low-birthweight
and other high-risk births, often to mothers who are young teenagers,
substance abusers, HIV-positive, or with poor prenatal care; aging,
with or without prior existing disabilities; high risk behaviors
involving substance abuse or sexual activities; and secondary
conditions, often resulting from inadequate acute or long-term care.
The nation lacks a clear understanding of the existence of these
disabilities, which are closely related to an individual's position in
the social structure, and certainly does not comprehend the possible
consequences for the disability service systems of a new population of
disabled persons from among what one author calls ``the vulnerable.''
(Aday, 1993). There are many gaps in the knowledge base about risk
factors associated with the emergence of disability, as there are no
comprehensive surveillance systems or epidemiological studies.
Priority
The Secretary will establish a research and demonstration project
to: (1) Define and characterize the emerging universe of disability;
(2) assess the incidence and prevalence of these ``new universe''
disabilities; (3) identify etiologies associated with these
disabilities; and (4) evaluate the implications of these emerging
disabilities for service systems and social policy. In addition to
activities proposed by the applicant to carry out these purposes, the
proposed R&D project shall carry out the following activities:
* Determine and test methods, using a range of existing
databases, to estimate and describe the emerging universe of disability
both for the present and in the future, and assess the feasibility of
using existing, or establishing new, surveillance systems to predict
and characterize future emerging disabilities;
* Assess the particular needs of the emerging universe, both
now and for the future, for vocational rehabilitation, special
education, medical and psychosocial rehabilitation, independent living
services, and assistive technology services, as well as for community-
based supports, income supports, and medical assistance;
* Analyze the implications for the selection, preparation,
and training of personnel, including professionals and peers, to
provide services to the emerging universe, and for the ways in which
services should be delivered;
* Design a practical and prioritized agenda for a future
research program to develop interventions and policy approaches to
address the disability-related problems of various segments of the
emerging universe; and
* Convene a conference of individuals both within and
outside of the disability field to discuss the Center's findings and
their implications.
APPLICABLE PROGRAM REGULATIONS: 34 CFR parts 350 and 351.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTCs)
Authority for the RRTC program of NIDRR is contained in section
204(b)(2) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760-
762). Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public and
private organizations, including institutions of higher education and
Indian tribes or tribal organizations, for coordinated research and
training activities. These entities must be of sufficient size, scope,
and quality to effectively carry out the activities of the Center in an
efficient manner consistent with appropriate State and Federal laws.
They must demonstrate the ability to carry out the training activities
either directly or through another entity that can provide such
training.
The Secretary may make awards for up to 60 months through grants or
cooperative agreements. The purpose of the awards is for planning and
conducting research, training, demonstrations, and related activities
leading to the development of methods, procedures, and devices that
will benefit individuals with disabilities, especially those with the
most severe disabilities.
Under the regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 352.32) the
Secretary may establish research priorities by reserving funds to
support particular research activities.
Description of the Rehabilitation Research and Training Center Program
RRTCs are operated in collaboration with institutions of higher
education or providers of rehabilitation services or other appropriate
services. RRTCs serve as centers of national excellence and national or
regional resources for providers and individuals with disabilities and
the parents, family members, guardians, advocates or authorized
representatives of the individuals.
RRTCs conduct coordinated and advanced programs of research in
rehabilitation targeted toward the production of new knowledge to
improve rehabilitation methodology and service delivery systems,
alleviate or stabilize disabling conditions, and promote maximum social
and economic independence of individuals with disabilities.
RRTCs provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to assist individuals to more effectively provide
rehabilitation services. They also provide training, including
graduate, pre-service, and in-service training, for rehabilitation
research personnel and other rehabilitation personnel.
RRTCs serve as informational and technical assistance resources to
providers, individuals with disabilities, and the parents, family
members, guardians, advocates, or authorized representatives of these
individuals through conferences, workshops, public education programs,
in-service training programs and similar activities.
NIDRR encourages all Centers to involve individuals with
disabilities and minorities as recipients in research training, as well
as clinical training.
Applicants have considerable latitude in proposing the specific
research and related projects they will undertake to achieve the
designated outcomes; however, the regulatory selection criteria for the
program (34 CFR 352.31) state that the Secretary reviews the extent to
which applicants justify their choice of research projects in terms of
the relevance to the priority and to the needs of individuals with
disabilities. The Secretary also reviews the extent to which applicants
present a scientific methodology that includes reasonable
[[Page 28440]]
hypotheses, methods of data collection and analysis, and a means to
evaluate the extent to which project objectives have been achieved.
The Department is particularly interested in ensuring that the
expenditure of public funds is justified by the execution of intended
activities and the advancement of knowledge and, thus, has built this
accountability into the selection criteria. Not later than three years
after the establishment of any RRTC, NIDRR will conduct one or more
reviews of the activities and achievements of the Center. In accordance
with the provisions of 34 CFR 75.253(a), continued funding depends at
all times on satisfactory performance and accomplishment.
General
The following requirements apply to these RRTCs pursuant to the
priorities unless noted otherwise:
Each RRTC must conduct an integrated program of research to develop
solutions to problems confronted by individuals with disabilities.
Each RRTC must conduct a coordinated and advanced program of
training in rehabilitation research, including training in research
methodology and applied research experience, that will contribute to
the number of qualified researchers working in the area of
rehabilitation research.
Each Center must disseminate and encourage the use of new
rehabilitation knowledge. They must publish all materials for
dissemination or training in alternate formats to make them accessible
to individuals with a range of disabling conditions.
Each RRTC must involve individuals with disabilities and, if
appropriate, their family members, as well as rehabilitation service
providers in planning and implementing the research and training
programs, in interpreting and disseminating the research findings, and
in evaluating the Center.
Priorities
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute
preference to applications that meet one of the following priorities.
The Secretary will fund under these competitions only applications that
meet one of these absolute priorities:
Priority 1: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who Are
Blind or Visually Impaired
Background
In 1990, approximately 17 out of every 1,000 persons in the
civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States were
unable to see to read ordinary newspaper print even when wearing
glasses. Of these 4.3 million individuals approximately 515,000 were
blind in both eyes (K.A. Nelson and E. Dimitrova, Severe Visual
Impairment in the United States and in Each State, 1990, Journal of
Visual Impairment and Blindness, March 1993, 80). The number of persons
with a visual impairment that substantially limits one or more major
life activity is estimated to be 1.3 million (M. Laplante and D.
Carlson, Disability in the United States: Prevalence and Causes, 1992,
Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training Center,
University of California, San Francisco, October, 1995). These
individuals are the primary target audience for this RRTC.
For the years 1991 and 1992, of the 4.57 million persons 21 to 64
years old who had some functional limitation seeing words or letters,
2.086 million individuals or 45.6 percent were employed, while 144,000
individuals, or 25.6 percent of those who were totally unable to see
words or letters, were employed. By comparison, for the same age group,
80.5 percent of all individuals without a disability were employed (J.
McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992, Household Economic
Studies, P70-33, December 1993). Among the cases closed by State
vocational rehabilitation agencies as non-rehabilitated or
rehabilitated in 1993, 25,488 individuals were blind or visually
impaired. Of those individuals, 18,273 or 71.7 percent, were
rehabilitated (Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA), Caseload
Services data, 1993).
In order to improve the employment status of individuals who are
blind and visually impaired, there is a need to identify barriers to
achieving employment outcomes and to develop new and improved
rehabilitation techniques that rehabilitation service providers can use
to address these barriers. In addition, rehabilitation service
providers and employers must be knowledgeable about job accommodations.
Rehabilitation service providers and employers should have the ability
to assist individuals who are blind or visually impaired to overcome
not only physical barriers, but also technological barriers to the
emerging electronic information infrastructure.
Computer technology is changing rapidly. Rehabilitation
professionals must have up-to-date knowledge of accessible computer
technology for individuals who are blind or visually impaired. RSA has
determined that State vocational rehabilitation agency staff need
training on state-of-the-art computer technology for individuals who
are blind or visually impaired. To address this need, RSA is
collaborating with NIDRR to support the training of State VR agency
staff through this RRTC, using a train the trainer model.
Since 1936 the Randolph-Sheppard Act program has been a source of
employment for individuals who are blind. The program enables
individuals who are blind to become licensed facility managers and
operate vending facilities on Federal property. According to RSA, in
fiscal year 1994, 3,524 blind vendors operated 3,419 vending facilities
under the Randolph-Sheppard Act program. The program generated $401
million in gross earnings with vendors averaging an annual income of
$26,478.
In order to ensure that the vending facilities are competitive, an
assessment should be undertaken to identify areas of the program that
may be improved by training State Business Enterprise program
counselors and licensed facility managers.
Priority 1
The Secretary will establish an RRTC on vocational rehabilitation
services for individuals who are blind or visually impaired that will:
(1) Investigate and document the employment status of individuals who
are blind or visually impaired; (2) identify the barriers to employment
that can be addressed by rehabilitation service providers or employers,
and develop or identify rehabilitation techniques or reasonable
accommodations that address these barriers; (3) train rehabilitation
professionals on new and effective rehabilitation techniques and
accommodations; (4) develop a national information and resource
referral data base for rehabilitation professionals and employers; and
(5) identify the training needs of State Business Enterprise program
counselors and licensed facility managers that will enable the vending
facilities to be competitive, develop and deliver training programs to
meet the identified needs, and evaluate the efficacy of the training.
In carrying out the purposes of the priority, the RRTC shall:
* Conduct at least three conferences to train State
vocational rehabilitation staff on state-of-the-art computer technology
for individuals who are blind or visually impaired;
* Solicit and utilize input from individuals who are blind
or severely visually impaired in the planning, development, and
implementation of the activities of the RRTC as much as possible; and
[[Page 28441]]
* Coordinate its research efforts with other NIDRR grantees
that address vocational rehabilitation in general, as well as those
that address the needs of individuals who are blind or visually
impaired.
Priority 2: Vocational Rehabilitation Services for Individuals Who are
Deaf or Hard of Hearing
Background
In 1991-1992 there were approximately 10.9 million persons age 15
and older with a ``functional limitation hearing normal conversation''
and an additional 924,000 persons who were ``unable to hear normal
conversation'' (J. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992,
Household Economic Studies, P70-33, December 1993). The number of
persons with a hearing impairment that substantially limits one or more
major life activity is estimated to be 1.2 million (M. Laplante and D.
Carlson, Disability in the United States: Prevalence and Causes, 1992,
Disability Statistics Rehabilitation Research and Training Center,
University of California, San Francisco, October, 1995). These
individuals are the primary target audience for this RRTC.
For the years 1991 and 1992, of all persons 21 to 64 years old who
had some functional limitation hearing normal conversation, 3,335,000
individuals or 63.6 percent were employed, while 189,000 individuals,
or 58.2 percent of those who were totally unable to hear normal
conversation, were employed. By comparison, for the same age group,
80.5 percent of all individuals without a disability were employed (J.
McNeil, 1993). Among the cases closed by State vocational
rehabilitation agencies as non-rehabilitated or rehabilitated in 1993,
21,888 individuals were deaf or hard of hearing. Of those individuals,
15,901, or 72.6 percent, were rehabilitated (Rehabilitation Services
Administration (RSA), Caseload Services data, 1993). Although the
Federal vocational rehabilitation system successfully serves and
rehabilitates significant numbers of individuals who are deaf or hard
of hearing, new knowledge is needed to address the vocational
rehabilitation needs of specific subgroups within this population such
as late-deafened adults, individuals who have limited English
proficiency, individuals who are functionally illiterate, and
individuals with co-existing disabilities, including psychiatric
disabilities and mental retardation.
``Low-functioning'' deaf individuals often do not have
comprehensive rehabilitation training and related services accessible
and available to them. This segment of the deaf population--sometimes
called ``low achieving,'' ``multiply disabled deaf,'' or
``traditionally underserved deaf''--requires long-term and intensive
habilitative and rehabilitative services. These individuals exhibit
deficits in vocational skills, independent living skills, manual and
oral communication skills, social skills, and academic skills, and many
have significant secondary disabilities. Many are from
socioeconomically and culturally disadvantaged backgrounds, and many
are from ethnic or linguistic minorities. Services to this population
are scarce and fragmented. In addition to understanding the social,
vocational, and educational implications of the disability, vocational
rehabilitation service providers must also be able to communicate with
the individuals, often through less than optimal means, such as
rudimentary sign language.
The application of emerging technology is expected to play a
pivotal role in improving the vocational rehabilitation and employment
status of persons who are deaf or hard of hearing. This new technology
will address a wide-range of workplace accommodation issues including,
but not limited to, communication, safety, and literacy.
Priority 2
The Secretary will establish an RRTC on the vocational
rehabilitation of individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing that
will: (1) Investigate and document the employment status of individuals
who are deaf or hard of hearing by age, gender, ethnic or linguistic
background, education, level of impairment, age at on-set of impairment
(particularly late-deafened adults), and co-existing conditions; (2)
identify the barriers to entering or maintaining employment that can be
addressed by vocational rehabilitation service providers or employers,
and identify or develop vocational rehabilitation techniques or
reasonable accommodations that address these barriers, including those
related to literacy skills and those using emerging assistive
technology such as assistive listening devices, telecommunications
equipment, and remote access technology; (3) train rehabilitation
professionals, including peer advocates, on new and effective
rehabilitation techniques and accommodations, and as appropriate
include consumers and employers in the training on accommodations; (4)
develop and disseminate consumer-oriented materials and develop a
national information and resource referral data base for rehabilitation
professionals and employers; and (5) identify the range of vocational
rehabilitation services and service resources required to meet the
needs of low-functioning deaf individuals.
In carrying out the purposes of the priority, the RRTC shall:
* Examine patterns of vocational rehabilitation service
usage by low-functioning deaf individuals with specific attention to
those from diverse cultural backgrounds;
* Solicit and utilize input from individuals who are deaf or
hard of hearing, including low-functioning deaf individuals, in the
planning, development, and implementation of the activities of the
grant as much as possible; and
* Coordinate its research efforts with grantees from NIDRR,
OSEP, and RSA that address vocational rehabilitation in general, as
well as those that address the needs of individuals who are deaf or
hard of hearing.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR parts 350 and 352.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC)
Authority for the RERC program of NIDRR is contained in section
204(b)(3) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760-
762). Under this program the Secretary makes awards to public and
private agencies and organizations, including institutions of higher
education, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations, to conduct
research, demonstration, and training activities regarding
rehabilitation technology in order to enhance opportunities for meeting
the needs of, and addressing the barriers confronted by, individuals
with disabilities in all aspects of their lives. An RERC must be
operated by or in collaboration with an institution of higher education
or a nonprofit organization.
Under the regulations for this program (see 34 CFR 353.32) the
Secretary may establish research priorities by reserving funds to
support particular research activities.
Description of the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center Program
RERCs carry out research or demonstration activities by: (1)
Developing and disseminating innovative methods of applying advanced
technology, scientific achievement, and psychological and social
knowledge to (a) solve
[[Page 28442]]
rehabilitation problems and remove environmental barriers, and (b)
study new or emerging technologies, products, or environments; (2)
demonstrating and disseminating (a) innovative models for the delivery
of cost-effective rehabilitation technology services to rural and urban
areas, and (b) other scientific research to assist in meeting the
employment and independent living needs of individuals with severe
disabilities; or (3) facilitating service delivery systems change
through (a) the development, evaluation, and dissemination of consumer-
responsive and individual and family-centered innovative models for the
delivery to both rural and urban areas of innovative cost-effective
rehabilitation technology services, and (b) other scientific research
to assist in meeting the employment and independent needs of
individuals with severe disabilities.
Each RERC must provide training opportunities to individuals,
including individuals with disabilities, to become researchers of
rehabilitation technology and practitioners of rehabilitation
technology in conjunction with institutions of higher education and
nonprofit organizations.
General
The following requirements apply to this RERC pursuant to this
absolute priority unless noted otherwise:
The RERC must have the capability to design, build, and test
prototype devices and assist in the transfer of successful solutions to
the marketplace. The RERC must evaluate the efficacy and safety of its
new products, instrumentation, or assistive devices.
The RERC must provide graduate-level research training to build
capacity for engineering research in the rehabilitation field and to
provide training in the applications of new technology to service
providers and to individuals with disabilities and their families.
The RERC must develop all training materials in formats that will
be accessible to individuals with various types of disabilities and
communication modes, and widely disseminate findings and products to
individuals with disabilities and their families and representatives,
service providers, manufacturers and distributors, and other
appropriate target populations.
The RERC must involve individuals with disabilities and, if
appropriate, their family members in planning and implementing the
research, development, and training programs, in interpreting and
disseminating the research findings, and in evaluating the Center.
The RERC must share information and data, and, as appropriate,
collaborate on research and training with other NIDRR-supported
grantees including, but not limited to, the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) Disability and Business Technical Assistance Centers and
other related RERCs and RRTCs. The RERC must work closely with the RERC
on Technology Evaluation and Transfer at the State University of New
York at Buffalo.
Priority
Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) the Secretary gives an absolute
preference to applications that meet the following priority. The
Secretary will fund under this competition only applications that meet
this absolute priority:
Priority: Assistive Technology for Older Persons With Disabilities
Background
In 1991-1992, of 30.68 million persons who were 65 years old and
over, 16.54 million or 53.9 percent had a disability. Of those 16.54
million with a disability, 15.21 million persons had a ``functional
limitation'' performing activities such as seeing, hearing, reaching,
or walking (J. McNeil, Americans with Disabilities: 1991-1992,
Household Economic Studies, P70-33, December 1993). The prevalence of
medical, neurological and orthopedic impairments increases with the age
of the population. It is estimated that over half of all Americans over
seventy years of age have one or more disabilities (McNeil, 1993).
Also, as a result of improved life-long health care and expanded
employment and educational opportunities, increased numbers of persons
with severe disabilities will become part of our elderly population and
experience new or changed assistive technology needs.
While assistive technology has been used in rehabilitation to help
reduce the adverse effects of disability, it is only beginning to be
used effectively to address problems in geriatric rehabilitation. An
RERC on assistive technology for older persons with disabilities will
address the application of technology to meet the special needs of
older persons with disabilities and their caregivers.
Many devices or techniques aimed at ameliorating specific
disabilities are designed to augment or take advantage of compensatory
abilities. However, multiple and gradual changes related to aging may
leave older persons without one or more areas of strength with which to
compensate for other functional losses. For example, an older person
requiring a wheelchair, because of gradual loss of muscle mass, may not
have, or may not be able to develop, the requisite arm strength to use
grab bars to assist them in transferring in and out of their
wheelchair.
Efforts to develop and disseminate technological aids to older
persons with functional limitations must be conducted in the context of
using effective information dissemination strategies to reach older
persons. It is also necessary to deliver effective training in the use
and maintenance of the technology that is prescribed. It is
particularly important to make information on assistive technology for
older persons with disabilities available in relation to the major
activities of work, personal and health care, and leisure.
Assistive technology can address the physical stress that is
problematic for caregivers of older persons with disabilities. Many of
these caregivers are spouses who are elderly themselves. Premature
admission to institutional care is commonly caused by a crisis of the
caregiver rather than by a sudden deterioration in the health or
abilities of the older persons with a disability. Typically, the
caregiver becomes injured or sick and finds it impossible to continue
to do the lifting and other demanding physical tasks. Assistive
technology that can assist the caregiver can have a major impact on
eliminating the need or delaying the time for institutional placement
of an older person with a disability.
Priority
The Secretary will establish an RERC on assistive technology for
older persons with disabilities for the purposes of: (1) Identifying
the needs for assistive technology by older persons with disabilities;
(2) developing design modifications to existing assistive technology
devices and disseminating these modifications to developers of
assistive technology; (3) developing and evaluating unique assistive
technology devices that otherwise will not be developed by the field;
(4) identifying the problems of assistive technology service delivery
utilization, including maintenance, and developing and testing service
delivery models to address those problems; and (5) developing and
delivering training and technical assistance to rehabilitation service
providers, providers of general services to older persons, and
consumers, on sources and uses of assistive technology for older
persons with disabilities and caregivers.
[[Page 28443]]
In addition to activities proposed by the applicant to carry out
these purposes, the RERC shall:
* Develop and implement an information dissemination
initiative to address utilization problems, including targeting
disability and elderly organizations as well as assistive technology
service providers;
* Coordinate and share information with NIDRR-funded RRTCs
on Rehabilitation and Aging, and with programs funded under the
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of
1988; and
* Establish a collaborative relationship with the RERC on
Technology Evaluation and Transfer and the RERC on Accessible Housing
and Universal Design.
Applicable Program Regulations: 34 CFR Parts 350 and 353.
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 84.133A, Research
and Demonstration Projects, 84.133B, Rehabilitation Research and
Training Center Program, 84.133E, Rehabilitation Engineering and
Research Center Program)
Dated: May 29, 1996.
Andrew Pepin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 96-13910 Filed 6-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P