FR Doc 04-17739
[Federal Register: August 4, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 149)]
[Notices]
[Page 47128-47133]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04au04-55]
Download: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Overview
Information; Research and Innovation To Improve Services and Results
for Children With Disabilities--Evidence-Based Interventions for Severe
Behavior Problems; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2004
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.324P.
Applications Available: August 4, 2004.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 10, 2004.
Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies (SEAs); local
educational agencies (LEAs); institutions of higher education (IHEs);
other public agencies; nonprofit private organizations; outlying areas;
freely associated States; and Indian tribes or tribal organizations.
Estimated Available Funds: $4,300,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1,075,000.
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $1,075,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in
the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 48 months.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to produce, and
advance the use of, knowledge to improve the results of education and
early intervention for infants, toddlers, and children with
disabilities.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority
is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections
661(e)(2) and 672 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,
as amended (IDEA)).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2004 this priority is an absolute
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that
meet this priority.
This priority is:
Research and Innovation to Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities--Evidence-Based Interventions for Severe
Behavior Problems.
Background: Children with severe behavior problems often engage in
behaviors that are disruptive in school environments and, at times,
dangerous to themselves and others. Aggression, self-injurious
behavior, and other disruptive behaviors pose a serious threat to
efforts to help these individuals lead more independent lives. Behavior
problems have been linked to initial referrals to institutions and
increased recidivism for those individuals leaving institutional
settings or those referred to crisis intervention programs from
community placements. Behavior problems interfere with such essential
activities as family life, employment, and educational activities.
There have been significant research advances in identifying
procedures for reducing severe behavior problems--almost exclusively
using behavioral approaches--and this research has expanded
significantly over the past several decades. Theoretical formulations
that incorporate the variables maintaining these behavior problems have
informed research on assessment and intervention. Functional
assessments (that determine why a child might be disruptive in a
particular setting) and functionally-based interventions (such as
teaching replacement skills and addressing environmental limitations)
for assessing and treating behavior problems dominate the research
literature and reviews of the effectiveness of these behavioral
interventions are supportive of their use. Analyses of the research on
positive behavioral support conclude that from one-half to two-thirds
of the outcomes are successful.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Carr, E.G., Horner, R.H., Turnbull, A.P., Marquis, J.G.,
McLaughlin, D.M., McAtee, M.L., Smith, C.E., Ryan, K.A., Ruef, M.B.,
& Doolabh, A. (1999). Positive behavior support for people with
developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. Washington, DC:
American Association on Mental Retardation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) encourages education
decision-makers to base instructional practices and programs on
scientifically based research. Yet, despite growing evidence of the
potential of various behavioral interventions to reduce behavior
problems, there is a need to better understand these interventions and
document their strengths and limitations. The accumulated knowledge
base primarily is derived from discovery-based research (identifying
new intervention strategies) and community-based research (applying
various strategies for a 2 limited number of students in community
settings, such as schools). However, broad-based recommendations for
practitioners and families cannot proceed without addressing
population-based questions (e.g., what proportion of all children and
what type of child will succeed with a particular intervention).
Important guidelines common to most outcome evaluations are often
not adequately followed in behavioral intervention studies. For
example, standardization in applying interventions among participants
is rare. Instead, programs aimed at reducing severe behavior problems
are frequently designed individually for each student. This lack of
standardization limits the ability to make definitive recommendations
about a particular intervention approach. Similar concerns can be
applied to functional assessments and outcome data. Functional
assessments are designed independently by each research group, and
often without addressing the psychometric properties of the
instruments. Traditional measures of interrater reliability and test-
retest reliability as well as measures of validity are lacking in most
functional assessments used in research programs. Outcomes assessed in
most behavioral studies tend to rely solely on idiosyncratic
observational data (e.g., frequency or duration of screaming), which
makes the interpretation of results across studies problematic. Recent
research using medical interventions use psychometrically sound rating
scale data.\2\ However, the exclusive reliance on this form of data
makes judgments about the educational relevance of these findings
suspect. Again, these concerns limit the ability to make
generalizations about the role of functional assessment in intervention
design and obscure conclusions about outcomes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Aman, M.G., De Smedt, G., Derivan, A., Lyons, B., Findling,
R.L.; Risperidone Disruptive Behavior Study Group (2002). Double-
blind, placebo-controlled study of risperidone for the treatment of
disruptive behaviors in children with subaverage intelligence.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 1337-1346
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adequate information about the characteristics of successful and
unsuccessful participants is also noticeably absent in this research
literature. Contributing to this problem is the lack of information
about selection and attrition in individual
[[Page 47129]]
studies.\3\ Relatively low numbers of studies make mention of how they
select those included in the research and few studies mention if they
use procedures to reduce selection bias. Few studies indicate if
participants drop out of treatment prematurely or assess potential
subject characteristics that would predict differential attrition. This
relative lack of information on important population-based questions
calls into question the ability to generalize of otherwise positive
outcome data on the treatment of behavior problems among students with
severe behavior problems.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Durand, V.M. (2002, September). Methodological challenges:
Single subject designs. Presentation at the National Institutes of
Health Conference--Research on Psychosocial and Behavioral
Interventions in Autism: Confronting Methodological Challenges.
Bethesda, MD.
\4\ ld.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population-based educational research (including the use of
randomized controlled trials--RCTs) is necessary to inform the field
about the educational efficacy and effectiveness of interventions.\5\
Educational efficacy refers to research in which control has been
exercised by the investigator over sample selection, the delivery of
the intervention, and the conditions under which the intervention
occurs.\6\ Efficacy research provides scientific evidence comparing an
intervention's effects to other interventions, to non-specific
intervention (e.g., ``treatment as usual''), or to no intervention.
Randomized experimental designs such as RCTs are recognized as the
standards by which efficacy is assessed. Guidelines, including the
CONSORT Statement,\7\ provide criteria for designing, analyzing and
reporting the findings from randomized experimental designs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ APA Task Force on Psychological Intervention Guidelines
(1995). Template for developing guidelines: Interventions for mental
disorders and psychosocial aspects of physical disorders.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; Chorpita, B.F.,
Barlow, D.H., Albano, A.M., & Daleiden, E.L. (1998). Methodological
strategies in child clinical trials: Advancing the efficacy and
effectiveness of psychosocial treatments. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 26, 7-16.
\6\ Hoagwood, K., Hibbs, E., Brent, D., & Jensen, P. (1995).
Introduction to the special section: Efficacy and effectiveness in
studies of child and adolescent psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 63, 683-687.
\7\ Mosher, D., Schulz, K.F. & Altman, D. (2001). The CONSORT
Statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of
reports of parallel-group randomized designs. Journal of the
American Medical Association, 285, 1987-1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Educational effectiveness refers to research in which a previously
tested efficacious intervention is examined with a heterogeneous group
within a more naturalistic setting (e.g., a school) or is provided by
real-world service practitioners rather than research therapists.\8\
Standards exist for identifying efficacious interventions \9\ and there
are components of positive behavior support that meet the criteria for
``probably efficacious'' interventions.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Hoagwood et al., supra note 6, at 683-687.
\9\ Division 12 Task Force. (1995). Training in and
dissemination of empirically-validated psychological treatments:
Report and recommendations. The Clinical Psychologist, 48, 3-23.
\10\ Kurtz, P.F., Chin, M.D., Huete, J.M., Tarbox, R.S.,
O'Connor, J.T., Paclawskyj, T.R., & Rush, K.S. (2003). Functional
analysis and treatment of self-injurious behavior in young children
a summary of 30 cases. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36,
205-219.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Priority: This priority supports rigorous efficacy and
effectiveness evaluations of empirically based interventions designed
to reduce severe problem behaviors and promote achievement and positive
social development among children with severe behavior problems. A
student with severe behavior problems is defined as a student whose
behavior significantly impedes his or her own learning or the learning
of others. Interventions must focus on skill building and address
social and environmental obstacles.
Year one will be considered a pilot year in which awardees may work
out final development issues for the intervention, pilot specific
outcome measures, refine materials, work out implementation issues, and
train school personnel. Such pilot work could, but need not, include a
series of replicated single-case research designs. The implementation
of the intervention will occur during years two through four.
Applications must:
(a) Propose a general design that is a randomized experiment in
which each site randomly assigns students or classrooms or schools to
the intervention or comparison group.
(b) Specify in detail what activities will be conducted in the
pilot year.
(c) Propose to implement an intervention that is appropriate for
children in grades kindergarten through eight.
(d) Provide a convincing theoretical and empirical rationale for
the proposed intervention being likely to improve children's outcomes
compared with the practices used in the comparison conditions. Programs
must have some preliminary data or ``soft'' evidence supporting the
potential effectiveness of the intervention or the potential
effectiveness of the components of the intervention, if the applicant
is combining components to form a more comprehensive intervention.
Preliminary or soft evidence means that the data may not be conclusive.
The preliminary data may have been gathered in such a way as not to
rule out alternative hypotheses. For example, the investigator might
have pre-test and post-test data indicating reduction in behavior
problems or improvement in positive behavior in a school or classroom
using the intervention, but not have data from a control group. This
could also include controlled research not yet implemented across
multiple sites or by typical intervention agents (e.g., teachers). This
could also include work using single subject designs that have not been
subjected to randomized designs. Preliminary data may include data that
were obtained separately for specific components of the proposed
intervention, but not from an evaluation of all of the proposed
intervention components integrated into one intervention.
(e) Describe the level and type of behavior support that is in
place for each school (such as the presence of school-wide discipline
procedures). This information may be used in analyses to determine if
differences across schools influence outcomes of the targeted
intervention. Applicants should describe how the level and type of
behavior support will be assessed.
(f) Provide access to students in a minimum of eight schools that
agree to implement the proposed intervention (if assigned to the
treatment condition) and to allow data collection to occur as outlined
in this initiative (whether the school is selected for the treatment or
comparison condition). Note that schools are not required to belong to
the same school district.
Before applicants may receive awards, they must--
(1) provide written acknowledgement from schools that the schools
agree to cooperate fully with the random assignment. To facilitate
random assignment, applicants may offer incentives to schools, such as
compensation for additional staff time required to cooperate with the
research effort, and provision of additional resources to enable a
school to conduct new activities under the project; and
(2) provide a letter of cooperation from participating schools or
school districts for the purposes of conducting the research. In the
letter of cooperation, representatives of the participating schools or
school districts must clearly indicate and accept the responsibilities
associated with participating in the study. These responsibilities must
include (i) an agreement to provide a sufficient number of students to
[[Page 47130]]
participate in the study; (ii) an agreement to the random assignment of
students or classrooms or schools to the intervention being evaluated
versus the comparison group (i.e., ``business as usual''); and (iii) an
agreement to cooperate with school-level data collection (e.g., school
personnel competing interventions, data from school records indicating
number of students receiving office referrals).
(g) Designate a coordinator to manage all aspects of data
collection, intervention implementation, and interaction with the
national contractor.
(h) Assure that they will provide approval from the applicant's
Institutional Review Board (IRB) for conducting research with human
subjects in time to begin data collection for schools for the cross-
site study in the spring of year one of the award. Applicants need to
have approval both for their own site-specific research and for the
cross-site data collection.
(i) Propose a sample of sufficient size to detect meaningful
differences between outcomes in the intervention and control condition,
taking into account attrition, variability across sites and children,
and differences in fidelity of implementation of the intervention.
Initial samples of fewer than 80 participants may be insufficient and
need to be carefully and persuasively justified. In general, the larger
the sample the better. A power analysis should be included.
(j) Include students from a range of settings. These settings may
include regular classrooms, segregated classrooms, or segregated
schools, although the percentage of students in segregated settings
should not exceed 60 percent of the total sample.
(k) Propose to use the intervention only if the intervention is
based on the individual needs of the child and will not interfere with
the services required on a child's individualized education program
(IEP) or the broad procedural safeguards stated in the IDEA.
(l) Propose primary settings for evaluating the intervention only
in classrooms within the child's educational placement. The
intervention sites must implement the same intervention. The
intervention must not be implemented in an intervention or comparison
school prior to the beginning of the evaluation study.
(m) Describe how age-related effects will be addressed in the
research if the range of ages of selected students spans across both
elementary and middle school age students. For example, the
investigator may randomly assign students into intervention and
comparison groups using child age stratification so that the groups
will not 5 differ significantly according to age. Age stratification
would insure that the results are attributable to the experimental
intervention and not differential maturation. Applicants are encouraged
to incorporate age as a variable for analysis if there is a theoretical
or empirical reason to analyze age as a variable in the research. In
either case, applicants should discuss the rationale.
(n) Describe how the applicant will handle the flow of participants
through each stage (a diagram is strongly recommended), and indicate
how protocol deviations will be decided and handled.
(o) Provide research designs that permit the identification and
assessment of factors impacting the fidelity of implementation.
Mediating and moderating variables that are measured in the
intervention condition and are also likely to affect outcomes in the
comparison condition should be measured in the comparison condition
(e.g., student time-on-task, school personnel experience/time in
position). Outcome measures of behavior change and skill development
should include standardized assessments of these outcomes.
Studies must be planned in such a way that the design ensures a
contribution to a greater program of knowledge beyond the efficacy or
effectiveness of a particular approach. This requires attending to
replicability, including treatment manuals, standard subject selection
and measures, and some links between theory and predictions.
(p) Describe plans to create an implementation manual for the
intervention that provides sufficient information for others to be able
to adopt and replicate the program.
(q) Propose complementary studies to conduct in conjunction with
the cross-site program evaluation. Complementary studies provide
investigators with the opportunity to design studies and collect data
within the context of the cross-site evaluation. Investigators will be
responsible for collecting the data for their complementary studies.
Funding for this data collection must be included in the applicant's
budget. The complementary research studies may address a range of
issues related broadly to the efficacy or effectiveness of the
intervention, the mechanisms by which the intervention results in
behavioral improvements, the development of assessment tools, or other
related topics. The complementary research provides an opportunity to
identify outcomes that, because of data constraints, are not explored
in the core evaluation or are specific to an individual site. It
expands the possibilities for multiple measures of the same variable,
and for the development of new measures. The scientific merit of the
complementary studies will be considered an important aspect of the
applicant's proposal.
(r) Address questions of implementation and how best to train and
support school personnel in the use of these interventions in their
classrooms.
(s) Use psychometrically sound observational, survey, or
qualitative methodologies as a complement to experimental methodologies
to assist in the identification of factors that may explain the
effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the intervention.
(t) Propose research teams that collectively demonstrate expertise
in (1) functional behavioral assessments and behavioral intervention,
(2) implementation and analysis of results from the research design
that will be employed, and (3) working with school personnel, schools,
or other education delivery settings that will be employed.
(u) Provide information documenting the credentials and level of
preparation required to deliver the intervention (e.g., certified
teacher, paraprofessional) and the nature and extent of professional
development, coaching, and monitoring required to effectively implement
the intervention. Additionally, applicants should document existing
family or community involvement in behavioral support plans.
(v) Discuss likely threats to the internal validity of the study
including attrition, student mobility, existing behavioral intervention
activities or programs at comparison schools, and potential difficulty
in implementation.
Projects must include a plan to:
(a) Work with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and a
national evaluation coordination contractor, funded through a separate
competition, to carry out randomized experiments of behavioral
interventions. The national evaluation coordination contractor, working
with OSEP and the recipients of awards under this competition, will
coordinate the collection of a core set of measures following
consistent protocols across sites so that comparable outcome data
(including measures of positive and negative behaviors) will be
obtained across sites. Details concerning the responsibilities of each
awardee vis-a-vis the national contractor are provided in the sections
below.
(b) Within a month of receiving the award, meet with the Department
and
[[Page 47131]]
the national evaluation coordinator in Washington, DC to agree upon
common procedures that will permit linking of the funded studies. This
linking will require agreement on a set of common identification and
outcome measures collected by all projects that will help the
evaluation of findings across studies and the generalization of the
findings. Projects must also plan for an additional meeting during year
one and two meetings (each year) in years two through four, for cross
project activities with Federal officials, the national evaluation
coordination contractor, and the other awardees funded in this
competition. In addition, projects must budget for a two-day Project
Directors' meeting in Washington, DC during each year of the project.
(c) If the intervention is effective, deliver training on
implementation to the control schools in the fourth year. For
comparison schools, intervention training must not be provided to the
school staff until the summer of year four, once the final cross-site
data collection has been completed.
(d) Obtain active informed consent of parents of children
participating in the study and of all school staff from whom data will
be collected.
(e) Provide all necessary materials, training, and professional
development to school personnel to implement the intervention to be
evaluated in the intervention schools.
(f) Work with the national evaluation coordination contractor for
the collection of cross-site data, in coordination with any local data
collection activities. The collection (including timing) of the cross-
site data will take precedence over any data collection activities for
the complementary studies. Cross-site data must be collected from
school staff and sent to the contractor in a timely fashion. There will
be regular conference calls with OSEP staff, the national contractor,
and each awardee to discuss, plan, and coordinate evaluation activities
at each site.
Projects must provide data to the national evaluation coordination
contractor from each site in the fall and spring of years two and
three, and the spring of year four of the project period. The core set
of evaluation data provided to the national contractor will include
assessments of the function of the students' behavior problems, changes
in targeted behaviors, measures of intervention implementation,
identified pro-social behaviors and measures of academic achievement.
The core evaluation data will be collected by the contractor and the
individual awardees beginning in the first year of the implementation
of intervention and continuing through the second and third years of
the implementation. (Note: applicants are not limited to collecting
data through shared assessment procedures.)
(g) Collaborate and participate with OSEP staff in the cross-site
study activities, including, (1) the design and implementation of the
cross-site research; (2) the development of a research protocol for IRB
review by all collaborating institutions; (3) the analysis,
presentation, and publication of the cross-site study findings; and (4)
the monitoring and evaluation of the scientific and operational
accomplishments of the project through conference calls, site visits,
and review of technical reports.
(h) Assess the extent to which treatment outcomes produce
meaningful changes in behavior. Clinical significance must be assessed
for all outcomes.
(i) Conduct an economic analysis of the intervention (i.e., one of
the outcome measures that must be collected by the awardee is the cost
to conduct the intervention so that the cost-effectiveness of the
intervention may be determined); and
(j) Form an advisory group to provide both technical and
substantive guidance and feedback on project activities.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties
the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. However, section
661(e)(2) of the IDEA makes the public comment requirements
inapplicable to the priority in this notice.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1461 and 1472.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81,
82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative agreements.
Estimated Available Funds: $4,300,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1,075,000.
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $1,075,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in
the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 4.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to 48 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs; IHEs; other public agencies;
nonprofit private organizations; outlying areas; freely associated
States; and Indian tribes or tribal organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not involve cost
sharing or matching.
3. Other: General Requirements--(a) The projects funded under this
competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
the IDEA).
(b) Applicants and grant recipients funded under this competition
must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals
with disabilities in planning, implementing, and evaluating the
projects (see section 661(f)(1)(A) of the IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address to Request Application Package: Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs), PO Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Telephone (toll
free): 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll free):
1-877-576-7734.
You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html
or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.
If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify
this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.324P.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the Grants and Contracts
Services Team listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section
VII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit Part III to
the equivalent of no more than 70 pages, using the following standards:
[[Page 47132]]
A ``page'' is 8.5 x 11, on one side
only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12-point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
The page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II,
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography, the references, or the letters of support.
However, you must include all of the application narrative in Part III.
We will reject your application if--
You apply these standards and exceed the page limit; or
You apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the
page limit.
3. Submission Dates and Times:
Applications Available: August 4, 2004.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: September 10, 2004.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted by
mail or hand delivery (including a commercial carrier or courier
service), or electronically using the Electronic Grant Application
System (e-Application) available through the Department's e-GRANTS
system. For information (including dates and times) about how to submit
your application by mail or hand delivery, or electronically, please
refer to Section IV. 6. Procedures for Submitting Applications in this
notice.
4. Intergovernmental Review: This program is not subject to
Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
5. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding
restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Procedures for Submitting Applications: Applications for grants
under this competition may be submitted electronically or in paper
format by mail or hand delivery.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
If you submit your application to us electronically, you must use
e-Application available through the Department's e-GRANTS system. The
e-GRANTS system is accessible through its portal page at: http://e-grants.ed.gov
.
If you use e-Application, you will be entering data online while
completing your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a
grant application to us. The data you enter online will be saved into a
database.
If you participate in e-Application, please note the following:
Your participation is voluntary.
You must submit your grant application electronically
through the Internet using the software provided on the e-Grants Web
site (http://e-grants.ed.gov) by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the
application deadline date. The regular hours of operation of the e-
Grants Web site are 6 a.m. Monday until 7 p.m. Wednesday; and 6 a.m.
Thursday until midnight Saturday, Washington, DC time. Please note that
the system is unavailable on Sundays, and after 7 p.m. on Wednesdays
for maintenance, Washington, DC time. Any modifications to these hours
are posted on the e-Grants Web site. We strongly recommend that you do
not wait until the application deadline date to initiate an e-
Application package.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you submit your application in paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
the Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424), Budget
Information--Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary
assurances and certifications.
Your e-Application must comply with any page limit
requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive an automatic acknowledgement, which will include a PR/Award
number (an identifying number unique to your application).
Within three working days after submitting your electronic
application, fax a signed copy of the Application for Federal Education
Assistance (ED 424) to the Application Control Center after following
these steps:
1. Print ED 424 from e-Application.
2. The applicant's Authorizing Representative must sign this form.
3. Place the PR/Award number in the upper right hand corner of the
hard copy signature page of the ED 424.
4. Fax the signed ED 424 to the Application Control Center at (202)
245-6272.
We may request that you give us original signatures on
other forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of System
Unavailability: If you are prevented from submitting your application
on the application deadline date because the e-Application system is
unavailable, we will grant you an extension of one business day in
order to transmit your application electronically, by mail, or by hand
delivery. We will grant this extension if--
1. You are a registered user of e-Application and you have
initiated an e-Application for this competition; and
2. (a) The e-Application system is unavailable for 60 minutes or
more between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date; or
(b) The e-Application system is unavailable for any period of time
during the last hour of operation (that is, for any period of time
between 3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time) on the
application deadline date.
We must acknowledge and confirm these periods of unavailability
before granting you an extension. To request this extension or to
confirm our acknowledgement of any system unavailability, you may
contact either (1) the person listed elsewhere in this notice under For
Further Information Contact (see VII. Agency Contact) or (2) the e-
GRANTS help desk at 1-888-336-8930.
You may access the electronic grant application for the Special
Education--Research and Innovation to Improve Services and Results for
Children with Disabilities--Evidence-Based Interventions for Severe
Behavior Problems competition at: http://e-grants.ed.gov.
b. Submission of Paper Applications By Mail.
If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the
U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must send the
original and two copies of your application on or before the
application deadline date to the following address: U.S. Department of
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number
84.324P), 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
1. A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service Postmark;
2. A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service;
3. A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier; or
4. Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the U.S. Secretary of
Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not
[[Page 47133]]
accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
1. A private metered postmark, or
2. A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is post marked after the application deadline
date, we will notify you that we will not consider the application.
Note: Applicants should note that the U.S. Postal Service does
not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this
method, you should check with your local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery,
you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of
your application on or before the application deadline date to the
following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control
Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.324P), 550 12th Street, SW., Room
7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts deliveries daily between 8
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays and
Federal holidays. A person delivering an application must show
identification to enter the building.
Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail
or hand deliver your application to the Department:
1. You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by the
Department--in Item 4 of the Application for Federal Education
Assistance (ED 424 (exp. 11/30/2004)) the CFDA number--and suffix
letter, if any--of the competition under which you are submitting your
application.
2. The Application Control Center will mail a Grant Application
Receipt Acknowledgment to you. If you do not receive the notification
of application receipt within 15 days from the mailing of your
application, you should call the U.S. Department of Education
Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are
listed in 34 CFR 75.210 of EDGAR. The specific selection criteria to be
used for this competition are in the application package.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN). We may also notify you informally.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a
final performance report, including financial information, as directed
by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an
annual performance report that provides the most current performance
and financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in
34 CFR 75.118.
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act (GPRA), the Department is currently developing indicators
and measures that will yield information on various aspects of the
quality of the Research and Innovation to Improve Services and Results
for Children with Disabilities program. Included in these indicators
and measures will be those that assess the quality and relevance of
newly funded research projects. Two indicators will address the quality
of new projects. First, an external panel of eminent senior scientists
will review the quality of a randomly selected sample of newly funded
research applications, and the percentage of new projects that are
deemed to be of high quality will be determined. Second, because much
of the Department's work focuses on questions of effectiveness, newly
funded applications will be evaluated to identify those that address
causal questions and then to determine what percentage of those
projects use randomized field trials to answer the causal questions. To
evaluate the relevance of newly funded research projects, a panel of
experienced education practitioners and administrators will review
descriptions of a randomly selected sample of newly funded projects and
rate the degree to which the projects are relevant to practice.
Other indicators and measures are still under development in areas
such as the quality of project products and long-term impact. Data on
these measures will be collected from the projects funded under this
competition. Awardees will also be required to report information on
their projects' performance in annual reports to the Department (EDGAR,
34 CFR 75.590).
We will notify grantees of the performance measures once they are
developed.
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Renee Bradley, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 4105, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-2600. Telephone: (202) 245-7277.
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 by contacting the following office: The Grants and
Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland
Avenue, SW., room 5075, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-
2550. Telephone: (202) 245-7363.
VIII. Other Information
Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) 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
Dated: July 30, 2004.
Troy R. Justesen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 04-17739 Filed 8-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P