[Federal Register: December 26, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 248)]
[Notices]
[Page 81495-81515]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26de00-49]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA No.: 84.133A]
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Notice Inviting
Applications for New Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects
for Fiscal Year 2001-2002
Note to Applicants
This notice is a complete application package. Together with the
statute
[[Page 81496]]
authorizing the programs and applicable regulations governing the
programs including the Education Department General Administrative
Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains information, application
forms, and instructions needed to apply for a grant under these
competitions.
These programs 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.
The estimates of funding levels in this notice do not bind the
Department of Education to make awards in any of these categories, or
to any specific number of awards or funding levels, unless otherwise
specified in statute.
Reasonable Accommodations: We will consider, and may fund, requests
for additional funding as an addendum to an application to reflect the
costs of reasonable accommodations necessary to allow individuals with
disabilities to be employed on the project as personnel on project
activities.
Applications Available: December 26, 2000.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 34 CFR Parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81,
82, 85, and 86; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Program--34 CFR Part 350, and the Notice of Final Priority
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2001.--Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects, CFDA No. 84-133A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
Deadline for transmittal of Estimated award Project
Funding priority applications number of amount (per period
awards year)* (months)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
84.133A-11 Spinal Cord Injury February 26, 2001..................... 4-8 $350,000 60
collaborative Projects.
84.133A-12: Spinal Cord Injury February 26, 2001..................... 1 350,000 60
Data Center.
84.133A-15: Spinal Cord Injury February 26, 2001..................... 1 150,000 60
Dissemination Center.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Note: Consistent with EDGAR 34 CFR 75.104(b), we will reject any application that proposes a project funding
level for any year that exceeds the stated maximum award amount for that year.
Program Title: Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers Program.
CFDA Number: 84.133A
Purpose of the Program: The purpose of the Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program is to improve the
effectiveness of services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act of
1973. The Assistant Secretary takes this action to focus research
attention on an area of national need. The priorities are intended to
improve rehabilitation services and outcomes for individuals with
disabilities.
Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and
tribal organizations.
Estimated Average Range of Awards: $150,000-$350,000.
Selection Criteria
Collaborative Spinal Cord Injury Research Selection Criteria
The Secretary uses the following selection criteria to evaluate
applications for Collaborative Spinal Cord Injury Research.
(a) Importance of the problem (10 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the importance of the problem.
(2) In determining the importance of the problem, the Secretary
considers one or more of the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant clearly describes the need
and target population (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project will have beneficial
impact on the target population (5 points).
(b) Design of research activities (30 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of research
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the research activities constitute a
coherent, sustained approach to research in the field, including a
substantial addition to the state-of-the-art (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the methodology of each proposed research
activity is meritorious, including consideration of the extent to
which--
(A) The proposed design includes a comprehensive and informed
review of the current literature, demonstrating knowledge of the state-
of-the-art (5 points);
(B) Each research hypothesis is theoretically sound and based on
current knowledge (5 points);
(C) Each sample population is appropriate and of sufficient size (5
points);
(D) The data collection and measurement techniques are appropriate
and likely to be effective (5 points); and
(E) The data analysis methods are appropriate (5 points).
(c) Design of dissemination activities (10 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of dissemination
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the materials to be disseminated are likely
to be effective and usable, including consideration of their quality,
clarity, variety, and format (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the materials and information to be
disseminated and the methods for dissemination are appropriate to the
target population, including consideration of the familiarity of the
target population with the subject matter, format of the information,
and subject matter (5 points).
(d) Plan of operation (10 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the plan of operation.
(2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the
Secretary considers the adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve
the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget,
including clearly defined responsibilities, and timelines for
accomplishing project tasks (10 points).
[[Page 81497]]
(e) Collaboration (10 points total). (1) The Secretary considers
the quality of collaboration.
(2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant's proposed collaboration with
one or more agencies, organizations, or institutions is likely to be
effective in achieving the relevant proposed activities of the project
(4 points).
(ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (3 points).
(iii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions
that commit to collaborate with the applicant have the capacity to
carry out collaborative activities (3 points).
(f) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (5 points total). (1)
The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget.
(2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
proposed project activities (3 points).
(ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project
activities (2 points).
(g) Plan of evaluation (10 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
(2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for
periodic assessment of progress toward--
(A) Implementing the plan of operation (3 points); and
(B) Achieving the project's intended outcomes and expected impacts
(2 points).
(iii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for
periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on identified
performance measures that--
(A) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and
expected impacts on the target population (3 points); and
(B) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate
(2 points).
(h) Project staff (15 points total). (1) The Secretary considers
the quality of the project staff.
(2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability (2 points).
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct
all proposed activities (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (3 points).
(iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (5 points).
Spinal Cord Injury Data Center and Spinal Cord Injury and Dissemination
Center Selection Criteria
The Secretary uses the following selection criteria to evaluate
applications for a Spinal Cord Injury Data Center and a Spinal Cord
Injury and Dissemination Center.
(a) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (20
points total). (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the
application to the absolute or competitive priority published in the
Federal Register.
(2) In determining the responsiveness of the application to the
absolute or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following
factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of
the absolute or competitive priority (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority
(15 points).
(b) Quality of the project design (40 points total).
(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the
proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable
(10 points).
(ii) The quality of the methodology to be employed in the proposed
project (10 points).
(iii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target
population or other identified needs (5 points).
(iv) The extent to which the proposed development efforts include
adequate quality controls and, as appropriate, repeated testing of
products (10 points).
(v) The extent to which the proposed project will be coordinated
with similar or related efforts, and with other appropriate community,
State, and Federal resources (5 points).
(c) Technical Assistance (10 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the extent to which the design of technical assistance
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers one or more of the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods for providing technical
assistance are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (5
points).
(ii) The extent to which the technical assistance is appropriate to
the target population, including consideration of the knowledge level
of the target population, needs of the target population, and format
for providing information (5 points).
(d) Plan of evaluation (10 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
(2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for
periodic assessment of progress toward--
(A) Implementing the plan of operation (3 points); and
(B) Achieving the project's intended outcomes and expected impacts
(2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the plan of evaluation provides for
periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on identified
performance measures that--
(A) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and
expected impacts on the target population (3 points); and
(B) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate
(2 points).
(e) Project staff (15 points total). (1) The Secretary considers
the quality of the project staff.
(2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability (2 points).
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
[[Page 81498]]
(i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct
all proposed activities (5 points).
(ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (3 points).
(iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (5 points).
(f) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (5 points total). (1)
The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget.
(2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
proposed project activities (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project
activities (3 points).
Additional Selection Criterion
We will use the selection criteria in 34 CFR 350.54 to evaluate
applications under these programs. The maximum score for all the
criteria is 100 points; however, we will also use the following
criterion so that up to an additional 10 points may be earned by an
applicant for a total possible score of 110 points.
Up to 10 points based on the extent to which an application
includes effective strategies for employing and advancing in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities in projects awarded under these
absolute priorities. In determining the effectiveness of those
strategies, we will consider the applicant's prior success, as
described in the application, in employing and advancing in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities. Thus, for purposes of this
competitive preference, applicants can be awarded up to a total of 10
points in addition to those awarded under the published selection
criteria for these priorities. That is, an applicant meeting this
competitive preference could earn a maximum total of 110 points.
Instructions for Application Narrative
We will reject without consideration or evaluation any application
that proposes a project funding level that exceeds the stated maximum
award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).
We strongly recommend the following:
(1) a one-page abstract;
(2) an application narrative (i.e., Part III that addresses the
selection criteria that will be used by reviewers in evaluating
individual proposals) of no more 75 pages for Project applications,
double-spaced (no more than 3 lines per vertical inch) 8" x 11" pages
(on one side only) with one inch margins (top, bottom, and sides). The
application narrative page limit recommendation does not apply to: Part
I--the electronically scannable form; Part II--the budget section
(including the narrative budget justification); and Part IV--the
assurances and certifications; and
(3) a font no smaller than a 12-point font and an average character
density no greater than 14 characters per inch.
Instructions for Transmittal of Applications
(a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant
must--
(1) Mail the original and two copies of the application on or
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA #84.133A [Applicant should add name of
program], Washington, DC 20202-4725; or
(2) Hand deliver the original and two copies of the application by
4:30 p.m. [Washington, DC time] on or before the deadline date to: U.S.
Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA
#84.133A [Applicant should add name of program]), Room 3633, Regional
Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, SW., Washington, DC.
(b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of
mailing:
(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.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.
(c) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service,
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
Notes: (1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should
check with its local post office.
(2) An applicant wishing to know that its application has been
received by the Department must include with the application a
stamped self-addressed postcard containing the CFDA number and title
of this program.
(3) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not
provided by the Department--in Item 10 of the Application for
Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA number--and letter,
if any--of the competition under which the application is being
submitted.
Application Forms and Instructions
The appendix to this application is divided into four parts. These
parts are organized in the same manner that the submitted application
should be organized. These parts are as follows:
Part I: Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424 (Rev.
11/12/99)) and instructions.
Part II: Budget Form--Non-Construction Programs (ED Form 524) and
instructions.
Part III: Application Narrative.
Additional Materials
Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B).
Certification Regarding Lobbying, Debarment, Suspension, and Other
Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (ED 80-
0013).
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED Form 80-0014)
and instructions. (NOTE: ED Form 80-0014 is intended for the use of
primary participants and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL (if
applicable) and instructions.
An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications.
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications
must each have an original signature. No grant may be awarded unless a
completed application form has been received.
For Applications Contact: The Grants and Contracts Service Team
(GCST), Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Switzer
Building, 3317, Washington, DC 20202, or call (202) 205-8207.
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may
call the TDD number at (202) 205-9860. The preferred method for
requesting information is to FAX your request to (202) 205-8717.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternative format by contacting the GCST. However, the
Department is not able to reproduce in an alternative format the
standard forms included in the application package.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
[[Page 81499]]
room 3414, Switzer Building, Washington, DC 20202-2645. Telephone:
(202) 205-5880. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD) may call the TDD number at (202) 205-4475. Internet:
Donna_Nangle@ed.gov.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding
paragraph.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at either of the
following sites:
http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at either of the preceding sites. 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.access.gpo.gov/nara/index.html
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 84.133A, Disability
and Rehabilitation Research Projects)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(4).
Dated: December 18, 2000.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
Appendix--Application Forms and Instructions
Applicants are advised to reproduce and complete the application
forms in this section. Applicants are required to submit an original
and two copies of each application as provided in this section.
However, applicants are encouraged to submit an original and seven
copies of each application in order to facilitate the peer review
process and minimize copying errors.
Frequent Questions
1. Can I get an extension of the due date?
No! On rare occasions the Department of Education may extend a
closing date for all applicants. If that occurs, a notice of the
revised due date is published in the Federal Register. However,
there are no extensions or exceptions to the due date made for
individual applicants.
2. What should be included in the application?
The application should include a project narrative, vitae of key
personnel, and a budget, as well as the Assurances forms included in
this package. Vitae of staff or consultants should include the
individual's title and role in the proposed project, and other
information that is specifically pertinent to this proposed project.
The budgets for both the first year and all subsequent project years
should be included.
If collaboration with another organization is involved in the
proposed activity, the application should include assurances of
participation by the other parties, including written agreements or
assurances of cooperation. It is not useful to include general
letters of support or endorsement in the application.
If the applicant proposes to use unique tests or other
measurement instruments that are not widely known in the field, it
would be helpful to include the instrument in the application.
Many applications contain voluminous appendices that are not
helpful and in many cases cannot even be mailed to the reviewers. It
is generally not helpful to include such things as brochures,
general capability statements of collaborating organizations, maps,
copies of publications, or descriptions of other projects completed
by the applicant.
3. What format should be used for the application?
NIDRR generally advises applicants that they may organize the
application to follow the selection criteria that will be used. The
specific review criteria vary according to the specific program, and
are contained in this Consolidated Application Package.
4. May I submit applications to more than one nidrr program
competition or more than one application to a program?
Yes, you may submit applications to any program for which they
are responsive to the program requirements. You may submit the same
application to as many competitions as you believe appropriate. You
may also submit more than one application in any given competition.
5. What is the allowable indirect cost rate?
The limits on indirect costs vary according to the program and
the type of application. An applicant for an RRTC is limited to an
indirect rate of 15 percent. An applicant for a Disability and
Rehabilitation Research Project should limit indirect charges to the
organization's approved indirect cost rate. If the organization does
not have an approved indirect cost rate, the application should
include an estimated actual rate.
6. Can profitmaking businesses apply for grants?
Yes. However, for-profit organizations will not be able to
collect a fee or profit on the grant, and in some programs will be
required to share in the costs of the project.
7. Can individuals apply for grants?
No. Only organizations are eligible to apply for grants under
NIDRR programs. However, individuals are the only entities eligible
to apply for fellowships.
8. Can nidrr staff advise me whether my project is of interest to
nidrr or likely to be funded?
No. NIDRR staff can advise you of the requirements of the
program in which you propose to submit your application. However,
staff cannot advise you of whether your subject area or proposed
approach is likely to receive approval.
9. How do I assure that my application will be referred to the most
appropriate panel for review?
Applicants should be sure that their applications are referred
to the correct competition by clearly including the competition
title and CFDA number, including alphabetical code, on the ED 424,
and including a project title that describes the project.
10. How soon after submitting my application can I find out if it
will be funded?
The time from closing date to grant award date varies from
program to program. Generally speaking, NIDRR endeavors to have
awards made within five to six months of the closing date.
Unsuccessful applicants generally will be notified within that time
frame as well. For the purpose of estimating a project start date,
the applicant should estimate approximately six months from the
closing date, but no later than the following September 30.
11. Can I call nidrr to find out if my application is being funded?
No. When NIDRR is able to release information on the status of
grant applications, it will notify applicants by letter. The results
of the peer review cannot be released except through this formal
notification.
12. If my application is successful, can I assume I will get the
requested budget amount in subsequent years?
No. Funding in subsequent years is subject to availability of
funds and project performance.
13. Will all approved applications be funded?
No. It often happens that the peer review panels approve for
funding more applications than NIDRR can fund within available
resources. Applicants who are approved but not funded are encouraged
to consider submitting similar applications in future competitions.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
[[Page 81500]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.014
[[Page 81501]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.015
[[Page 81502]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.016
[[Page 81503]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.017
[[Page 81504]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.018
[[Page 81505]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.019
[[Page 81506]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.020
[[Page 81507]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.021
[[Page 81508]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.022
[[Page 81509]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.023
[[Page 81510]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.024
[[Page 81511]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.025
[[Page 81512]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.026
[[Page 81513]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.027
[[Page 81514]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26DE00.028
[[Page 81515]]
[FR Doc. 00-32786 Filed 12-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C