[Federal Register: June 10, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 111)]
[Notices]
[Page 31675-31684]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10jn97-151]
[[Page 31675]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Education
_______________________________________________________________________
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services; Notices
[[Page 31676]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
AGENCY: Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priorities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Secretary announces final priorities for programs
administered by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services (OSERS) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). The Secretary may use these priorities in Fiscal Year 1997 and
subsequent years. The Secretary takes this action to focus Federal
assistance on identified needs to improve results for children with
disabilities. The final priorities are intended to ensure wide and
effective use of program funds.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect on July 10, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on these final
priorities contact the Grants and Contracts Services Team, 600
Independence Avenue, SW., room 3317, Switzer Building, Washington, DC
20202-2641. The preferred method for requesting information is to FAX
your request to: (202) 205-8717. Telephone: (202) 260-9182.
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD)
may call the TDD number: (202) 205-9860. Individuals with disabilities
may obtain a copy of this notice in an alternate format (e.g. Braille,
large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the
Department as listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice contains five final priorities
authorized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. These
final priorities support the National Education Goals by helping to
improve results for children with disabilities.
On March 24, 1997, the Secretary published a notice of proposed
priorities in the Federal Register (62 FR 13972).
The publication of these final priorities does not preclude the
Secretary from proposing additional priorities, nor does it limit the
Secretary to funding only these priorities, subject to meeting
applicable rulemaking requirements. Funding of particular projects
depends on the availability of funds, and the quality of the
applications received.
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.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
In response to the Secretary's invitation in the notice of proposed
priorities, forty-five parties submitted comments. An analysis of the
comments and of the changes in the proposed priorities follows.
Technical and other minor changes--as well as suggested changes the
Secretary is not legally authorized to make under the applicable
statutory authority--are not addressed.
Priority--Center on Implementing Inclusive Education for Children With
Disabilities in Urban Districts, Particularly Students With Severe
Disabilities, as Part of Systemic Education Reform Efforts
Comment: One commenter recommended that the priority require the
center to collect and disseminate information on best practices in
special education in areas other than inclusion. The commenter stated
that collecting and disseminating information on inclusion practices,
as required in the proposed priority, promoted one special education
setting over another.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that collecting and disseminating
information on best practices in special education is important, and
notes that there are several ongoing Departmental initiatives to do
just that. The Secretary prefers not to duplicate those ongoing
efforts, and believes that there is a compelling need for the timely
dissemination of information on inclusion practices to urban districts
confronted with increasingly complex issues.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the governance of the
school district as well as the governance of schools be added to the
priority.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenter that the
governance of the school district affects the success of inclusion and
systemic education reform initiatives.
Changes: The priority has been revised to add language on the
governance of the school district. Under (f)(3), the language of the
priority has been revised to include evaluation data at the building
and district levels. Also, governance has been added to the language
under (f)(7), and the priority now requires the analysis of policies,
procedures, governance, and fiscal implications at the urban district
level.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Center should
specifically look at how children with disabilities in urban districts
are included in the State's accountability system with special emphasis
on how students with severe disabilities are assessed and
accountability for student progress is ensured.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the Center's activities could
complement other projects on accountability supported by the
Department.
Changes: Language has been added to include State assessment and
public accountability systems in the (f)(6) requirement for the Center
to produce a variety of evaluation data including information about how
project activities are integrated in broader school reform efforts.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification on whether or not
the 60-month project is one single award for the Nation and if it is
considered a pilot project.
Discussion: As stated in the priority, the Department plans to make
one award, national in scope, the intent of which is to be a capacity
building project to implement what we have learned thus far in urban
settings.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter implied that the priority should also
include a rural and suburban focus.
Discussion: The Secretary notes that there are many examples of
inclusive practices occurring in suburban (e.g., Minnesota, Maryland)
and rural (e.g., Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Kansas, Oregon)
environments, but the issues around implementing integrated, inclusive
practices in urban settings have been far more complex and problematic.
Given that forty percent of our Nation's students attend four percent
of the country's school districts, the need is compelling to focus on
urban districts.
Changes: None.
Comment: Department staff received several comments indicating
confusion between the title of the proposed priority and the
requirements of the priority. Some individuals thought the Center was
required to be located in an urban district, while others questioned
whether or not the Center's activities were exclusively focused on
students with severe disabilities.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees the title of the proposed priority
could be confusing with regard to the location of the Center and the
focus on students with severe disabilities. The Center is not required
to be physically located in an urban district; however, the focus of
the priority is inclusive education for students with disabilities in
urban districts. In addition, although the priority includes all
students with
[[Page 31677]]
disabilities, the primary emphasis is on students with severe
disabilities.
Changes: The title has been changed to ``Center on Implementing
Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities in Urban Districts,
Particularly Students with Severe Disabilities, as Part of Systemic
Education Reform Efforts.''
Priority--Center to Promote the Access to and Participation by Minority
Institutions in Discretionary Programs Authorized Under the Individuals
With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Comment: One commenter stated that if the Regional Resource Centers
are already conducting technical assistance (TA) activities on a
national basis, then it may be less essential for the Center funded
under this priority to provide TA to eligible institutions.
Discussion: The technical assistance activities of the Regional
Resource Centers are much broader in scope and, unlike the activities
identified in this priority, are not specifically designed to improve
the capacity of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),
other minority institutions (OMIs), and other eligible institutions
(OEIs) to prepare personnel to work with children with disabilities.
The TA activities under this priority must be based on the personnel
preparation needs of HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs and address those needs in
the most effective and cost efficient way. To the extent that other
technical assistance providers may be involved in related activities,
the Secretary believes that the required coordination between the
Center funded under this priority and other providers of technical
assistance will enhance, not duplicate, the purposes of this grant.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that this priority should require
that plans for technical assistance, dissemination of materials on
personnel preparation competitions under IDEA, and related analyses
concerning HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs take into account the findings and
plan developed under Priority 4--Focus 2, Developing a National Plan
for Training Personnel to Teach Children with Blindness and Low Vision.
Discussion: The Minority Center will provide technical assistance
(TA) to HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs based on the specific TA needs of each
particular entity. If training personnel to teach children with
blindness and low-vision is a specific TA need of a minority
institution, as determined by the institution's particular needs
assessment, then the Minority Center would provide that TA. It would be
appropriate for the Minority Center, in providing TA for the
preparation of personnel to teach children with blindness and low
vision, to consider the findings under Priority 4--Focus 2. However,
given the variety of potential TA needs of those minority entities that
will receive assistance from the Center, the Secretary prefers not to
specify the particular areas of personnel preparation on which the
Center must focus.
Changes: None.
Priority--Technical Assistance to Parent Projects
Comment: Four commenters suggested that the requirement in this
priority to provide technical assistance (TA) and dissemination should
be expanded to cover certain specific issues, including educational
reform, assessment, alternative conflict resolution, and transition
issues.
Discussion: The priority requires that direct TA and dissemination
activities on relevant content areas (as identified through the needs
assessment) be provided to individual parent training and information
projects (PTIs) and authorizes the Technical Assistance to Parent
Projects (TAPP) to provide TA and dissemination, as appropriate, on the
specific topics identified by the commenter. The Secretary agrees,
however, that educational reform and alternative conflict resolution
are particularly important issues, and has added specific references to
these issues within the priority.
Changes: The priority has been amended to identify educational
reform and alternative conflict resolution as examples of content areas
that may be addressed.
Comment: Twenty-nine (29) commenters wrote in support of including
community-based parent resource centers that are not funded under IDEA,
but are successfully serving traditionally underrepresented or
underserved parents of children in urban and rural settings, as
eligible recipients of all TA activities. Commenters suggested that
these community-based parent resource programs, in addition to the PTIs
currently supported under IDEA, should be able to receive assistance
from the TAPP. Some of the commenters recommended that the purpose
section of the priority specifically refer to these community-based
parent resource centers, while others suggested that these centers be
identified in each of the required activities listed in paragraphs (a)
through (f) of the priority. In addition, some commenters recommended
that regional leadership retreats for parent leaders of the community-
based parent resource centers be a required TA activity.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the community-based parent
resource centers that do not currently receive funding under IDEA are
providing important support to communities confronted with a host of
societal challenges. The Secretary also agrees that including these
projects in current TAPP activities has been beneficial to parents in
many communities. Accordingly, the Secretary has amended the priority
to clarify that non-IDEA parent resource centers are not necessarily
precluded from participating in TAPP activities. In particular, the
Secretary has revised the priority to enable community-based parent
centers that are not funded under IDEA to receive TA in order to better
serve underserved and underrepresented populations. However, the
Secretary emphasizes that the primary purpose of the priority is to
provide TA for establishing, developing, and coordinating parent
training and information projects (PTIs) supported under IDEA and
encourages community-based centers to compete for IDEA funding. Given
the requirement that the TAPP focus on coordination between, and
improvement of, IDEA parent projects, it is largely within the TAPP's
discretion to determine the extent to which it can address the needs of
other centers.
Changes: The proposed priority has been amended to authorize the
TAPP to provide TA to parent resource organizations that are not funded
under IDEA in order to improve services to underserved and
underrepresented populations.
Comment: Seventeen commenters recommended that the TAPP be required
to conduct a leadership retreat similar to the cross-regional retreat
previously conducted by the current TAPP. Another commenter did not
believe it necessary or beneficial for separate leadership retreats to
be funded for community-based or experimental parent programs. The
commenter believed that it was important for all parent training
entities to be trained together and to receive and benefit from the
information provided at each event. This commenter also suggested
several content areas (e.g., transition, early intervention, and best
practices in inclusive settings for various disabilities) that should
be addressed at the national and regional conferences.
Discussion: The Secretary believes it is important to allow
applicants the opportunity to propose what they believe to be the most
effective approach for planning and conducting
[[Page 31678]]
the national and regional conferences, and any additional meetings or
retreats they deem beneficial. The Secretary expects applicants to
propose a management strategy or strategies for conducting the
conferences, and to justify implementation of their particular plans.
Changes: None.
Comment: Four commenters expressed support for a regional approach
toward delivering TA. One commenter stated that the regional
conferences are essential, and that they should be conducted by
personnel from each specific region and address issues pertinent to
that particular region. Another commenter recommended that TAPP be
organized on a regional basis. This commenter stressed that each region
has it own unique characteristics, issues and problems that can be
addressed most effectively by a regional unit. One commenter suggested
that the TAPP include a full-time regional director in each of the four
regions.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that a regional approach to
providing TA is often beneficial, but believes that other approaches
may be equally appropriate and beneficial. The Secretary believes it is
the responsibility of the applicant to determine how best to provide TA
in order to fulfill the purposes of the priority, and declines to
impose more specific limitations on available TA approaches.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the TAPP assist the PTIs to
technologically link to information produced by specialized centers on
transition, inclusion, and assistive technology, and by other centers
funded under IDEA. This commenter also stated that the TAPP should help
PTIs to link electronically to sources other than National Information
Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities (NICHCY), such as
Educational Resources Information Center Clearinghouse on Disabilities
and Gifted Education (ERIC), sources on genetic information, and other
information resources that provide data on specific disability areas
and identify the best practices for achieving educational success in
relation to disability area, age level, and severity of disability.
Discussion: The priority requires the TAPP to electronically link
the PTIs to each other, to NICHCY, and to other information sources and
also requires the project to implement additional strategies for
maximizing the computer and technological capabilities of the PTIs. The
Secretary supports each of the suggestions recommended by the commenter
and emphasizes that each is authorized under the priority. The
Secretary prefers, however, that applicants be given the opportunity to
propose and justify their own approach toward linking PTIs
electronically within the limited parameters outlined in the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that both the National TAPP
director and the Regional TAPP directors be parents. The commenter
pointed to the growth of the parent movement and the strength of
parental leadership to support the position that parents assume these
positions.
Discussion: The Secretary cannot direct that the TAPP appoint
particular classes of people to director positions. The Secretary
agrees, however, that parent leadership development and mentoring
should come largely from other parents. This position is supported by
the authorizing legislation for the PTI program which provides for
extensive involvement of parents of infants, toddlers, children, and
youth with disabilities in the operation of PTIs.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters noted that evaluation was not
specifically identified as a required activity of the TAPP project. The
commenters recommended that TAPP be required to evaluate regularly the
results of its technical assistance system.
Discussion: The Secretary acknowledges the importance of evaluating
the technical assistance system and of seeking feedback from users of
the system. The Secretary notes, however, that the commenters' concerns
are addressed by the application review process. The selection criteria
for this competition require the reviewers to determine the quality of
the evaluation plan for the project described in each application,
including the extent to which the applicant's methods of evaluation are
appropriate for the project, are objective and produce data that are
quantifiable. The information on selection criteria is included in the
application package each applicant receives rather than in the priority
itself.
Changes: None.
Priority--Special Projects--National Initiatives
Focus 1--An Academy: Linking Teacher Education to Advances in Research
Comment: One commenter suggested that the Academy use computer-
assisted instruction and select appropriate software as part of its
responsibility to enhance educational results for children with
disabilities through the use of technology.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the use of computer-assisted
instruction and the selection of appropriate software can be effective
strategies in improving results for children with disabilities. The
Secretary emphasized that the priority does not preclude an applicant
from proposing either of these methods. Nevertheless, the Secretary
prefers to retain the broad authority in the priority that affords
applicants the discretion to propose and justify those technological
strategies that they consider appropriate.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the Academy address a
broader range of research that has demonstrated positive results for
children with disabilities (i.e., empirically validated methods). The
commenter suggested that applicants could then put together their
``best package'' of methods to be covered, and supply the data to
support that package.
Discussion: While there exists a broader range of research-based
designs that identify validated approaches, the Academy must focus its
resources on addressing national needs through advances in research. At
this time, the Secretary believes that the selected topics are the most
critical national needs for which there is sufficient research to
inform practice.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification as to whether the
Academy must address all three focus areas: (a) Teaching reading to
children with learning disabilities; (b) using technology to enhance
educational results for children with disabilities; and (c) using
positive behavioral supports to teach children with disabilities who
exhibit challenging behaviors.
Discussion: The priority requires the Academy to focus its staff
and resources on all three of the identified focus areas.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification as to how
researchers will benefit from the Academy's activities and asked
whether only original researchers can apply for the Academy.
Discussion: The priority states the teacher education programs will
benefit by integrating research advances into their respective
preservice preparation programs, and that researchers will benefit from
learning how the findings of their research impact and may be used to
improve personnel preparation programs. Both statements were intended
as examples of the potential benefits of bridging the gap between
research and practice, and were not
[[Page 31679]]
intended to impose any restrictions on the pool of eligible applicants.
Changes: None.
Focus 2--Developing a National Plan for Training Personnel to Serve
Blind and Low-Vision Children
Comment: One commenter requested that Focus 2 of the priority use
``person-first language'' (e.g., ``children with blindness'') as
opposed to ``blind children.''
Discussion: The Secretary agrees with commenter and has amended the
priority accordingly.
Changes: The Secretary has changed all references to ``blind and
low-vision children'' in the proposed priority to ``children with
blindness and low-vision.''
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the needs of students with
multiple and severe disabilities (including vision loss) be addressed
by the priority. One of the commenters stated that the curricula at the
institutions of higher education should support the development of
knowledge and skills related to the education of children who are blind
and have multiple disabilities, including those with deaf-blindness.
Discussion: The intent of the priority is to understand the
systemic nature of the problem of preparing personnel to teach children
with blindness and low-vision. The project, based on a systemic and
systematic needs assessment, shall design a comprehensive approach that
includes strategies for solving the shortage problem of personnel in
this area. While curricula at institutions of higher education might
address the needs of children who are blind and have multiple
disabilities, it would be premature to require that such issues be part
of an eventual strategy. The Secretary prefers to retain the broad
language of the priority, and allow the project to identify and address
critical issues (including, if appropriate, severe and multiple
disabilities such as deaf-blindness) and to recommend a solution in the
National Plan.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters recommended that the National Plan for
training personnel to meet the needs of children with blindness and
low-vision include training of both orientation and mobility
specialists and teachers of children with deaf-blindness. One commenter
noted that students often enter dual certification programs for
orientation and mobility instructors and teachers of children with
deaf-blindness or other visual impairments. One commenter recommended
requiring early childhood, adolescence, and technology issues, and
collaboration techniques as part of the plan developed under Focus 2.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees with the commenters that personnel
with a wide range of skills and knowledge are necessary to address the
various needs of children with visual impairments. At the same time,
however, the Secretary believes that it is particularly important to
address the need for teachers.
Changes: The priority has been revised in its title and in the text
to refer to personnel to ``serve'' rather than ``teach'' or ``educate''
children with blindness and visual impairments. However, language has
also been added to the priority to emphasize the importance of
addressing the need for qualified personnel ``particularly in the area
of teaching''.
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the National Plan under
Focus 2 be developed as quickly as possible. One commenter suggested
that the Department require the project to be completed in 2 years
given the immediate need for personnel to teach children with blindness
and low-vision. Specifically, the commenter proposed a 5-6 month period
to conduct the needs assessment, and one and a half years to develop
the National Plan.
Discussion: The Secretary is committed to developing a
comprehensive National Plan as quickly as possible, and believes a two-
year time frame is adequate. The project period (up to 24 months) is
identified in the application notice for this competition.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters made suggestions concerning the funding
level needed to develop a National Plan for training personnel to teach
children with blindness and low vision. One commenter stated that a
total allocation of $300,000 would be sufficient, while another
commenter recommended that funding be sufficient to allow all
interested parties (e.g., parents, teachers, universities, consumers,
State and local educational agencies, professional organizations,
national service agencies, national accreditation agencies) to
participate in the development of the plan by traveling to meetings
and/or utilizing distance technologies (e.g., video conferencing). The
latter commenter stated that if all such parties collaborate during the
development of the National Plan, the plan is more likely to be
implemented successfully.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that a funding level of $300,000
for up to two years should be sufficient to develop a national strategy
that includes appropriate collaboration of interested parties. This
maximum award level is reflected in the application notice for this
competition.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that the project under Focus 2
identify and utilize the most accurate data regarding the numbers of
children served in connection with the needs assessment. The commenter
noted various discrepancies in counts and stated that the discrepancies
exist because the annual count provisions under IDEA require State
departments of education to categorize children by a primary
disability. The commenter asserted that the project's analysis of the
personnel shortage will be faulty without identifying all children with
blindness and low-vision and their service needs, and that the analysis
must account for the numbers of children underserved or not currently
served.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the accuracy of the number of
children with blindness and low-vision, types of services needed, and
the personnel needed to provide necessary services are important issues
that may be considered in determining the extent of the personnel
shortage and in developing the National Plan. The commenter has raised
a few of the many potential issues that applicants may address in
describing their plan for conducting the needs assessment.
Nevertheless, the Secretary prefers to retain the broad authority in
the priority that affords applicants the discretion to propose and
justify the needs assessment plan that they consider most appropriate.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters recommended that the National Plan ensure
that programs preparing personnel to teach children with blindness and
visual impairments meet nationally-recognized personnel standards. One
commenter specifically recommended that: (1) University programs be
required to adhere to the ``Standards for University Personnel
Preparation Programs in Education of Students with Visual Impairments''
recently developed by the Association for Education and Rehabilitation
of the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER); (2) the curriculum of
university teacher preparation programs recognize and address teacher
competencies related to the ``Core Curriculum for Students With Visual
Impairments: Developed in Conjunction with Goal #8 of the National
Agenda for Education of Children and Youths with Visual Impairments,
Including Those with Multiple Disabilities''; and (3) the curriculum of
each university program address teacher competencies relative to
meeting the cultural, racial, and ethnic
[[Page 31680]]
diversities of students, and to the extent possible, assure that those
diversities are reflected in the personnel preparing to enter the
field.
Discussion: The Secretary expects that the National Plan will
address standards and curriculum for preparing capable and qualified
personnel to educate children with blindness and low-vision. Given the
variety of approaches to preparing personnel who are capable and
qualified to teach children with varying levels of visual disabilities,
the Secretary prefers to afford applicants the discretion to propose,
as appropriate, curricula or personnel standards based on the needs of
children with blindness and visual impairments.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter identified the age ranges of students with
blindness or low-vision as a major cause behind the shortages of
personnel to teach children with visual impairments. The commenter
stated that approaches and strategies for addressing educational and
developmental needs of visually-impaired infants and pre-schoolers are
far different from those used to teach high-school age students with
visual impairments. Consequently, the commenter recommended that the
required needs assessment under Focus 2 reflect the need for personnel
to teach students of different ages.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the needs of children with
blindness and low-vision vary according to their developmental and
academic progress, and has revised the priority accordingly.
Changes: The priority has been revised to clarify the National Plan
must address the need for qualified personnel to teach blind and low-
vision children across all age ranges.
Comment: One commenter recommended that the needs assessment and
the comprehensive approach under Focus 2 specifically address the
underrepresentation of minorities among personnel working with children
with low-vision and that the project develop strategies to address this
problem.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the project should address
the participation level of underrepresented populations in the field of
teaching children with blindness and low-vision and has revised the
priority accordingly.
Changes: The priority has been amended to require that the
comprehensive approach for preparing personnel under Focus 2 address
the level of participation among underrepresented populations in the
applicable field.
Comment: One commenter recommended that Focus 2 of the priority
include more specificity about the source of public input in the
development of the needs assessment and in the design of a
comprehensive teacher preparation strategy. Specifically, the commenter
recommended that the project be required to: (1) Obtain input from
State departments of education, visually impaired professionals,
university personnel, and other special education personnel; and (2)
consider successful models in preparing personnel to teach children
with blindness and low-vision.
Discussion: The Secretary expects applicants to obtain input from
relevant sources in developing the needs assessment and recommended
strategy. The approach recommended by the commenter is a permissible
data gathering technique that applicants may consider. The Secretary
prefers, however, to allow applicants the opportunity to propose and
justify the particular approach for obtaining information that they
believe is most useful.
Changes: None.
Priority--Research Institute on Secondary Education Services for
Children and Youth With Disabilities
Comment: One commenter recommended adding to the priority
requirements to study: (1) The inclusion of students in the National
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and their progress on the
various areas of assessment; (2) strategies that are being used to
assist students to access the general education curriculum; (3) the
extent to which students with disabilities are progressing toward
standards established by States and districts; and (4) the rates of
graduation with a regular diploma, special diploma, and GED.
Discussion: The Secretary agrees that the NAEP, State, and district
standards, and rates of graduation are important issues for secondary
students with disabilities, and notes that the Department is currently
funding projects that address those concerns. The Secretary also notes
that the priority, as written, does not preclude an applicant from
proposing to include those issues in its application for funding. The
recommendation to include the study of strategies that assist students
with disabilities in accessing the general education curriculum would
be included under the requirement for the study of effective strategies
for restructuring academic and vocational courses to accommodate
students with disabilities. The Secretary concurs that adding language
to the priority would clarify that accessing the general education
curriculum is included under the requirement.
Changes: Language has been added to the priority to clarify that
the institute requirements include the study of strategies to assist
students with disabilities in accessing the general education
curriculum.
Comment: One commenter expressed the concern that the priority
addresses only macro-type factors such as classroom restructuring and
more effective use of counseling services, while ignoring important
micro-type factors such as skill acquisition routines or practice
strategies for insuring student mastery of critical concepts. The
commenter recommended that the priority be revised to require
applicants to address questions surrounding effective instructional
conditions that result in successful skill acquisition and
generalization as well as successful understanding and mastery of
critical content.
Discussion: The priority, as written, requires the study of
effective support strategies, supplementary aids, and services aimed at
improving educational results for secondary students with disabilities.
It was intended that the reference in the priority to ``support
strategies, supplementary aids and services'' included instruction. The
Secretary concurs that the priority should be clarified to include the
study of effective instructional practices that result in successful
skill acquisition and generalization as well as successful
understanding and mastery of critical content.
Change: The priority has been amended to clarify that the study of
effective instructional practices aimed at improving educational
results for secondary students with disabilities is included in the
requirements.
Comment: One commenter recommended that successful transition to
postsecondary settings be the major focus of a separate priority.
Discussion: The priority, as written, requires the research
institute to study issues surrounding transition to postsecondary
education and employment. The Secretary agrees that successful
transition to postsecondary settings is critical for improving results
for secondary students with disabilities, and notes that a number of
the Department's funded projects address this issue. Also, projects
proposing to address this issue in more depth are eligible to submit an
application under this priority and are encouraged to apply.
Changes: None.
[[Page 31681]]
General Comments
Comment: One commenter recommended that all Department of Education
grants should be capped at some reasonable indirect rate, such as 8
percent, regardless of whether the grant category is personnel
preparation, model demonstration, outreach, or research.
Discussion: The subject of indirect cost rates is a Department-wide
issue, and is addressed in the Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR). It is not an issue that can be
addressed in individual priority announcements. The Department will
consider the indirect cost rate issue in its review of the EDGAR
regulations.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter stated that collaboration with other
important service providers such as Mental Retardation/Developmental
Disabilities agencies or programs, mental health and health care
providers, and University Affiliated Programs, etc. should be required
elements in all of the proposed priorities.
Discussion: The Secretary acknowledges that collaboration with
other service providers is often an important element in improving
results for children with disabilities. As written, the various
priorities include language on evaluating, coordinating, and
collaborating with other stakeholders, other technical assistance
providers, other information sources, other experts and researchers in
related subject matter and methodological fields, etc; and none of the
priorities preclude an applicant from proposing collaboration with the
agencies and programs recommended by the commenter. Given the variety
of potential collaboration strategies applicants could propose, the
Secretary believes it would be impossible to provide a comprehensive
list in any priority. The Secretary prefers to maintain the broad
language of the priorities, and allow applicants to propose and justify
their particular strategy.
Changes: None.
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:
Absolute Priority 1--Center on Implementing Inclusive Education for
Children With Disabilities in Urban Districts, Particularly Students
With Severe Disabilities, as Part of Systemic Education Reform Efforts
Background
During the past ten years research and demonstration activities
related to inclusive education have expanded dramatically. Increasing
numbers of State and local education agencies are involved in school
reform and inclusion efforts to ensure that all students, including
those with severe disabilities, are provided with equal educational
opportunities, meaningful access to the general curriculum, and
effective educational and related services in their neighborhood
schools.
However, in the midst of multiple social and economic problems,
urban districts are confronted with increasingly complex issues that
have made the pursuit of inclusion and systemic education reform
initiatives difficult. The need is compelling, considering that forty
percent of our Nation's students attend four percent of the country's
school districts.
Priority: This priority is national in scope and is designed to
help bridge the gap between the knowledge base and the state of
practice in urban districts by: (a) Incorporating extant theory and
research findings about the inclusion of students with disabilities,
particularly students with severe disabilities, into systemic
educational reform efforts, including efforts to improve education in
multicultural environments; (b) increasing the capacity of urban school
districts to provide high quality inclusive educational opportunities
for students with disabilities, particularly students with severe
disabilities; and (c) creating a national network of parents, education
professionals (including teacher's organizations and unions), and
advocacy groups interested in pursuing inclusion of students with
disabilities, particularly students with severe disabilities, as a
component of systemic education reform in urban districts in order to
facilitate increased exchange of information and collaborative problem
solving among these stakeholders.
The Center must--
(a) Prepare a synthesis of the relevant extant systemic reform,
systems change, and inclusion theory and research with emphasis on
urban schools with diverse populations to serve as the conceptual and
empirical basis for center activities;
(b) Translate this knowledge base into educational practices and
materials that promote the inclusion of children with disabilities in
regular education programs, and can be used by program implementers and
policy makers in urban areas at district, building, and classroom
levels;
(c) Provide training and technical assistance via direct technical
assistance as well distance learning and other innovative methods in
the adoption, use, and maintenance of inclusive educational practices
involving access to the general education curriculum in urban settings;
(d) Evaluate the effectiveness of the center's activities in
promoting inclusive educational practices in multiple urban settings by
assessing: (1) The number of school sites where activities are
conducted; (2) the number of people trained; (3) the types of follow-up
activities that appear most valuable; and (4) the number of children
with disabilities who are served in inclusive educational programs;
(e) Evaluate the effect of the Center's activities on results for
children with disabilities;
(f) Produce a variety of evaluation data, including: (1) Factors
that contribute to the successful adoption, use, and maintenance of
inclusive educational efforts in urban districts; (2) descriptions of
the instructional contexts and settings, and classroom instructional
supports; (3) school governance, organizational, and administrative
patterns at the building and district levels; (4) the attitudes and
involvement of school administrators, school personnel, union
membership, families, students, and other stakeholders; (5) information
about student results and the social validity of project activities;
(6) information about how project activities are integrated in broader
school reform efforts including State assessment and public
accountability systems; and (7) analysis of policies, procedures,
governance, and fiscal implications at the urban district level;
(g) Develop linkages with U.S. Department of Education technical
assistance providers and disseminators to communicate findings and
distribute products;
(h) Coordinate activities on an on-going basis with other relevant
efforts sponsored by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP),
including the Consortium for Inclusive Schooling Practices, and State-
wide Systems Change projects;
(i) Provide training and experience in translating research to
practice, materials development, technical assistance, dissemination,
and program evaluation for a limited number of graduate students
including students
[[Page 31682]]
who are from traditionally underrepresented groups;
(j) Conduct topical meetings and other activities on issues and
emerging or promising inclusion practices in urban education; and
(k) Collect and ensure timely dissemination of information on
inclusion to urban policymakers and program implementers.
Under this priority, the Secretary anticipates making one award for
a cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 60 months
subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation
awards. In determining whether to continue the Urban Center for the
fourth and fifth years of the project, the Secretary, in addition to
considering factors in 34 CFR 75.253(a), will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts
selected by the Secretary. The services of the review team, including a
two-day site visit to the project are to be performed during the last
half of the Center's second year and may be included in that year's
evaluation required under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the
services to be performed by the review team must also be included in
the Center's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be
approximately $4,000;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
Center; and
(c) The degree to which the Center's technical assistance,
evaluation, and dissemination activities demonstrate the potential for
significantly increasing the capacity of urban schools to serve
children with disabilities in inclusive school and community settings.
This award will be jointly funded under two statutory authorities:
(1) The Research in Education of Individuals with Disabilities Program;
and (2) the Program for Children with Severe Disabilities. The
Secretary has determined that this joint award is necessary to address
not only the needs of children with severe disabilities in urban
settings, but also the broader needs of all children with disabilities
in urban settings.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1441 and 1424.
Absolute Priority 2--Center to Promote the Access To and Participation
By Minority Institutions in Discretionary Programs Authorized Under the
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Background
The Congress has found that the Federal Government must be
responsive to the growing needs of an increasingly diverse society and
that a more equitable distribution of resources is essential for the
Federal Government to meet its responsibility to provide an equal
educational opportunity for all individuals, including children with
disabilities. Specifically, the Congress has concluded that increasing
the participation in awards for IDEA grants, cooperative agreements and
contracts by Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs),
other institutions of higher education whose minority enrollment is at
least 25 percent (OMIs), and other eligible institutions as defined
under section 312 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (OEIs) can
greatly improve our success in educating children with disabilities
from diverse backgrounds.
Priority: This priority is part of the Secretary's plan for
increasing participation of minority entities in grant competitions.
The purpose of this priority is to improve educational results for
children with disabilities from diverse backgrounds by supporting a
national center to: (a) Promote the participation of HBCUs, OMIs, and
OEIs in personnel preparation competitions authorized by IDEA; and (b)
increase the capacity of HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs to prepare personnel to
work with children with disabilities. The Center must--
(1) Identify the universe of HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs;
(2) Establish and maintain contacts with the minority entities;
(3) Conduct needs assessments and negotiate technical assistance
agreements on an annual basis with each HBCU, OMI, or OEI requesting
assistance. The Center may propose cross-institutional activities if
similar objectives are established in several agencies and if combining
activities could create cost savings or extend benefits to minority
entities requesting assistance. In developing these activities, the
Center must analyze the needs of each entity and determine the most
effective and cost efficient means of addressing those needs. In
developing each specific technical assistance agreement, the Center
must--
(i) Reconcile the needs identified by the entity with the Center's
resources and its ability to respond;
(ii) Describe the strategies and mechanisms it will use to respond
to the technical assistance and professional development needs;
(iii) Identify the persons involved in the technical assistance
activity;
(iv) Specify the beginning and end date of the activity;
(v) Describe how the technical assistance activity will contribute
to promoting the immediate and long-term goals of the project,
including improved educational results for children with disabilities;
and
(vi) Describe a plan for coordinating with other technical
assistance providers (e.g., the Regional Resource Centers) that may be
involved in related activities;
(4) Analyze the performance of grantees to serve as a basis for
providing technical assistance, especially in the areas of recruitment
and retention of students in personnel preparation programs, improving
the quality of those programs, placement of students after graduation,
and other areas that contribute to improved results for children with
disabilities;
(5) Develop materials and implement strategies that are necessary
to carry out the center's activities.
(6) Prepare and disseminate materials explaining personnel
preparation competitions under IDEA to the HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs;
(7) Analyze the results of each competition in terms of the degree
to which the HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs applied, and the degree to which
they were successful, and submit this analysis to the Department and
the HBCUs, OMIs, and OEIs served by the project;
(8) Provide advice as requested by the Department on strategies to
further the purposes of section 610(j) of IDEA; and,
(9) Disseminate state-of-the-art practices in personnel
preparation, recruitment, and retention through linkages with U.S.
Department of Education dissemination and technical assistance
providers, in particular those technical assistance providers supported
under IDEA.
The Secretary anticipates making one award for a grant with project
period of up to 60 months subject to the requirements of 34 CFR
75.253(a) for continuation awards. In determining whether to continue
the Center for the fourth and fifth years of the project period, the
Secretary, in addition to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), will
consider--
(a) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated scope of work have been or are being met by the Center;
and
[[Page 31683]]
(b) The degree to which minority entities applied and were
successful in participating in personnel preparation programs under
IDEA.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1409(j) and 1431.
Absolute Priority 3--Technical Assistance to Parent Projects
This priority is issued under the Program for Training Personnel
for the Education of Individuals with Disabilities--Parent Training and
Information Centers. This priority focuses primarily on the provision
of technical assistance for establishing, developing, and coordinating
parent training and information projects supported under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (hereinafter referred to as
PTIs). The project must:
(a) Plan and conduct one national and four regional conferences
each year;
(b) Conduct an assessment of the training and information needs of
the PTIs;
(c) Provide direct technical assistance and disseminate information
through a variety of mechanisms to individual parent training and
information projects on management processes or content areas (e.g.,
special education and related services issues, educational reform, laws
and regulations, alternative dispute resolution, networking) as
identified through the needs assessment;
(d) Maximize the computer and technological capabilities of the
PTIs by: (1) Systematizing data collection to conduct needs assessments
(e.g., of who is and is not being served, where and what kinds of
problems or successes exist in States, tracking effects of Federal and
State initiatives), (2) linking the PTIs together electronically using
a web page and bulletin boards that are user-friendly, enable PTIs to
access and communicate with each other, and link PTIs directly to the
National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities
(NICHCY) and other information sources, and (3) implementing other
appropriate strategies.
(e) Identify effective strategies for working with parents,
families, and schools, and incorporate these strategies into training
materials, technical assistance activities, and conferences; and
(f) Provide direct technical assistance to PTIs and other parent
centers (including, as appropriate, non-IDEA funded community-based
centers) that serve underserved and underrepresented populations.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1431(e).
Absolute Priority 4--Special Projects--National Initiatives
This priority is issued under the Program for Training Personnel
for the Education of Individuals with Disabilities. The purpose of this
priority is to support projects of national significance related to the
preparation of personnel needed to serve infants, toddlers, children,
and youth with disabilities. Projects funded under this priority must
address one of the following focus areas:
Focus 1--An Academy: Linking Teacher Education to Advances in Research
The purpose of this project will be to link teacher education
programs with recent advances in research that have documented
successful methods and strategies for assisting children with
disabilities to achieve better results. The teacher education programs
will benefit by integrating these research advances into their
respective preservice preparation programs for preparing personnel to
work with children with disabilities, including special education,
early intervention, related services personnel, and regular educators.
The researchers will benefit from understanding how the findings of
their research impact and improve the personnel preparation programs. A
preservice program is defined as one that leads toward a degree,
certification, or professional license or standard, and may be
supported at the associate, baccalaureate, master's or specialist
level.
The Academy must focus its staff and resources on research
advancements that improve results for children with disabilities in:
(a) Teaching reading to children with learning disabilities; (b) using
technology to enhance educational results for children with
disabilities; and (c) using positive behavioral supports to teach
children with disabilities who exhibit challenging behaviors.
Activities: The Academy must--
(a) Design an approach, consistent with principles of effective
professional development, for linking teacher education programs to the
recent advances in research listed above. The professional development
approach must consider a range of strategies for facilitating the
exchange of knowledge between researchers and individuals who prepare
personnel to work with children with disabilities. Strategies may
include, for example, face to face meetings, electronic networks,
seminars, retreats, mentoring agreements, and building local resource
banks;
(b) Design a comprehensive approach for reaching out to teacher
education programs across the country in each of the three research
areas identified above;
(c) Design innovative tools to facilitate the exchange of
knowledge, such as experiential activities, videos, course syllabi,
interactive media, etc.; and
(d) Evaluate the progress of linking research advances to teacher
education programs.
Focus 2--Developing A National Plan for Training Personnel to Serve
Children With Blindness and Low-Vision
In recent years, the number of institutions of higher education
that offer teacher training programs for teachers of children with
blindness and low-vision has significantly diminished. Today, very few
vision training programs for teachers of individuals with visual
impairments exist across the country. In some geographic areas, no such
program exists. There has also been a concurrent reduction in the
number of personnel available to meet the needs of children who are
blind or have low-vision. Institutions currently respond to this
shortage by offering abbreviated courses, off-campus courses, and
distance learning. Both individual institutions and regional
organizations are seeking more effective responses to this problem.
These problems are significant. Thus, immediate attention must be
devoted to developing a national strategy for addressing the need for
qualified personnel to serve children with blindness and low-vision
across all age ranges, particularly in the area of teaching.
Activities: The project must--
(a) Conduct a systemic and systematic needs assessment of the
personnel shortage identified above; and
(b) Design a comprehensive approach for preparing capable and
qualified personnel to serve students with blindness and low-vision
across all age ranges, including strategies for solving this shortage
problem, consideration and comparisons of the merits of each
alternative strategy, and a recommended solution. The comprehensive
approach shall also address the level of participation in the
profession by underrepresented populations.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C 1431.
Absolute Priority 5--Research Institute on Secondary Education Services
for Children and Youth With Disabilities
This priority is issued under the Secondary Education and
Transitional Services for Youth with Disabilities Program. This
institute supports a strategic program of research to study a variety
of strategies to improve
[[Page 31684]]
educational results for students with disabilities in secondary
education settings (including urban, rural, and suburban community
settings), and promote their successful transition to postsecondary
settings.
The secondary research institute must design and conduct a
strategic program of research to study--
(a) The range of effective support strategies, supplementary aids,
and services (e.g., instructional practices, counseling, tutoring,
assistive technology) aimed at improving educational results for
students with disabilities in a wide range of typical secondary
education experiences (e.g., academic, vocational, extracurricular) as
well as their retention in school and their engagement in the
educational process. This includes the study of strategies to assist
students in accessing the general education curriculum;
(b) Effective strategies that secondary school personnel can use to
restructure academic and vocational courses to accommodate students
with disabilities with diverse learning needs and styles;
(c) The extent to which secondary schools are effectively
implementing the transition services requirement of IDEA;
(d) The extent to which secondary academic and vocational curricula
promote postsecondary education and employment; and
(e) Standards and models for developing instructional and
transition plans for students who are entering or enrolled in secondary
school programs.
The program of research must include, but need not be limited to,
studying school based exemplars, or designing and implementing
interventions using a rich array of research methods to reach the
intended goals of this priority as articulated by the proposed research
hypotheses. In addition, the research must be designed in a manner that
is likely to lead to improved services and results for children and
youth with disabilities, including those who are members of cultural,
linguistic, or racial minority groups.
The institute must--
(a) Design and conduct a strategic program of research across
multiple sites to represent organizational and demographic diversity;
(b) Collect, analyze, and communicate student results data and
supporting context data; and multiple results data for teachers,
parents, and administrators, as appropriate;
(c) Collaborate with other research institutes supported under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and experts and researchers
in related subject matter and methodological fields, to design and
conduct the activities of the institute;
(d) Carry out the research within a conceptual framework, based on
previous research or theory, that provides a basis for the issues that
will be studied, the research methods and instrumentation that will be
used, and the specific target populations and settings that will be
studied;
(e) Collaborate with communication specialists and professional and
advocacy organizations to ensure that findings are prepared in formats
that are useable for specific audiences such as teachers,
administrators, and other service providers;
(f) Develop linkages with U.S. Department of Education
dissemination and technical assistance providers, in particular those
supported under IDEA, to communicate research findings and distribute
products;
(g) Provide training and research opportunities for a limited
number of graduate students, including students who are from
traditionally underrepresented groups;
(h) Coordinate research and dissemination activities with other
relevant efforts sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education and with
the U.S. Department of Labor, including other research institutes, and
information clearinghouses; and
(i) Meet with the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
project officer in the first four months of the project to review the
program of research and communication approaches.
The Institute must budget for two trips annually to Washington, DC.
for: (1) A two-day Research Project Directors' meeting; and (2) another
meeting to collaborate with the OSEP project officer.
Under this priority, the Secretary anticipates making one award for
a cooperative agreement with a project period of up to 60 months
subject to the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a) for continuation
awards. In determining whether to continue the Institute for the fourth
and fifth years of the project period, the Secretary, in addition to
the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), will consider--
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of three experts
selected by the Secretary. The services of the review team, including a
two-day site visit to the project, are to be performed during the last
half of the Institute's second year and may be included in that year's
evaluation required under 34 CFR 75.590. Costs associated with the
services to be performed by the review team must also be included in
the Institute's budget for year two. These costs are estimated to be
approximately $4,000;
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
Institute; and
(c) The degree to which the Institute's research designs,
methodologies, and activities demonstrate the potential for advancing
significant new knowledge.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1425.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: Research in
Education of Individuals with Disabilities Program, 84.023; Training
Personnel for the Education of Individuals with Disabilities
Program--Grants for Personnel Training and Parent Training and
Information Centers, 84.029; Program for Children with Severe
Disabilities, 84.086; and Secondary Education and Transitional
Services for Youth with Disabilities Program, 84.158)
Dated: June 4, 1997.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 97-15032 Filed 6-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P