FR Doc E7-12549
[Federal Register: June 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 124)]
[Notices]
[Page 35443-35447]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28jn07-38]
Download: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research--
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program--
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTCs)
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of final priority for a RRTC on Vocational
Rehabilitation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services announces a priority on vocational
rehabilitation under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Projects and Centers Program administered by the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). The Assistant Secretary
may use this priority for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2007 and
later years. We take this action to focus research attention on areas
of national need. We intend this priority to improve rehabilitation
services and outcomes for individuals with disabilities.
DATES: Effective Date: This priority is effective July 30, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 6030, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone: (202) 245-7462 or via Internet:
donna.nangle@ed.gov.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may
call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an
alternative
[[Page 35444]]
format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request to the contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers (RRTCs)
RRTCs conduct coordinated and integrated advanced programs of
research targeted toward the production of new knowledge to improve
rehabilitation methodology and service delivery systems, alleviate or
stabilize disability conditions, or promote maximum social and economic
independence for persons with disabilities. Additional information on
the RRTC program can be found at: http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/res-program.html#RRTC
.
General Requirements of RRTCs
RRTCs must--
Carry out coordinated advanced programs of rehabilitation
research;
Provide training, including graduate, pre-service, and in-
service training, to help rehabilitation personnel more effectively
provide rehabilitation services to individuals with disabilities;
Provide technical assistance to individuals with
disabilities, their representatives, providers, and other interested
parties;
Demonstrate in their applications how they will address,
in whole or in part, the needs of individuals with disabilities from
minority backgrounds;
Disseminate informational materials to individuals with
disabilities, their representatives, providers, and other interested
parties; and
Serve as centers of national excellence in rehabilitation
research for individuals with disabilities, their representatives,
providers, and other interested parties.
We published a notice of proposed priority (NPP) for NIDRR's
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program,
RRTC program, in the Federal Register on March 27, 2007 (72 FR 14263).
The NPP included a background statement that described our rationale
for the priority proposed in that notice.
There are differences between the NPP and this notice of final
priority (NFP) as discussed in the following section.
Analysis of Comments and Changes
In response to our invitation in the NPP, eleven parties submitted
comments on the proposed priority. An analysis of the comments and of
any changes in the priority since publication of the NPP follows.
Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes, or
suggested changes the law does not authorize us to make under the
applicable statutory authority. In addition, we do not address general
comments that raised concerns not directly related to the proposed
priority.
Comments: None.
Discussion: Upon internal review of the NPP, NIDRR wishes to
further clarify the focus of research related to ``best practices''
activities to be conducted under this priority. In the NPP, NIDRR
proposed that an RRTC funded under the priority must contribute to
several outcomes, including increased knowledge of ``best practices''
for prioritizing and providing services to individuals with the most
significant disabilities. In the NPP, we proposed specifically that the
research to be conducted to contribute to this outcome must focus on
the ``extent to which individuals with the most significant
disabilities are given priority for services by their respective State
Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) programs.'' We are revising this
language to specifically reflect section 101(a)(5)(A) of the
Rehabilitation Act, and related regulations under 34 CFR 361.36 to
clarify that NIDRR and RSA are specifically interested in research on
best practices for administering and implementing an order of selection
in serving individuals with the most significant disabilities.
Changes: NIDRR has revised the priority to clarify that the focus
of best practices research to be conducted under paragraph (d) of the
priority must be on the administration and implementation of an order
of selection in serving individuals with the most significant
disabilities.
Comment: One commenter noted that a relatively low percentage of
consumers of State VR programs who are blind or have low vision, and
whose cases have been closed with an employment outcome, obtain
competitive employment. Based on this finding, the commenter recommends
that paragraph (e) of the priority be amended to include a focus on
individuals who are blind or have low vision.
Discussion: As described in the NPP, NIDRR and RSA have chosen to
focus their research resources on individuals with developmental
disabilities (DD) and individuals with mental illness (MI) because
historically these individuals have had very low employment outcome
rates. Individuals with MI have the lowest annual closure rate in the
VR system. Individuals with DD also have low rates of closure relative
to other subpopulations. These low closure rates, combined with the
fact that individuals with DD and MI comprise about half of VR clients
nationally, provide the strategic rationale for the proposed focus of
paragraph (e).
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters noted that the findings of the RRTC
should be incorporated into training and ongoing educational
requirements of VR personnel, and disseminated to individuals with
disabilities. These commenters suggest that paragraph (f) of the
priority be amended to include a requirement for a direct VR program
delivery impact strategy.
Discussion: We agree with this commenter's observation that the
proposed priority unduly restricts dissemination efforts to ``State and
Federal administrators of the VR program,'' and that applicants should
disseminate the results of their research widely throughout the VR
service delivery system as well as to individuals with disabilities. It
is beyond the scope of this grant, however, to ensure that research
findings are formally incorporated into training and education
requirements of VR staff.
Changes: NIDRR has revised paragraph (f) of the priority to require
the RRTC to disseminate research results and provide training and
technical assistance to all VR program personnel, as well as
individuals with disabilities.
Comment: Four commenters suggested that the priority be amended to
incorporate specific research topics related to services provided to
youth in transition from school to employment settings.
Discussion: NIDRR and RSA have made a strategic decision to focus
the work of this RRTC on the State-level structures and systems for
providing employment services to individuals with disabilities. As
described in the Background section in the NPP, the goal of this RRTC
is to produce information that will properly contextualize future
employment interventions and intervention studies. This new knowledge
will help determine the real world applicability of those
interventions, and the results of research on them. NIDRR and RSA
believe that new knowledge will include information about many State-
level systems that serve individuals transitioning from school to
postsecondary work activity and agree that this important area could
benefit from additional research-based knowledge. NIDRR and RSA believe
that
[[Page 35445]]
an applicant could propose research on transition-related service
delivery structures under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the priority.
However, we have no basis for requiring that all applicants focus their
research in this manner.
Changes: None.
Comment: Four commenters suggested that the term ``home-based
employment'' utilized in paragraph (c) of the priority be broadened to
include self-employment and entrepreneurship.
Discussion: NIDRR and RSA are specifically interested in the extent
to which State VR systems use home-based employment options to provide
VR services. Under paragraph (c) the priority allows applicants to
propose research that examines a wide variety of VR program
characteristics. The list of characteristics in paragraph (c) was not
intended to be exhaustive. Accordingly, an applicant could propose to
focus research on the broader categories of self-employment and
entrepreneurship. However, NIDRR has no basis for requiring that all
applicants focus on self-employment or entrepreneurship in responding
to the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: Referring specifically to paragraph (a) of the priority,
three commenters suggested that NIDRR require applicants to explore the
interaction between State procurement policies and choice provisions
that are spelled out in the Rehabilitation Act.
Discussion: To the extent that research literature on this topic
exists, applicants may propose to include it in their literature review
and synthesis. Applicants may also propose to examine this topic under
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) of the priority. However, NIDRR has
no basis for requiring that all applicants focus on the interaction
between state procurement policies and the choice provisions described
in section 102(d) of the Rehabilitation Act.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters recommended that paragraph (b) of the
priority be expanded to require research on specific disability
employment service topics such as interagency agreements, VR
connections to One-Stop Centers, VR connections to apprenticeship
programs, policies related to needs-based financing of postsecondary
education, and VR connections to programs for military veterans.
Discussion: The priority allows applicants to propose studies
examining these specific characteristics of disability employment
services, as well as many others. However, NIDRR has no basis for
requiring that all applicants focus on these factors in responding to
the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters recommended that paragraph (c) of the
priority be expanded to require research on specific VR program
characteristics such as extended evaluations and trial work
experiences, VR agreements with agencies providing long-term services
and employment supports, characteristics of individuals denied VR
services, and different types of purchase-of-service agreements.
Discussion: In paragraph (c), we described the characteristics we
thought applicants should examine in their studies, but as noted
previously the list of characteristics was not intended to be
exhaustive. Accordingly, under paragraph (c), an applicant could
propose to examine the characteristics suggested by the commenters, as
well as many others. However, NIDRR has no basis for requiring that all
applicants focus on the additional characteristics recommended by the
commenters.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether best-practices research on
serving people with MI and DD, under paragraph (e) of the priority,
could focus on services provided by non-VR agencies.
Discussion: Under paragraph (e) of the priority, best practices
research must be coordinated with and informed by research conducted
under paragraphs (b) and (c) of the priority. Under paragraph (b), the
RRTC must research the role of community non-governmental organizations
and government entities in the delivery of services to individuals with
disabilities. Accordingly, an applicant's research could include best
practices from non-VR service providers. NIDRR and RSA are ultimately
interested in application of these best-practices findings within the
VR system, regardless of their source.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked whether NIDRR would consider
applications that propose randomized controlled intervention designs.
Discussion: As described in the Background section of the NPP, and
clearly outlined in the proposed priority, the purpose of this RRTC is
to conduct research that is largely descriptive, in order to provide
the contextual basis for future interventions and intervention studies.
A randomized-controlled trial would not produce information that
fulfills this purpose. NIDRR will not consider proposals that are not
responsive to paragraphs (a) through (f).
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter asked NIDRR to define the term ``best
practices'' that is used in the priority.
Discussion: Generally, the term ``best practices'' refers to the
notion that there are methods or processes that are more closely
associated with achieving a desired goal than others. The goal
identified in paragraph (d) is the prioritization of services to those
with the most significant disabilities. The goal identified in
paragraph (e) of the priority is achieving a high rate of placing or
retaining individuals from specific disability subpopulations in jobs.
NIDRR and RSA are specifically interested in research that will help
identify current practices, interventions, or service-delivery
structures that are associated with achieving these goals.
Changes: NIDRR has revised the priority to include the following
definition of best practices: ``For purposes of this priority, best
practices are defined as current practices, interventions, or service-
delivery structures that are associated with achievement of a
particular goal.''
Comment: One commenter asked whether NIDRR would consider systemic
change strategies that enhance the adoption of evidence-based research,
as a best practice for serving individuals with MI or DD.
Discussion: NIDRR requires that best practices research under
paragraphs (d) and (e) be coordinated with research activities under
paragraphs (b) and (c). Paragraphs (b) and (c) require research on the
structural and systemic characteristics of the States' disability
employment services networks, and the States' VR programs,
respectively. To the extent that successful systemic change strategies
currently exist within these employment service-delivery structures,
applicants are free to examine them in their research on best practices
under paragraphs (d) and (e).
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested that NIDRR require applicants to
identify specific strategies for collaboration with the Helen Keller
National Center under paragraph (d) of the priority, given the unique
employment challenges of individuals who are deaf-blind.
Discussion: While the priority requires a RRTC to conduct research
to help determine best practices for prioritizing and providing
services to individuals with the most significant disabilities, it does
not require the RRTC to address the needs of any particular disability
group in meeting this requirement. Accordingly, applicants may propose
to collaborate with any
[[Page 35446]]
organizations that they believe will help achieve the desired outcomes
under this priority. However, NIDRR has no basis for requiring that all
applicants collaborate with the Helen Keller National Center or any
other particular organization.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter noted that the statutory definition of
``individual with a significant disability'' includes language that
restricts this population to those with multiple VR service needs. The
commenter notes that this definition precludes prioritization of VR
services for people with significant disabilities who only need one VR
service. The commenter recommends that NIDRR remove language from the
priority that refers to ``significant'' disability, so that the
statutory definition of significant disability does not limit research
on the VR prioritization process to those who fit that definition.
Discussion: Title I of the Rehabilitation Act requires State
agencies to give priority to those individuals with the most
significant disabilities if it cannot serve all eligible individuals.
Through this priority, NIDRR seeks to sponsor research that is directly
relevant to the VR State agencies and requirements that govern the
operation of the VR program. Making the change suggested by the
commenter would not further this goal.
Changes: None.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use this priority, we invite applications through
a notice in the Federal Register. When inviting applications we
designate the priority as absolute, competitive preference, or
invitational. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by either
(1) Awarding additional points, depending on how well or the extent to
which the application meets the competitive preference priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the
competitive preference priority over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the invitational
priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the
invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other
applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Note: This NFP is in concert with President George W. Bush's New
Freedom Initiative (NFI) and the Plan. The NFI can be accessed on
the Internet at the following site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom
.
The Plan, which was published in the Federal Register on February
15, 2006 (71 FR 8165), can be accessed on the Internet at the following
site: http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html.
Through the implementation of the NFI and the Plan, NIDRR seeks
to--(1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and
rehabilitation research; (2) Foster an exchange of expertise,
information, and training to facilitate the advancement of knowledge
and understanding of the unique needs of traditionally underserved
populations; (3) Determine best strategies and programs to improve
rehabilitation outcomes for underserved populations; (4) Identify
research gaps; (5) Identify mechanisms of integrating research and
practice; and (6) Disseminate findings.
Priority
Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) on Vocational
Rehabilitation (VR)
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services establishes a priority for the funding of a Rehabilitation
Research and Training Center (RRTC) on Vocational Rehabilitation (VR)
Services. The RRTC must conduct research on the complex employment
service delivery structures for individuals with disabilities,
investigate ``best practices'' in certain critical areas, and provide
training and technical assistance in order to improve VR services and
employment outcomes among individuals with disabilities. For purposes
of this priority, best practices are defined as current practices,
interventions, or service-delivery structures that are associated with
achievement of a particular goal. Under this priority, the RRTC must
contribute to the following outcomes:
(a) A foundation of available knowledge about the VR program's
characteristics and outcomes. The RRTC must contribute to this outcome
by conducting a literature review and creating a synthesis of previous
research on the system-level characteristics of the VR program, and
outcomes associated with those characteristics. This review and
synthesis will inform the subsequent research, training, and evaluation
efforts of the RRTC.
(b) Increased knowledge about the broad constellation of Federal
and State policies and programs through which employment services are
delivered to individuals with disabilities, and the characteristics of
individuals with disabilities who are receiving those services. The
RRTC must contribute to this outcome by researching and providing a
detailed State-by-State description of the larger employment services
network and the role of the VR program within it. This research must
identify and describe key characteristics of Federal, State and local
government entities and community non-governmental organizations that
either directly deliver or directly purchase employment services for
individuals with disabilities.
(c) Increased knowledge of the structure and operations of VR
service delivery practices at the State level. The RRTC must contribute
to this outcome by researching and providing a detailed description of
the key characteristics of each State's VR system. These
characteristics should include, but not be limited to, VR service
delivery structure and practices, patterns of resource allocation,
patterns of internal and external provision of services, the extent to
which the VR agency uses cooperative agreements with other agencies to
deliver services, operational definitions of ``individuals with the
most significant disabilities,'' characteristics of clients, employment
outcomes and settings, the level of integration of work settings, the
extent of use of home-based employment, and means of addressing
transportation barriers. This research must describe elements internal
to each State's VR agency or agencies, and provide a base upon which
future researchers can analyze the operational consequences and
outcomes of different internal arrangements and agency decisions.
(d) Increased knowledge of ``best practices'' for prioritizing and
providing services to individuals with the most significant
disabilities, when the State VR agency cannot serve all eligible
individuals. The RRTC must contribute to this outcome by conducting
research on the administration and implementation of an order of
selection in serving individuals with the most significant disabilities
by their respective State VR programs, and identifying best practices
among State VR programs for ensuring that individuals with the most
significant disabilities receive services on a priority basis.
Collection and analysis of data for this research must be coordinated
with and informed by research on the disability employment service and
VR structures described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this priority.
This
[[Page 35447]]
coordination will allow best practices findings to be properly
contextualized, and therefore more likely to be successfully applied in
other States or agencies.
(e) Increased knowledge of ``best practices'' for helping
individuals with developmental disabilities (DD) and individuals with
mental illness (MI) obtain and retain employment. The RRTC must
contribute to this outcome by conducting research to determine best
practices for placing or retaining individuals with DD or MI in jobs.
Collection and analysis of data for this best practices research must
be coordinated with and informed by research on the disability
employment service and VR structures described in paragraphs (b) and
(c) of this priority. This coordination will allow best practices
findings to be properly contextualized, and therefore more likely to be
successfully applied in other States or agencies.
(f) Enhancement of the knowledge base of: (1) State and Federal VR
program personnel, (2) personnel of other employment programs for
individuals with disabilities, and (3) individuals with disabilities,
by disseminating research results and providing training and technical
assistance based on the new knowledge about the disability employment
service structures described in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
priority, and best practices knowledge described in paragraphs (d) and
(e) of this priority.
In addition, this RRTC must:
Collaborate with RSA's technical assistance mechanisms to
effectively disseminate best practices materials developed in the
research component of this RRTC.
Coordinate its research, dissemination, training, and
technical assistance efforts with grantees in NIDRR's Employment
domain, as appropriate.
Executive Order 12866
This notice of final priority has been reviewed in accordance with
Executive Order 12866. Under the terms of the order, we have assessed
the potential costs and benefits of this regulatory action.
The potential costs associated with the notice of proposed priority
are those resulting from statutory requirements and those we have
determined as necessary for administering these programs effectively
and efficiently.
In assessing the potential costs and benefits--both quantitative
and qualitative--of this notice of final priority, we have determined
that the benefits of the final priority justify the costs.
Summary of Potential Costs and Benefits
The potential costs associated with this final priority are minimal
while the benefits are significant.
The benefits of the Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers
have been well established over the years in that similar projects have
been completed successfully. This final priority will generate new
knowledge and technologies through research, development,
dissemination, utilization, and technical assistance projects.
Another benefit of this final priority is that the establishment of
a new RRTC conducting research projects will support the President's
NFI and will improve the lives of persons with disabilities. This RRTC
will generate, disseminate, and promote the use of new information that
will improve the options for individuals with disabilities to perform
regular activities in the community.Applicable Program Regulations: 34
CFR part 350.
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 the following site:
http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html
.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.133B,
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers Program)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 764(b)(2).
Dated: June 25, 2007.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. E7-12549 Filed 6-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P