Early Childhood Educator Professional Development (ECEPD) Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2007; (CFDA) Number: 84.349A [OESE]

[Federal Register: February 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 34)]
[Notices]
[Page 7861-7868]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21fe07-23]
Download:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Overview
Information; Early Childhood Educator Professional Development (ECEPD)
Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year
(FY) 2007

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.349A.
Dates:
Applications Available: February 20, 2007.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 20, 2007.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 19, 2007.
Eligible Applicants: A partnership that has not previously received
an ECEPD grant and that consists of at least one entity from each of
the following categories:
(i) One or more institutions of higher education (IHEs), or other
public or private entities (including faith-based organizations), that
provide professional development for early childhood educators who work
with children from low-income families in high-need communities.
(ii) One or more public agencies (including local educational
agencies (LEAs), State educational agencies (SEAs), State human
services agencies, and State and local agencies administering programs
under the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990), Head
Start agencies, or private organizations (including faith-based
organizations).
(iii) If feasible, an entity with demonstrated experience in
providing training to educators in early childhood education programs
concerning identifying and preventing behavior problems or working with
children identified as or suspected to be victims of abuse. This entity
may be one of the partners described in paragraphs (i) and (ii) under
Eligible Applicants.
A partnership may apply for these funds only if one of the partners
currently provides professional development for early childhood
educators working in programs located in high-need communities with
children from low-income families.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
$14,549,000 for the ECEPD program for FY 2007, of which we anticipate
$14,330,765 would be available for these grants. For FY 2007,
approximately 1 percent of the ECEPD appropriation would be set aside
to administer the grant award competition, and 0.5 percent would be set
aside for evaluation activities authorized under section 9601
(Evaluations) of the ESEA as amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7941(a). The
actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action.
However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete
the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.
Estimated Range of Awards: $2,400,000-$4,800,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,600,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6 awards.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.

Project Period: Up to 36 months.

Full Text of Announcement

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the ECEPD program is to enhance
the school readiness of young children, particularly disadvantaged
young children, and to prevent them from encountering difficulties once
they enter school, by improving the knowledge and skills of early
childhood educators who work in communities that have high
concentrations of children living in poverty.
Projects funded under the ECEPD program provide high-quality,
sustained, and intensive professional development for these early
childhood educators in how to provide developmentally appropriate
school-readiness services for preschool-age children that are based on
the best available research on early childhood pedagogy and on child
development and learning. For these grants, the Department is
increasing the emphasis on the quality of program evaluations.
The specific activities for which recipients may use grant funds
are identified in the application package.
Priorities:
This competition includes one absolute priority, and, within that
priority, one competitive preference priority and three invitational
priorities as follows.
In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is from
section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended (ESEA), 20 U.S.C. 6651(e)(5)(A).
Absolute Priority: For FY 2007 this priority is an absolute
priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that
meet this priority.
This priority is:
High-Need Communities.
The applicant partnership, if awarded a grant, shall use the grant
funds to carry out activities that will improve the knowledge and
skills of early childhood educators who are working in early childhood
programs that are located in high-need communities.
An eligible applicant must demonstrate in its application how it
meets the statutory requirement in section 2151(e)(5)(A) of the ESEA by
including relevant demographic and socioeconomic data about the high-
need community in which each program is located, as indicated in the
application package. (See section 2151(e)(3)(B)(i) of the ESEA.)
High-need community, as defined in section 2151(e)(9)(B) of the
ESEA, means--
(a) A political subdivision of a State, or a portion of a political
subdivision of a State, in which at least 50 percent of the children
are from low-income families; or
(b) A political subdivision of a State that is among the 10 percent
of political subdivisions of the State having the greatest numbers of
such children.

Note: The following additional terms used in or related to this
absolute priority have statutory definitions that are included in
the application package: Early childhood educator and low-income
family.

Competitive Preference Priority: Within this absolute priority, we
give competitive preference to applications that address the following
priority.
This priority is from the notice of final priority for
Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods, published in the Federal

[[Page 7862]]

http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/finrule/2005-1/012505a.html.

Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i), we award up to an additional 20
points to an application, depending on how well the application meets
this priority.
When using the priority to give competitive preference to an
application, the Secretary will review applications using a two-stage
process. In the first stage, the application will be reviewed without
taking the priority into account. In the second stage of review, the
applications rated highest in stage one will be reviewed for
competitive preference. We consider awarding additional (competitive
preference) points only to those applicants with top-ranked scores on
the selection criteria.
This priority is:
Scientifically Based Evaluation Methods.
The Secretary establishes a priority for projects proposing an
evaluation plan that is based on rigorous scientifically based research
methods to assess the effectiveness of a particular intervention, as
described in the following paragraphs. The Secretary intends that this
priority will allow program participants and the Department to
determine whether the project produces meaningful effects on student
achievement or teacher performance.
Evaluation methods using an experimental design are best for
determining project effectiveness. Thus, when feasible, the project
must use an experimental design under which participants (e.g.,
students, teachers, classrooms, or schools) are randomly assigned to
participate in the project activities being evaluated or to a control
group that does not participate in the project activities being
evaluated.
If random assignment is not feasible, the project may use a quasi-
experimental design with carefully matched comparison conditions. This
alternative design attempts to approximate a randomly assigned control
group by matching participants (e.g., students, teachers, classrooms,
or schools) with non-participants having similar pre-program
characteristics.
In cases where random assignment is not possible and participation
in the intervention is determined by a specified cutting point on a
quantified continuum of scores, regression discontinuity designs may be
employed.
For projects that are focused on special populations in which
sufficient numbers of participants are not available to support random
assignment or matched comparison group designs, single-subject designs
such as multiple baseline or treatment-reversal or interrupted time
series that are capable of demonstrating causal relationships can be
employed.
Proposed evaluation strategies that use neither experimental
designs with random assignment nor quasi-experimental designs using a
matched comparison group nor regression discontinuity designs will not
be considered responsive to the priority when sufficient numbers of
participants are available to support these designs. Evaluation
strategies that involve too small a number of participants to support
group designs must be capable of demonstrating the causal effects of an
intervention or program on those participants.
The proposed evaluation plan must describe how the project
evaluator will collect--before the project intervention commences and
after it ends--valid and reliable data that measure the impact of
participation in the program or in the comparison group.
If the priority is used as a competitive preference priority,
points awarded under this priority will be determined by the quality of
the proposed evaluation method. In determining the quality of the
evaluation method, we will consider the extent to which the applicant
presents a feasible, credible plan that includes the following:
(1) The type of design to be used (e.g., random assignment or
matched comparison). If matched comparison, include in the plan a
discussion of why random assignment is not feasible.
(2) Outcomes to be measured.
(3) A discussion of how the applicant plans to assign students,
teachers, classrooms, or schools to the project and control group or
match them for comparison with other students, teachers, classrooms, or
schools.
(4) A proposed evaluator, preferably independent, with the
necessary background and technical expertise to carry out the proposed
evaluation. An independent evaluator does not have any authority over
the project and is not involved in its implementation.
In general, depending on the implemented program or project, under
a competitive preference priority, random assignment evaluation methods
will receive more points than matched comparison evaluation methods.

Definitions

As used in this notice--
Scientifically based research (section 9101(37) of the ESEA as
amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), 20 U.S.C.
7801(37)):
(A) Means research that involves the application of rigorous,
systematic, and objective procedures to obtain reliable and valid
knowledge relevant to education activities and programs; and
(B) Includes research that--
(i) Employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation
or experiment;
(ii) Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the
stated hypotheses and justify the general conclusions drawn;
(iii) Relies on measurements or observational methods that provide
reliable and valid data across evaluators and observers, across
multiple measurements and observations, and across studies by the same
or different investigators;
(iv) Is evaluated using experimental or quasi-experimental designs
in which individuals, entities, programs, or activities are assigned to
different conditions and with appropriate controls to evaluate the
effects of the condition of interest, with a preference for random-
assignment experiments, or other designs to the extent that those
designs contain within-condition or across-condition controls;
(v) Ensures that experimental studies are presented in sufficient
detail and clarity to allow for replication or, at a minimum, offer the
opportunity to build systematically on their findings; and
(vi) Has been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or approved by a
panel of independent experts through a comparably rigorous, objective,
and scientific review.
Random assignment or experimental design means random assignment of
students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to participate in a project
being evaluated (treatment group) or not participate in the project
(control group). The effect of the project is the difference in
outcomes between the treatment and control groups.
Quasi-experimental designs include several designs that attempt to
approximate a random assignment design.
Carefully matched comparison groups design means a quasi-
experimental design in which project participants are matched with non-
participants based on key characteristics that are thought to be
related to the outcome.
Regression discontinuity design means a quasi-experimental design
that closely approximates an experimental design. In a regression
discontinuity design, participants are assigned to a treatment or
control group based on a numerical rating or score of a variable
unrelated to the treatment such as the rating of an application for
funding. Eligible students, teachers, classrooms, or schools above a
certain score (``cut

[[Page 7863]]

score'') are assigned to the treatment group and those below the score
are assigned to the control group. In the case of the scores of
applicants' proposals for funding, the ``cut score'' is established at
the point where the program funds available are exhausted.
Single subject design means a design that relies on the comparison
of treatment effects on a single subject or group of single subjects.
There is little confidence that findings based on this design would be
the same for other members of the population.
Treatment reversal design means a single subject design in which a
pre-treatment or baseline outcome measurement is compared with a post-
treatment measure. Treatment would then be stopped for a period of
time, a second baseline measure of the outcome would be taken, followed
by a second application of the treatment or a different treatment. For
example, this design might be used to evaluate a behavior modification
program for disabled students with behavior disorders.
Multiple baseline design means a single subject design to address
concerns about the effects of normal development, timing of the
treatment, and amount of the treatment with treatment-reversal designs
by using a varying time schedule for introduction of the treatment and/
or treatments of different lengths or intensity.
Interrupted time series design means a quasi-experimental design in
which the outcome of interest is measured multiple times before and
after the treatment for program participants only.
Invitational Priorities: Within the absolute priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that address the following
invitational priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an
application that meets these invitational priorities a competitive or
absolute preference over other applications.
These priorities are:

Invitational Priority 1--English Language Acquisition Plan

For applicants serving children with limited English proficiency,
the Secretary is especially interested in applications that include a
specific plan for the development of English language acquisition for
these children from the start of their preschool experience. The ECEPD
program is designed to prepare children to enter kindergarten with the
necessary cognitive, early language, and literacy skills for success in
school. School success often is dependent on each child entering
kindergarten being as proficient as possible in English so that the
child is ready to benefit from formal reading instruction in English
when the child starts school.
The English language acquisition plan should, at a minimum: (1)
Include a description of the approach for the development of language,
based on the linguistic factors or skills that serve as the foundation
for a strong language base, which is a necessary precursor for success
in the development of pre-literacy and literacy skills for children
with limited English proficiency; (2) explain the acquisition
strategies, based on best available valid and reliable research, that
the applicant will use to address English language acquisition in a
multi-lingual classroom; (3) describe how the project will facilitate
the children's transition to English proficiency by means such as the
use of print-rich instructional activities in appropriate multiple
languages, and hiring bilingual teachers, paraprofessionals, or
translators to work in the preschool classroom; (4) include intensive
professional development for instructors and paraprofessionals on the
development of English language proficiency; and (5) include a timeline
that describes benchmarks for the introduction of the development of
English language proficiency and the use of measurement tools.
Ideally, at least one instructional staff member in each ECEPD
classroom should be dual-language proficient both in a child's first
language and in English to facilitate the child's understanding of
instruction and transition to English proficiency. At a minimum, each
classroom should include a teacher who is proficient in English.

Invitational Priority 2--Classroom Curricula and Teacher Professional
Development

The Secretary is especially interested in applications that focus
the professional development provided through this project that will be
provided for early childhood educators on specific curricula promoting
young children's school readiness in the areas of language and
cognitive development and early reading and numeracy skills that are
being used in those educators' early childhood programs, and on the
research base supporting that curricula. In addition to being based on
scientifically based research, the curricula should have standardized
training procedures and published curriculum materials to support
implementation by the early childhood educators. The chosen curricula
should include a scope and sequence of skills and content with concrete
instructional goals that are designed to promote early language,
reading, and numeracy skills.
The need for rigorous preschool curricula is driven by the national
focus on high-quality preschool experiences that prepare children for
formal reading instruction in the elementary grades. The professional
development in the ECEPD program provides opportunities for the program
participants to achieve greater understanding of the implementation of
scientifically based curricula that focus on early language, reading,
and numeracy skills of young children. Grantees should focus on
assisting the early childhood educators to implement fully the selected
curricula and on measuring learning outcomes for the children taught by
those educators.

Invitational Priority 3--Applications That Include One or More
Privately Funded Preschools as Participating Sites

Under the third invitational priority, the Secretary is especially
interested in applications that include, as a participating site (or
sites), one or more privately funded preschools, such as a preschool
operated by a faith-based organization, located in a high-need
community that serves concentrations of children from low-income
families.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6651(e).
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
(b) The notice of final priority for Scientifically Based
Evaluation Methods, published in the Federal Register on January 25,
2005 (70 FR 3586).

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except federally recognized Indian tribes.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to IHEs only.

II. Award Information

Type of Award: Discretionary grants.
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested
$14,549,000 for the ECEPD program for FY 2007, of which we anticipate
$14,330,765 would be available for these grants. For FY 2007,
approximately 1 percent of the ECEPD appropriation would be set aside
to administer the grant award competition and 0.5 percent would be set
aside for evaluation activities authorized under section 9601
(Evaluations) of the ESEA as amended by NCLB, 20 U.S.C. 7941(a). The
actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action.

[[Page 7864]]

However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete
the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program.
Estimated Range of Awards: $2,400,000-$4,800,000.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $3,600,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 3-6 awards.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
notice.

Project Period: Up to 36 months.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants: A partnership that has not previously
received an ECEPD grant and that consists of at least one entity from
each of the following categories:
(i) One or more IHEs, or other public or private entities
(including faith-based organizations), that provide professional
development for early childhood educators who work with children from
low-income families in high-need communities.
(ii) One or more public agencies (including LEAs, SEAs, State human
services agencies, and State and local agencies administering programs
under the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990), Head
Start agencies, or private organizations (including faith-based
organizations).
(iii) If feasible, an entity with demonstrated experience in
providing training to educators in early childhood education programs
concerning identifying and preventing behavior problems or working with
children identified as or suspected to be victims of abuse. This entity
may be one of the partners described in paragraphs (i) and (ii) under
Eligible Applicants.
A partnership may apply for these funds only if one of the partners
currently provides professional development for early childhood
educators working in programs located in high-need communities with
children from low-income families.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: Each partnership that receives a grant
under this program must provide (1) at least 50 percent of the total
cost of the project for the entire grant period; and (2) at least 20
percent of the project cost for each year. The project may provide
these funds from any source, other than this program, including other
Federal sources. The partnership may satisfy these cost-sharing
requirements by providing contributions in cash or in-kind, fairly
evaluated, including plant, equipment, and services. Only allowable
costs may be counted as part of the grantee's share. For example, a
grantee generally may not count toward its share the salary costs of
teachers who are participating in the grant, except for (under certain
circumstances) the portion of time that a teacher participates in
direct professional development or administering assessments under the
grant. In addition, any indirect costs over and above the allowable
amount may not be counted toward a grantee's share. For additional
information about indirect costs, see section IV.5. Funding
Restrictions of this notice.

IV. Application and Submission Information

1. Address To Request Application Package: You may obtain an
application package via the Internet or from the Education Publications
Center (ED Pubs). To obtain an application via the Internet, use the
following Internet address: http://www.ed.gov/programs/eceducator/index.html.

To obtain a copy from ED Pubs, write or call the following:
Education Publications Center, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398.
Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244. If you use
a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll
free): 1-877-576-7734.
You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html
or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: edpubs@inet.ed.gov.

If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify
this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.349A.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print,
audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the program contact
person listed in section VII. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT of this
notice. However, the Department is not able to reproduce in an
alternative format the standard forms included in the application
package.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission: Requirements
concerning the content of the application, together with the forms you
must submit, are in the application package for this competition.
Page Limits: You must include in Part I of the application an
Abstract briefly describing your proposed project. You must limit the
Abstract to one (1) page.
The application narrative for this program (Part III of the
application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection
criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must
limit Part III of the application to the equivalent of no more than 30
typed pages. Part IV of the application is where you, the applicant,
provide a budget narrative that reviewers use to evaluate your
application. You must limit the budget narrative in Part IV of the
application to the equivalent of no more than 5 typed pages. Part V of
the application is where you, the applicant, include the Appendices
described later in this section, including any response to the
Competitive Preference Priority-Scientifically Based Evaluation
Methods. You must limit any response to the Competitive Preference
Priority to no more than 3 typed pages.
For all page limits, use the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application and budget narratives, including titles,
headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions. Text in
tables, charts, or graphs, and the limited Appendices, may be single
spaced.
Use a font that is either 12-point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (characters per inch). You may use other point fonts for
any tables, charts, graphs, and the limited Appendices, but those
tables, charts, graphs and limited Appendices should be in a font size
that is easily readable by the reviewers of your application.
Any tables, charts, or graphs are included in the overall
narrative page limit. The limited Appendices, including the partnership
agreement required as a group agreement under 34 CFR 75.128, and any
Competitive Preference Priority response, are not part of the overall
narrative page limits.
Appendices are limited to the following: Absolute Priority
Form (required); partnership agreement (required); any response to the
Competitive Preference Priority; and any position descriptions (and
resumes or curriculum vitae if available) of key personnel (including
key contract personnel and consultants).
Other application materials are limited to the specific materials
indicated in the application package, and may not include any video or
other non-print materials.
Our reviewers will not read any pages of your application that--
Exceed the page limits if you apply these standards; or
Exceed the equivalent of the page limits if you apply
other standards.
3. Submission Dates and Times.
Applications Available: February 20, 2007.

[[Page 7865]]

Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 20, 2007.
Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted
electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For
information (including dates and times) about how to submit your
application electronically, or by mail or hand delivery if you qualify
for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer
to section IV. 6. Other Submission Requirements in this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
deadline requirements.
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 19, 2007.
4. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about
Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order
12372 is in the application package for this competition.
5. Funding Restrictions: (a) Indirect Costs. For purposes of
indirect cost charges, the Secretary considers all ECEPD program grants
to be ``educational training grants'' within the meaning of section
75.562(a) of EDGAR. Consistent with 34 CFR 75.562, the indirect cost
rate for any recipient other than a State agency or agency of local
government (such as an LEA or a federally recognized Indian tribal
government) is limited to a maximum of eight percent, or the amount of
the recipient's actual indirect costs permitted by its negotiated
indirect cost rate agreement, whichever is less. This indirect cost
limit applies to cost-type contracts only if those contracts are for
educational training as defined in 34 CFR 75.562. Further information
about indirect cost rates is in the application package for this
competition.
(b) Pre-award Costs. For FY 2007 the Secretary approves, under
sections 75.263 and 74.25(e)(1) of Education Department General
Administrative Regulations, pre-award costs incurred by recipients of
ECEPD grants more than 90 calendar days before the grant award.
Specifically, the Secretary approves necessary and reasonable pre-award
costs incurred by grant recipients for up to 90 days before the
application deadline date. These pre-award costs must be related to the
needs assessment that applicants conduct under section
2151(e)(3)(B)(iii) of the ESEA before submitting their applications to
determine the most critical professional development needs of the early
childhood educators to be served by the project and in the broader
community.
Applicants incur any pre-award costs at their own risk. The
Secretary is under no obligation to reimburse these costs if for any
reason the applicant does not receive an award or if the award is less
than anticipated and inadequate to cover these costs.
We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions
in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Other Submission Requirements: Applications for grants under
this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify
for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the
instructions in this section.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications.
Applications for grants under the ECEPD program, CFDA 84.349A must
be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply
site at: http://www.grants.gov. Through this site, you will be able to

download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and
then upload and submit your application. You may not e-mail an
electronic copy of a grant application to us.
We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format
unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of
the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no
later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written
statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these
exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that
is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in
this section under Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.
You may access the electronic grant application for the ECEPD
program at: http://www.grants.gov. You must search for the downloadable

application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include
the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.349
not 84.349A).
Please note the following:
When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find
information about submitting an application electronically through the
site, as well as the hours of operation.
Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time
stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted, and
must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than
4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date.
Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not consider your
application if it is date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system
later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline
date. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify
you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time
stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date.
The amount of time it can take to upload an application
will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the
application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we
strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline
date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov.
You should review and follow the Education Submission
Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are
included in the application package for this competition to ensure that
you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov
system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures
pertaining to Grants.gov at http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf.

To submit your application via Grants.gov, you must
complete all of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process see
http://www.Grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp). These steps

include (1) registering your organization, a multi-part process that
includes registration with the Central Contractor Registry (CCR); (2)
registering yourself as an Authorized Organization Representative
(AOR); and (3) getting authorized as an AOR by your organization.
Details on these steps are outlined in the Grants.gov 3-Step
Registration Guide (see www.grants.gov/section910/Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf. You also must provide on your
application the same D-U-N-S Number used with this registration. Please
note that the registration process may take five or more business days
to complete, and you must have completed all registration steps to
allow you to submit successfully an application via Grants.gov. In
addition you will need to update your CCR registration on an annual
basis. This may take three or more business days to complete.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your

[[Page 7866]]

application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you
qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as
described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in
paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
all information you typically provide on the following forms:
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications. Please note that two of these forms-the SF 424 and the
Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424-have
replaced the ED 424 (Application for Federal Education Assistance).
You must attach any narrative sections of your application
as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable
Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the three file
types specified in this paragraph or submit a password-protected file,
we will not review that material.
Your electronic application must comply with any page-
limit requirements described in this notice.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that
contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates
receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The
Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send
a second notification to you by e-mail. This second notification
indicates that the Department has received your application and has
assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified
identifying number unique to your application).
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues
with the Grants.gov System: If you are experiencing problems submitting
your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov
Support Desk at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support
Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it.
If you are prevented from electronically submitting your
application on the application deadline date because of technical
problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension
until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand
delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing
instructions as described elsewhere in this notice.
If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed
elsewhere in this notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and
provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with
Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will
accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem
occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your
ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time,
on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after
a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted.

Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply
only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the
Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed
to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before
the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem
you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system.

Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement: You qualify for an
exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your
application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application
through the Grants.gov system because--
You do not have access to the Internet; or
You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to
the Grants.gov system; and
No later than two weeks before the application deadline
date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the
application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business
day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement
to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception
prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application.
If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be
postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline
date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must
receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the
application deadline date.
Address and mail or fax your statement to: Rosemary V. Fennell,
U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3C122,
Washington, DC 20202-6132. FAX: (202) 260-7764.
Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the
mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a
commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail
the original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the applicable
following address:
By mail through the U.S. Postal Service: U.S. Department of
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A,
400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260 or
By mail through a commercial carrier: U.S. Department of Education,
Application Control Center--Stop 4260, Attention: CFDA Number 84.349A,
7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506.
Regardless of which address you use, you must show proof of mailing
consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
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.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated
postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your
local post office.

c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.
If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission
requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper
application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original
and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
CFDA Number 84.349A, 550 12th Street,

[[Page 7867]]

SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260.

The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays and
Federal holidays.

Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you
mail or hand deliver your application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by
the Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including
the suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are
submitting your application; and
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a
notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not
receive this notification within 15 business days from the
application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of
Education Application Control Center at (202) 245-6288.

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from section 75.210 of EDGAR. The maximum score for all the
selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion
is indicated in parentheses. Each criterion also includes the factors
that the reviewers will consider in determining how well an application
meets the criterion. The selection criteria are as follows:
(a) Need for project (up to 10 points).
(1) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
(2) In determining the need for the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the proposed project will focus on
serving or otherwise addressing the needs of disadvantaged individuals.
(b) Significance (up to 10 points). The Secretary considers the
significance of the proposed project. In determining the significance
of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project, especially improvements in
teaching and student achievement.
(ii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build
local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the
needs of the target population.
(c) Quality of the project design (up to 20 points). The Secretary
considers the quality of the design of the proposed project. In
determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a
coherent, sustained program of training in the field.
(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.
(d) Quality of project services (up to 10 points). The Secretary
considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the services to be provided by
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and
sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for
eligible project participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or
beneficiaries of those services.
(ii) The extent to which the training or professional development
services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient
quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice
among the recipients of those services.
(e) Quality of project personnel (up to 10 points). The Secretary
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed
project. In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have been
traditionally underrepresented based on race, color, national origin,
gender, age, or disability. In addition, the Secretary considers the
following factors:
(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of key project personnel.
(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and
experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
(f) Quality of the management plan (up to 10 points). The Secretary
considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project
director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are
appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed
project.
(g) Quality of the project evaluation (up to 25 points). The
Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of
the proposed project. In determining the quality of the evaluation, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough,
feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the
proposed project.
(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
(h) Adequacy of Resources (up to 5 points). The Secretary considers
the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the
adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers
the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(ii) The potential for continued support of the project after
Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated
commitment of appropriate entities to such support.
2. Review and Selection Process: An additional factor we consider
in selecting an application for an award is geographical distribution
(section 2151(e)(4)(B) of the ESEA).

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notice
(GAN). We may also notify you informally.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a
final

[[Page 7868]]

performance report, including financial information, as directed by the
Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual
performance report that provides the most current performance and
financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in 34
CFR 75.118. For specific requirements on grantee reporting, please go
to: http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

4. Performance Measures: For FY 2007, grants under the ECEPD
program will be governed by the achievement indicators that the
Secretary published in the Federal Register on March 31, 2003 (68 FR
15646). These achievement indicators are included in the application
package.
In addition, under the Government Performance and Results Act of
1993 (GPRA), the Secretary has established the following measures for
evaluating the overall effectiveness of the ECEPD program, which are
coordinated with the program's achievement indicators and are included
in the application package: (1) The ECEPD teacher's average score on
the Early Language and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO); and (2)
the percentage of children who demonstrate improved readiness for
school in the areas of early language (as measured by the Peabody
Picture Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III), Receptive) and early literacy
(as measured by the PALS Pre-K, Upper Case Alphabet Knowledge subtask).
The coordination of these achievement indicators and performance
measures is designed to improve program management, and to help
Congress, the Department, the Office of Management and Budget, and
others review a program's progress toward its goals. All grantees must
document participant outcomes on these performance measures in the
annual performance report referenced in section VI. 3. of this notice.
The applicant's evaluation design provided in response to the selection
criterion for Quality of project evaluation in section V. 1. of this
notice should include the use of these assessment tools, at a minimum.

VII. Agency Contact

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemary Fennell, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3C-122, Washington, DC 20202-
6132. Telephone: (202) 260-0792, or by e-mail: eceprofdev@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 format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer
diskette) on request to the program contact person listed in this
section.

VIII. Other Information

Electronic Access to This Document: You may view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the
Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.

Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html
.

Dated: February 15, 2007.
Raymond Simon,
Deputy Secretary for Education.
[FR Doc. E7-2964 Filed 2-20-07; 8:45 am]