Attachment A

Transfer of Reading Skills in Limited English-Proficient (LEP) Students

ED-98-R-0018

Work Statement

I . Introduction

A. Overview

With the aim of advancing formal reading instruction for the growing number of limited English-proficient (LEP) students in our schools, the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs (OBEMLA) requires the services of a contractor to conduct a two year psycho-linguistic study to identify the specific reading skills that transfer from Spanish to English in young learners, specifically on the literacy skills used by Spanish-literate children in the process of learning to read English. By young learners, we refer to children who are entering Kindergarten or Grade One and will be finishing Grades Two or Three at the end of the study. It is expected that such research will reveal skills that both facilitate and impede learning and, once identified, will be useful in expediting the teaching of English reading to Spanish-background students in the early grades.

The Department requires applications that provide a ready-to-go design, instruments and students for a direct study of the literacy skills that transfer from Spanish literacy to English literacy-learning. Applicants are encouraged to carefully review Section II, B, Study Questions, and Section L, Instructions to Offerors, for details of the Department's expectations for this study.

B. Background

The issue of literacy skills-transfer is pertinent to the President's educational initiatives1, OBEMLA's research agenda2 and to the state of knowledge for improving student performance to high academic standards3.

Generally, the literature indicates that the skills conducive to literacy in one's first language are comparatively well established. The skills requisite for literacy in English for a growing population of LEP students have not been established. In outlining its recommendations for a research agenda, the National Research Council (1997) summarized research findings and stated the need in this way:

While some evidence suggests that initial reading instruction in a weak [second] language can be disadvantageous to long-term academic outcomes, there are also cases of children who learn to read initially in a second language and do well academically. We need to understand what characteristics differentiate these two groups of children so we do not put children into programs that threaten their chances for successful literacy acquisition. Furthermore, many non-English-speaking children arrive in American schools after having experienced some schooling and some literacy instruction in a native language. However, an insufficient attempt has been made to understand the cognitive processes underlying successful transfer of first-language literacy skill to the second language, the negative transfer, or the differences between children who manage learning to read in a second language well and those who do not. Such information would make English literacy training... much more efficient and effective.

Complicating investigations of the topic has been a variety of language and background issues. To the cognitive and social experiences entailed in acquiring literacy in any language, add the following circumstances for second-language-learners and their teachers:

diversity of languages and dialects among language minority students;

the differing relationship of those languages with the English phonemic and alphabetic structures, implying varying approaches in teaching English literacy;

varying first-language oral capabilities among speakers of other languages, such as in the case of English-monolingual Hispanic children, and

the potential for failure when the culture of a school's literacy program is not prepared to accommodate or recognize a particular student's strengths, areas of readiness or learning style.

This study reduces the focus of the topic to one language group, and to a tighter range of issues, the transfer of cognitive and linguistic skills from Spanish literacy to English literacy for young readers in the range of grades K-3. Applicants are invited to propose a detailed design for a two-year study, including the identification of appropriate student groups and literacy instruments for both languages.

C. Previous Research

Literacy and School Success - In the general population, there are striking disparities in	the degree and quality of language interactions between parents and young children associated with the children's' rates of vocabulary growth, word usage and other measures related to school success.4 But, little information is available on the literacy-related practices in the homes of language minority children.5

- Immigrant children who have had 2 to 3 years of initial schooling (and presumably literacy instruction) in their native countries demonstrate better academic outcomes. This is consistent with the claim that children should first learn to read in a language they already speak.6

-High levels of skill in Spanish first-language reading has been shown to facilitate English second-language reading.7

- There is consistent evidence that literacy can be used as a route to general language learning, including the development of oral competencies.8 Connected to the finding cited immediately above (that high levels of skill in Spanish first-language reading facilitated English second-language reading), this suggests that Spanish literacy may promote academic levels of English reading and oral competence.

Oral Language - As expected, positive correlations have been found between English	second-language oral proficiency and English second-language reading ability, particularly at higher grade levels, but not equally across all first- language groups.9

- However, the way in which students are assessed for oral language proficiency may influence outcomes. For instance, face-to-face tasks may predict less well than oral performance in autonomous discourse tasks.10

Learner Strategies - Both case- and large scale studies of accomplished Spanish-English	readers have identified successful strategies that bilinguals use to build second language literacy skills, particularly with regard to comprehension.11 Proficient second-language readers focus much more on word meaning, presumably because this is a greater source of difficulty for them, than do proficient monolingual readers.

- There are also "robust findings concerning [the] metalinguistic superiority [of bilinguals],"12 This implies that bilinguals, whose metalinguistic skills have been identified as early as the age of three years, may have an advantage when learning new material based on their ability to abstract the structure of language. Presumedly, this ability is also achieved by bi- literate students.

Instruction:	- There is remarkably little directly relevant research with regard to reading instruction in a second language. Studies of bilingual programs do not typically distinguish students who arrive at school already reading in their first language from those who learn to read only at school.13

- While the ability to segment spoken language is a prerequisite to beginning reading, and that bilingualism promotes this ability, no studies have been found that would clarify whether acquiring this ability in a first language is a sufficient basis for initial literacy instruction in a second language, or whether this ability to segment language needs to be applied to the second language before literacy in that language can be acquired.14

- In studies that look at the reading skills of children already in school, the major risk factors associated with failure in beginning literacy are principally related to poor instruction: lack of explicit instruction in orthography, absence of background knowledge acquired in highly literate environments and unavailability of semantic support for decoding that comes from familiarity with the words one reads. Though any one of these factors does not determine literacy achievement, their combination may ensure a high rate of failure.15

- In contrast, the recently published Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children (NRC, in press), emphasizes the critical role of informal language and literacy experiences from birth that are essential to making formal instruction succeed. The panel also recommends, among its many suggestions, that: If language minority children arrive at school with no proficiency in English but speaking a language for which there are instructional guides, learning materials, and locally available proficient teachers, then these children should be taught how to read in their native language while acquiring proficiency in spoken English, and then subsequently taught to extend their skills to reading in English (p. 11).16

- According to some investigators (c.f. Chall), a major obstacle to helpful research on reading instruction for language-minority children is the failure to recognize the existence of developmental changes in the reading process, and changes in the speed and efficiency of second-language learning (fluency facilitates comprehension).17

D. Authorizing Legislation

Public Law 193-382 of 1994, Improving America's School Act (IASA), "Title VII: Bilingual Education, Language Enhancement and Language Acquisition Programs," Subpart 2, Sec. 7131. AUTHORITY, and Sec. 7132. RESEARCH:

''Subpart 2--Research, Evaluation, and Dissemination

''SEC. 7131. AUTHORITY.

''(a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to conduct data collection,

dissemination, research, and ongoing program evaluation activities in accordance with

the provisions of this subpart for the purpose of improving bilingual education and

special alternative instruction programs for children and youth of limited English

proficiency.

''(b) Competitive Awards.--Research and program evaluation activities carried out

under this subpart shall be supported through competitive grants, contracts and

cooperative agreements awarded institutions of higher education, nonprofit

organizations, and State and local educational agencies.

''(c) Administration.--The Secretary shall conduct data collection, dissemination,

and ongoing program evaluation activities authorized by this subpart through the

Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs.

''SEC. 7132. RESEARCH.

''(a) Administration.--The Secretary shall conduct research activities authorized by

this subpart through the Office of Educational Research and Improvement in

coordination and collaboration with the Office of Bilingual Education and Minority

Language Affairs.

''(b) Requirements.--Such research activities--

''(1) shall have a practical application to teachers, counselors,

paraprofessionals, school administrators, parents, and others involved in

improving the education of limited English proficient students and their families;

''(2) may include research on effective instructional practices for multilingual

classes, and on effective instruction strategies to be used by teachers and other

staff who do not know the native language of a limited English proficient child or

youth in their classrooms;

''(3) may include establishing (through the National Center for Education

Statistics in consultation with experts in bilingual education, second language

acquisition, and English-as-a-second-language) a common definition of `limited

English proficient student' for purposes of national data collection; and

''(4) shall be administered by individuals with expertise in bilingual education

and the needs of limited English proficient students and their families.

''(c) Field-Initiated Research.--

''(d) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with agencies and organizations

that are engaged in bilingual education research and practice, or related research, and

bilingual education researchers and practitioners to identify areas of study and

activities to be funded under this section.

''(e) Data Collection.--The Secretary shall provide for the continuation of data

collection on limited English proficient students as part of the data systems operated

by the Department.

II. General Approach

A. Objectives

1. Within the study's resources, this investigation will clarify the value of an educational investment in Spanish literacy as a basis for English literacy- development, and the conditions in which it facilitates English literacy- development.

2. The findings will be instructive to both the reading research community, and to parents and education practitioners.

B. Policy Questions

1. What guidance from the study's findings is suggested to parents and educators involved in federally-sponsored programs for limited English proficient students, such as Improving America's Schools Act (IASA), Title I and Title VII programs?

2. What guidance from the study's findings is suggested to coordinators, tutors and training personnel of the America Reads program?

C. Research Questions

In the following questions, the contractor shall address the issues of skills- transfer related to two related areas, the relevant cognitive processes, and the relavant linguistic features of Spanish and English, as well as their interaction. Further, the contractor shall address, where applicable, relevant relationships among the four domains of language proficiency, listening, speaking, reading and writing.

1. For children entering school and in the early grades, do literacy skills that are acquired in Spanish actually transfer during the process of learning to read English? How is this demonstrated? (Included in this question are the following elements: How did the investigators measure literacy in Spanish and English? What was the level and content of Spanish reading materials? What were the structural [orthographic, linguistic and rhetorical] differences between the first and second languages?)

2. How significant and helpful is the transfer of skills in facilitating the acquisition of English literacy? At what point is reading ability in Spanish a sufficient base for initiating and facilitating literacy instruction in English? What are the indicators?

3. Specifically, what is it that transfers between languages? What are the cognitive processes underlying the transfer of Spanish literacy skills to the acquisition of English literacy? For instance, does phoneme awareness transfer? Does the acquisition of Spanish literacy predict a smooth, continued transition to English literacy-learning, or do different skills need to be acquired in learning to read in English?

4. What is the role of English oral proficiency in the process skills transfer? What level or range of English oral language ability is needed to support English reading acquisition in this process?

5. Related to Question 4, does bilingualism affect literacy-facilitating skills and, consequently, English literacy? Are different cognitive processes or linguistic skills involved? (In addressing this question, the contractor shall include a definition and measure of the degree or magnitude of "bilingualism.")

6. What additional student and student-background information was the investigators able to collect, including: How did students learn to read Spanish? What relevant factors were found in the family history and home environment?

7. Did the researchers observe students facing difficulties in the process of acquiring English literacy? What was the nature of those problems? What interventions are suggested for preventing or remedying obstacles to skills- transfer?

III. Scope of Work

A. Tasks

Task 1:	Meetings with the Department of Education (ED)

1.1	Meet with the Designated COTR to Discuss and Plan Baseline Management Plan

The contractor shall meet with the designated Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) and Contracting Officer (CO) or Contract Specialist (CS) in Washington, DC to discuss the contractor's development of a Baseline Management Plan (BMP) at the beginning of every year of the study. The BMP will be a refinement of the step-by-step procedures included in the study design plan and other relevant proposal components. The purpose is to also clarify other details about tasks, deliverables and time lines submitted in the technical proposal.

In this discussion with the COTR, the contractor shall identify the dates for conducting briefings for Department staff and the Advisory Group (Task 1.3), and dates for conducting presentations (Task 1.4). Among other issues, the meeting will focus on replacing the placeholder dates in the Schedule of Deliverables with actual dates, and on expectations for timeliness in activities such as Task 2.3. Other issues may include such topics as data safeguards to be implemented under Task 5 and the value of taking photos of readers for strengthening the Practitioners Report under Task 7.

The contractor shall meet with the COTR, CO and other appropriate Department of Education (ED) officials within fifteen (15) working days after the effective date of the contract, in Month 1, and within fifteen (15) working days after the start of Year 2 of the contract, in Month 13.

1.2	Prepare and Submit Updated Baseline Management Plan

Based on decisions arrived at in Task 1.1, and by the last work day of the contract's first month of each contract year, the contractor shall submit three copies of an updated BMP to the COTR and CO for approval. The contractor will receive notification of approval or required modifications from the COTR within (15) days after receipt. The contractor shall revise the BMP based on the COTR's comments and shall submit it within 60 days after the contract effective date, by the end of Month #2 in Year 1, and within 60 days of the beginning of Year 2, Month #14. Further changes in the BMP may, from time to time, be required as the work progresses. Such changes shall be subject to review and approval by ED.

1.3	Hold Progress Meetings with the Department

During each year of the study, the contractor shall provide a minimum of two progress briefings for the Director of the Program Office, an Advisory Group* and other Department staff (a total of approximately ten persons). The meetings will be located in Washington, DC. The contractor shall discuss the status of all tasks, the achievement of project milestones, expenditure information, quality control information, any problems or concerns that might affect the project and any other relevant topic. In particular, the contractor shall discuss any work that is behind schedule and plans to complete such work.

(*The Advisory Group will be made up principally of ED staff who have taken a consistent interest in this project, including members of the technical review panel and of OBEMLA's Research Team. Its role will be to assist the COTR in technical issues, including advising him/her on evaluating the contractor's performance with Task 2 activities.)

The contractor shall submit a draft agenda and proposed handouts for the COTR's approval two (2) weeks before each meeting is held. The COTR will provided comments within five (5) work days. The contractor shall revise the agenda and handouts as recommended, and fax or email the final version to the COTR at least one day prior to the meeting.

1.4	Conduct Presentations on Progress and Results of the Study

In addition to progress briefings, the contractor shall conduct up to three (3) presentations on the progress and results of the study at national conferences during the two project years. The contractor and the COTR shall jointly decide on the selection and dates of the conference presentations. As an example of the government's purpose for this task, the contractor shall be prepared to present a summary of its literature review, design and any preliminary findings during at the Year 2000 Conference of the National Association for Bilingual Education, American Education Research Association and/or the Department's Regional IAS Conferences. The contractor shall decide jointly with the COTR on the selection of a highly qualified staff member, conversant with the topics of the conference to conduct these presentations. The presentation shall be supplemented by hand-outs and visuals prepared by the contractor.

Task 2:	Prepare the Forms for Information Collection Clearance Process

Information gathering procedures are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1984, Reauthorized in 1995. The contractor shall prepare the documentation ("OMB package") required to obtain the necessary clearances. The review process takes a minimum of 120 days to complete. No data collection activity subject to this process shall begin until a clearance has been obtained. (OMB clearance is not required for or implementation of the pilot study, Task 4, which is limited to nine students).

2.1	Prepare and Submit a Draft Forms Clearance Package

The contractor shall prepare a draft package during the first month of the contract and shall submit four (4) paper copies, and one (1) electronic copy compatible with Microsoft Word '97, to the COTR by the last work day of month 1 after the contract's effective date. The draft package shall demonstrate a level of quality and clarity that minimizes the likelihood of questions or arguments from OMB, and maximizes the likelihood of approval within the minimum four month period. The COTR will provide comments within two (2) weeks of the draft's due date. The contractor shall be available for up to two, ninety-minute conference calls during that two week period for addressing questions from the COTR or ED's Information Management Group (IMG). The contractor shall make, if required, revisions to its instruments or procedures to be submitted in the final package.

2.2	Submit a Final Forms Clearance Package

Respective of agreed-on changes in the draft, the contractor shall submit the finalized package to the COTR, along with six paper copies and one electronic copy, by the last work day of month 2 after the effective date of the contract. The COTR will send a written evaluation of all Task 2 activities to the contractor by the end of month 6 after the effective date of the contract's first year.

2.3	Respond in Writing to ED and/or OMB Questions

During the clearance process the contractor shall respond to IMG and OMB questions, and make revisions based on agreement with IMG and OMB recommendations. The contractor shall respond in writing to IMG and/or OMB within two (2) business days.

Task 3:	Conduct Pilot Study and Analyze Results

3.1	Conduct a Pilot Test of the Data Collection Procedures and Instruments

By the end of the contract month 3 after the contract's effective date, the contractor shall conduct a pilot test of the data collection procedures and instruments to be used in the study. The purpose of the pilot is to test-run the technical and administrative operations of the study. To this end, the contractor shall involve all members of the project participating in the data collection. By the end of the first contract month, the contractor shall show signed documents as evidence of having secured permission from those individuals/families to be interviewed and from participating LEAs, as applicable. The contractor shall investigate between four and nine children; no more than nine (9) children shall participate in the pilot.

3.2	Report on Pilot's Implications

By the last work day of month 4 after the contract's effective date, the contractor shall submit a report analyzing the pilot outcomes and their implications for adjusting the design, instruments or procedures. The report shall present a comprehensive checklist of material and procedural elements required by the design, and an indication of the extent to which each is ready to be fully implemented. In the report, the contractor shall identify changes to be made, including how, by whom and when they will be made.

The contractor shall submit a report that emphasizes check list, flowchart and/or bulleted formats. The government's intent is for this document to be clear and useful to the participants responsible for the study's implementation. The contractor shall deliver four copies of the report to the COTR, one to the CS.

Task 4:	Update the Review of Current Literature (Submitted in the Proposal) Relevant to the Technical Issues in the Implementation of the Study.

By the end of month 11 after the contract's effective date, the contractor shall update the literature review, submitted in their proposal. The update shall summarize any late contributions to the literature on the relevant theories, practices, approaches, methods, strategies, and use them to analyze and contrast pertinent technical issues to be considered in the implementation of this study.

The contractor shall submit four (4) paper copies and one (1) electronic copy of the review to the COTR, and one paper copy to the CS, in the form of an addendum to the original review. The scope to the addendum shall reflect the scope of the original. The addendum shall contain clear cross-references where applicable, and be similar enough in format to be easily used as a companion to the original.

Task 5:	Conduct the Collection of Data

The contractor shall collect data according to the implementations steps (and any adjustments identified up to, and including Task 4) planned in the original proposal, and shall use the instruments/procedures approved by OMB. The contractor shall complete the data collection by the end of month 19 after the effective contract date.

The contractor shall establish and employ procedures that safeguard data, including procedures for training staff regarding their responsibilities under the Privacy Act, 1974.

Task 6:	Data Processing and Analysis

The contractor shall process and analyze collected data according to the Data Collection and Analysis Plan from the original proposal, and any revisions to it due to adjustments from previous tasks, particularly Tasks 2, 3 and 4. Task 6 shall be completed by the end of month #20 after the contract's effective date. The results of the analysis shall be reported in Task 7.

Task 7:	Prepare Reports on Skills-Transfer from Spanish to English by Young Readers

The contractor shall prepare separate reports on the results of its analysis, addressing two audiences: researchers, and practitioners/parents/policy-makers. The reports shall summarize the study's implementation and findings for years 1 and 2, and include information regarding the study's planning, implementation and administration. The contractor shall submit the draft reports by the end of month #21 after the contract's effective date. The contractor shall incorporate agreed-on changes into the set of Final Reports, due on September 22, 2000.

7.1	Prepare and Submit Draft Study Reports

The contractor shall submit two sets of draft study reports, under separate cover, with one addressing research field, and the other addressing education practitioner/parent/policy- maker audiences. The contractor shall submit four sets of paper copies, and one set in electronic format compatible with Microsoft Word '97, of the Draft Study Reports to the COTR by the end of month 21 after the contract's effective date. The COTR will provide comments on each within three (3) weeks of the draft due date.

The "Researcher's Report" shall consist of a report written for a research audience. It shall include summary and findings, a review of relevant work leading to the research conducted under this contract, a full description of the study rationale and design, a detailed presentation of the findings, and discussion of their significance for research and practice. The contractor shall include tables and graphics to accompany the narrative.

The "Practitioner's Report" shall contain a report written for education practitioners (teachers and administrators), parents of young children and policy-makers. This report shall contain a summary and findings, a synopsis of the project's objectives and design, and a full description of major outcomes. The contractor shall also provide recommendations to readers on ways in which the information gained from this study can be used to assist in the successful preparation of Spanish-background LEP children for reading.

7.2 Submit Final Study Reports

The contractor shall incorporate the COTR's comments on the draft versions of the Study Reports and submit final versions by September 22, 2000.

7.2.1 The final Study Report intended for a research audience shall include the following elements:

1) Summary and Findings

2) Description of the purpose of the study

2) Short literature review of and summary of technical issues involved in conducting the study and rationale for study design

3) Step by step procedures for conducting the study

4) Characteristics of sites, circumstances and children in which data was collected

5) Data analysis procedures to answer study questions

6) Data collection instruments

7) Discussion of significance of study results for research and practice, and its relation to other contributions to the field

7.2.2 The final Study Report intended for practitioners, parents and policy-makers shall include the following elements:

1) Summary and Findings

2) Review of significance of understanding skills-transfer from Spanish to English

2) Summary of project objectives and design

3) Major findings

4) Guidance on how individuals and programs serving Spanish-background LEP students may use study results

The contractor shall submit four (4) paper copies each of the two Final Study Report volumes under separate cover, and one (1) electronic version compatible to Microsoft '97, to the COTR, and one (1) paper copy of each volume to the CO. In addition, the contractor shall submit for dissemination another (1) electronic version of the documents in a format compatible with Microsoft '97 and one (1) unbound, camera-ready copy of each volume, to the Department's National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.

Task 8:	Submit Data Files to ED

All data shall be the property of the U.S. Department of Education. By September 27, 2000, the contractor shall destroy any identifying information contained in the data records before turning over all data files to ED on September 29, 2000. The contractor shall submit two copies of the data sets in electronic format compatible with Microsoft Office Suite '97 programs. The contractor shall also submit to ED three (3) copies of the printed documentation along with the data files.

B. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

In addition to the reports that are required for each task, as described above, the contractor shall submit one copy of the following reports, monthly, to the contracting officer, with one copy to the COTR:

Monthly Progress Reports/Exception Reports. The contractor shall prepare monthly progress reports due within ten work days after the end of each month. They shall briefly summarize the major activities and accomplishments for the reporting period. They shall provide information for each project task regarding significant findings and events, problems encountered and staff use. The reports shall also specify the extent to which the project is on schedule, briefly describe the activities planned for the next month, identify and discuss significant deviations from any substantive or time factors in the management plan, and identify and discuss any decisions which may be needed from ED. If there are no exceptions, the reports shall state that there are no exceptions. If there are exceptions to the management plan, the contractor shall describe the plan for resolving the problems.

Monthly Manpower/Expenditure Reports. The contractor shall prepare monthly expenditure reports due within ten work days after the end of each month. These reports, prepared and signed by the project director, shall summarize the actual personnel assignments for the month just completed, showing for each staff member the hours charged by task. The report shall project similar assignment information for the upcoming month. The reports shall also exhibit expenditures, segregating project costs by individual and by task, and specifying for all travel the locations duration and personnel for each trip.

Transfer of Reading Skills in Limited English-Proficient (LEP) Students

CONTRACT YEAR 1

Oct. 98	Nov. 98	Dec. 98	Jan. 99	Feb. 99	Mar. 99	Apr. 99	May 99	June 99	July 99	Aug. 99	Sept. 99
Month #1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
BMP Meeting	Submit Updated BMP	Brief Director & Advi- sory	Brief Director & Advi- sory
Prepare, submit draft OMB Package	Submit final OMB Package	Respond to OMB question s	Respond to OMB question s	Respond to OMB question s	Update Literatur e Analysis
Show permissi on for pilot test	Prepare agreed site(s) for pilot	Conduct pilot of nine students	Report results, analysis of pilot	COTR visit to selected sites
Notify sites of study	Update sites of study	Update sites of study	Update sites of study	Prepare sites for study	Begin collectin g data	Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	(Data collec- tion ?)	(Data collec- tion ?)	(Data collec- tion ?)	Data collec- tion
Present at IAS Conf (?)

Transfer of Reading Skills in Limited English-Proficient (LEP) Students

CONTRACT YEAR 2

Oct. 99	Nov. 99	Dec. 99	Jan. 00	Feb. 00	Mar. 00	Apr. 00	May 00	June 00	July 00	Aug. 00	Sept. 00
Month 13	14	15	16	17	18	19	20	21	22	23	24
Baseline Mngmt. Plan (BMP) Mtg.	Submit Updated BMP

(COTR visits selected sites)	Brief Director & Advi- sory on prelimin ary results	Brief Director & Advi- sory Group
Submit second BMP update	Begin setting up draft study reports' formats	Analyze prelimin ary student outcome s	Conduct and complet e Data Analysis	Prepare and submit draft study reports	Obemla commen ts on draft reports	Prepare final study reports	Submit final study reports
Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	Data collec- tion	End Collec- tion
Present prelim's at NABE ?	Present at AERA ?	Present study at IAS Conf. ?
SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES

Transfer of Reading Skills in Limited English-Proficient (LEP) Students

DELIVERABLE	DATES	DUE	COPIES	COTR RESPO NSE
Task 1.1 Two meetings with the designated COTR to discuss and plan Baseline Management Plan (BMP) submitted in the technical proposal.	10-15-98

10-15-99	Within 15 working days after contract award, and 13th contract month	@What a BMP consists of
Task 1.2 Submit Updated Baseline Management Plan. (The contractor will receive notification of approval or required modifications from the COTR within 15 days. Any revisions to the BMP based on the COTR's review shall be submitted 60 days after the contract effective date. Further changes in the BMP may, from time to time, be required as the work progresses. )	10-30-98

10-29-99	30 days after contract's effective date, and the last work day of contract month #13	Three copies of an updated BMP to the COTR, and one to CO, for approval.	W/in 15 days after receipt
Task 1.3	Progress Briefings with the Department, to be located in Washington, DC. Actual dates to be determined in the BMP, Task 1.2. (Dates stated here are "no-later-than" placeholder or default dates.)	1-29-99

7-30-99

1-28-00

7-28-00	During the 4th, 10th, 16th and 22nd contract months
In preparing for each briefing, the contractor shall submit a draft agenda and proposed handouts for the COTR's approval. (Dates stated here are "no-later-than" default dates.)	1-15-99

7-16-99

1-14-00

7-14-00	2 weeks before each briefing is held.	One copy by email or fax	5 work days
The contractor shall revise the agenda and handouts as necessary, and send the final version to the COTR. (Dates stated here are "no-later-than" default dates.)	1-28-99

7-29-99

1-27-00

7-27-00	At least one day prior to the briefing	One copy by email or fax
Reporting Requirements: In addition to the reports that are required for each task, the contractor shall submit one copy of a monthly Progress Report/Exception Report and copy of a monthly Expenditure Report due within ten work days after the end of each month.	Beginning 11-10-98

... for a total of 24 monthly reports	No later than ten work days after the end of each month	One copy to the COTR, one to the CS
Task 1.4	Conduct up to 3 presentations on progress and results of the study over the two project years.	9-?-99

2-?-00

9-?-00	To be determined in the BMP.

See calendar table.
Task 2.1	Submit a Draft Forms Clearance Package	10-30-98	@By the last day of month 1 of contract	4 paper copies, 1 in electronic format	W/in 2 weeks
The contractor shall be available for up to two, ninety-minute conference calls during two week period for addressing COTR/IMG questions.	From 11- 2-98

To 11-13- 98	First two weeks of contract month #2
The contractor shall be prepared to make revisions to its instruments or procedures that shall be submitted in the final OMB package.	From 11- 2-98 To 7-30-99	During contract months 2-10
Task 2.2	Submit a Final Forms Clearance Package	11-30-98	By end of contract month #2	Six copies, one to COTR in electronic format	End of year 1
Task 2.3	Respond in writing to ED questions within two (2) business days	From 11- 16-98 To 7-30-99	During contract months 3-10
Task 3.1 The contractor shall show documentation of having secured written permission from those individuals/families to be interviewed in the pilot test, and from participating LEAs, as applicable.

10-30-98	By the end of the contract month # 1
Task 3.1	Conduct a Pilot Test of the Data Collection Procedures and Instruments	12-18-98 (a default date)	Before end of contract month #3
Task 3.2 Report on the sites, students and outcomes of a pilot test on the data collection procedures and instruments to be used in the study, analyzing the pilot's implications for adjusting the design, instruments or procedures.	1-29-99	By last work day of month #4	Four copies for COTR, one for CS
Task 4:	Update the Review of Current Literature Relevant to the Technical Issues in the Implementation of the Study	8-31-99	By the end of contract month # 11	4 paper & 1 electronic copy to the COTR, 1 paper copy to the CS
Task 5:	Data Collection Completed. All collected data is subject to privacy regulations.	4-28-00	By the end of contract month # 19
Task 6:	Data Processing and Analysis Completed	5-31-00	By end of contract month # 20
Task 7.1	Submit Draft Study Reports, two sets of drafts under separate cover.	6-30-00	By the end of contract month # 21	4 paper & 1 electronic copies of each set to COTR; 1 paper set to CS	W/in 3 weeks
The contractor shall incorporate agreed-on changes into the set of Final Reports
Task 7.2	Submit Final Study Reports, two reports in each set, under separate cover.

One unbound copy, and one electronic version, compatible to Microsoft 97, sent to NCBE.	9-22-00	Contract month # 24	4 paper set of each report, & 1 electronic set to COTR; 1 paper set to CS; 1 un- bound set & 1 electronic set to NCBE
Task 8:	Submit data files to COTR

Attach 3 paper copies of all study documents to the data files	9-28-00	Contract month #24	2 copies of data sets in 3 ½" diskettes compatible w/ Microsoft Office Suite '97 programs
The contractor shall destroy any identifying information contained in the data records before turning over all data files to ED.	9-27-00