[Federal Register: February 19, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 33)]
[Notices]
[Page 7547-7574]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19fe02-174]
[[Page 7547]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of Education
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Education: State Program Improvement Grants Program Notice
Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001; Notice
[[Page 7548]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA No.: 84.323A]
Special Education: State Program Improvement Grants Program
Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2001
Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package.
Together with the statute authorizing the program and the applicable
regulations governing this program, including the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains all of
the information, application forms, and instructions needed to apply
for a grant under this program.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program, authorized under
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of
1997, is to assist State educational agencies and their partners
referred to in section 652(b) of IDEA with reforming and improving
their systems for providing educational, early intervention, and
transitional services, including their systems for professional
development, technical assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about
best practices, to improve results for children with disabilities.
Eligible Applicants: A State educational agency of one of the 50
States, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or
an outlying area (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa,
and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: April 29, 2002.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: June 28, 2002.
Available Funds: $13.5 million.
Estimated Range of Awards: Awards will be not less than $530,000,
nor more than $2,120,000 in the case of the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and not less than
$84,800, in the case of an outlying area. Pursuant to subsection
655(a)(1) the Secretary has increased the minimum and maximum award
amount above the minimum and maximum award amount for the FY 1999,
2000, and 2001 competitions to account for inflation. The Secretary
anticipates that there may be additional funds available subsequent to
making awards under this year's competition. To utilize additional
funds that might become available, the Secretary intends to run a
separate competition under which only grantees from the FY 1999, 2000
and 2001 competitions would be eligible. This competitive supplement
could be used to enhance those State Improvement Grant activities that
can be shown, based on the project's data-based evaluation, to have
impacted positively on the goal(s) of the project.
Consistent with EDGAR 34 CFR 75.104(b), we will reject any
application that proposes a project funding level for any year that
exceeds the stated maximum award amount for that year.
We will set the amount of each grant after considering:
(1) The amount of funds available for making the grants;
(2) The relative population of the State or outlying area; and
(3) The types of activities proposed by the State or outlying area.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $1,000,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 13.
Note: The Department of Education is not bound by the estimated
size and number of awards in this notice.
Project Period: Not less than one year and not more than five
years.
Page Limits: Part III of each application submitted under a
priority in this notice, the application narrative, is where an
applicant addresses the selection criteria that are used by reviewers
in evaluating the application. You must limit Part III to the
equivalent of no more than 100 pages, using the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5" x 11" (on one side only) with one-inch
margins (top, bottom, and sides).
Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, and captions, as well as all text in charts,
tables, figures, and graphs.
If using a proportional computer font, use no smaller than
a 12-point font, and an average character density no greater than 18
characters per inch. If using a nonproportional font or a typewriter,
do not use more than 12 characters per inch.
The page limit does not apply to Part I--the cover sheet; Part II--
the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part
IV, the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the
resumes, the bibliography or references, or the letters of support.
However, you must include all of the application narrative in Part III.
We will reject without consideration or evaluation any application
if--
You apply these standards and exceed the page limit; or
You apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the
page limit.
Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81,
82, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99; and (b) The selection criteria for this
program are drawn from EDGAR in 34 CFR 75.210.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education only.
General Requirements
(a) Projects funded under this notice must make positive efforts to
employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with
disabilities in project activities (see section 606 of IDEA);
(b) Applicants and grant recipients funded under this notice must
involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with
disabilities in planning, implementing, and evaluating the projects
(see section 661(f)(1)(A) of IDEA); and
(c) Projects funded under these priorities must budget for a two-
day Project Directors' meeting in Washington, D.C. during each year of
the project.
Description of Program
The statutory authorization for this program and the application
requirements that apply to this competition are set out in sections
651-655 of the IDEA.
Findings and Purposes
(a) States are responding with some success to multiple pressures
to improve educational and transitional services and results for
children with disabilities in response to growing demands imposed by
ever-changing factors, such as demographics, social policies, and labor
and economic markets.
(b) In order for States to address those demands and to facilitate
lasting systemic change that is of benefit to all students, including
children with disabilities, States must involve local educational
agencies, parents, individuals with disabilities and their families,
teachers and other service providers, and other interested individuals
and organizations in carrying out comprehensive strategies to improve
educational results for children with disabilities.
(c) Targeted Federal financial resources are needed to assist
States, working in partnership with others, to identify and make needed
changes to address the needs of children with disabilities into the
next century.
(d) State educational agencies, in partnership with local
educational agencies and other individuals and organizations, are in
the best position to identify and design ways to meet
[[Page 7549]]
emerging and expanding demands to improve education for children with
disabilities and to address their special needs.
(e) Research, demonstration, and practice over the past 20 years in
special education and related disciplines have built a foundation of
knowledge on which State and local systemic-change activities can now
be based.
(f) Research, demonstration, and practice in special education and
related disciplines have demonstrated that an effective educational
system now and in the future must--
(1) Maintain high academic standards and clear performance goals
for children with disabilities, consistent with the standards and
expectations for all students in the educational system, and provide
for appropriate and effective strategies and methods to ensure that
students who are children with disabilities have maximum opportunities
to achieve those standards and goals;
(2) Create a system that fully addresses the needs of all students,
including children with disabilities, by addressing the needs of
children with disabilities in carrying out educational reform
activities;
(3) Clearly define, in measurable terms, the school and post-school
results that children with disabilities are expected to achieve;
(4) Promote service integration, and the coordination of State and
local education, social, health, mental health, and other services, in
addressing the full range of student needs, particularly the needs of
children with disabilities who require significant levels of support to
maximize their participation and learning in school and the community;
(5) Ensure that children with disabilities are provided assistance
and support in making transitions as described in section 674(b)(3)(C)
of the Act;
(6) Promote comprehensive programs of professional development to
ensure that the persons responsible for the education or a transition
of children with disabilities possess the skills and knowledge
necessary to address the educational and related needs of those
children;
(7) Disseminate to teachers and other personnel serving children
with disabilities research-based knowledge about successful teaching
practices and models and provide technical assistance to local
educational agencies and schools on how to improve results for children
with disabilities;
(8) Create school-based disciplinary strategies that will be used
to reduce or eliminate the need to use suspension and expulsion as
disciplinary options for children with disabilities;
(9) Establish placement-neutral funding formulas and cost-effective
strategies for meeting the needs of children with disabilities; and
(10) Involve individuals with disabilities and parents of children
with disabilities in planning, implementing, and evaluating systemic-
change activities and educational reforms.
Absolute Priority
Under section 653 and 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we will give an absolute
preference to applications that meet the following priority. We will
fund under this competition only those applications that meet this
absolute priority.
This priority supports projects that assist State educational
agencies and their partners in reforming and improving their systems
for providing educational, early intervention, and transitional
services, including their systems for professional development,
technical assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about best
practices, to improve results for children with disabilities.
State Improvement Plan
Applicants must submit a State improvement plan that--
(a) Is integrated, to the maximum extent possible, with State plans
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, if appropriate;
(b) Identifies those critical aspects of early intervention,
general education, and special education programs (including
professional development, based on an assessment of State and local
needs) that must be improved to enable children with disabilities to
meet the goals established by the State under section 612(a)(16) of the
Act. Specifically, applicants must include:
(1) An analysis of all information, reasonably available to the
State educational agency, on the performance of children with
disabilities in the State, including--
(i) Their performance on State assessments and other performance
indicators established for all children, including drop-out rates and
graduation rates;
(ii) Their participation in postsecondary education and employment;
and
(iii) How their performance on the assessments and indicators
compares to that of non-disabled children;
(2) An analysis of State and local needs for professional
development for personnel to serve children with disabilities that
includes, at a minimum:
(i) The number of personnel providing special education and related
services; and
(ii) Relevant information on current and anticipated personnel
vacancies and shortages (including the number of individuals described
in paragraph (b)(2)(i) with temporary certification), and on the extent
of certification or retraining necessary to eliminate those shortages,
that is based, to the maximum extent possible, on existing assessments
of personnel needs;
(3) An analysis of the major findings of the Secretary's most
recent reviews of State compliance, as they relate to improving results
for children with disabilities; and
(4) An analysis of other information, reasonably available to the
State, on the effectiveness of the State's systems of early
intervention, special education, and general education in meeting the
needs of children with disabilities;
(c) Describes a partnership agreement that--
(1) Specifies--
(i) The nature and extent of the partnership among the State
educational agency, local educational agencies, and other State
agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with
disabilities, and the respective roles of each member of the
partnership; and
(ii) How those agencies will work in partnership with other persons
and organizations involved in, and concerned with, the education of
children with disabilities, including the respective roles of each of
these persons and organizations; and
(2) Is in effect for the period of the grant;
(d) Describes how grant funds will be used in undertaking the
systemic-change activities, and the amount and nature of funds from any
other sources, including funds under part B of the Act retained for use
at the State level under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act, that
will be committed to the systemic-change activities;
(e) Describes the strategies the State will use to address the
needs identified under paragraph (b), including how it will--
(1) Change State policies and procedures to address systemic
barriers to improving results for children with disabilities;
(2) Hold local educational agencies and schools accountable for
educational progress of children with disabilities;
(3) Provide technical assistance to local educational agencies and
schools
[[Page 7550]]
to improve results for children with disabilities;
(4) Address the identified needs for in-service and pre-service
preparation to ensure that all personnel who work with children with
disabilities (including both professional and paraprofessional
personnel who provide special education, general education, related
services, or early intervention services) have the skills and knowledge
necessary to meet the needs of children with disabilities, including a
description of how it will--
(i) Prepare general and special education personnel with the
content knowledge and collaborative skills needed to meet the needs of
children with disabilities, including how the State will work with
other States on common certification criteria;
(ii) Prepare professionals and paraprofessionals in the area of
early intervention with the content knowledge and collaborative skills
needed to meet the needs of infants and toddlers with disabilities;
(iii) Work with institutions of higher education and other entities
that (on both a pre-service and an in-service basis) prepare personnel
who work with children with disabilities to ensure that those
institutions and entities develop the capacity to support quality
professional development programs that meet State and local needs;
(iv) Work to develop collaborative agreements with other States for
the joint support and development of programs to prepare personnel for
which there is not sufficient demand within a single State to justify
support or development of a program of preparation;
(v) Work in collaboration with other States, particularly
neighboring States, to address the lack of uniformity and reciprocity
in the credentialing of teachers and other personnel;
(vi) Enhance the ability of teachers and others to use strategies,
like behavioral interventions, to address the conduct of children with
disabilities that impedes the learning of children with disabilities
and others;
(vii) Acquire and disseminate, to teachers, administrators, school
board members, and related services personnel, significant knowledge
derived from educational research and other sources, and how the State,
if appropriate, will adopt promising practices, materials, and
technology;
(viii) Recruit, prepare, and retain qualified personnel, including
personnel with disabilities and personnel from groups that are
underrepresented in the fields of regular education, special education,
and related services;
(ix) Integrate its plan, to the maximum extent possible, with other
professional development plans and activities, including plans and
activities developed and carried out under other Federal and State laws
that address personnel recruitment and training; and
(x) Provide for the joint training of parents and special
education, related services, and general education personnel;
(5) Address systemic problems identified in Federal compliance
reviews, including shortages of qualified personnel;
(6) Disseminate results of the local capacity-building and
improvement projects funded under section 611(f)(4) of the Act;
(7) Address improving results for children with disabilities in the
geographic areas of greatest need;
(8) Assess, on a regular basis, the extent to which the strategies
implemented under this subpart have been effective; and
(9) Coordinate its improvement strategies with public and private
sector resources.
Required Partners
Applicants must:
(a) Establish a partnership with local educational agencies and
other State agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of
children with disabilities; and
(b) Work in partnership with other persons and organizations
involved in, and concerned with, the education of children with
disabilities, including--
(1) The Governor;
(2) Parents of children with disabilities;
(3) Parents of nondisabled children;
(4) Individuals with disabilities;
(5) Organizations representing individuals with disabilities and
their parents, such as the parent training and information centers;
(6) Community-based and other nonprofit organizations involved in
the education and employment of individuals with disabilities;
(7) The lead State agency for part C of the Act;
(8) General and special education teachers, and early intervention
personnel;
(9) The State advisory panel established under part B of the Act;
(10) The State interagency coordinating council established under
part C of the Act; and
(11) Institutions of higher education within the State.
Optional Partners
A partnership established by applicants may also include--
(a) Individuals knowledgeable about vocational education;
(b) The State agency for higher education;
(c) The State vocational rehabilitation agency;
(d) Public agencies with jurisdiction in the areas of health,
mental health, social services, and juvenile justice; and
(e) Other individuals.
Reporting Procedures
Each State educational agency that receives a grant must submit
performance reports to the Secretary pursuant to a schedule to be
determined by the Secretary, but not more frequently than annually. The
reports must describe the progress of the State in meeting the
performance goals established under section 612(a)(16) of the Act,
analyze the effectiveness of the State's strategies in meeting those
goals, and identify any changes in the strategies needed to improve its
performance. Grantees must also provide information required under
EDGAR at 34 CFR 80.40.
Use of Funds
Each State educational agency that receives a State Improvement
Grant under this program--
(a) May use grant funds to carry out any activities that are
described in the State's application and that are consistent with the
purpose of this program;
(b) Shall, consistent with its partnership agreement established
under the grant, award contracts or subgrants to local educational
agencies, institutions of higher education, and parent training and
information centers, as appropriate, to carry out its State improvement
plan; and
(c) May award contracts and subgrants to other public and private
entities, including the lead agency under part C of the Act, to carry
out that plan;
(d)(1) Shall use not less than 75 percent of the funds it receives
under the grant for any fiscal year--
(i) To ensure that there are sufficient regular education, special
education, and related services personnel who have the skills and
knowledge necessary to meet the needs of children with disabilities and
developmental goals of young children; or
(ii) To work with other States on common certification criteria; or
(2) Shall use not less than 50 percent of those funds for these
purposes, if the State demonstrates to the Secretary's
[[Page 7551]]
satisfaction that it has the personnel described in paragraph (d)(1).
Selection Criteria
We will use the following selection criteria in 34 CFR 75.210 to
evaluate applications for new grants under this competition. The
maximum score for all of these criteria is 100 points. The maximum
score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses.
(a) Need for project. (19 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 specific gaps or weaknesses in services,
infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be
addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude
of those gaps or weaknesses.
(b) Significance. (19 points). (1) The Secretary considers the
significance of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the
Secretary considers the likelihood that the proposed project will
result in system change or improvement.
(c) Quality of the project design. (19 points). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the design of the proposed project.
(2) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.
(ii) The extent to which the design of the proposed project is
appropriate to, and will successfully address, the needs of the target
population or other identified needs.
(iii) The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a
coherent, sustained program of training in the field.
(iv) The extent to which the design of the proposed project
reflects up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.
(v) The extent to which the proposed project will establish
linkages with other appropriate agencies and organizations providing
services to the target population.
(vi) The extent to which the proposed project is part of a
comprehensive effort to improve teaching and learning and support
rigorous academic standards for students.
(d) Quality of project personnel. (8 points). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the personnel who will carry out the proposed
project.
(2) 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
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3) 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.
(e) Adequacy of resources. (8 points). (1) The Secretary considers
the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.
(2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment,
supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the
lead applicant organization.
(ii) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(iii) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project.
(iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to
the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed
project.
(v) The potential for continued support of the project after
Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated
commitment of appropriate entities to this type of support.
(f) Quality of the management plan. (8 points). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.
(2) 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) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives
are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including
those of parents, teachers, the business community, a variety of
disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of
services, or others, as appropriate.
(g) Quality of the project evaluation. (19 points). (1) The
Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of
the proposed project.
(2) 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 provide for
examining the effectiveness of project implementation strategies.
(iii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use
of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the
intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and
qualitative data to the extent possible.
(iv) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide
performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward
achieving intended outcomes.
Competitive Preference: Within this absolute priority, we will give
the following competitive preference under section 606 of IDEA and 34
CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) to applications that are otherwise eligible for
funding under this priority:
Up to ten (10) points based on the effectiveness of the applicant's
strategies for employing and advancing in employment qualified
individuals with disabilities as project employees in project
activities as required under paragraph (a) of the ``General
Requirements'' section of this notice. In determining the effectiveness
of those strategies, we may consider the applicant's past success in
pursuit of this goal.
For purposes of this competitive preference, applicants can be
awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under
the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an
applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum
total of 110 points.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79.
One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The
Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local
governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial
assistance.
[[Page 7552]]
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Applicants must contact the appropriate State Single Point of
Contact (SPOC) to find out about, and to comply with, the State's
process under Executive Order 12372. Applicants proposing to perform
activities in more than one State should immediately contact the SPOC
for each of those States and follow the procedure established in each
State under the Executive Order. See the latest official SPOC list on
the Website of the Office of Management and Budget at the following
address: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html In States that
have not established a process or chosen a program for review, State,
areawide, regional, and local entities may submit comments directly to
the Department.
Any State Process Recommendation and other comments submitted by a
State SPOC and any comments from State, areawide, regional, and local
entities must be mailed or hand-delivered by the date indicated in this
notice to the following address: The Secretary, E.O. 12372--CFDA#
84.323A, U.S. Department of Education, room 7E200, 400 Maryland Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20202-0125.
Proof of mailing will be determined on the same basis as
applications (see 34 CFR 75.102). Recommendations or comments may be
hand-delivered until 4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time) on the date
indicated in this notice.
Please note that the above address is not the same address as the
one to which the applicant submits its completed application. Do not
send applications to the above address.
Instructions for Transmittal of Applications
(a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant
must--
(1) Mail the original and six copies of the application on or
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA#84.323A), 7th and D Streets, SW., Room
3633, Regional Office Building #3, Washington, DC 20202-4725. or
(2) Hand-deliver the original and six copies of the application by
4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time) on or before the deadline date to: U.S.
Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA#
84.323A), Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets,
SW., Washington, DC 20202-4725.
The Application Control Center accepts application deliveries daily
between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (Washington, DC time), except Saturdays,
Sundays, and Federal holidays. The Center accepts application
deliveries through the D Street entrance only. A person delivering an
application must show identification to enter the building.
(b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary.
(c) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service,
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
Notes
(1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated
postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should check with
its local post office.
(2) The Application Control Center will mail a Grant Application
Receipt Acknowledgment to each applicant. If an applicant fails to
receive the notification of application receipt within 15 days from the
date of mailing the application, the applicant should call the U.S.
Department of Education Application Control Center at (202) 708-9493.
(3) If your application is late, we will notify you that we will
not consider the application.
(4) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not
provided by the Department--in Item 4 of the Application for Federal
Assistance (ED 424 (exp.11/30/2004)) the CFDA number and suffix letter,
if any, of the competition under which the application is being
submitted.
Application Instructions and Forms
The appendix to this notice is divided into three parts, plus a
statement regarding estimated public reporting burden, additional non-
regulatory guidance, and various assurances, certifications, and
required documentation. These parts and additional materials are
organized in the same manner that the submitted application should be
organized. The parts and additional materials are as follows:
Part I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev.
11-2001)) and instructions.
Part II: Budget Information--Non-Construction Programs (ED Form No.
524) and instructions. The budget section of the application form
requires all applicants for multi-year projects to provide detailed
budget information for the total grant period requested. The Department
will establish, at the time of initial award, the funding levels for
each year of the grant award. By requesting detailed budget information
in the initial application for the total grant period, the need for a
formal noncompeting continuation application in the remaining years has
been eliminated. A performance report will be required annually to
determine substantial progress, rather than a non-competing
continuation application.
Part III: Application Narrative.
Additional Materials
The following forms and other items must be included in the
application:
a. Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
b. Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B) and
instructions.
c. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension, and
Other Responsibility Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements (ED
80-0013).
d. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and
Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED 80-0014) and
instructions. (Note: ED Form GCS-0014 is intended for the use of
grantees and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
e. Certification of Eligibility for Federal Assistance in Certain
Programs (ED 80-0016).
f. Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL) (Rev. 7-
97) and instructions.
g. Table of Contents.
An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications.
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications
must each have an original signature. All applicants must submit ONE
original signed application, including ink signatures on all forms and
assurances, and THREE copies of the application. Please mark each
application as ``original'' or ``copy''. No grant may be awarded unless
a completed application has been received. FOR APPLICATIONS AND GENERAL
INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for applications and general information
should be addressed to the Grants and Contracts Services Team,
[[Page 7553]]
400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3317, Switzer Building, Washington, DC
20202-2641. The preferred method for requesting information is to FAX
your request to: (202) 205-8717. Telephone: (202) 260-9182. Individuals
who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the TDD
number: (202) 205-8953.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of this notice or
the application packages referred to in this notice in an alternative
format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by
contacting the Department as listed above. However, the Department is
not able to reproduce in an alternative format the standard forms
included in the application package.
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:
www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at the previous 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.access.gpo/
nara/index.html
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1405, 1461, 1472, 1474, and 1487.
Dated: February 13 2002.
Robert H. Pasternack,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
Instructions for Estimated Public Reporting Burden
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this
information collection is OMB No. 1820-0620. The time required to
complete this information collection is estimated to average between
50-130 hours per response, including the time to review instructions,
search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete
and review the information collection. If you have any comments
concerning the accuracy of the time estimate or suggestions for
improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education,
Washington, DC 20202-4651. If you have any comments or concerns
regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write
directly to: Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-2641.
Application Narrative
The narrative should address fully all aspects of the selection
criteria in the order listed and should give detailed information
regarding each criterion. Do not simply paraphrase the criteria.
Provide position descriptions, not resumes.
Budget
Budget line items must support the goals and objectives of the
proposed project and be directly applicable to the program design and
all other project components.
Final Application Preparation
Use the above checklist to verify that all items are addressed.
Prepare one original with an original signature, and include six
additional copies. Do not use elaborate bindings or covers. The
application must be mailed to the Application Control Center (ACC) and
postmarked by the deadline date of February 15, 2002.
Questions and Answers
Following is a series of questions and answers that will serve as
guidance for State educational agency (SEA) in completing the grant
application for a State Improvement Grant (SIG) as authorized by the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The questions were
chosen to provide additional insight into the statutory requirements
contained in the grant application. The questions were generated from a
number of sources including parents of students with disabilities,
Regional Resource Centers, the Federal Resource Center, State Directors
of Special Education, SEA staff and staff from the Office of Special
Education Programs.
Eligible Applicants
1. Who May Apply for a State Improvement Grant?
A State educational agency of one of the 50 States, the District of
Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or an outlying area
(United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) \1\ (sections 602(18),
602(27), 652(a), and 655(a)(1)(2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unless otherwise noted, the term ``State'' refers to the 50
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
and the outlying areas (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Can Two or More SEAs Apply Jointly for a SIG?
No. A State applying for a State Improvement Grant must submit an
individual application. However, included in the application will be a
description of how: (1) The State will work to develop collaborative
agreements with other States for the joint support and development of
programs to prepare personnel for which there is not sufficient demand
within a single State to justify support or development of this type of
program of preparation; and (2) the State will work in collaboration
with other States, particularly neighboring States, to address the lack
of uniformity and reciprocity in the credentialing of teachers and
other personnel (section 653(c)(3)(D)(iv) and (v)).
Partners
3. With Whom Is the State Supposed To Form Partnerships and How Are the
Partnerships Structured?
Part D Subpart 1--State Program Improvement Grants for Children
with Disabilities, section 652(b) describes three types of State
partners. In order to be considered for a State Improvement Grant, a
State educational agency must establish a partnership with individuals
and organizations considered ``Required Partners.'' Required partners
are made up of two subsets of partners--those called ``Contractual
partners'' and those called ``Other partners.'' The SEA's contractual
partners are local educational agencies and other State agencies
involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with
disabilities. These partners are called contractual because they must
be parties to a formal ``partnership agreement'' that is explained
further below in question four.
Other partners include individuals and organizations involved in,
and concerned with, the education of children with disabilities, with
whom the SEA works in partnership to implement the State improvement
grant. Other partners may be, but the SEA is not required to make them,
parties to the formal partnership agreement. Those ``other partners''
may include the Governor; parents of children with disabilities;
parents of nondisabled
[[Page 7554]]
children; individuals with disabilities; organizations representing
individuals with disabilities and their parents, such as the parent
training and information centers; \2\ community-based and other
nonprofit organizations involved in the education and employment of
individuals with disabilities; the lead State agency for Part C;
general and special education teachers, and early intervention
personnel; the State advisory panel established under Part B; the State
interagency coordinating council established under Part C; and
institutions of higher education (IHEs) within the State. The State is
encouraged to only partner with those IHEs that are currently
implementing or, based on the partnership Agreement, will develop and
implement, training programs that are consistent with the principles of
IDEA Amendments of 1997 (e.g., training that facilitates access to the
general education curriculum; training that facilitates inclusionary
practices; joint training of general educators, special educators and
parents, where appropriate; training that targets pedagogical practices
that focus on accommodating and modifying instruction to meet State
standards). Based on the needs assessment, the State must focus at
least 75% of the funds received under the State Improvement Grant on
the professional development and training of regular education, special
education, or related services personnel (only 50% of the funds must be
used on professional development if the State can demonstrate to the
Department that it has sufficient personnel; see question 13 for
additional clarification). In order to ensure that the perspectives of
school based staff are represented in the grant activities, the State
is encouraged to incorporate into its partnership agreement and
partnership activities, professional organizations that negotiate for
and may represent school-based staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ States in which Community Parent Resource Centers are
located are encouraged to include these organizations as ``other
partners.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to required partners, the SEA, at its option, may
include as partner's individuals and organizations called ``Optional
Partners''. The SEA may include ``optional partners'' as parties to the
formal partnership agreement or work in partnership with them, without
them being parties to the partnership agreement. Those optional
partners may include individuals knowledgeable about vocational
education, the State agency for higher education, the State vocational
rehabilitation agency, public agencies with jurisdiction in the areas
of health, mental health, social services, and juvenile justice and
other individuals.
4. What Is the Partnership Agreement and What Must It Include?
Each State's application must include a description of the
partnership agreement entered into by the SEA with its contractual
partners and with any ``other'' and ``optional'' partners who will be
parties to the partnership agreement. As specified in the grant
application package, the partnership agreement must specify the nature
and extent of the partnership among the SEA, the LEAs, and other State
agencies involved in, or concerned with, the education of children with
disabilities. It must specify the respective roles of each member of
the partnership in the implementation of the proposed State improvement
grant. The partnership agreement must also specify how the SEA, LEAs,
and other State agencies identified above, will work in partnership
with other persons and organizations involved in, and concerned with,
the education of children with disabilities (these would be the ``other
partners'' and any ``optional partners''), and must specify the
respective roles of each of these persons and organizations (section
653(c)(1)(B)).
The partnership agreement must indicate that it is in effect for
the period of the grant. The terms of the partnership agreement will
determine whether the SEA will award subgrants or contracts to any of
the partners listed in section 654(a)(2)(A).
5. What Is the Connection Between the Partnership Agreement and the
SEA's Use of Funds?
The SEA must, as appropriate, award contracts or subgrants to LEAs,
IHEs, and parent training and information centers identified in the
partnership agreement to carry out the State improvement grant
activities. To carry out the State improvement grant activities, the
SEA may also award contracts and subgrants to other public and private
entities, including the lead agency under Part C and other agencies
that are partners, as well as public and private entities that are not
partners. It is anticipated that a SEA will need and desire the
resources of other individuals and organizations to develop and
implement all of the systemic change, technical assistance, in-service
and pre-service training, dissemination and assessment activities
designated in the State improvement grant application. There is,
however, no required amount of funds that must be used for contracts or
subgrants (section 654(a)(2)).
Funding Availability and Levels
6. What are the grant amounts to States?
We must make a grant to each State educational agency whose
application we selected for funding under this subpart in an amount for
each fiscal year that is: (1) Not less than $530,000, nor more than
$2,120,000, in the case of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and (2) not less than $84,800, in the
case of an outlying area (United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (Section
655(a)). This means that the Department will reject and will not
consider any application that proposes a budget that exceeds the
maximum award amount or is less than the minimum award amount for any
single budget period of 12 months.
7. How Will Decisions Be Made Regarding the Amount of Funds That States
Will Receive If Approved for a State Improvement Grant?
The Department will set the amount of each grant, within the limits
outlined in the response to question 6, after considering: (1) The
relative population of the State; (2) the types of activities proposed
by the State; and (3) the amount of funds available for making the
grants (section 655(c)). Using the same considerations, (but without
the increase in the minimum and maximum awards to account for inflation
that we have added for this competition) we funded successful
applications for fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000 at the following
levels:
North Dakota............................................ $500,000
Vermont................................................. 500,000
Wyoming................................................. 500,000
Alaska.................................................. 550,000
Montana................................................. 550,000
Nebraska................................................ 575,816
Utah.................................................... 578,551
Maine................................................... 600,000
New Hampshire........................................... 600,000
Hawaii.................................................. 600,000
Idaho................................................... 625,000
Oklahoma................................................ 814,000
Oregon.................................................. 850,000
Iowa.................................................... 875,526
New Mexico.............................................. 880,000
Kansas.................................................. 900,000
Connecticut............................................. 920,000
Kentucky................................................ 1,000,000
Washington.............................................. 1,088,288
Massachusetts........................................... 1,009,000
Minnesota............................................... 1,015,000
Alabama................................................. 1,025,000
Georgia................................................. 1,060,000
Maryland................................................ 1,095,000
Louisiana............................................... 1,100,000
Missouri................................................ 1,145,000
New Jersey.............................................. 1,200,000
[[Page 7555]]
North Carolina.......................................... 1,210,000
Virginia................................................ 1,240,000
Ohio.................................................... 1,320,000
Pennsylvania............................................ 1,320,000
Michigan................................................ 1,320,000
Illinois................................................ 1,400,000
Florida................................................. 1,550,000
New York................................................ 1,650,000
California.............................................. 1,840,000
8. How Will the Connection Between Grant Amounts and ``Need'' Be
Determined?
As previously stated in the response to question 7, we must set the
amount of each grant after considering: (1) The relative population of
the State; (2) the types of activities proposed by the State or
outlying area; and (3) the amount of funds available for making the
grants. ``Need'' will be determined through the quality of the needs
assessment performed under section 653(b) including: (i) An analysis of
all information, reasonably available to the State educational agency,
on the performance of children with disabilities in the State; (ii) an
analysis of State and local needs for professional development for
personnel to serve children with disabilities; (iii) an analysis of the
major findings of the Department's most recent reviews of State
compliance, as they relate to improving results for children with
disabilities; and (iv) an analysis of other information, for example,
findings made by the Department's Office for Civil Rights, reasonably
available to the State, on the effectiveness of the State's systems of
early intervention, special education, and general education in meeting
the needs of children with disabilities.
9. What We Will Consider In Making An Award On a Competitive Basis?
Using the selection criteria identified elsewhere in this
application package, we expect to select for funding applications from
States that demonstrate a need for improvement and effective strategies
to meet those State needs. The application should show how the State
plans to fulfill the purpose of the State Improvement Grant, which is
to assist State educational agencies and their partners in reforming
and improving their systems for providing educational, early
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with
disabilities. We will give priority to applications on the basis of
need, as indicated by information from the findings of Federal
compliance reviews (section 653(d)).
Improvement Strategies and Use of Funds
10. Can Funds From the State Improvement Grants Be Distributed to LEAs
on a Competitive Basis?
Yes. The statute does not provide a particular method for States to
use when distributing State Improvement Grant funds to LEAs or other
entities. When awarding and administering subgrants, under 34 CFR
80.37(a), the State must follow State law and procedures. As long as
the SEA's proposal to contract or subgrant SIG funds is consistent with
the partnership agreement and the funds are used to support the
activities specified in the approved grant application, there is no
statutory prohibition against the funds being distributed to LEAs on a
competitive basis.
11. Can Charter Schools Be Involved as Partners in the State
Improvement Grant?
Yes. Charter schools are schools under contract--or charter--
between a public agency and groups of parents, teachers, community
leaders or others who want to create alternatives and choice within the
public school system. Charter schools can be involved as partners in
the State Improvement Grant, either as an LEA or as part of an existing
LEA, consistent with the State charter schools law.
12. Does the ``Service Obligation'' Apply to the Use of State
Improvement Grant Funds If They Are Being Used for Scholarships?
No. The ``service obligation'' contained under the personnel
preparation discretionary grant program provides that a recipient of a
scholarship funded by the personnel preparation program under section
673(b), (c), (e), and to the extent appropriate (d), must subsequently
perform work in the field in which they were trained or repay the cost
of the financial assistance. The service obligation only applies to
scholarships awarded under the personnel preparation program. However,
consistent with State law, a SEA may impose its own service obligation.
13. Can Funds Be Used To Prepare Early Intervention Personnel?
Yes, but only in limited circumstances. Under section 654(b)(1), a
State educational agency that receives a grant must use not less than
75 percent of the funds it receives under the grant for any fiscal year
to work with other States on common certification criteria or to ensure
that there are sufficient regular education, special education, and
related services personnel who have the skills and knowledge necessary
to meet the needs of children with disabilities and developmental goals
of young children. This section ensures that based on the needs
assessment, the State focuses at least 75% of the funds received under
the State Improvement Grant on the professional development and
training of regular education, special education, or related services
personnel. Only 50% of the funds must be used on professional
development if the State can demonstrate to the Department that it has
sufficient personnel. Training that prepares personnel to deliver early
intervention services that could not also be considered regular
education, special education, or related services would not be a
permissible use of the 75%, or 50% as the case may be, of the funds.
However, it would be permissible for early intervention personnel to
participate in training in those areas of special education and related
services that would be useful to them, even if the training is funded
using the 75% of the funds. There is no limitation on the use of the
remaining 25% of the funds received under the SIG; it can be used to
train personnel to provide early intervention services or for any other
activity in an approved SIG.
14. How Does a State Demonstrate That It Meets the Requirement To Use
at Least 75% (or 50% If Applicable) of the Grant Funds for Professional
Development?
States should structure the presentation of their budget so that
the Department can easily determine that the State has met the 75% or
50% requirement as the case may be.
15. What Is the Relationship of the SIG to the State Set Aside Under
Part B?
In order to carry out the activities proposed in the State's SIG
application, a State may choose to supplement the State Improvement
Grant award with funds from the IDEA Part B State set aside (i.e., the
portion of the IDEA, Part B grant awards retained for use by the SEA
under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act for discretionary
purposes).
16. Can Funds From Sources Other Than the SIG Be Used To Support the
Required Activities for Awards Under This Program?
Yes. In addition to the SIG award, funds from other sources (e.g.,
other IDEA discretionary grants, Part B State set aside funds,
preschool grants) may be used, so long as those activities are
permissible under the funding statute
[[Page 7556]]
and regulations to carry out any activities described in the State's
SIG application. States may also use funds from private sources (e.g.
foundations) to carry out activities described in the State's
application. In its State Improvement Plan, the State must describe the
amount and nature of funds from any other sources, including the Part B
funds retained for use under sections 611(f) and 619(d) of the Act and
Part D discretionary funds that will be committed to the SIG program.
17. Can SIG Funds Be Used for Direct Services to Children With
Disabilities?
Yes. The statute does not forbid the use of SIG funds for direct
services to children with disabilities; however, funding for these
services must come from the 25% or 50% of the grant award, as the case
may be, not obligated by statute to fund professional development
activities or to work with other States on common certification
criteria. In addition, the need for direct services must be one of the
critical aspects of early intervention, general education and special
education identified in the State's need assessment. The direct
services improvement strategy must be described in the States'
application and be consistent with the purpose of the grant, which is
to assist State educational agencies and their partners in reforming
and improving their systems for providing educational, early
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with
disabilities.
Strategies Used To Address Identified Needs
18. Is Interstate Personnel Preparation Mandatory?
No. The State is required to describe how it will work to develop
collaborative agreements with other States for the joint support and
development of programs to prepare personnel for which there is not
sufficient demand within the State to justify support or development of
this type of program of preparation (section 653(c)(3)(D)(iv)). If the
State demonstrates, through its needs assessment, that there is
sufficient demand within the State to support its own personnel
preparation programs, then interstate collaborative agreements are not
required.
19. Is Training of General Education Personnel Required?
Yes. In its application, the State is required to include a
description of how the State will prepare general as well as special
education personnel with the content knowledge and collaborative skills
needed to meet the needs of children with disabilities (section
653(c)(3)(D)(i)).
20. Is Training of Parents Required?
Yes. In its application, the State is required to include a
description of how the State will provide for the joint training of
parents and special education, related services, and general education
personnel (section 653(c)(3)(D)(x)).
Role of Regional Resource Center/Technical Assistance and Dissemination
Projects
21. What Role Can the Regional Resource Center (RRC) Play in the
Development of the State Improvement Grant Application?
The RRC is encouraged to provide general technical assistance to
States in the development of their State improvement grant application.
An RRC is funded to provide technical assistance and resources to all
States within its region and must do so on an equitable basis across
those States. Helping States improve their special education programs
is the central mission of the RRCs and many State activities related to
the State Improvement Grant program will be crucial in these
improvement efforts. It would be inappropriate, however, for an RRC to
help a State in drafting its grant application or even to provide
technical assistance on strategies to improve the competitiveness of a
State's application because it could be viewed as providing a
competitive advantage to one potential applicant over another. On the
other hand, helping States, for example, with data analyses, needs
assessments, and facilitating meetings concerning planning the States'
improvement activities could be, except as noted above, a part of the
RRC's technical assistance activities to the States in their region.
RRCs can also assist States in their implementation of a State
Improvement Grant once those grants are awarded.
22. Can the State Use SIG Funds To Subcontract or Contract With the
University or Entity in Which the RRC Is Located To Carry Out SIG
Activities?
Yes. The State can use SIG funds to subgrant or contract with the
University or entity in which the RRC is located to carry out SIG
activities. However, the University or other entity would need to
ensure that personnel time and other resources covered by the RRC's
cooperative agreement with the Department are not used to work on SIG
activities performed under the subgrant or contract and that work done
under the other subcontract or contract is not represented as being
performed as part of the cooperative agreement with the Department of
Education.
23. Can Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) Projects Funded
by OSEP Play a Role in SIG Activities?
Similarly to RRCs, TA&D projects funded by OSEP must ensure that
the services they provide are fairly and evenhandedly available to
their respective audience (under the terms of their OSEP funding
agreement/grant/contract) in all States, that the proposed SIG activity
is permissible under the terms of the particular Project's funding
agreement/ grant/contract/ with OSEP and that projects do not accept
SIG funds under contract or grant with an SEA for activities they are
currently receiving Federal funds to provide. In addition, TA&D
projects, like the RRCs, should not engage in activities that could be
seen as providing a competitive advantage to any one State over others
in the SIG competition.
Relationship Between State Improvement Grant and Other Federal Statutes
and Requirements
24. What Is the Link Between the Comprehensive System of Personnel
Development (CSPD) and the SIG? What Are the Similarities and
Differences?
The requirements for a CSPD as amended by IDEA Amendments of 1997
must be implemented by July 1, 1998 regardless of whether or not a
State receives a SIG. Under section 612(a)(14) of IDEA, in order to be
eligible for funding under Part B, a State must have in effect a
comprehensive system of personnel development that is designed to
ensure an adequate supply of qualified special education, regular
education, related services, and early intervention personnel and that
meets the requirements contained in the personnel development sections
of the State Improvement Plan addressing needs assessment and
improvement strategies. It is intended that the CSPD meet the SIG
personnel development requirements so that it may serve as the
framework for the State's personnel development part of a SIG grant
application.
[[Page 7557]]
25. To What Extent Does the State Improvement Grant Proposal Have To Be
Linked to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973?
To the ``maximum extent possible'' State improvement grant
proposals must be linked to State plans under ESEA and the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The IDEA Amendments of 1997 emphasize that
children with disabilities have access to the general curriculum and
general educational reforms. Although the legislation does not mention
integration with any other State plans under any other Federal statute,
because the State improvement grant proposal is focused on systems
change for students with disabilities, integration with relevant State
plans or projects would be beneficial (section 653(a)(2)(A)).
26. What Is the Relationship Between the Performance Goals and
Indicators a State Must Have To Be Eligible for Part B and the State
Improvement Grant Proposal?
Under Part B (section 612(a)(16)), in order to be eligible to
receive financial assistance under Part B, the State must have in place
by July 1, 1998 performance goals for children with disabilities that
must promote the purposes of the IDEA and be consistent, to the maximum
extent appropriate, with other goals and standards developed for
children established by the State and performance indicators to assess
progress toward achieving those goals. A State must have developed
those performance goals and indicators in order to apply for a State
Improvement Grant because in conducting the needs assessment required
as part of its application, the State must identify those critical
aspects of early intervention, general education, and special education
programs that must be improved to enable children with disabilities to
meet the performance goals and indicators established by the State for
the performance of children with disabilities under section 612(a)(16).
In submitting the required SIG performance reports to the Department
under section 653(f), the State must describe the progress of the State
in meeting the performance goals established under section 612(a)(16),
analyze the effectiveness of the State's strategies in meeting those
goals, and identify any changes in the strategies needed to improve its
performance.
Monitoring and Corrective Action Plans
27. How Is the State Improvement Grant Aligned With Federal Compliance
Reviews?
There are three areas in which the State Improvement Grant aligns
with Federal compliance reviews. First, the State improvement plan must
include an analysis of the major findings of the Department's most
recent reviews of State compliance, as they relate to improving results
for children with disabilities (section 653(b)(2)(C)). The second is
that the State improvement plan must include a description of
strategies that will address systemic problems identified in Federal
compliance reviews, including shortages of qualified personnel (section
653(c)(3)(E)). The third area of alignment with monitoring is that in
determining competitive awards we will give priority to applications on
the basis of need, as indicated by information from the findings of
Federal compliance reviews (section 653(d)(2)).
28. Can the State Improvement Grant Funds Be Used To Address
Deficiencies Identified in Federal Compliance Reviews?
Yes, if the activities to address the deficiencies are consistent
with the purposes of the grant and described in the State's
application. If, for example, a Federal compliance review identified
that a personnel shortage impacted on the provision of a free
appropriate public education to students with disabilities, then it
would be consistent with the purposes of the grant to use grant funds
to address the personnel shortage.
Applications, Length of Awards, and Reapplication
29. Can the First Grant Be Written as a Planning Grant?
No. The purpose of the SIG program is to assist State educational
agencies, and their partners referred to in section 652(b), in
reforming and improving their systems for providing educational, early
intervention, and transitional services, including their systems for
professional development, technical assistance, and dissemination of
knowledge about best practices, to improve results for children with
disabilities. In order to be funded a State must include in its
application improvement strategies that were developed to address State
and local needs identified in the State needs assessment. The purpose
of the needs assessment is to provide the necessary information to
facilitate the development of a State improvement plan that identifies
those critical aspects of early intervention, general education, and
special education programs that must be improved to enable children
with disabilities to meet the goals established by the State under
section 612(a)(16). In conjunction with the needs assessment, the
improvement strategies (section 653(c)) subsumed in the State
improvement grant proposal constitute the State's plan for the use of
SIG funds.
30. What Grant Period Can a State Request in Its Initial Application?
A State may request a grant of from one to five years. However, we
may award a grant that is shorter than the State requests, but not less
than one year, if the State's application does not sufficiently justify
the full requested duration.
31. If a Project Is Funded for Less Than Five Years, Can It Be Extended
Later?
No, with the exception of relatively short ``no-cost'' extensions
that are sometimes given to allow the completion of project activities.
These extensions do not award new funds or approve new activities.
32. After a State Completes One State Improvement Grant, Can It Apply
for Another? If So, Will It Compete Against All Applicants or only
Against Other States That Have Received Previous Grants?
Yes, a State can apply for another SIG after it completes one. It
will be in competition with all applicants, not just those with
previous grants. We will give priority to applications on the basis of
need (section 653(d)(2)).
33. If a State Applies Unsuccessfully in One Year, Will It Be Able To
Apply Again?
Yes.
34. Will a Project Be Approved and Funded All at Once or a Year at a
Time?
At the time of the initial grant award, the project duration of one
to five years will be determined and budgets for all years of the grant
will be established. However, funds can only be awarded one-year at a
time. States receiving multi-year grants will submit annual performance
reports to demonstrate that their grants are making substantial
progress. Funding for project years after the first will be based, in
part, on these reports. This is not part of the competitive process of
awarding funds, and it is expected that funding will be continued each
year for the duration of the project, provided that substantial
[[Page 7558]]
progress is demonstrated and that Congress continues to fund the
program.
35. Does Funding Have To Be the Same for All Years of the Project?
No, but it cannot exceed $2,120,000 or be less than $530,000 or
$84,800 in the case of an outlying territory.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U
[[Page 7559]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.005
[[Page 7560]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.006
[[Page 7561]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.007
[[Page 7562]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.008
[[Page 7563]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.009
[[Page 7564]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.010
[[Page 7565]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.011
[[Page 7566]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.012
[[Page 7567]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.013
[[Page 7568]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.014
[[Page 7569]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.015
[[Page 7570]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.016
[[Page 7571]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.017
[[Page 7572]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.018
[[Page 7573]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.019
[[Page 7574]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN19FE02.020
[FR Doc. 02-3995 Filed 2-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C