[Federal Register: July 10, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 131)]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Overview
Information; Technology and Media Services for Individuals With
Disabilities--Center on Technology Implementation; Notice Inviting
Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.327G.
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 10, 2009.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 19, 2009.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purposes of the Technology and Media
Services for Individuals with Disabilities program are to: (1) Improve
results for children with disabilities by promoting the development,
demonstration, and use of technology, (2) support educational media
services activities designed to be of educational value in the
classroom setting to children with disabilities, and (3) provide
support for captioning and video description of educational materials
that are appropriate for use in the classroom setting.
Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority
is from allowable activities specified in the statute or otherwise
authorized in the statute (see sections 674 and 681(d) of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. 1474 and
Absolute Priority: For FY 2009 and any subsequent year in which we
make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition,
this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we
consider only applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
Technology and Media Services for Individuals with Disabilities--
Center on Technology Implementation.
Background: Students with disabilities can benefit from the use of
instructional and assistive technology (D.P. Bryant, Goodwin, & B.R.
Bryant, 2003; L.S. Fuchs, D. Fuchs, Hamlet, Powell, Capizzi, &
Seethaler, 2006; Slavin, Cheung, Groff, & Lake, C., 2008; Slavin
Lake, 2007). However, research suggests that the benefits of using
technology depend on the quality of the implementation of the
technology (Fitzer, et al., 2007; Zorfass & Rivero, 2005; Slavin, et
al., 2008; Morrison, 2007; Todis, 2001).
Implementation of any practice or program is a topic of general
concern in education and, fortunately, there is a growing body of
knowledge on implementing educational innovations that can help ensure
that innovations (including technology innovations) are implemented and
sustained with fidelity and effectiveness (Bond, Drake, McHugo, Rapp,
Whitley, & National Evidence-Based Practices Project Research Group,
press; Fixsen & Blase, 2009; Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, &
2005; Mueser, Torrey, Lynde, Singer, & Drake, 2003; Torrey, Lynde,
Gorman, 2005). After an extensive review of available research on
implementation Fixsen, et al. (2005) identified the following core
components (``implementation drivers'') as critical to the successful
implementation of any program or practice: (i) Staff recruitment and
selection, (ii) preservice and inservice training, (iii) ongoing
consultation and coaching, (iv) staff and program evaluation, (v)
facilitative administrative supports, and (vi) systems interventions.
Furthermore, Fixsen, et al. also found that successful implementation
of a new practice or program involves a multiyear process that
progresses through stages, including exploration and adoption, program
installation, initial implementation, full operation, innovation, and
There is a growing body of knowledge focusing specifically on the
implementation of technology. For example, the following factors have
been shown to affect the implementation of technology programs or
practices in education: Teacher motivation to use the technology being
implemented; compatibility between the technology being implemented and
the teacher's pedagogical orientation; the availability of ongoing
technology planning and administrative support; professional
development relevant to the technology being implemented; and school
readiness and infrastructure to support the technology being
implemented (Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, & Marx, 2000; Cradler,
Ertmer, 2005; Glazer, Hannafin, & Song, 2005). To achieve the full
benefits of technology for children with disabilities, schools must
effectively implement the technology practices or programs. Schools,
therefore, can benefit tremendously from having access to better
information on effective technology implementation strategies and TA to
aid them in successfully implementing technology practices and programs
on their own.
Priority: The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative
agreement to support the establishment and operation of a Center on
Technology Implementation (Center) that will develop, test, and
disseminate the following two types of products to support effective
and sustainable local implementation of evidence-based technology
practices and programs to improve educational outcomes for students
(1) Implementation Resource Kits. The Center's Implementation
Resource Kits must be designed to guide and support the implementation
of specific evidence-based technology practices or programs for local
educational agencies (LEAs).
(2) Implementation Practice Guide. The Center's Implementation
Practice Guide must summarize available evidence and provide general
guidance (not limited to a specific practice or program) on
implementing technology programs and practices to benefit students with
To be considered for funding under this absolute priority,
applicants must meet the application requirements contained in this
priority. Any project funded under this absolute priority also must
meet the programmatic and administrative requirements specified in the
Application Requirements. An applicant must include in its
(a) A detailed plan for implementing the activities described in
the Project Activities section of this priority, including:
(1) A dissemination plan that describes the Center's strategy for
communicating findings (upon review and approval from OSEP) to key
(i) Professional organizations, including but not limited to, the
Council of Administrators of Special Education, the National
Association of State Directors of Special Education, the Council of the
Great City Schools, the Council for Exceptional Children, the National
Education Association, The Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive
Technology Society of North America (RESNA) and the American Federation
(ii) Federal technical assistance and dissemination projects,
including (but not limited to) the Regional Resource Centers funded
under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the
Comprehensive Centers and State Educational Technology projects funded
under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended,
statewide assistive technology programs as funded under the Assistive
Technology Act of 1998 (as amended), and other relevant Federal
projects as determined by OSEP; and
(iii) Technology developers, vendors and researchers.
(2) The dissemination plan must include provisions for preparing
national and State TA providers to disseminate and use the
Implementation Resource Kits and Implementation Practice Guide without
the need for ongoing TA from the Center and after the end of the
(c) A budget for attendance at the following:
(1) A one and one half day kick-off meeting to be held in
Washington, DC, within four weeks after receipt of the
award, and an annual planning meeting held in Washington, DC, with the
OSEP Project Officer during each subsequent year of the project period.
(2) A three-day Project Directors' Conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project period; and
(3) A two-day technology project director's meeting in Washington,
DC, during each year of the project period.
Project Activities. To meet the requirements of this priority, the
Center must conduct the following activities:
(a) Conduct an ongoing review of research and scholarly literature
on the implementation of practices and programs in education, with an
emphasis on implementing instructional and assistive technology
practices and programs with students with disabilities.
(b) Select at least three evidence-based technology practices and
programs (which must include at least one technology program, as
defined in this notice) upon which to base the development of
Implementation Resource Kits. The evidence base for each selected
technology practice or program must meet a standard of rigor similar to
those applied by one of the following: the What Works Clearinghouse
(http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/references), the Best Evidence Encyclopedia
(http://www.bestevidence.org/methods/methods.htm), or the Campbell
Note: The technology practices and programs selected pursuant to
paragraph (b) of this section of the priority must make integral use
of technology, but may involve other materials and activities as
well (e.g., computers used in combination with other hard copy
textual materials or World Wide Web activities incorporated into
inquiry-based classroom activities).
For purposes of this priority, the following definitions apply \1\:
\1\ These definitions of ``technology practice'' and
``technology program'' are adapted from Fixsen, et al. (2005 p. 26).
The examples provided with these definitions are provided for
illustrative purposes only and are not intended to guide the
Center's selections nor to imply endorsement of them as evidence
(1) Technology practices are skills, techniques, and strategies
involving the use of technology that can be used by practitioners to
achieve educational outcomes for students with disabilities. Examples
of technology practices include using word processors in writing
instruction and making classroom accommodations to integrate AT devices
(2) Technology programs are integrated collections of technology
practices that are performed within a set of defined parameters (e.g.,
a defined philosophy, a defined service delivery structure, or a
defined set of treatment components). Examples of technology programs
include schoolwide progress monitoring programs that uses a Web-based
system for interpreting data and selecting educational interventions,
and programs for systematically assessing individual student needs for
assistive technology and supporting the use of the technology in
(c) Develop a detailed conceptual framework for implementing each
technology practice or program selected pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this section of the priority. The Center's detailed conceptual
(1) Describe the core intervention components of the selected
technology practices or programs (i.e., key elements such as materials,
procedures, teacher resources, and environmental features that must be
maintained for the practice or program to be effective);
(2) Describe the core implementation components (as well as their
sources) needed for successful implementation of the selected
technology practices and programs through all phases of implementation
(i.e., initial exploration and adoption through initial implementation,
full operation, innovation, and sustainability). (For more information
about ``core intervention components'' and ``core implementation
components,'' see Fixsen et al., 2005, pp. 24-26, and 28-34,
(3) Describe the anticipated impact on the target group or groups
of students, including changes in their learning outcomes and how
mediating and moderating variables (e.g., instructional methodology,
time-on-task, learning supports, class structure) may affect how well
the technology practice or program supports student learning outcomes;
(4) Serve as a basis for designing the Implementation Resource Kits
and the formative and summative evaluations of the project.
(d) Develop an Implementation Resource Kit based on the detailed
conceptual framework for each selected technology practice and program.
(For more information on Implementation Resource Kits, also referred to
as implementation packages and toolkits, see Mueser, et al., 2003;
Torrey, et al., 2005; and McHugo, et al., 2007). The Center must design
its Implementation Resource Kits to be usable by TA providers and core
implementation components that are typically available to LEAs, so that
the Implementation Resource Kits will continue to be used after the
completion of the Center's project period. In developing the
Implementation Resource Kits, the Center must perform field-based
tryouts and formative evaluations of the Implementation Resource Kits,
in order to refine and revise the kits, as needed. Each Implementation
Resource Kit must include at least the following:
(1) Procedures and instruments to assess the implementation
readiness and the implementation needs of the LEA (at the teacher,
school, and LEA levels). These procedures and instruments may include
surveys, resource inventories, school or LEA self-study guides,
observational instruments, and other suitable procedures and
instruments and must be drawn to the greatest extent possible from
existing procedures and instruments that have been studied and
validated in previous research.
(2) Methods and resources to support the implementation process at
its various levels (teacher, school, LEA) and through its various
phases from initial exploration and adoption through sustainability.
These methods and resources may include: Interactive professional
development activities and media, community-of-practice guidelines and
resources, online awareness and skill development resources, video and
multi-media products, sample language for inclusion in technology
policies and plans, and public awareness materials to generate broad-
based support for sustained implementation, and other suitable methods
and resources. The Center should, to the maximum extent possible,
include methods and resources that have previously been developed and
(3) Procedures and instruments to evaluate implementation as it
progresses through the various phases, including measures of the
fidelity of implementation, the sustainability, and the impact on
students with disabilities. The procedures and instruments must be
designed to suggest corrective actions in cases where the
implementation is not progressing as desired. The Center should, to the
maximum extent possible, include procedures and instruments that have
been studied and validated in previous research.
(e) In consultation with participating State educational agencies,
field-test each Implementation Resource Kit in 8 to 10 LEAs, including
urban, suburban and rural school LEAs, and LEAs with high enrollments
of English language learners and low-income students. In these field
tests, the Center must study implementation of the selected technology
practice or program over a
course of at least three calendar years and the processes of
implementation from adoption through full operation and sustainability.
The field tests must be designed to evaluate implementation,
sustainability, and impact on outcomes for students with disabilities
and how the differences in variables such as type of LEA affect
implementation. The field test must, to the greatest possible extent,
use typically-available TA providers to utilize the Implementation
Resource Kits. This will allow the field test to represent typical
circumstances and will also foster the capability of the typically-
available TA providers to use the Implementation Resource Kits after
the end of the project period.
(f) Develop one Implementation Practice Guide on technology
implementation for students with disabilities. In contrast to the
Implementation Resource Kits, which apply to specific technology
practices and programs, the Implementation Practice Guide must apply
generally to the implementation of technology (assistive and
instructional) to benefit students with disabilities. The
Implementation Practice Guide must be developed by a panel of experts
through a systematic process of reviewing evidence that supports
specific recommendations and documenting the level of support for each
recommendation. The following Web site provides examples of practice
guides and the procedures for developing them:
(g) Establish and maintain an advisory committee to review the
activities and outcomes of the Center and to provide programmatic
support and advice throughout the project period. At a minimum, the
advisory committee must meet on an annual basis in Washington, DC, and
consist of individuals with knowledge and expertise in: Effective
instructional technology and assistive technology, effective schoolwide
and LEA-wide technology implementation practices, and rigorous
evaluation methods. The committee membership must also include
individuals with disabilities, parents of individuals with
disabilities, and individuals from communities representing rural, low-
income, urban and limited English proficiency populations. The Center
must submit the names of proposed members of the advisory committee to
the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) for approval within
eight weeks after receipt of the award.
(h) Prior to developing any new paper or electronic product, submit
a proposal describing the content and purpose of the product to the
OSEP Project Officer and the Proposed Product Advisory Board at OSEP's
Technical Assistance Coordination Center for approval.
(i) Conduct a summative evaluation of both the Implementation
Resource Kits and Implementation Practice Guide in collaboration with
the Center to Improve Project Performance (CIPP) as described in the
Note: The major tasks of CIPP are to guide, coordinate, and
oversee the summative evaluations conducted by selected Technical
Assistance, Personnel Development, Parent Training and Information
Centers, and Technology projects that individually receive $500,000
or more funding from OSEP annually. The efforts of CIPP are expected
to enhance individual project evaluations by providing expert and
unbiased assistance in designing evaluations, conducting analyses,
and interpreting data.
To fulfill the requirements of the summative evaluation to be
conducted under the guidance of CIPP, the Center must--
(1) Hire or designate, with the approval of the OSEP Project
Officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time,
experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the Center to work with CIPP
on the following tasks:
(i) Planning for the Center's summative evaluation (e.g., selecting
evaluation questions, developing a timeline for the evaluation,
locating sources of relevant data, and refining the conceptual
frameworks used for the evaluation).
(ii) Developing the summative evaluation design and instrumentation
(e.g., determining quantitative or qualitative data collection
strategies, selecting respondent samples, and pilot testing
(iii) Coordinating the evaluation timeline with the implementation
of the Center's activities.
(iv) Collecting summative data.
(v) Writing reports of summative evaluation findings.
(2) Cooperate with CIPP staff in order to accomplish the tasks
described in paragraph (1) of this section; and
(3) Dedicate a minimum of $65,000 of the annual budget request for
this project to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section, implementing the Center's
formative evaluation and traveling to Washington, DC, in the second
year of the project period for the Center's review for continued
(j) Maintain ongoing communication with the OSEP Project Officer
through regular teleconferences and e-mail communication.
Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project: In deciding whether to
continue funding the Center for the fourth and fifth years, the
Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), and in
(a) The recommendation of a review team consisting of experts
selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-
day intensive meeting in Washington, DC, that will be held during the
last half of the second year of the project period. The Center must
budget for travel expenses associated with this one-day intensive
(b) The timeliness and effectiveness with which all requirements of
the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the
(c) The degree to which the Center's activities have the potential
to contribute to changed practice and improved implementation of
technologies and access and progress in the general education
curriculum for students with disabilities.
References: Bond, G.R., Drake, R.E., McHugo, G.J., Rapp, C.A.,
Whitley, R., & National Evidence-Based Practices Project Research
Group. Strategies for improving fidelity in the National Evidence-Based
Practices Project. Research on Social Work Practice, in press.
Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B.J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R.W. (2000).
Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up
technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools.
Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149-164.
Bryant, D.P., Goodwin, M., & Bryant, B.R. (2003). Vocabulary
Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities: A Review of the
Research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 117-28.
Cradler, J. (1995). Implementing technology in education: Recent
findings from research and evaluation studies. Far West Laboratory.
Retrieved on February 1, 2008 from
Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: the final frontier
in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology
Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.
Fitzer, K.M., Freidhoff, J.R., Fritzen, A., Heintz, A., Koehler, J.,
Mishra, P., Ratcliffe, J., Zhang, T., Zheng, J., & Zhou, W. (2007).
Guest editorial: More questions than answers: Responding to the
reading and mathematics software effectiveness study. Contemporary
Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7(2), 1-6.
Fixsen, D.L., & Blase, K.A. (2009, January). Implementation: The
missing link between research and practice. NIRN Implementation
Brief 1. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina,
Fixsen, D.L., Blase, K.A., Horner, R., & Sugai, G. (2009, February).
evidence-based practices in education. Scaling-up Brief 1.
Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG, SISEP.
Fixsen, D.L., Naoom, S.F., Blase, K.A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace,
F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature.
Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida
Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research;
available at http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~nirn/resources/publications/Monograph/.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlet, C.L., Powell, S.R., Capizzi, A.M., &
Seethaler, P.M. (2006). The Effects of Computer-Assisted Instruction
on Number Combination Skill in At-Risk First Graders. Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 39(5), 467-75.
Glazer, E., Hannafin, M.J., & Song, L. (2005). Promoting technology
integration through collaborative apprenticeship. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 57-67.
McHugo, G.M., Drake, R.E., Whitley, R., Bond, G.R., Campbell, K.,
Rapp, C.A., Goldman, H.H., Lutz, W., & Finnerty, M. (2007). Fidelity
outcomes in the National Implementing Evidence-Based Practices
Project. Psychiatric Services, 58, 1279-1284.
Morrison, K. (2007). Implementation of Assistive Computer
Technology: A Model for School Systems. International Journal of
Special Education, 22(1), 83-95.
Mueser, K.T., Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D., Singer, P., & Drake, R.E.
(2003). Implementing evidence-based practices for people with severe
mental illness. Behavior Modification, 27(3), 387-411.
Slavin, R.E. & Lake, C. (2007, February). Effective programs in
elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University, Center for Data-Driven Reform in
Slavin, R.E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., and Lake, C. (2008). Effective
reading programs for middle and high schools: A best evidence
synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 3, 290-322.
Todis, B. (2001). It can't hurt: Implementing AAC technology in the
classroom for students with severe and multiple disabilities. In
Woodward, J., & Cuban, L. (Eds.) Technology, curriculum, and
professional development: Adapting schools to meet the needs of
students with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
Torrey, W.C., Lynde, D.W., & Gorman, P. (2005). Promoting the
implementation of practices that are supported by research: The
National Implementing Evidence-Based Practice Project. Child and
Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14 (2), 297-306.
Zorfass, J., & Rivero, H.K. (2005). Collaboration is Key: How a
Community of Practice Promotes Technology Integration. Journal of
Special Education Technology, 20 (3), 51-60.
Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested
parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities and
requirements. Section 681(d) of the IDEA, however, makes the public
comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1474 and 1481.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80,
81, 82, 84, 85, 86, 97, 98, and 99.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants
except Federally recognized Indian Tribes.
Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of
higher education (IHEs) only.
II. Award Information
Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement.
Estimated Available Funds: $1,375,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2010 from the list of
unfunded applicants from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will reject any application that proposes a
budget exceeding $1,375,000 for a single budget period of 12 months.
The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in
the Federal Register.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: State educational agencies; local
educational agencies (LEAs), including public charter schools that are
considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private
nonprofit organizations; outlying areas; freely associated States;
Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This competition does not require cost
sharing or matching.
3. Other: General Requirements--(a) The projects funded under this
competition must make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
(b) Applicants and grant recipients funded under this competition
must involve individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals
with disabilities ages birth through 26 in planning, implementing, and
evaluating the projects (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of the IDEA).
IV. Application and Submission Information
1. Address To Request Application Package
Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD
20794-1398. Telephone, toll free: 1-877-433-7827. FAX: (301) 470-1244.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call, toll
You can contact ED Pubs at its Web site, also:
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html or at its e-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org.
If you request an application package from ED Pubs, be sure to
identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.327G.
Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application
package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape,
or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under
Accessible Format in section VIII of this notice.
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
Requirements concerning the content of an application, together
with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this
Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application)
is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that
reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit the
application narrative to the equivalent of no more than 50 pages, using
the following standards:
A ``page'' is 8.5 x 11, on one side
only, with 1 margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch)
all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings,
footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in
charts, tables, figures, and graphs.
Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller
than 10 pitch (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, the references, or the letters of support.
However, the page limit does apply to all of the application narrative
section (Part III).
We will reject your application if you exceed the page limit or if
you apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the page limit.
3. Submission Dates and Times
Applications Available: July 10, 2009.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 10, 2009.
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted
electronically using the Electronic Grant Application System (e-
Application) accessible through the Department's e-Grants site, or in
paper format by mail or hand delivery. For information (including dates
and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in
paper format by mail or hand delivery, please refer to section IV.6.
Other Submission Requirements of this notice.
We do not consider an application that does not comply with the
Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or
auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact
the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII
of this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or
auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the
application process, the individual's application remains subject to
all other requirements and limitations in this notice.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 19, 2009.
4. Intergovernmental Review
This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental
Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the
application package for this competition.
5. Funding Restrictions
We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the
Applicable Regulations section of this notice.
6. Other Submission Requirements
Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted
electronically or in paper format by mail or hand delivery.
a. Electronic Submission of Applications
If you choose to submit your application to us electronically, you
must use e-Application, accessible through the Department's e-Grants
Web site at: http://e-grants.ed.gov.
While completing your electronic application, you will be entering
data online that will be saved into a database. You may not e-mail an
electronic copy of a grant application to us.
Please note the following:
Your participation in e-Application is voluntary.
You must complete the electronic submission of your grant
application by 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. E-Application will not accept an application for this
competition after 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
deadline date. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait
until the application deadline date to begin the application process.
The hours of operation of the e-Grants Web site are 6:00
a.m. Monday until 7:00 p.m. Wednesday; and 6:00 a.m. Thursday until
8:00 p.m. Sunday, Washington, DC time. Please note that, because of
maintenance, the system is unavailable between 8:00 p.m. on Sundays and
6:00 a.m. on Mondays, and between 7:00 p.m. on Wednesdays and 6:00 a.m.
on Thursdays, Washington, DC time. Any modifications to these hours are
posted on the e-Grants Web site.
You will not receive additional point value because you
submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you
if you submit your application in paper format.
You must submit all documents electronically, including
all information you typically provide on the following forms: the
Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of
Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information--Non-
Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and
certifications. You must attach any narrative sections of your
application as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF
(Portable Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the
three file types specified in this paragraph or submit a password
protected file, we will not review that material.
Your electronic application must comply with any page
limit requirements described in this notice.
Prior to submitting your electronic application, you may
wish to print a copy of it for your records.
After you electronically submit your application, you will
receive an automatic acknowledgment that will include a PR/Award number
(an identifying number unique to your application).
Within three working days after submitting your electronic
application, fax a signed copy of the SF 424 to the Application Control
Center after following these steps:
(1) Print SF 424 from E-Application.
(2) The applicant's Authorizing Representative must sign this form.
(3) Place the PR/Award number in the upper right hand corner of the
hard-copy signature page of the SF 424.
(4) Fax the signed SF 424 to the Application Control Center at
We may request that you provide us original signatures on
other forms at a later date.
Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of System
Unavailability: If you are prevented from electronically submitting
your application on the application deadline date because E-Application
is unavailable, we will grant you an extension of one business day to
enable you to transmit your application electronically, by mail, or by
hand delivery. We will grant this extension if--
(1) You are a registered user of e-Application and you have
initiated an electronic application for this competition; and
(2)(a) E-Application is unavailable for 60 minutes or more between
the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the
application deadline date; or
(b) E-Application is unavailable for any period of time between
3:30 p.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application
We must acknowledge and confirm these periods of unavailability
before granting you an extension. To request this extension or to
confirm our acknowledgment of any system unavailability, you may
contact either (1) the person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT (see VII. Agency Contact) or (2) the e-
Grants help desk at 1-888-336-8930. If E-Application is unavailable due
to technical problems with the system and, therefore, the application
deadline is extended, an e-mail will be sent to all registered users
who have initiated an e-Application.
Extensions referred to in this section apply only to the
unavailability of e-Application. If e-Application is available, and,
for any reason, you are unable to submit your application
electronically or you do not receive an automatic acknowledgment of
your submission, you may submit your application in paper format by
hand delivery in accordance with the instructions in this notice.
b. Submission of Paper Applications by Mail
If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the
U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must mail the
original and two copies of your application, on or before the
application deadline date, to the Department at the following address:
U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention:
(CFDA Number 84.327G), LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the
U.S. Department of Education.
If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do
not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
If your application is postmarked after the application deadline
date, we will not consider your application.
Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a
dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with
your local post office.
c. Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery
If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery,
you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of
your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date,
to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of
Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number
84.327G), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-4260.
The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, except
Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand
Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your
application to the Department--
(1) You must indicate on the envelope and--if not provided by the
Department--in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix
letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your
(2) The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification
of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this grant
notification within 15 business days from the application deadline
date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application
Control Center at (202) 245-6288.
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition
are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package.
2. Review and Selection Process: In the past, the Department has
had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because
so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have
conflicts of interest. The Standing Panel requirements under the IDEA
also have placed additional constraints on the availability of
reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that, for some
discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into
two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within the
specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department
to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals
who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of
applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase
the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process while
permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary
grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.
However, if the Department decides to select an equal number of
applications in each group for funding, this may result in different
cut-off points for fundable applications in each group.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your
U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award
Notification (GAN). We may notify you informally, also.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding,
we notify you.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify
administrative and national policy requirements in the application
package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of
an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and
include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also
incorporates your approved application as part of your binding
commitments under the grant.
3. Reporting: At the end of your project period, you must submit a
final performance report, including financial information, as directed
by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an
annual performance report that provides the most current performance
and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary
under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent
performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements
on reporting, please go to
4. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and
Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), the Department has established a set of
performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed
to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and
quality of the Technology and Media Services for Individuals with
Disabilities program. These measures focus on the extent to which
projects are high-quality, are relevant to improving outcomes of
children with disabilities, and contribute to improving outcomes for
children with disabilities. We will collect data on these measures from
the project funded under this competition.
The grantee will be required to report information on its project's
performance in annual reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).
VII. Agency Contact
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Malouf, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 4119, Potomac Center Plaza
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-6253.
If you use a TDD, call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free,
VIII. Other Information
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format
(e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by
contacting the Grants and Contracts Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202-2550. Telephone: (202) 245-
7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
Electronic Access to This Document: You can view this document, as
well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal
Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the
Internet at the following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available
free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S.
Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in
the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of this document is the document
published in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal
Regulations is available on GPO Access at:
Delegation of Authority: The Secretary of Education has delegated
authority to Andrew J. Pepin, Executive Administrator for the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, to perform the functions
of the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Dated: July 6, 2009.
Andrew J. Pepin,
Executive Administrator for Special Education and Rehabilitative
[FR Doc. E9-16380 Filed 7-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P