4000-01-U
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance on State
Data Collection--National Technical Assistance Center to
Improve State Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use
Accurate IDEA Part B Data
AGENCY:

Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative

Services, Department of Education.
ACTION:
SUMMARY:

Notice.
The Department of Education (Department) is

issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for
fiscal year (FY) 2024 for Technical Assistance on State
Data Collection--National Technical Assistance Center to
Improve State Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use
Accurate IDEA Part B Data.
DATES:
Applications Available:

[INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER].
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:

[INSERT DATE 30

DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].
Pre-Application Webinar Information:

No later than [INSERT

DATE 5 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL
REGISTER], the Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services will post details on pre-recorded
informational webinars designed to provide technical
assistance (TA) to interested applicants.

Links to the

webinars may be found at
https://www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/osep/new-osepgrants.html.
ADDRESSES:

For the addresses for obtaining and submitting

an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant
Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 7,
2022 (87 FR 75045) and available at
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/12/07/202226554/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-ofeducation-discretionary-grant-programs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richelle Davis, U.S.

Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, room 4A10,
Washington, DC 20202.

Telephone:

202-245-6391.

Email:

Richelle.Davis@ed.gov.
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech
disability and wish to access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7-1-1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Full Text of Announcement
I.

Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program:

The purpose of the Technical

Assistance on State Data Collection program is to improve
the capacity of States to meet the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) data collection and
reporting requirements.

Funding for the program is

authorized under section 611(c)(1) of IDEA, which gives the
Secretary authority to reserve not more than one-half of
one percent of the amounts appropriated under Part B for
each fiscal year to provide TA activities, where needed, to
improve the capacity of States to meet the data collection
and reporting requirements under Parts B and C of IDEA.
The maximum amount the Secretary may reserve under this
set-aside for any fiscal year is $25,000,000, cumulatively
adjusted by the rate of inflation.

Section 616(i) of IDEA

requires the Secretary to review the data collection and
analysis capacity of States to ensure that data and
information determined necessary for implementation of
section 616 of IDEA are collected, analyzed, and accurately
reported to the Secretary.

It also requires the Secretary

to provide TA, where needed, to improve the capacity of
States to meet the data collection requirements, which
include the data collection and reporting requirements in
sections 616 and 618 of IDEA.

In addition, the Secretary

may use funds reserved under section 611(c) of IDEA to
“administer and carry out other services and activities to
improve data collection, coordination, quality, and use
under Parts B and C of the IDEA.”

Further Consolidated

Appropriations Act, 2024, Public Law 118-47, Division D,
Title III, 136 Stat. 138, 460 (2024).
The Data Center will provide TA to help States to (1)
effectively and efficiently respond to IDEA-related data

submission requirements; (2) improve the analyses of IDEA
data to the extent these analyses respond to critical
policy questions that will facilitate program improvement
and compliance accountability; and (3) comply with
applicable privacy requirements, including the privacy and
confidentiality requirements under IDEA and the Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g) and
its regulations at 34 CFR part 99.1
Assistance Listing Number (ALN):
OMB Control Number:
Priority:

84.373Y.

1820-0028.

This competition includes one absolute priority.

This priority is from the notice of final priority and
requirements (NFP) for this program published elsewhere in
this issue of the Federal Register.
Absolute Priority:

For FY 2024 and any subsequent year in

which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications
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:
National Technical Assistance Center to Improve State
Capacity to Collect, Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA
Part B Data.

The Center must review the need for additional resources (with input
from the Department) and disseminate existing resources developed by
the Department, such as: (1) IDEA/FERPA Crosswalk (Surprenant &
Miller, August 24, 2022); and (2) Data sharing agreement template (at
https://dasycenter.org/us-dept-ed-shares-idea-data-sharing-moutemplate/.

Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative
agreement to establish and operate the National Technical
Assistance Center to Improve State Capacity to Collect,
Report, Analyze, and Use Accurate IDEA Part B Data (Data
Center).
The Data Center will provide TA to help States better
meet current and future IDEA Part B data collection and
reporting requirements, improve data quality, and analyze
and use section 616, section 618, and other IDEA data
(e.g., State Supplemental Survey-IDEA) to identify and
address programmatic strengths and areas for improvement.
This Data Center will focus on providing TA on collecting,
reporting, analyzing, and using Part B data on children
with disabilities ages 3 through 21 required under sections
616 and 618 of IDEA.

However, the Data Center will not

provide TA on Part B data required under section 616 of
IDEA for Indicators B7 (Preschool Outcomes) and B12 (Early
Childhood Transition); TA on collecting, reporting,
analyzing, and using Part B data associated with children
with disabilities ages 3 through 5 for these indicators
will be provided by the National IDEA Technical Assistance
Center on Early Childhood Data Systems, ALN 84.373Z.
The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following
expected outcomes:

(a)

Improved State data infrastructure by

coordinating and promoting communication and effective data
governance strategies among relevant State offices,
including State educational agencies (SEAs), local
educational agencies (LEAs), and schools to improve the
quality of IDEA data required under sections 616 and 618 of
IDEA;
(b)

Increased capacity of States to submit accurate

and timely data, to enhance current State validation
procedures, and to prevent future errors in State-reported
IDEA Part B data;
(c)

Improved capacity of States to meet the data

collection and reporting requirements under sections 616
and 618 of IDEA by addressing personnel training needs,
developing effective tools (e.g., training modules) and
resources (e.g., documentation of State data processes),
and providing in-person and virtual opportunities for
cross-State collaboration about data collection and
reporting requirements that States can use to train
personnel in schools, programs, agencies, and districts;
(d)

Improved capacity of SEAs, and LEAs in

collaboration with SEAs, to collect, report, analyze, and
use both SEA and LEA IDEA data to identify programmatic
strengths and areas for improvement, address root causes of
poor performance towards outcomes, and evaluate progress
towards outcomes;

(e)

Improved IDEA data validation by using results

from data reviews conducted by the Department to work with
States to generate tools that can be used by States to lead
to improvements in the validity and reliability of data
required by IDEA and enable States to communicate accurate
data to local consumers (e.g., parents and families, school
boards, the general public); and
(f)

Increased capacity of States to collect, report,

analyze, and use high-quality IDEA Part B data.
In addition, to be considered for funding under this
competition, applicants must meet the following
requirements:
Applicants must-(a)

Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the

application under “Significance,” how the proposed project
will-(1)

Address the capacity needs of SEAs and LEAs to

meet IDEA Part B data collection and reporting requirements
and to increase their capacity to analyze and use section
616 and section 618 data as both a means of improving data
quality and identifying programmatic strengths and areas
for improvement.

To meet this requirement the applicant

must-(i)

Demonstrate knowledge of current educational

issues and policy initiatives about IDEA Part B data

collection and reporting requirements and knowledge of
State and local data collection systems, as appropriate;
(ii)

Present applicable national, State, and local

data to demonstrate the capacity needs of SEAs and LEAs to
meet IDEA Part B data collection and reporting requirements
and use section 616 and section 618 data as a means of both
improving data quality and identifying programmatic
strengths and areas for improvement; and
(iii)

Describe how SEAs and LEAs are currently

meeting IDEA Part B data collection and reporting
requirements and use section 616 and section 618 data as a
means of both improving data quality and identifying
programmatic strengths and areas for improvement.
(b)

Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the

application under “Quality of project services,” how the
proposed project will-(1)

Ensure equal access and treatment for members of

groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based
on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or
disability.

To meet this requirement, the applicant must

describe how it will-(i)

Identify the needs of the intended recipients for

TA and information; and
(ii)

Ensure that products and services meet the needs

of the intended recipients of the grant;

(2)
outcomes.

Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended
To meet this requirement, the applicant must

provide-(i)
(ii)

Measurable intended project outcomes; and
In appendix A, the logic model (as defined in 34

CFR 77.1) by which the proposed project will achieve its
intended outcomes, which depicts, at a minimum, the goals,
activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed
project;
(3)

Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in

appendix A) to develop project plans and activities,
describing any underlying concepts, assumptions,
expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed
relationships or linkages among these variables, and any
empirical support for this framework;
Note:

The following websites provide more information on

logic models and conceptual frameworks:
https://osepideasthatwork.org/sites/default/files/202112/ConceptualFramework_Updated.pdf and
www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/programareas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptualframework.

(4)

Be based on current research and make use of

evidence-based practices (EBPs).2

To meet this requirement,

the applicant must describe-(i)

The current research on the capacity of SEAs and

LEAs to report and use data, specifically section 616 and
section 618 data, as both a means of improving data quality
and identifying strengths and areas for improvement; and
(ii)

How the proposed project will incorporate

current research and EBPs in the development and delivery
of its products and services;
(5)

Develop products and provide services that are of

high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to
achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project.

To

address this requirement, the applicant must describe-(i)

How it proposes to identify and develop the

knowledge base on the capacity needs of SEAs and LEAs to
meet IDEA Part B data collection and reporting requirements
and SEA and LEA analysis and use of sections 616 and 618
data as a means of both improving data quality and
identifying programmatic strengths and areas for
improvement;

For purposes of these requirements, “evidence-based practices” (EPBs)
means, at a minimum, demonstrating a rationale (as defined in 34 CFR
77.1) based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation
that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve
student outcomes or other relevant outcomes.

(ii)

Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,3

which must identify the intended recipients, including the
type and number of recipients, that will receive the
products and services under this approach;
(iii)

Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized

TA,4 which must identify-(A)

The intended recipients, including the type and

number of recipients, that will receive the products and
services under this approach; and
(B)

Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of

potential TA recipients to work with the project,
assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure,
available resources, and ability to build capacity at the
local level; and
(iv)

Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained

TA,5 which must identify--

“Universal, general TA” means TA and information provided to
independent users through their own initiative, resulting in minimal
interaction with TA center staff and including one-time, invited or
offered conference presentations by TA center staff. This category of
TA also includes information or products, such as newsletters,
guidebooks, or research syntheses, downloaded from the TA center's
website by independent users. Brief communications by TA center staff
with recipients, either by telephone or email, are also considered
universal, general TA.
4 “Targeted, specialized TA” means TA services based on needs common to
multiple recipients and not extensively individualized. A relationship
is established between the TA recipient and one or more TA center
staff. This category of TA includes one-time, labor-intensive events,
such as facilitating strategic planning or hosting regional or national
conferences. It can also include episodic, less labor-intensive events
that extend over a period of time, such as facilitating a series of
conference calls on single or multiple topics that are designed around
the needs of the recipients. Facilitating communities of practice can
also be considered targeted, specialized TA.
5 “Intensive, sustained TA” means TA services often provided on-site and
requiring a stable, ongoing relationship between the TA center staff
and the TA recipient. “TA services” are defined as negotiated series

(A)

The intended recipients, including the type and

number of recipients, that will receive the products and
services under this approach;
(B)

Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of

SEA personnel to work with the project, including their
commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative
to their needs, current infrastructure, available
resources, and ability to build capacity at the SEA and LEA
levels;
(C)

Its proposed approach to prioritizing TA

recipients with a primary focus on meeting the needs of
States with known ongoing data quality issues, as measured
by the Office of Special Education Programs’ (OSEP’s)
review of the quality of the IDEA sections 616 and 618
data;
(D)

Its proposed plan for assisting SEAs (and LEAs,

in conjunction with SEAs) to build or enhance training
systems related to the IDEA Part B data collection and
reporting requirements that include professional
development based on adult learning principles and
coaching;
(E)

Its proposed plan for working with appropriate

levels of the education system (e.g., SEAs, regional TA
providers, LEAs, schools, and families) to ensure that

of activities designed to reach a valued outcome. This category of TA
should result in changes to policy, program, practice, or operations
that support increased recipient capacity or improved outcomes at one
or more systems levels.

there is communication between each level and that there
are systems in place to support the capacity needs of SEAs
and LEAs to meet Part B data collection and reporting
requirements under sections 616 and 618 of the IDEA; and
(F)

Its proposed plan for collaborating and

coordinating with Department-funded TA investments (e.g.,
the Center funded under 84.373Z, the Center for IDEA Fiscal
Reporting, the Center for the Integration of IDEA Data, the
Data Center to Address Significant Disproportionality, and
the Weiss Center) and Institute of Education
Sciences/National Center for Education Statistics research
and development investments, where appropriate, in order to
align complementary work and jointly develop and implement
products and services to meet the purposes of this
priority; and
(6)

Develop products and implement services that

maximize efficiency.

To address this requirement, the

applicant must describe-(i)

How the proposed project will use technology to

achieve the intended project outcomes;
(ii)

With whom the proposed project will collaborate

and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and
(iii)

How the proposed project will use non-project

resources to achieve the intended project outcomes.
(c)

In the narrative section of the application under

“Quality of the project evaluation,” include an evaluation

plan for the project developed in consultation with and
implemented by a third-party6 evaluator.

The evaluation

plan must-(1)

Articulate formative and summative evaluation

questions, including important process and outcome
evaluation questions.

These questions should be related to

the project’s proposed logic model required in paragraph
(b)(2)(ii) of these application and administrative
requirements;
(2)

Describe how progress in and fidelity of

implementation, as well as project outcomes, will be
measured to answer the evaluation questions.

Specify the

measures and associated instruments or sources for data
appropriate to the evaluation questions.

Include

information regarding reliability and validity of measures
where appropriate;
(3)

Describe strategies for analyzing data and how

data collected as part of this plan will be used to inform
and improve service delivery over the course of the project
and to refine the proposed logic model and evaluation plan,
including subsequent data collection;
(4)

Provide a timeline for conducting the evaluation

and include staff assignments for completing the plan.

The

A “third-party” evaluator is an independent and impartial program
evaluator who is contracted by the grantee to conduct an objective
evaluation of the project. This evaluator must not have participated
in the development or implementation of any project activities, except
for the evaluation activities, or have any financial interest in the
outcome of the evaluation.

timeline must indicate that the data will be available
annually for the annual performance report and at the end
of Year 2 for the review process; and
(5)

Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to

cover the costs of developing or refining the evaluation
plan in consultation with a third-party evaluator, as well
as the costs associated with the implementation of the
evaluation plan by the third-party evaluator.
(d)

Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the

application under “Adequacy of resources and quality of
project personnel,” how-(1)

The proposed project will encourage 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, as
appropriate;
(2)

The proposed key project personnel, consultants,

and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience
to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the
project’s intended outcomes;
(3)

The applicant and any key partners have adequate

resources to carry out the proposed activities; and
(4)

The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to

the anticipated results and benefits, and funds will be
spent in a way that increases their efficiency and cost-

effectiveness, including by reducing waste or achieving
better outcomes.
(e)

Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the

application under “Quality of the management plan,” how-(1)

The proposed management plan will ensure that the

project’s intended outcomes will be achieved on time and
within budget.

To address this requirement, the applicant

must describe-(i)

Clearly defined responsibilities for key project

personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable;
and
(ii)

Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the

project tasks;
(2)

Key project personnel and any consultants and

subcontractors will be allocated to the project and how
these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve
the project’s intended outcomes;
(3)

The proposed management plan will ensure that the

products and services provided are of high quality,
relevant, easily accessible, and useful to recipients; and
(4)

The proposed project will benefit from a

diversity of perspectives, including those of families,
educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers,
among others, in its development and operation.
(f)

Address the following application requirements:

(1)

Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts

and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management
plan described in the narrative;
(2)

Include, in the budget, attendance at the

following:
(i)

A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in

Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual
planning meeting in Washington, DC, with the OSEP project
officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent
year of the project period.
Note:

Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award

teleconference must be held between the OSEP project
officer and the grantee’s project director or other
authorized representative;
(ii)

A two and one-half day project directors’

conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the
project period; and
(iii)

Three annual two-day trips to attend Department

briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other
meetings, as requested by OSEP;
(3)

Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual

set-aside of 5 percent of the grant amount to support
emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed
project’s intended outcomes, as those needs are identified
in consultation with, and approved by, the OSEP project
officer.

With approval from the OSEP project officer, the

project must reallocate any remaining funds from this
annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter
of each budget period;
(4)

Provide an assurance that it will maintain a

high-quality website, with an easy-to-navigate design, that
meets government or industry-recognized standards for
accessibility;
(5)

Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist

OSEP with the transfer of pertinent resources and products
and to maintain the continuity of services to States during
the transition to this new award period and at the end of
this award period, as appropriate; and
(6)

Budget at least 50 percent of the grant award for

providing targeted and intensive TA to States.
Program Authority:

20 U.S.C. 1411(c), 1416(i), 1418(c),

1418(d), 1442; Further Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2024, Public Law 118-47, Division D, Title III, 138 Stat.
460, 685 (2024).
Note:

Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a

manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements
contained in Federal civil rights laws.
Applicable Regulations:

(a)

The Education Department

General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77,
79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99.

(b)

The Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) Guidelines to Agencies on
Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in

2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of
the Department in 2 CFR part 3485.

(c)

The OMB Guidance

for Federal Financial Assistance in 2 CFR part 200, as
adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2
CFR part 3474.

(d)

The NFP.

(e)

The regulations for

this program in 34 CFR part 300.
Note:

The Department will implement the changes included

in the OMB final rule, OMB Guidance for Federal Financial
Assistance
(https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/22/202407496/guidance-for-federal-financial-assistance), formerly
called, Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants
and Agreements, which amends 2 CFR part 200, on October 1,
2024.

Grant applicants who anticipate a performance period

start date on or after October 1, 2024, should follow the
provisions stated in the updated 2 CFR part 200, when
preparing an application.

For more information about these

updated regulations please visit:
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/fund/guid/uniformguidance/index.html.

The Department will continue to

provide more resources on our webpage as they become
available.
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:

$6,250,000 in year one;

$6,500,000 in years two through five.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the
quality of applications, we may make additional awards in
FY 2025 from the list of unfunded applications from this
competition.
Maximum Award:

We will not make an award exceeding

$6,250,000 for a single budget period of 12 months in year
one and $6,500,000 for a single budget period of 12 months
in years two through five.
Estimated Number of Awards:
Note:

1.

The Department is not bound by any estimates in this

notice.
Project Period:
III.

Up to 60 months.

Eligibility Information
1.

Eligible Applicants:

SEAs; State lead agencies

under Part C of IDEA; LEAs, including public charter
schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs;
other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations;
freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes
or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations.
2.

a.

Cost Sharing or Matching:

This competition

does not require cost sharing or matching.

b.

Indirect Cost Rate Information:

an unrestricted indirect cost rate.

This program uses

For more information

regarding indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated
indirect cost rate, please see
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocfo/intro.html.
c.

Administrative Cost Limitation:

This program does

not include any program-specific limitation on
administrative expenses.

All administrative expenses must

be reasonable and necessary and conform to Cost Principles
described in 2 CFR part 200, subpart E of the OMB Guidance
for Federal Financial Assistance.
3.

Subgrantees:

Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c), a

grantee under this competition may award subgrants--to
directly carry out project activities described in its
application--to the following types of entities:

IHEs,

nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the
activities proposed in the application, and public
agencies.

The grantee may award subgrants to entities it

has identified in an approved application or that it
selects through a competition under procedures established
by the grantee, consistent with 34 CFR 75.708(b)(2).
4.
(a)

Other General Requirements:
Recipients of funding under this competition must

make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of
IDEA).

(b)

Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must,

with respect to the aspects of their proposed project
relating to the absolute priority, involve individuals with
disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities
ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and
evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).
IV.

Application and Submission Information
1.

Application Submission Instructions:

Applicants

are required to follow the Common Instructions for
Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant
Programs, published in the Federal Register on December 7,
2022 (87 FR 75045), and available at
www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-26554, which contain
requirements and information on how to submit an
application.
2.

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.

However, under

34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order
to make an award by the end of FY 2024.
3.

Funding Restrictions:

We reference regulations

outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable
Regulations section of this notice.

4.

Recommended Page Limit:

The application narrative

is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria
that reviewers use to evaluate your application.

We

recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to
no more than 70 pages and (2) use the following standards:
•

A “page” is 8.5" x 11", on one side only, with 1"

margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
•

Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical

inch) all text in the application narrative, including
titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference
citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts,
tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
•

Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

•

Use one of the following fonts:

Times New Roman,

Courier, Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover
sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget
justification; the assurances and certifications; or the
abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application
package for completing the abstract), the table of
contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes,
the reference list, the letters of support, or the
appendices.

However, the recommended page limit does apply

to all of the application narrative, including all text in
charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.
V.

Application Review Information

1.

Selection Criteria:

The selection criteria for

this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:
(a)

Significance (10 points).

(1)

The Secretary considers the significance of the

proposed project.
(2)

In determining the significance of the proposed

project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i)

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.
(ii)

The importance or magnitude of the results or

outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project.
(b)

Quality of project services (35 points).

(1)

The Secretary considers the quality of the

services to be provided by the proposed project.
(2)

In determining the quality of the services to be

provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers
the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring
equal access and treatment for eligible project
participants who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color,
national origin, gender, age, or disability.
(3)

In addition, 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 there is a conceptual

framework underlying the proposed research or demonstration
activities and the quality of that framework.
(iii)

The extent to which the services to be provided

by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from
research and effective practice.
(iv)

The extent to which the training or professional

development services to be provided by the proposed project
are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead
to improvements in practice among the recipients of those
services.
(v)

The extent to which the TA services to be

provided by the proposed project involve the use of
efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as
appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources.
(vi)

The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-

quality products and services from the proposed project.
(c)

Quality of the project evaluation (15 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

will provide performance feedback and permit periodic
assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.
(iv)

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.
(d)

Adequacy of resources and quality of project

personnel (20 points).
(1)

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources

for the proposed project and 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 the project director or principal
investigator.
(ii)

The qualifications, including relevant training

and experience, of key project personnel.
(iii)

The qualifications, including relevant training

and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.
(iv)

The qualifications, including relevant training,

experience, and independence, of the evaluator.
(v)

The adequacy of support, including facilities,

equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the
applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.
(vi)

The relevance and demonstrated commitment of

each partner in the proposed project to the implementation
and success of the project.
(vii)

The extent to which the budget is adequate to

support the proposed project.
(viii)

The extent to which the costs are reasonable

in relation to the objectives, design, and potential
significance of the proposed project.
(e)

Quality of the management plan (20 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)

The extent to which the time commitments of the

project director and principal investigator and other key
project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the
objectives of the proposed project.
(iii)

The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-

quality products and services from the proposed project.
(iv)

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.
2.

Review and Selection Process:

We remind potential

applicants that in reviewing applications in any
discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may
consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance
of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as
the applicant’s use of funds, achievement of project
objectives, and compliance with grant conditions.

The

Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to
submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of
unacceptable quality.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the
Secretary requires various assurances, including those
applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal
financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4,
104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3.

Additional Review and Selection Process Factors:

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 section 682(b) of 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 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.
4.

Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions:

Consistent with 2 CFR 200.206, before awarding grants under
this competition the Department conducts a review of the
risks posed by applicants.

Under 2 CFR 200.208, the

Secretary may impose specific conditions, and under 2 CFR
3474.10, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions
on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially
stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a
financial or other management system that does not meet the
standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled
the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not
responsible.
5.

Integrity and Performance System:

If you are

selected under this competition to receive an award that
over the course of the project period may exceed the
simplified acquisition threshold (currently $250,000),
under 2 CFR 200.206(a)(2) we must make a judgment about
your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance
under Federal awards--that is, the risk posed by you as an
applicant--before we make an award.

In doing so, we must

consider any information about you that is in the integrity
and performance system (currently referred to as the
Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information
System (FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award

Management.

You may review and comment on any information

about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and
that is currently in FAPIIS.
Please note that, if the total value of your currently
active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement
contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000,
the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, appendix XII,
require you to report certain integrity information to
FAPIIS semiannually.

Please review the requirements in 2

CFR part 200, appendix XII, if this grant plus all the
other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6.

In General:

In accordance with the OMB Guidance

for Federal Financial Assistance located at 2 CFR part 200,
all applicable Federal laws, and relevant Executive
guidance, the Department will review and consider
applications for funding pursuant to this notice inviting
applications in accordance with-(a)

Selecting recipients most likely to be successful

in delivering results based on the program objectives
through an objective process of evaluating Federal award
applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b)

Prohibiting the purchase of certain

telecommunication and video surveillance services or
equipment in alignment with section 889 of the National
Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115—232) (2 CFR
200.216);

(c)

Providing a preference, to the extent permitted

by law, to maximize use of goods, products, and materials
produced in the United States (2 CFR 200.322); and
(d)

Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the

greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer
effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR
200.340).
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), or we may send
you an email containing a link to access an electronic
version of your GAN.

We also may notify you informally.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected
for funding, we notify you.
2.

Administrative and National Policy Requirements:

We identify administrative and national policy requirements
in the application package and reference these and other
requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this
notice.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and
conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations
section of this notice and include these and other specific
conditions in the GAN.

The GAN also incorporates your

approved application as part of your binding commitments
under the grant.

3.

Open Licensing Requirements:

Unless an exception

applies, if you are awarded a grant under this competition,
you will be required to openly license to the public grant
deliverables created in whole, or in part, with Department
grant funds.

When the deliverable consists of

modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends
only to those modifications that can be separately
identified and only to the extent that open licensing is
permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal
restrictions on the use of pre-existing works.
Additionally, a grantee that is awarded competitive grant
funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant
deliverables.

This dissemination plan can be developed and

submitted after your application has been reviewed and
selected for funding.

For additional information on the

open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.
4.

Reporting:

(a)

If you apply for a grant under

this competition, you must ensure that you have in place
the necessary processes and systems to comply with the
reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive
funding under the competition.

This does not apply if you

have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).
(b)

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 multiyear 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 www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.
5.

Performance Measures:

For the purpose of

Department reporting under 34 CFR 75.110, the Department
has established a set of performance measures that are
designed to yield information on various aspects of the
effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance on
State Data Collection program.
•

These measures are:

Program Performance Measure #1:

The percentage of

TA and dissemination products and services deemed to be of
high quality by an independent review panel of experts
qualified or individuals with appropriate expertise to
review the substantive content of the products and
services.
•

Program Performance Measure #2:

The percentage of

TA and dissemination products and services deemed by an
independent review panel of qualified experts or members of
the target audiences to be of high relevance to educational
and early intervention policy or practice.
•

Program Performance Measure #3:

The percentage of

TA and dissemination products and services deemed by an
independent review panel of qualified experts or members of

the target audiences to be useful in improving educational
or early intervention policy or practice.
•

Program Performance Measure #4:

The cost

efficiency of the Technical Assistance on State Data
Collection Program includes the percentage of milestones
achieved in the current annual performance report period
and the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal
year.
The measures apply to projects funded under this
competition, and grantees are required to submit data on
these measures as directed by OSEP.
Grantees will be required to report information on
their project’s performance in annual and final performance
reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).
The Department will also closely monitor the extent to
which the products and services provided by the Center meet
the needs identified by stakeholders and may require the
Center to report on such alignment in their annual and
final performance reports.
6.

Continuation Awards:

In making a continuation

award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among
other things, whether a grantee has made substantial
progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the
project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner
that is consistent with its approved application and
budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance

measurement requirements, whether the grantee has made
substantial progress in achieving the performance targets
in the grantee’s approved application.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also
considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance
with the assurances in its approved application, including
those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit
discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal
financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4,
104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
VII.

Other Information

Accessible Format:

On request to the program contact

person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and
a copy of the application package in an accessible format.
The Department will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF)
or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille,
large print, audiotape, compact disc, or other accessible
format.
Electronic Access to This Document:

The official version

of this document is the document published in the Federal
Register.

You may access the official edition of the

Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov.

At this site you can view this document,

as well as all other Department documents published in the

Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format
(PDF).

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader,

which is available free at the site.
You may also access Department documents published in
the Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov.

Specifically, through the

advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your
search to documents published by the Department.
Glenna Wright-Gallo,
Assistant Secretary for
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2024-15053 Filed: 7/5/2024 11:15 am; Publication Date: 7/9/2024]