Rule2022-21634
Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions-School-Based Mental Health Services Grant Program
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 4, 2022
Effective
November 3, 2022
Issuing agencies
Education Department
Abstract
The Department of Education (Department) announces final priorities, requirements, and definitions under the School-Based Mental Health Services (SBMH) Grant Program, Assistance Listing Number (ALN) 84.184H. We may use one or more of these priorities, requirements, and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2022 and later years. These final priorities, requirements, and definitions are designed to direct funds to increase the number of credentialed school-based mental health services providers (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7112(6)) in local educational agencies (LEAs) with demonstrated need (as defined in this document), in order to meet student mental health needs.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60092-60102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21634]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED-2021-OESE-0122]
Final Priorities, Requirements, and Definitions--School-Based
Mental Health Services Grant Program
AGENCY: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final priorities, requirements, and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) announces final
priorities, requirements, and definitions under the School-Based Mental
Health Services (SBMH) Grant Program, Assistance Listing Number (ALN)
84.184H. We may use one or more of these priorities, requirements, and
definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2022 and later years.
These final priorities, requirements, and definitions are designed to
direct funds to increase the number of credentialed school-based mental
health services providers (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7112(6)) in local
educational agencies (LEAs) with demonstrated need (as defined in this
document), in order to meet student mental health needs.
DATES: These priorities, requirements, and definitions are effective
November 3, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Banks, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 3E357, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453-6704. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#327d7761771c61515a5d5d5e1c7f575c46535e1c7a57535e465a7257561c555d44"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="83ccc6d0c6add0e0ebececefadcee6edf7e2efadcbe6e2eff7ebc3e6e7ade4ecf5">[email protected]</span></a>.
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:
Executive Summary
Purpose of this Regulatory Action: As defined by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), ``Mental health includes our
emotional, psychological, and social well-being. It affects how we
think, feel, and act. It
[[Page 60093]]
also helps determine how we handle stress, relate to others, and make
healthy choices. Mental health is important at every stage of life,
from childhood and adolescence through adulthood.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm">www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm</a>. Accessed on September 17, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought on
challenges for children and youth that impacted their overall
emotional, psychological, and social well-being and their ability to
fully engage in learning. The disruptions in routines, relationships,
and the learning environment have led to increased stress and trauma,
social isolation, and anxiety.
These final priorities, requirements, and definitions are intended
to support the provision of timely and necessary mental health supports
to children and youth by (1) increasing the number of credentialed
school-based mental health services providers in LEAs with demonstrated
need through recruitment and retention-related incentives for school-
based mental health services providers; (2) promoting the
respecialization and certification of existing mental health services
providers to qualify them for work in LEAs with demonstrated need; and
(3) increasing the diversity, and cultural and linguistic competency,
of school-based mental health services providers, including competency
in providing identity-safe services. Summary of the Major Provisions of
this Regulatory Action: Through this regulatory action, we establish
four priorities, program and application requirements, and definitions.
Costs and Benefits: The final priorities, requirements, and
definitions will impose minimal costs on entities that receive
assistance through the SBMH program. Application submission and
participation in this program are voluntary. The Secretary believes
that the costs imposed on applicants by the final priorities are
limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application for an
SBMH grant competition that uses one or more of the final priorities.
Because the costs of carrying out program activities will be paid for
with grant funds, the costs of implementation will not impose financial
burdens on any eligible applicants, including small entities.
We believe that the benefits of this regulatory action outweigh any
associated costs because it will result in the submission of a greater
number of high-quality discretionary grant applications likely to
result in the achievement of program objectives.
Purpose of Program: The SBMH program provides competitive grants to
State educational agencies (SEAs) (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(49)),
LEAs (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(30)), and consortia of LEAs to
increase the number of credentialed (as defined in this document)
school-based mental health services providers providing mental health
services to students in LEAs with demonstrated need.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7281.
We published a notice of proposed priorities, requirements, and
definitions (NPP) in the Federal Register on August 2, 2022 (87 FR
47152). The NPP contained background information and our reasons for
proposing the priorities, requirements, and definitions. As discussed
in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section of this document, we
made substantive changes to Priorities 1, 2 and 3. We made both
substantive and editorial changes to the application requirements and
definitions, and we made minor substantive changes to the Regulatory
Impact Analysis (RIA).
Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPP, 17
parties submitted comments addressing the proposed priorities, as well
as the requirements and definitions. We group major issues according to
subject. Generally, we do not address technical and other minor changes
or suggested changes that the law does not authorize us to make under
the applicable statutory authority.
Analysis of Comments and Changes: An analysis of the comments and
of any changes in the priorities, requirements, and definitions since
publication of the NPP follows.
General Comments
Comment: Several commenters expressed general support for the SBMH
program and priorities. One commenter also expressed support for the
Department's efforts to expand and make mental health services more
inclusive for children, while another commenter offered support for the
commitment to building and expanding a diverse and culturally competent
school-based mental-health services provider workplace.
Discussion: We appreciate the support for the program and for the
specific emphasis on creating a more diverse services provider
workforce and efforts to promote more inclusive practices within
provider preparation programs.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested revising the background section of
the NFP to include an explanation and data to describe the confluence
of gun and other community violence, structural racism in the United
States, and the COVID-19 pandemic to better substantiate specific
aspects of the program.
Discussion: We thank the commenter for this suggestion. However, we
do not include a background section in the NFP, nor is the background
section considered part of the final priorities, requirements, and
definitions. Therefore, we are not making any changes in response to
this comment.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested encouraging the strategy of using
young adult peer support specialists to expand services related to
mental health and substance use prevention, early intervention,
treatment, and recovery support services.
Discussion: We appreciate this comment and agree with the need for
substance use and misuse support services. To the extent young adult
peer support specialists meet the definition of a school-based mental
health services provider, these individuals could be available to
provide the specified services to students under the SBMH program.
Changes: None.
Priorities
Comment: Several commenters expressed general support for the
priorities. Some commenters suggested additional priorities. For
example, one commenter suggested adding a priority related to
incorporating trauma-informed care and learner-centered approaches to
provider preparation programs. This same commenter also suggested
adding a priority for projects that propose to partner with nonprofits
with expertise in these same areas.
A second commenter recommended adding a priority or requirement to
increase the capacity of school personnel, beyond school-based mental
health services providers, to attend to mental health needs.
A third commenter suggested adding a priority or requirement to
align systems of support by coordinating mental health services that
are provided in and out of school.
A fourth commenter suggested incentivizing applicants to partner
with Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), Hispanic-Serving
Institutions (HSIs), or Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs)--particularly when the LEA serves high percentages of minority,
Hispanic, or Black children and youth.
[[Page 60094]]
Discussion: We do not think it is necessary to add priorities that
prescribe specific practices, such as trauma-informed care. We note
that these practices are allowable under the program, and we believe
that applicants should propose the recruitment, retention, and
respecialization strategies that they believe will best accomplish the
goals of their projects.
We also do not believe that a stand-alone priority requiring a
partnership with a nonprofit is necessary given that community
organizations referenced in application requirement (g) include
nonprofits, making this type of partnership already permissible.
We agree with the importance of aligning systems of support by
coordinating mental health services provided in and out of school. We
believe paragraph (g) addresses collaboration of efforts within and
outside of school (e.g., collaboration with local and school-based
health centers). Nevertheless, we made a small change to (g) to
specifically reference ``school-based'' efforts whereby applicants must
describe how they collaborate and coordinate.
We also agree with the importance of partnerships with MSIs (as
defined in this notice), but do not agree that further incentives are
required to promote such partnerships. However, we revised application
requirement (g) to clarify that applicants may propose to collaborate
and coordinate with HBCUs (as defined in this notice), MSIs (which
include HSIs), and Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) (as defined
in this notice) to achieve plan goals and objectives.
Changes: We revised application requirement (g) to specifically
reference school-based efforts and to reference HBCUs, MSIs, and TCUs
as entities with which LEAs may collaborate and coordinate.
Comment: One commenter recommended revising Priority 2 to align
with the definition of ''retention.'' Specifically, the commenter
suggests using the phrase ``stay in their position'' in both the
priority and the definition to underscore that the goal is for services
providers to remain in their position within a school in order for
children and youth to have ongoing access to the same services
provider, thus increasing the likelihood of realizing the most
therapeutic benefit from the services.
Discussion: The Department thanks the commenter for this suggestion
and agrees it is important to make this change for the reasons stated
by the commenter.
Change: The Department has revised Priorities 1 and 2 to align the
language with the definition of ``retention'' and to clarify the intent
of the language.
Comment: Two commenters suggested revising how we describe
respecialization in Priority 3, specifically to require that
respecialization plans be developed in collaboration with and endorsed
by a relevant state or national professional organization and that
references to incremental training in respecialization plans be removed
in order to focus respecialization on increasing pathways to meet
existing credentialing standards, rather than revising existing
standards to be less rigorous.
Discussion: We agree with revising the description of
respecialization in Priority 3 for the reasons noted by the commenter.
And, while we encourage applicants to collaborate with relevant
organizations in developing their respecialization plans, only SEAs or
other credentialing bodies establish the credentialing requirements for
serving as a school-based mental health services provider.
Changes: We revised Priority 3 to clarify how we refer to
respecialization and the outcome to which respecialization must lead.
Comment: One commenter suggested broadening Priority 3 beyond the
goal of increasing the number of services providers to also include
increasing access to needed training.
Discussion: The purpose of this program is to increase the number
of school-based mental health services providers. General training that
does not lead to a degree or credential as a school-based mental health
services provider is not consistent with the purpose of this program.
Change: None.
Application Requirements
Comment: Three commenters recommended adding new application
requirements. One commenter suggested requiring applicants to describe
how they would incorporate school leaders in the development,
implementation, and evaluation of the project. The same commenter
recommended allowing applicants to reserve a percentage of funding for
training teachers and school leaders on general mental health supports,
while another commenter suggested requiring that providers be trained
in trauma-informed practices. The third commenter recommended requiring
grantees to continuously monitor and evaluate their outcomes and noted
the importance of planning for these activities at the outset of the
grant.
Discussion: The Department agrees with the importance of leadership
engagement with the project and will modify requirement (i) (Plan for
prompt delivery of services) to require applicants to describe how
leaders at each level of the project (including school leaders) will be
engaged in the implementation and evaluation of the project.
The Department declines to allow applicants to set aside funding
for training on general mental health supports and requiring that
providers be trained in trauma-informed approaches. Training that does
not lead to a credential as a school-based mental health services
provider is not consistent with the purpose of this grant program.
Additionally, the Department does not prescribe specific approaches
or practices within this program. Rather, applicants should propose how
they will best address the application requirements and selection
criteria in order to accomplish the goals of their projects.
Last, the Department agrees with the commenter about the importance
of planning for monitoring and evaluation activities at the beginning
of a grant. We have added application requirement (d) (Logic model),
which requires applicants to describe their theory of action using a
logic model that identifies key project components and relevant
outcomes.
Change: We modified application requirement (h) (Use of grant
funds) asking applicants to describe how leaders across all levels of
the project will be engaged. We have also added application requirement
(d) for a logic model.
Comment: One commenter recommended adding an annual reporting
requirement for grantees to help measure the extent to which
disparities in access to mental health services were reduced.
Discussion: The Department appreciates the commenter's point
related to the importance of using data to determine the impact of the
program on disparities in access to mental health services. We include
performance measures in a grant competition's notice inviting
applications. Additionally, we are developing our evidence-building
strategy; that is, our strategy to collect and analyze program data and
conduct a program evaluation to share what works with the field, which
will include considerations of equitable access to mental health
services.
Change: None.
Comment: Four commenters recommended requiring applicants to
include additional data in their description of the importance and
[[Page 60095]]
magnitude of the problem in application requirement (c). For example,
commenters suggested requiring data on incidents of traumatic events,
student substance use, school discipline, and the perspectives and
needs of school leaders. Two of the four commenters also suggested
requiring disaggregated data by student demographics, and one of these
commenters recommended requiring disaggregated data by services
provider.
Discussion: We appreciate these recommendations; however, we do not
believe such additional data are necessary to achieve program purposes.
Rather, we encourage applicants, in addressing the application
requirement and responding to the selection criteria, to include the
data they think best describes the problem they wish to address.
Change: None.
Comment: One commenter requested the Department to release desired
ratios of school-based mental health services providers to students to
help LEAs in determining whether they meet the criteria.
Discussion: The Department supports the following ratios
recommended by national professional associations such as the National
Association of School Psychologists: student-to-counselor 250:1,
student-to-psychologist 500:1, student-to-social worker
250:1.<SUP>2 3 4</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``School Counselor Roles and Ratios.'' American School
Counselor Association Home Page. <a href="https://www.schoolcounselor.org/About-School-Counseling/School-Counselor-Roles-Ratios">https://www.schoolcounselor.org/About-School-Counseling/School-Counselor-Roles-Ratios</a>. Accessed June
29, 2022.
\3\ ``Research Summary: Shortages in School Psychology.''
National Association of School Psychologists. <a href="https://www.nasponline.org/research-and-policy/policy-priorities/critical-policy-issues/shortage-of-school-psychologists">https://www.nasponline.org/research-and-policy/policy-priorities/critical-policy-issues/shortage-of-school-psychologists</a>. Accessed March 28,
2022.
\4\ ``NASW Standards for School Social Work Services.'' National
Association of Social Workers. <a href="https://www.socialworkers.org/Practice/School-Social-Work">https://www.socialworkers.org/Practice/School-Social-Work</a>. Accessed September 8, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change: None.
Comment: One commenter raised concerns about sustainability of the
mental health services provider positions after the grant ends given
that grant funds can be used to pay for salaries. In response, the
commenter suggested that only matching funds be used for salaries.
Another commenter suggested adding language to application requirement
(h) requiring applicants to address sustainability beyond the life of
the grant.
Discussion: We believe paying for salaries with grant funds is a
key strategy for achieving the goals of the program, so we decline to
limit paying for salaries out of matching funds. However, we appreciate
the commenters' concerns about sustainability of projects beyond the
life of the grants and agree that applicants should consider at the
onset of the grant how they will sustain the project after the budget
period ends.
Change: The new requirement for a logic model requires applicants
to describe how they will sustain the project beyond the life of the
grant.
Comment: Three commenters suggested revisions to application
requirement (f) (Number of providers). Two of the three commenters
suggested revising how the Department collects data on the number of
services providers in application requirement (f) to ensure that
telehealth is considered a method of service delivery and not a
substitute for in-person services. The third commenter recommended
adding a requirement to submit data on the diversity of the existing
and planned new providers and whether it aligns with student
demographics.
Discussion: The Department agrees with the comment to clarify the
language about providers offering telehealth services for the reasons
stated by the commenter.
We do not believe, given how broadly diversity can be defined, it
is necessary to collect data on the diversity of providers at the
outset of the grant. However, we encourage applicants, in addressing
application requirement (f) and responding to the selection criteria,
to include the data they think best describes their diversity goals.
Change: We revised application requirement (f), by clarifying that
data on services providers offering telehealth services should be
provided if this service delivery method was used.
Comment: Four commenters had comments on application requirement
(g) (A plan for collaboration). One of the four commenters expressed
concern about the difficulties LEAs would have collaborating and
coordinating to the degree required in the proposed application
requirement. One of the four commenters suggested requiring
collaboration with nonprofit organizations, while another commenter
suggested adding the Department's Regional Educational Laboratories and
Comprehensive Centers to the list of entities with which applicants may
coordinate. The fourth commenter stressed that collaboration with
colleges and universities looks different than collaboration with
professional organizations.
Discussion: The Department understands the challenges often
associated with coordination and collaboration with other agencies,
particularly for small or rural LEAs. To ease the burden on applicants,
we have streamlined and clarified this requirement, while maintaining
the overall purpose of coordinating efforts with Federal, State, and
local organizations to maximize mental health services. And, while we
do not think it is necessary to have a stand-alone requirement to
partner with a nonprofit organization, or to call out specific
Department-funded technical assistance centers and grantees, we
encourage applicants to coordinate with these entities, if appropriate.
Change: We revised application requirement (g) by clarifying the
requirements for an applicant's plan for collaboration and coordination
with related Federal, State, local, and school-based organizations and
efforts.
Comment: Three commenters expressed concern about the challenges of
hiring qualified services providers given current shortages and how
these challenges will affect the applicant's ability to address
application requirement (i) to provide services immediately.
Discussion: The desire is for students to receive mental health
supports as soon as reasonably possible. However, we agree that the
requirement, as framed in the NPP, may not account fully for the
potential impact of current provider shortages and have revised the
language to better state the Department's expectations.
Change: We revised the title and language of application
requirement (i) to clarify that services should start as soon as
possible, but no later than 180 days from award.
Comment: One commenter recommended requiring applicants to provide,
in application requirement (i), their plans to increase the pipeline of
individuals seeking recertification or training to become a school-
based mental health services provider.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestion. We anticipate
that Priority 3 will accomplish this desired outcome. Additionally, the
new requirement in application requirement (d) for a logic model will
require applicants to describe how they plan to sustain the project
beyond the life of the grant.
Change: Added a new application requirement for logic models in
application requirement (d).
Definitions
Comment: Overall, 10 commenters commented on the proposed
definitions. One commenter suggested explicitly referencing services
providers for substance use disorders as part of the mental health
workforce.
[[Page 60096]]
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestion. We do not
think any changes are necessary, nor does the Department have the
authority to change the definition of school-based mental health
services provider in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965, as amended. Services providers for substance use disorders that
meet this definition are allowable under this program.
Change: None.
Comment: Three commenters recommended omitting the terms and
definitions of ``certified,'' ``certification,'' and ``licensed''
because the commenters believe the terms incorrectly imply that one
credential is higher than another. Alternatively, the commenters
recommend adopting a revised definition of ``credentialed'' in lieu of
these terms.
Discussion: We thank the commenters for this comment and will make
these changes. We believe the word ``credentialed'' is an appropriate
umbrella term that captures the various terms States might use as part
of their credentialing systems. We also believe the term
``credentialed'' adequately reflects the meaning of ``qualified''
services provider and therefore, deleted references to the term
``qualified'' as well.
Change: We removed the definitions of ``licensed,'' ``certified,''
and ``certification'' and have omitted references to these terms, and
the term ``qualified,'' from the purpose of the program, and the
priorities, requirements, and definitions.
We also revised the definition of ``credentialed'' to explicitly
state the need for possessing a valid license or certificate awarded by
the State or other relevant body.
Comment: Five commenters suggested changes to the definition of
``respecialization.'' Four commenters recommended changes to ensure
that professionals engaging in school-based mental health service
delivery are properly credentialed. Two of the four commenters also
recommended requiring development of respecialization plans to include
collaboration with and endorsement by a relevant state or national
professional organization. A fifth commenter suggested defining the
term to mean, in part, that strategies are evidence-based.
Discussion: We agree with the importance of ensuring that school-
based mental health services providers are properly credentialed and
have made revisions accordingly. However, we do not believe it is
appropriate to require endorsement of respecialization plans by
professional associations, given that credentialing requirements are
established by SEAs or another credentialing body, not specific
organizations. Additionally, we decline to define ``respecialization''
to mean evidence-based strategies, given that this program is part of
an effort to build evidence in this area. The use of logic models in
this program reflects the approach to evidence that the Department
considers to be appropriate in light of the available body of evidence.
Change: We made changes to how we refer to ``respecialization'' in
the definition and the outcomes to which respecialization must lead.
Comment: One commenter recommended adding a sixth option, related
to collaboration with institutions of higher education (IHEs) to expand
candidate opportunities, to the list of strategies that applicants can
consider for respecialization.
Discussion: We do not believe it is necessary to add this sixth
option. We encourage partnerships with IHEs to help candidates obtain
the desired school-based mental health services credential.
Change: None.
Comment: One commenter recommended adding language to the
respecialization definition about diversification of services providers
who are representative of an applicant's student population.
Discussion: We agree with the importance of developing a more
diverse services provider workforce. Rather than change the definition
of respecialization, we think the language added to the definition of
``recruitment'' regarding recruitment and support of underrepresented
populations and the final priority in this notice about increasing the
number of services providers who are from diverse backgrounds addresses
the commenter's suggestion.
Change: None.
Comment: Two commenters suggested revising the definition of
``recruitment'' to include recruitment of underrepresented populations
as an incentive for mitigating shortages.
Discussion: Recruitment of providers from diverse backgrounds is a
priority for this program, and we agree that focusing recruitment in
this area is helpful. We believe providing additional supports to
underrepresented populations would also be helpful.
Change: We have revised the definition of ``recruitment'' to
include recruitment and support of underrepresented populations.
Comment: One commenter suggested defining recruitment to mean, in
part, that strategies are evidence-based. The same commenter suggested
adding evidence-based strategies to the definition of ``retention.''
Discussion: We decline the recommendation to define ``recruitment''
and ``retention'' to mean evidence-based strategies, given that there
is not yet a large body of evidence in these areas. We will consider
using available funds for evaluation of this program to build this body
of evidence.
Change: None.
Comment: Four entities commented on the definition of ``LEA with
demonstrated need.'' One commenter thanked the Department for including
instances of community violence and traumatic events in the definition.
Another commenter expressed support for the definition and urged the
Department to focus on LEAs with demonstrated need because of high
rates of community violence, poverty, and suicide. The third commenter
requested adding a variable for a significant number of students that
have witnessed or experienced a traumatic event. The final commenter
recommended a variable specific to school discipline.
Discussion: We appreciate the comments we received in support of
the definition. We do not believe it is necessary to add a variable for
witnessing or experiencing a traumatic event because we generally think
such experiences would be covered under the reference to community
violence in paragraph (2) or under the reference to adverse childhood
experiences in paragraph (3) of the definition. We agree with the
comment to include discipline data as a possible variable, given the
disproportionate impact discipline policies can have on underserved
students.
Change: We revised the definition of LEA with demonstrated need to
include repeated disciplinary exclusions as an example of an adverse
childhood experience.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Comment: One individual commented on the Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA). Specifically, the commenter questioned the clarity of the
analysis for Priority 3 and suggested that incremental training was not
an adequate representation of the needed retraining. The commenter also
asked for guidance on documenting financial hardships for SEAs and
LEAs.
Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's review and comment on
this section of the NPP. We revised the RIA to better clarify what we
meant about Priority 3.
[[Page 60097]]
Additionally, we recognize funding for education is limited in many
States. The purpose of SBMH is to provide additional resources to help
increase the number of credentialed school-based mental health services
providers and help schools recruit and retain such individuals. In
order to assist SEAs and LEAs to implement grant activities and reach
this goal, we explicitly allow the use of grant funds for
administrative costs to offset the financial hardships they may be
experiencing.
Change: We revised the summary of the potential costs and benefits
to clarify what we meant in our description of the benefit of Priority
3.
Final Priorities
Priority 1--SEAs Proposing To Increase the Number of Credentialed
School-Based Mental Health Services Providers in LEAs With Demonstrated
Need.
To meet this priority, an SEA must propose to increase the number
of credentialed school-based mental health services providers by
implementing plans that address recruitment (defined in this document)
and retention (defined in this document) of services providers in LEAs
with demonstrated need. Applicants must propose plans that include both
of the following:
(a) Recruitment. An applicant must propose a plan to increase the
number of credentialed services providers serving students in LEAs with
demonstrated need.
(b) Retention. An applicant must also propose a plan to increase
the likelihood that credentialed services providers providing services
in LEAs with demonstrated need stay in their position over time.
Priority 2--LEAs or Consortia of LEAs With Demonstrated Need
Proposing To Increase the Number of Credentialed School-Based Mental
Health Services Providers.
To meet this priority, an LEA or consortium of LEAs with
demonstrated need must propose measures to increase the number of
credentialed school-based mental health services providers, including
plans to address the recruitment and retention of credentialed services
providers in the LEA(s). Applicants must propose plans that include
both of the following:
(a) Recruitment. An applicant must propose a plan to increase the
number of credentialed services providers serving students in the
LEA(s) with demonstrated need.
(b) Retention. An applicant must also propose a plan to improve the
likelihood that credentialed services providers providing services in
the LEA(s) with demonstrated need stay in their position over time.
Priority 3--SEAs Proposing Respecialization, Professional
Retraining, or Other Preparation Plan for Existing Mental Health
Services Providers To Qualify Them for Work in LEAs With Demonstrated
Need.
To meet this priority, an applicant must propose a respecialization
(defined in this document), professional retraining, or other
preparation plan that leads to a state credential as a school
psychologist, school social worker, school counselor, or other school-
based mental health services provider (as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7112(6))
and that is designed to increase the number of services providers
qualified to serve in LEAs with demonstrated need.
Priority 4--Increasing the Number of Credentialed School-Based
Mental Health Services Providers in LEAs With Demonstrated Need Who Are
From Diverse Backgrounds or From Communities Served by the LEAs With
Demonstrated Need.
To meet this priority, applicants must propose a plan to increase
the number of credentialed school-based mental health services
providers in LEAs with demonstrated need who are from diverse
backgrounds or who are from communities served by the LEAs with
demonstrated need.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ All strategies to increase the diversity of providers must
comply with applicable Federal civil rights laws, including Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants must describe how their proposal to increase the number
of school-based mental health services providers who are from diverse
backgrounds or who are from the communities served by the LEA with
demonstrated need will help increase access to mental health services
for students within the LEA with demonstrated need and best meet the
mental health needs of the diverse populations of students to be
served.
Types of Priorities:
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)), or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Final Requirements
The following are program requirements and several application
requirements for this program. We may apply one or more of these
requirements in any year in which the program is in effect.
Eligible Applicants: One or both of SEAs, as defined in 20 U.S.C.
7801(49), or LEAs, as defined in 20 U.S.C. 7801(30), including
consortia of LEAs.
Program Requirements:
(a) Applicants that receive an award under this program must ensure
that any school-based mental health services provider hired under this
grant, including any services provider that offers telehealth services,
is qualified by the State to work in an elementary school (as defined
in 20 U.S.C. 7801(19)) or secondary school (as defined in 20 U.S.C.
7801(45)).
(b) Applicants that receive an award under this program must ensure
that any school-based mental health services provider offering services
(including telehealth services) does so in an equitable manner and
consistent with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA),
the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as all other
applicable Federal, State, and local laws and profession-specific
ethical obligations.
Application Requirements:
(a) Describe the LEAs with demonstrated need designated by the SEA
to be served by the proposed project.
SEA applicants must describe the LEAs with demonstrated need
designated to benefit from the SBMH program.
(b) Describe how the LEA, or each LEA in the proposed consortium
(if applicable), meets the definition of an LEA with demonstrated need.
To meet this requirement, an LEA applicant or the lead LEA
submitting an application on behalf of a consortium must describe how
the LEA or each LEA
[[Page 60098]]
in the consortium meets the definition of an ``LEA with demonstrated
need.''
(c) Describe the importance and magnitude of the problem.
Applicants must describe the lack of school-based mental health
services providers and its effect on students in the LEA(s) to be
served by the grant. This must include a description of the nature of
the problem for the LEA(s), based on information including, but not
limited to, the most recent available ratios of school-based mental
health services providers to students enrolled in the LEA(s), or for
SEA applicants, the LEAs designated by the SEA to benefit from the SBMH
program. These data must be provided in the aggregate and disaggregated
by profession (e.g., school social workers, school psychologists,
school counselors) as compared to local, State, or national data. The
description may also include LEA-level or school-level demographic data
(including rates of poverty; rates of chronic absenteeism; the
percentage of students involved in the juvenile justice system,
experiencing homelessness, or in foster care; and discipline data),
school climate surveys, school violence/crime data, data related to
suicide rates, and descriptions of barriers to hiring and retaining
credentialed school-based mental health services providers in the LEA.
(d) Logic model.
The applicant must describe its approach to increase the number of
credentialed school-based mental health services providers using a
logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1), including the key project
components and relevant outcomes (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1). The
description should indicate how the proposed approach taken under this
program will improve or expand on any previous approaches, how the new
approach will address barriers, and how the applicant will sustain the
increased number of school-based mental health services providers after
the performance period has ended.
(e) Detailed project budget, including matching funds.
To promote the sustainability of the school-based mental health
services, all applicants must include non-Federal matching funds in one
of the following amounts, as determined by the Secretary in the notice
inviting applications:
(1) At least 10 percent of their budgets.
(2) At least 15 percent of their budgets.
(3) At least 20 percent of their budgets.
(4) At least 25 percent of their budgets.
Budgets must describe how the applicant will meet the matching
requirement for each budget period awarded under this grant and must
indicate the source of the funds, such as State, local, or private
resources. The Secretary may consider decreasing or waiving the
matching requirement post award, on a case-by-case basis, if an
applicant demonstrates a significant financial hardship.
Budgets must also specify the portion of funds that will be used
for respecialization, if applicable.
Administrative costs for SEA applicants may not exceed 10 percent
of the annual grant award. This includes funding for State-level or
LEA-level administrative costs that promote respecialization, if
applicable. Administrative costs for applicants that are LEAs and
consortia of LEAs may not exceed 5 percent of the annual grant award.
(f) Number of providers.
Applicants must include the most recent available data on the
number of school-based mental health services providers in the
identified LEA(s), disaggregated by profession (e.g., school social
workers, school psychologists, school counselors), and the projected
number of school-based mental health services providers that will be
placed into employment in the identified LEA(s) for each year of the
plan using funds from this grant or matching funds. If applicable,
applicants should provide data on the current and projected
unduplicated numbers of school-based mental health services providers
disaggregated by profession (e.g., school social workers, school
psychologists, school counselors), offering telehealth services.
(g) A plan for collaboration and coordination with related Federal,
State, and local organizations, and school-based efforts.
Applicants must propose a plan describing how they will collaborate
and coordinate with related Federal, State, and local organizations,
and school-based efforts (e.g., professional associations; colleges or
universities, including HBCUs, MSIs, and TCUs; local mental health;
public health; child welfare; or other community agencies, including
school-based health centers), to achieve plan goals and objectives of
increasing the number of school-based mental health services providers
in LEAs with demonstrated need. The plan must include a description of
how such collaboration and coordination will promote program success
across multiple programs.
(h) Use of grant funds to supplement, and not supplant, existing
school-based mental health services funds and to expand, not duplicate,
efforts to increase the number of providers.
Applicants must describe how project funds will supplement, and not
supplant, non-Federal funds that would otherwise be available for
activities funded under this program.
Applicants must describe how they will use the SBMH program funds
to expand, rather than duplicate, existing or new efforts to increase
the number of credentialed school-based mental health services
providers in LEAs with demonstrated need and how they will integrate
existing funding streams and efforts to support the plan.
(i) Plan for prompt delivery of services to students.
For SEA applicants, applicants must describe their plan to ensure
the prompt delivery of services to students (i.e., as soon as possible,
but no later than 180 days from award), including via subgrants to
LEAs, as appropriate. For LEA applicants and consortia of LEAs,
applicants must describe their plan to ensure the prompt delivery of
services to students (i.e., as soon as possible, but no later than 180
days from award). Additionally, SEA and LEA applicants must describe
how leaders across all levels of the project will be engaged in the
implementation and evaluation of the project.
Final Definitions
The Department establishes the following definitions of
``credentialed,'' ``LEA with demonstrated need,'' ``recruitment,''
``respecialization,'' ``retention,'' and ``telehealth'' for use in this
program. We may apply these definitions in any year in which this
program is in effect.
Credentialed means an individual who possesses a valid license or
certificate from the SEA or relevant regulatory body as a school
psychologist, school counselor, or a school social worker, or other
mental health services provider, approved by the State to provide
school-based mental health services.
LEA with demonstrated need means an LEA that has a significant need
for additional school-based mental health services providers based on--
(1) High student to mental health services provider ratios as
compared to other LEAs statewide or nationally;
(2) High rates of community violence (including hate crimes),
poverty, substance use (including opioid use), suicide, or trafficking;
or
(3) A significant number of students who are migratory,
experiencing homelessness, have a family member deployed in the
military or with a military-service connected disability
[[Page 60099]]
(including veterans), have experienced a natural or manmade disaster or
a traumatic event, or have other adverse childhood experiences, such as
repeated disciplinary exclusions from the learning environment.
Recruitment means strategies that help attract and hire
credentialed school-based mental health services providers, including
by doing at least one of the following:
(1) Providing an annual salary or stipend for school-based mental
health services providers who maintain an active national
certification.
(2) Providing payment toward the school loans accrued by the
school-based mental health services provider.
(3) Creating pathways to grant cross-State credentialing
reciprocity for school-based mental health services providers.
(4) Providing incentives and supports to help mitigate shortages.
These may include, for example, increasing pay; offering monetary
incentives for relocation to high-need areas; providing services via
telehealth; creating hybrid roles that allow for leadership, academic,
or research opportunities; developing induction programs; developing
paid internship programs; focusing on recruitment and support of
underrepresented populations; and offering service scholarship
programs, such as those that provide grants in exchange for a
commitment to serve in the LEA for a minimum number of years.
Respecialization means strategies that provide opportunities for
professional retraining and alternative pathways to obtain a State
credential, aligned with the standards of the relevant professional
organization, as a school-based mental health services provider for
individuals who hold, at a minimum, a degree in a related field (e.g.,
special education, clinical psychology, community counseling),
including by doing one or more of the following:
(1) Revising, updating, or streamlining requirements for such
individuals so that additional training or other requirements focus
only on training needed to obtain a credential as a school-based mental
health services provider.
(2) Providing a stipend or making a payment to support the training
needed to obtain a credential as a school-based mental health services
provider.
(3) Offering flexible options for completing training that leads
such professionals to meet State credentialing requirements as a
school-based mental health services provider.
(4) Establishing a provisional, time limited, and nonrenewable
credential to allow individuals seeking respecialization to provide
school-based mental health services under the direct supervision of a
fully credentialed school-based mental health services provider of the
same profession.
(5) Offering other meaningful activities that result in existing
mental health services providers obtaining a State credential as a
school-based mental health services provider.
Retention means strategies to help ensure that credentialed
individuals stay in their position to avoid gaps in service and
unfilled positions, including by--
(1) Providing opportunities for advancement or leadership, such as
career pathways programs, recognition and award programs, and
mentorship programs; and
(2) Offering incentives and supports to help mitigate shortages.
These may include, for example, increasing pay; making payments toward
student loans; offering monetary incentives for relocation to high-need
areas; providing services via telehealth; offering service scholarship
programs, such as those that provide grants in exchange for a
commitment to serve in the LEA for a minimum number of years; and
developing paid internship programs.
Telehealth means the use of electronic information and
telecommunication technologies to support and promote long-distance
clinical health care, patient and professional health-related
education, public health, and health administration. Technologies
include videoconferencing, the internet, store-and-forward imaging,
streaming media, and landline and wireless communications.
This document does not preclude us from proposing additional
priorities, requirements, definitions, or selection criteria, subject
to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.
Note: This notice does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use these priorities, requirements, and
definitions, we invite applications through a notice in the Federal
Register.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must be determined whether this
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to the
requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to
result in a rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
This final regulatory action will have an annual effect on the
economy of more than $100 million because approximately $143 million is
available under this program from FY 2022 appropriations actions and
$100 million is available each year from FY 2023 to FY 2026. Therefore,
this final action is ``economically significant'' and subject to review
by OMB under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866. Notwithstanding
this determination, we have assessed the potential costs and benefits,
both quantitative and qualitative, of this final regulatory action and
have determined that the benefits justify the costs.
We have also reviewed this final regulatory action under Executive
Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only on a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the
[[Page 60100]]
behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing these final priorities, requirements, and
definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would
justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on an analysis of anticipated costs and benefits, we
believe that the priorities, requirements, and definitions are
consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this final regulatory action does not
unduly interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the
exercise of their governmental functions.
In this regulatory impact analysis, we discuss the need for
regulatory action, the potential costs and benefits, net budget
impacts, assumptions, limitations, and data sources, as well as
regulatory alternatives we considered.
Summary of Potential Costs and Benefits
The final priorities, requirements, and definitions are necessary
for the implementation of the SBMH program consistent with the
requirements established by Congress in the Department of Education
Appropriations Act, 2022, and the Explanatory Statement accompanying
that Act. The Department believes that implementation of the SBMH
program will most exclusively confer benefits on the recipients of
Federal funds, while the costs associated with the priorities,
requirements and definitions will be minimal. This regulatory action
does not impose significant costs on eligible entities as participation
in this program is voluntary, and the costs imposed on applicants are
limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application.
This program was established under a statute with broad authority
and only nonbinding report language establishing program purpose,
eligibility, or requirements; consequently, this rulemaking action is
necessary to ensure program funds are used for their intended purpose.
More specifically, the final priorities, requirements, and definitions
are likely to (1) ensure that the Department collects from applicants
for SBMH funding the information necessary for competitive review of
applications by peer reviewers, and (2) fund high-quality applications
that will lead to the implementation of projects consistent with
congressional intent. Absent this rulemaking action, there is no
alternative means of meeting these objectives.
The specific benefits of establishing a menu of priorities include
ensuring that funds are used consistent with congressional intent and
providing flexibility to the Department for supporting multiple
strategies designed to address the shortage of school-based mental
health services providers. The first strategy, embedded in priorities 1
and 2, is to focus grant activities on hiring additional school-based
mental health services providers in LEAs with demonstrated need to
increase the number of school-based mental health services providers in
schools and LEAs that have the most need for such services. The
definition of ``LEA with demonstrated need,'' incorporated into these
priorities, also was crafted to provide flexibility for an LEA to show
need through data (ratios of school counselors to students), a
description of events or conditions affecting school environment (such
as community violence or disasters), or evidence that an applicant will
serve students who have or are likely to face adverse childhood
experiences. Although the total number of LEAs is high (over 13,000 in
school year 2018-19), the available funding will only support a limited
number of multiyear projects. Absent the targeting of SBMH funds to
LEAs with demonstrated need, the program may allocate scarce Federal
resources to high-capacity LEAs that already meet the mental health
needs of their students. Moreover, ensuring that funds are targeted to
LEAs with demonstrated need was a requirement of the FY 2020 SBMH
competition, and Congress directed the Department, through the
Explanatory Statement accompanying the Department of Education
Appropriations Act, 2022, to incorporate the same requirement into the
FY 2022 SBMH competition.
The benefit of including priority 3 is that it supports another
strategy for addressing the shortage of school-based mental health
services providers. Requirements for school-based mental health
services providers are established by States and generally include the
completion of a bachelor's degree or higher, completion of a practicum,
and an internship in a K-12 school, which typically take several years
to fulfill. Priority 3 is likely to support States working to establish
innovative strategies to expand the pipeline for credentialed mental
health providers by establishing pathways for individuals in related
fields to attain the credentials to work as school-based mental health
services providers. Under this priority, for example, a State might
determine that individuals in related fields, such as counseling or
social work, would only need professional retraining to qualify as a
school-based mental health services provider, rather than a full degree
or credentialing program. This strategy has the benefit of reducing the
time necessary for credentialing and potentially increasing the number
of credentialed mental health providers available for hiring by LEAs,
which is the core goal and purpose of the SBMH program. Absent the
expanded use of strategies to shorten the time needed to meet the
requirements to become a school-based mental health services provider,
SBMH grantees may not be able to increase the number of such providers
in schools due to the documented shortage of such providers.
The benefit of priority 4 is that it supports another strategy for
expanding the workforce of school-based mental health services
providers. Currently, the psychology \6\ and school counselor \7\
workforce is significantly less diverse than the student population.\8\
Increasing the number of credentialed school-based mental health
services providers from diverse backgrounds and from communities served
by LEAs with demonstrated need, and who can provide culturally and
linguistically appropriate services, not only would expand the numbers
of these providers but also increase access to and improve the quality
of mental health services available to students. Further, this priority
supports the Administration's equity agenda \[14]\ and the Department's
mission to support equity and excellence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ <a href="https://www.apa.org/workforce/data-tools/demographics">https://www.apa.org/workforce/data-tools/demographics</a>.
\7\ <a href="https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/9c1d81ab-2484-4615-9dd7-d788a241beaf/member-demographics.pdf">https://www.schoolcounselor.org/getmedia/9c1d81ab-2484-4615-9dd7-d788a241beaf/member-demographics.pdf</a>.
\8\ <a href="https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cge/racial-ethnic-enrollment">https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cge/racial-ethnic-enrollment</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) section of this document
discusses the
[[Page 60101]]
burden estimates for preparing an application. The potential benefits
of receiving Federal funds under this program to expand the pool of and
hire school-based mental health services providers will likely outweigh
the application costs detailed in the PRA section. The costs of
implementing the requirements established in this notice can be paid
for with grant funds.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
The Department believes that the final priorities, requirements,
and definitions in this document are needed to administer the program
effectively. The authorizing statute does not provide sufficient detail
to develop and administer a competitive grant program consistent with
the intent of Congress as expressed in the Explanatory Statement
accompanying the Department of Education Appropriations Act 2022, which
provided funding for the program in FY 2022, or the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, which provided additional funding for FYs 2022 through
2026. Consequently, absent the final priorities, requirements, and
definitions, the Department will not have a sufficient basis for
evaluating the quality of applications or ensuring that the program
achieves its intended objectives.
Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A-4 (available at <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-for-agencies/circulars/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-for-agencies/circulars/</a>), in the
following table we have prepared an accounting statement showing the
classification of the expenditures associated with the provisions of
this regulatory action. This table provides our best estimate of the
changes in annual monetized transfers as a result of this regulatory
action.
Expenditures are classified as transfers from the Federal
Government to SEAs and LEAs.
Accounting Statement Classification of Estimated Expenditures
[In millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers
Category -------------------------------
3% 7%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized monetized transfers.......... $108.6 $108.6
-------------------------------
From whom to whom?...................... From the Federal government to
SEAs and LEAs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this final regulatory action would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The U.S. Small Business Administration Size Standards define
proprietary institutions as small businesses if they are independently
owned and operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and
have total annual revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit institutions are
defined as small entities if they are independently owned and operated
and not dominant in their field of operation. Public institutions are
defined as small organizations if they are operated by a government
overseeing a population below 50,000.
The small entities that this final regulatory action would affect
are LEAs. Of the impacts we estimate accruing to grantees or eligible
entities, all are voluntary. Eligible applicants most likely would
apply only if they determine that the likely benefits exceed the costs
of preparing an application. The likely benefits include the potential
receipt of a grant as well as other benefits that may accrue to an
entity through its development of an application, such as the use of
that application to seek funding from other sources to address a
shortage in mental health providers. Therefore, we do not believe that
the final priorities, requirements, and definitions would significantly
impact small entities beyond the potential for increasing the
likelihood of their applying for, and receiving, competitive grants
from the Department.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 does not require you to respond
to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control
number. We display the valid OMB control number assigned to the
collection of information in this notice of final priorities,
regulations, and definitions at the end of the affected sections of the
requirements.
The final priorities, requirements, and definitions contain
information collection requirements that are approved by OMB. The final
priorities, requirements, and definitions do not affect the currently
approved data collection. An FY 2022 competition would require
applicants to complete and submit an application for Federal assistance
using Department standard application forms. We estimate that for the
FY 2022 SBMH competition and later competitions, each applicant will
spend approximately 40 hours of staff time to address these priorities,
requirements, and definitions. We estimate that we will receive
approximately 300 applications for these funds. The total number of
burden hours for all applicants to review instructions, search existing
data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and
review the collection of information is estimated to be 12,000 hours.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive Order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with disabilities
can obtain this document 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 <a href="http://www.govinfo.gov">www.govinfo.gov</a>. At this site, you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of the Department published in
the Federal Register, in text or
[[Page 60102]]
Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat
Reader, which is available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
<a href="http://www.federalregister.gov">www.federalregister.gov</a>. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
James F. Lane,
Senior Advisor, Office of the Secretary Delegated the Authority to
Perform the Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary for the
Office Elementary and Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2022-21634 Filed 10-3-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 4, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.