Notice2025-11610
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance on State Data Collection-IDEA Data Management Center
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
June 25, 2025
Issuing agencies
Education Department
Abstract
The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2025 for a Technical Assistance on State Data Collection--IDEA Data Management Center.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 120 (Wednesday, June 25, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 25, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27004-27011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-11610]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Awards; Technical Assistance on State Data
Collection--IDEA Data Management Center
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice
inviting applications for new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2025 for a
Technical Assistance on State Data Collection--IDEA Data Management
Center.
DATES:
Applications Available: June 25, 2025.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 25, 2025.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: August 25, 2025.
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 23, 2024 (89 FR 104528) and available at
<a href="http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/23/2024-30488/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs">www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/23/2024-30488/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Bae, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 4A224, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone:
(202) 987-1557. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#30715d491e7251557055541e575f46"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b4f5d9cd9af6d5d1f4d1d09ad3dbc2">[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:
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 provides the
Secretary with the authority to reserve not more than one-half of one
percent of the amounts appropriated under Part B for each fiscal year
to provide technical assistance (TA) activities authorized under
section 616(i), 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 fiscal year 2025 is $42,657,297, cumulatively adjusted by the rate
of inflation. For fiscal year 2025 the Secretary plans to reserve
$27,500,000. 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 sections 616
and 642 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 Further
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, Public Law 118-47, Division D,
Title III, 138 Stat. 460, 685 gives the Secretary authority to 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.''
Assistance Listing Number (ALN): 84.373M.
OMB Control Number: 1820-0028.
Priority: This competition includes one priority. This priority is
from the notice of final priority (NFP) for this program published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Absolute Priority: For FY 2025 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:
IDEA Data Management Center.
Background:
The Department prioritizes supporting States in meeting the
requirements of IDEA to collect, report, analyze, and use high-quality
IDEA data (including data reported under IDEA sections 616, 618, and
642), and assisting them in meeting their needs to enhance, streamline,
and integrate IDEA data into other data systems such as their State
longitudinal data systems (SLDS) and early childhood integrated data
systems (ECIDS). States have identified several benefits to having more
integrated data systems including, more standardized and streamlined
data collection and reporting across programs serving children; better
tracking of child level outcomes in areas such as math, literacy, and
science; better tracking of system level outcomes such as developmental
screening and referral; and more support for program improvement. Data
integration across systems allows States to provide administrators,
parents, and policymakers more accurate and comprehensive data to
evaluate and improve special education and early intervention programs
and services.
While States have recognized the benefits of data integration,
despite some progress over the past decade, many States indicate that
they still struggle to link IDEA data into K-12 and early childhood
data systems often because they do not have the expertise, resources,
or staffing to develop integrated data systems. States have requested
TA to support stronger linkages between SLDS and ECIDS as a way to
better respond to IDEA reporting requirements and improve coordination
and access to actionable data that they can use to better evaluate
program effectiveness, guide policy decisions, refine instructional and
intervention strategies, and provide parents with the information they
need to support their children's educational and developmental
progress.
Priority:
The purpose of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to
establish and operate an IDEA Data Management Center (Data Management
Center). The Data Management Center will respond to State needs as
States determine whether and how to coordinate and integrate their IDEA
Part B and Part C data required to meet the data collection
requirements in sections 616 and 618 of IDEA into their longitudinal
data systems (including SLDS and ECIDS) while ensuring applicable IDEA
and Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) privacy
protections are met. This integration will improve the capacity of
States to collect, report, analyze, and use high-quality IDEA Part
[[Page 27005]]
B and Part C data to establish and meet high expectations for each
child with a disability. The Data Management Center will help States
address challenges with data management procedures and data systems
architecture and better meet current and future IDEA Part B and Part C
data collection and reporting requirements. The Data Management
Center's work will comply with the privacy and confidentiality
protections under IDEA and FERPA. The Data Management Center will not
provide the Department with access to child-level data and will further
ensure that such data is de-identified, as defined in 34 CFR
99.31(b)(1).
The Data Management Center must be designed to achieve, at a
minimum, the following expected outcomes:
(a) Increased capacity of States to use interagency agreements or
other mechanisms to coordinate and integrate IDEA Part B and IDEA Part
C data required under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA within their SLDS
while meeting the applicable privacy requirements under Parts B and C
of the IDEA and FERPA (which may include developing or disseminating TA
resources on privacy, interagency agreements on data sharing and/or
data coordination, and integration);
(b) Increased use of IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C data within States
by developing products to allow States to report their special
education, preschool special education, and early intervention data to
various partners (e.g., other State agencies, policymakers, school and
early care and education program personnel, local and State school
boards, local educational agency (LEA) administrators, early care and
education childhood administrators, researchers, charter school
authorizers, parents and advocates, Indian Tribes, and Tribal
organizations) through their longitudinal data systems;
(c) Increased number of States that use data governance and data
management procedures to increase their capacity to meet the IDEA Part
B and IDEA Part C reporting requirements under sections 616 and 618 of
IDEA;
(d) Increased capacity of States to utilize their SLDS and ECIDS to
collect, report, analyze, and use high-quality IDEA Part B and IDEA
Part C data (including data required under sections 616, 618, and 642
of IDEA);
(e) Increased capacity of States to use their SLDS and ECIDS to
analyze high-quality data on the participation and outcomes of children
with disabilities who receive services under IDEA and under Title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA),
to improve IDEA and ESEA programs and the outcomes of children with
disabilities; and
(f) Increased capacity of States to coordinate and use available
IDEA Part C early intervention data with IDEA Part B preschool special
education data (and to integrate or link such data with ECIDS, if
applicable) to analyze high-quality data on the participation and
outcomes of infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities served
under IDEA who may also participate in other programs and services
(e.g., child care, Early Head Start, Head Start, publicly funded
preschool, and home visiting programs).
In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered
for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application
and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:
(a) Describe, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Address State challenges associated with State data management
procedures, data systems architecture, and building EDFacts data files
and reports for timely reporting of the IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C
data to the Department and the public. To meet this requirement the
applicant must--
(i) Present applicable national, State, or local data demonstrating
the difficulties that States have encountered in the collection and
submission of valid and reliable IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C data;
(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational and technical
issues and policy initiatives relating to IDEA Part B data and IDEA
Part C collections and EDFacts file specifications for the IDEA Part B
and IDEA Part C data collections; and
(iii) Present information about the current level of implementation
of integrating IDEA Part B data within SLDS and IDEA Part C and IDEA
Part B preschool special education data within ECIDs, and the reporting
of high-quality IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C data to the Department and
the public.
(b) Describe, in the narrative section of the application under
``Quality of the project design,'' how the proposed project will--
(1) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet
this requirement, the applicant must provide--
(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and
(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1) by
which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that
depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended
outcomes of the proposed project;
(2) 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 website provides more information on logic
models and conceptual frameworks: <a href="https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/Products/Region/central/Resource/100644">https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/rel/Products/Region/central/Resource/100644</a>.
(3) Be based on current research and make use of evidence-based \1\
practices (EBPs). To meet this requirement, the applicant must
describe--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the purposes of these requirements, ``evidence-based''
means the proposed project component is supported by one or more of
strong evidence, moderate evidence, promising evidence, or evidence
that demonstrates a rationale (as such terms are defined in 34 CFR
77.1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) The current research on data collection strategies, data
management procedures, and data systems architecture; and
(ii) How the proposed project will incorporate current research and
EBPs in the development and delivery of its products and services;
(4) 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 or develop the knowledge base on
States' data management processes and data systems architecture;
(ii) A plan to provide a range of products and services to--
(A) Improve States' capacity to report high-quality IDEA Part B and
Part C data required under sections 616, 618, and 642 of IDEA through
their SLDS and other applicable data systems; and
(B) Improve States' capacity to link and integrate (where
determined appropriate by States) their IDEA Part C early intervention
and IDEA Part B preschool special education data with data/data systems
associated with other Federal programs and services that support
infants, toddlers, and young children and their families in order to
report high-quality IDEA Part C data and IDEA Part B preschool special
education data required under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA. The plan
must include, at a minimum, how the project will--
(1) In Years 1 through 5--
(i) Support, in partnership with the Department, the implementation
of an
[[Page 27006]]
existing open-source electronic tool to assist States in building
EDFacts data files and reports that can be submitted to the Department
and made available to the public. The tool must utilize Common
Education Data Standards (CEDS) and meet all States' needs associated
with reporting the IDEA Part B and Part C data required under sections
616, 618, and 642 of IDEA;
(ii) Provide maintenance to support the appropriate functionality
of the open-source electronic tool as changes are made to data
collections, reporting requirements, file specifications, and CEDS
(such as links within the system to include TA products developed by
other Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and Department-funded
centers or contractors);
(iii) Provide TA focused on data governance to facilitate the use
of the open-source electronic tool and training to State staff to
implement the open-source electronic tool;
(iv) Revise the CEDS ``Connections'' to calculate metrics needed to
report the IDEA Part B and Part C data required under sections 616 and
618 of IDEA;
(v) Develop other outputs (e.g., reports, Application Programming
Interface, new innovations) of an open-source electronic tool that can
support reporting by States of IDEA Part B data to different partner
groups (e.g., LEAs, charter schools, legislative branch, parents);
(vi) Implement strategies to support the inclusion of other OSEP
and Department-funded TA centers' products within the open-source
electronic tool or build connections that allow the SEAs to pull IDEA
Part B data efficiently into the other TA products;
(vii) Support a user group of States that are using an open-source
electronic tool for reporting IDEA Part B data required under sections
616 and 618 of IDEA; and
(viii) Develop products and presentations that include tools and
solutions to challenges in data management procedures and data system
architecture for reporting the IDEA Part B and Part C data required
under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA;
(2) In Years 2 through 5--
(i) Develop, in partnership with the Department, an open-source
electronic tool to assist States with linking and integrating their
IDEA Part C early intervention and IDEA Part B preschool special
education data with other data/data systems associated with other
Federal programs and services that support infants, toddlers, and young
children and their families, in order to provide high-quality reporting
of the IDEA Part C data and IDEA Part B preschool special education
data required under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA; drive program
improvement; improve results for children with disabilities; and
improve compliance accountability. The tool must utilize CEDS and meet
States' needs associated with linking or integrating their Part C early
intervention and Part B preschool special education data with other
data/data systems associated with other Federal programs that support
infants, toddlers, and young children and their families;
(ii) Develop the CEDS ``Connections'' to ensure the electronic tool
is built for States to conduct analyses related to reporting the IDEA
Part C data and IDEA Part B preschool special education data required
under sections 616 and 618 of IDEA, driving program improvement,
improving results for children with disabilities and their families,
and improving compliance accountability;
(iii) Provide maintenance to support the appropriate functionality
of the open-source electronic tool as changes are made to data
reporting requirements and CEDS;
(iv) Provide TA on data governance to facilitate the use of the
open-source electronic tool and training to State staff to implement
the open-source electronic tool; and
(v) Support a user group of States that are using an open-source
electronic tool for reporting the IDEA Part C data and IDEA Part B
preschool special education data required under sections 616, 618, and
642 of IDEA;
(iii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,\2\ which must
identify the intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those products and services under
this approach;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iv) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,\3\ which
must identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients, that will receive the products and services, a description
of the products and services that the Center proposes to make
available, and the expected impact of those 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
(C) The process by which the proposed project will collaborate with
Department-funded centers (including TA centers such as the DaSy Center
that provides Department-funded TA on early childhood data privacy, and
the Privacy Technical Assistance Center) and other federally funded TA
centers to develop and implement a coordinated TA plan when they are
involved in a State;
(v) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,\4\ which must
identify--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of
recipients from a variety of settings and geographic distribution, that
will receive the products and services under this approach;
(B) Its proposed approach to address States' challenges associated
with integrating IDEA Part B data within SLDS and IDEA Part C and IDEA
Part B preschool special education data within ECIDS and to report
high-quality IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C data to the Department and the
public, which should, at a minimum, include providing on-site
consultants to SEAs and Part C lead agencies to--
(1) Model and document data management and data system integration
policies, procedures, processes, and activities within the State;
(2) Support the State's use of an open-source electronic tool and
provide technical solutions to meet State-specific data needs;
[[Page 27007]]
(3) Develop a sustainability plan for the State to maintain the
data management and data system integration work in the future; and
(4) Support the State's cybersecurity plan in collaboration, to the
extent appropriate, with the Department's Student Privacy Policy Office
and its Privacy Technical Assistance Center;
(5) 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, such
as non-Federal funds and in-kind contributions, to achieve the intended
project outcomes; and
(6) Develop a dissemination plan that describes how the applicant
will systematically distribute information, products, and services to
varied intended audiences, using a variety of dissemination strategies,
to promote awareness and use of the Center's products and services.
(c) In the narrative section of the application under ``Quality of
the project evaluation or other evidence-building,'' describe how the
project will develop an evaluation plan in consultation with, and to be
implemented by, a third-party evaluator.\5\ The evaluation plan must--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 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, nor have any
financial interest in the outcome of the evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Articulate formative and summative evaluation questions,
including important process and outcome evaluation questions. These
questions must be related to the project's proposed logic model
required under paragraph (b)(2)(ii);
(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 timeline must indicate
that the data will be available annually for the Annual Performance
Report (APR) and at the end of Year 2; 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,'' how--
(1) The project will make positive efforts to employ and advance in
employment qualified individuals with disabilities;
(2) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to
carry out the proposed activities; and
(3) 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) Describe, 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 and how these allocations are appropriate and
adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;
(3) 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; and
(4) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and
services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to
recipients.
(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant
must--
(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 three-day project directors' conference in Washington, DC,
during each year of the project periods, provided that, if the meeting
is conducted virtually, the project must reallocate unused travel funds
no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;
(iii) Three annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings,
Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by
OSEP; and
(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of
five 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 a new award
at the end of this award period, as appropriate; and
(6) Budget at least 50 percent of the grant award, in years three
through five, for providing targeted and intensive TA to States.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1411(c), 1416(i), 1418(c), 1418(d),
1442, 1482; 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.
[[Page 27008]]
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 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) 34 CFR
300.702. (e) The NFP.
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: $2,700,000.
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of
applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2026 from the list of
unfunded applications from this competition.
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $2,700,000 for a
single budget period of 12 months.
Estimated Number of Awards: 1.
Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.
Project Period: Up to 60 months.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; State lead agencies under Part C of
the 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: This program uses an
unrestricted indirect cost rate. For more information regarding
indirect costs, or to obtain a negotiated indirect cost rate, please
see <a href="http://www.ed.gov/about/ed-offices/ofo#Indirect-Cost-Division">www.ed.gov/about/ed-offices/ofo#Indirect-Cost-Division</a>.
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 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 other 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. Other General Requirements:
(a) 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 23, 2024 (89 FR 104528), and available at
<a href="http://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/23/2024-30488/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs">www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/23/2024-30488/common-instructions-for-applicants-to-department-of-education-discretionary-grant-programs</a>, 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. Please note that, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we have shortened
the standard 60-day intergovernmental review period in order to make
awards by the end of FY 2025.
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:
<bullet> A ``page'' is 8.5'' x 11'', on one side only, with 1''
margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> Use a font that is 12 point or larger.
<bullet> 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).
The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.
In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the specific nature and magnitude of gaps
or challenges are identified and the extent to which these gaps or
challenges will be addressed by the services, supports, infrastructure,
or opportunities described in the proposed project.
(2) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely
to be attained by the proposed project, especially contributions toward
improving teaching practice and student learning and achievement.
(b) Quality of the project design (35 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the proposed
project. In determining the quality of the design of the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be
achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified, measurable, and
ambitious yet achievable within the project period,
[[Page 27009]]
and aligned with the purposes of the grant program.
(2) The quality of the logic model or other conceptual framework
underlying the proposed project, including how inputs are related to
outcomes.
(3) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed
project reflect up-to-date knowledge and an evidence-based project
component.
(4) 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 build recipient and project
capacity in ways that lead to improvements in practice among the
recipients of those services.
(5) The extent to which the 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.
(c) Quality of the project evaluation or other evidence-building
(20 points).
The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation or other
evidence-building of the proposed project. In determining the quality
of the evaluation or other evidence-building, the Secretary considers
the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other
evidence-building are thorough, feasible, relevant, and appropriate to
the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other
evidence-building are designed to measure the fidelity of
implementation of the project.
(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other
evidence-building will provide performance feedback and provide
formative, diagnostic, or interim data that is a periodic assessment of
progress toward achieving intended outcomes.
(4) The extent to which the methods of evaluation or other
evidence-building include the use of objective performance measures
that are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and
will produce quality data that are quantitative and qualitative.
(d) Adequacy of resources (15 points).
The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed
project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience,
of project consultants or subcontractors.
(2) The extent to which the evaluator has the qualifications,
including the relevant training, experience, and independence, required
to conduct an evaluation of the proposed project, including experience
conducting evaluations of similar methodology as proposed and with
evaluations for the proposed population and setting.
(3) The adequacy of support for the project, including facilities,
equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant or the
lead applicant organization.
(4) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in
the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project.
(5) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the
proposed project and 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).
The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the
proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for
the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The feasibility of the management plan to achieve project
objectives and goals on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing
project tasks.
(2) 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.
(3) The extent to which the project director or principal
investigator, when hired, has the qualifications required for the
project, including formal training or work experience in fields related
to the objectives of the project and experience in designing, managing,
or implementing similar projects for the target population to be served
by the project.
(4) The extent to which the key personnel in the project, when
hired, have the qualifications required for the proposed project,
including formal training or work experience in fields related to the
objectives of the project, and represent or have lived experiences of
the target population.
(5) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality and
accessible products and services from the proposed project for the
target population.
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).
In the event there are two or more applications with the same final
score, and there are insufficient funds to fully support each of these
applications, the scores under selection criterion (b) Quality of the
project design will be used as a tiebreaker. If the scores remain tied,
then the scores under selection criterion (d) Adequacy of resources
will be used to break the tie.
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;
[[Page 27010]]
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), 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 System
for Award Management's (SAM) Responsibility/Qualification reports
(formerly referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity
Information System (FAPIIS)). You may review and comment on any
information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and
that is currently in the Responsibility/Qualification reports in SAM.
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
SAM semiannually. Please review these requirements if this grant plus
all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
6. In General: In accordance with the 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 <a href="http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html">www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html</a>.
5. Performance Measures: For the purposes 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:
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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.
<bullet> 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 project meet needs identified by
stakeholders and may require the project to report on such alignment in
its 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
[[Page 27011]]
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; 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; and whether the
continuation of the project is in the best interest of the Federal
Government.
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 <a href="http://www.govinfo.gov">www.govinfo.gov</a>. 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
<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.
Diana Diaz,
Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2025-11610 Filed 6-24-25; 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 June 25, 2025.
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.