Description: Tags: 041604c

Friday,
April 16, 2004
Part IV
Department of
Education
Office of Vocational and Adult Education;
Community Technology Centers Program;
Notices
VerDate mar<24>2004 16:21 Apr 15, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\16APN3.SGM 16APN3
20766 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 74 / Friday, April 16, 2004 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION education policy in a generation. It is award a ‘‘community-based

designed to implement the President’s organization’’ and an ‘‘institution of
RIN 1830–ZA05
agenda to improve America’s public higher education.’’ Community colleges
Community Technology Centers schools by: (1) Ensuring accountability are considered institutions of higher
Program for results, (2) providing unprecedented education, rather than community-based
flexibility in the use of Federal funds in organizations. Section 9101(6) of the
AGENCY: Office of Vocational and Adult implementing education programs, (3) ESEA defines a community-based
Education, Department of Education. focusing on proven educational organization to mean ‘‘a public or
ACTION: Notice of final requirements, methods, and (4) expanding educational private nonprofit organization of
priorities, and selection criteria for choice for parents. Since the enactment demonstrated effectiveness that—(A) is
novice and non-novice applicants for of the original ESEA in 1965, the representative of a community or
the Community Technology Centers Federal Government has spent more significant segments of a community;
program. than $130 billion to improve public and provides educational or related
schools. Unfortunately, this investment services to individuals in the
SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for in education has not yet eliminated the community.’’ Under the CTC program a
Vocational and Adult Education achievement gap between affluent and community college could apply directly
announces final requirements, lower-income students or between for an award as an ‘‘institution of higher
priorities, and selection criteria under minority students and non-minority education’’, but it could not otherwise
the Community Technology Centers students. One of the purposes of the serve as a ‘‘community-based
(CTC) program. The Assistant Secretary CTC program is to address these gaps by organization’’ in an application filed by
may use one or more of these providing students with access to another eligible entity. For example, a
requirements, priorities, and selection information technology and related community college could not play the
criteria for competitions in FY 2004 and training. required role of one of the entities in
competitions to be conducted in later We published a notice of proposed partnership with an applicant under
years. requirements, priorities, and selection Priority 1.
We establish these final requirements, criteria in the Federal Register on Changes: None.
priorities, and selection criteria to February 2, 2004 (69 FR 5000). Access to Comments and Information
further the purpose of the CTC program, In that notice, we discussed (on pages
which is to assist eligible applicants to 5000 through 5003) our proposed Comments: One commenter expressed
create or expand community technology requirements, priorities, and selection concern regarding the posting of public
centers that provide disadvantaged criteria for the FY 2004 CTC comments and inquired whether they
residents of economically distressed competition and competitions to be are posted online or could be posted
urban and rural communities with conducted in later years. Except for two online for all to see and not just for
access to information technology and changes to Priority 1, which we explain those who can physically travel to DC
related training. in the Analysis of Comments and to view them.
Changes section, and minor editorial Discussion: The Department does not
EFFECTIVE DATE: These final
and technical revisions, there are no have an electronic docket system so it
requirements, priorities, and selection
differences between the notice of is not possible currently for us to post
criteria are effective May 17, 2004.
proposed requirements, priorities, and comments online in a systematic
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: manner. We will be developing such a
Karen Holliday, U.S. Department of selection criteria, and this notice of final
requirements, priorities, and selection system in the future as part of a Federal
Education, OVAE, 400 Maryland government wide initiative on
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202– criteria.
electronic rulemaking. A summary of
7110. Telephone: (202) 245–7708 or via Analysis of Comments and Changes the public comments, and our
Internet at karen.holliday@ed.gov. responses, are contained in this notice
In response to our invitation in the
If you use a telecommunications which will be published in the Federal
notice of proposed requirements,
device for the deaf (TDD), you may call Register and can be electronically
priorities, and selection criteria, nine
the Federal Information Relay Service accessed in text or Adobe Portable
parties submitted comments. An
(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339. Document Format (PDF) on the Internet
Individuals with disabilities may analysis of the comments and of any
changes in the proposed requirements, at the following site: http:/www.ed.gov/
obtain this document in an alternative news/fedregister.
format (e.g., Braille, large print, priorities, or selection criteria since we
published the notice follows. Changes: None.
audiotape, or computer diskette) on Comments: Commenters suggested
We have grouped major issues by
request to the contact person listed that the Department make available on
subject. Generally, we do not address
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION its Web site information concerning
technical and other minor, non-
CONTACT. instructional strategies that have proven
substantive changes and suggested
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: changes that the law does not authorize effective and evidence-based model
us to make under the applicable programs that could be adopted or
Background replicated locally in an effort to assist
statutory authority.
The Community Technology Centers applicants. Another commenter also
program is authorized under Title V, Definitions suggested that the Department consider
Part D, Subpart 11, Sections 5511–13 of Comments: One commenter sought working with intermediate
the Elementary and Secondary clarification regarding the definition of organizations, whether they be state,
Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) (20 U.S.C. a ‘‘community-based organization’’ local or regional, to better identify and
7263–7263b), as amended by Public (CBO) and whether a community college target resources and technical assistance
Law 107–110, the No Child Left Behind is considered a CBO. where need is greatest and to support
Act of 2001. Discussion: Section 5512(a) of the and disseminate the good work that has
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 ESEA includes among the types of already been accomplished as widely as
is the most sweeping reform of Federal applicants eligible to apply for a CTC possible.
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 74 / Friday, April 16, 2004 / Notices 20767
Discussion: The Department’s Web disadvantaged secondary school Discussion: While we recognize that
site provides information on practices students. The commenter recommended there are a variety of ways to support
that can improve student performance at that if the Department uses absolute learning and program outreach, Section
http://www.ed.gov/teachers/ priorities for the FY 2004 program, some 5513(b) of the ESEA does not allow
landing.jhtml?src=fp. The Office of of the funding should be reserved for Federal funds to be used for the
Vocational and Adult Education will either proposed Priority 3 or Priority 4 purchase of food.
continue to update the Web site as programs. Additionally, another Changes: None.
additional information becomes commenter suggested that the
available. Through the Department’s Department broaden the scope of the Mandatory Services for High School
technical assistance provider, grantees CTC program to include greater family Students
can access information specific to issues involvement and learning and Comments: Several commenters
surrounding CTCs at http:// specifically to provide support for single expressed concerns with the
www.americaconnects.net. parents through such areas as life skills requirement that projects must serve
Changes: None. enhancement and lifelong learning students who are entering or enrolled in
Matching Requirement opportunities. grades 9 through 12. One commenter
Discussion: Section 5513(a) of the further recommended that, unless the
Comments: One commenter sought
ESEA requires that grant recipients use 9th through 12th grade requirement is
clarification regarding the matching
funds for ‘‘(1) creating or expanding legislatively mandated, the Department
requirement of cash or in-kind support
community technology centers that should eliminate the requirement, as the
of at least 50% from non-Federal
expand access to information commenter stated that ‘‘good centers’’
sources towards total project costs. Two
technology and related training for should improve the academic skills of
commenters expressed concern that
disadvantaged residents of distressed children of all ages. As an alternative,
some organizations and LEAs may have
urban and rural communities’’. Serving the commenter suggested the
difficulty raising the required minimum
disadvantaged students as well as other Department have a requirement that
match of $250,000 and asked whether
members of the disadvantaged applicants offer programs for those in
the Department is aware of any
community is mandatory. With respect the 9th through 12th grades and that
instances where entities had difficulties
to the commenter’s recommendation their management plans be reflective of
providing the required match.
that funding be reserved for either the intended program.
Discussion: The statute requires that
proposed Priority 3 or Priority 4 should Discussion: We recognize the need to
Federal funds may not be used to pay
the Department use absolute priorities, ensure that children of all ages improve
for more than 50 percent of a CTC
we offer the following. Elsewhere in this their academic skills. However, we are
project’s total costs. As an example, if a
issue of the Federal Register, we are especially concerned about issues
CTC applicant requests $250,000 in
publishing a notice inviting applications relating to the academic achievement of
Federal funds (the mandatory minimum
for new awards for this program for FY high school students. As a result,
request) for its project, the applicant
2004 in which we establish the through Priority 2, we may give priority
must have available or obtain at least
priorities to be used in the FY 2004 to applications focused on improving
$250,000 in cash or in kind from non-
competition. To the extent that we do the academic achievement of low-
Federal sources. Through our
not use Priorities 3 and 4 in the FY 2004 achieving high school students while
experience with the CTC program since
competition, applicants may include not neglecting members of the
1999, we have discovered that, in order
services for adult learners as well as disadvantaged community as a whole.
to provide significant increased access
family literacy activities as part of their
to technology at the local level, CTC Changes: None.
overall program, as long as they meet
projects must be adequately funded.
We believe that the minimum award the other requirements and priorities set Additional Credit for Past Performance
threshold, coupled with the applicant’s forth in the notice inviting applications.
With respect to the commenter’s Comments: One commenter
mandatory match, will ensure the recommended that the priorities provide
applicant’s ability to be effective. We suggestion to broaden the scope toward
greater family involvement and for the award of additional points to
have taken into account the ability of applicants that meet the requirements
applicants to raise funds and therefore, learning, we agree that the family has a
significant impact on the educational set forth therein and also have prior
in the notice of proposed requirements, experience in implementing a CTC
priorities, and selection criteria, development of low and under-
achieving students. Applicants may project. The commenter further
proposed to lower the minimum recommended that additional or
required match that was required in FY want to structure their project designs to
include more family involvement ‘‘priority’’ points be given to applicants
2003 from $300,000 to $250,000 for FY that have projects in underserved areas.
2004. We are adopting that change in consistent with the CTC program’s
statutory purpose. We cannot, however, Under this proposal, the award of such
this notice. Additionally, if an applicant additional points would become part of
desires to draw non-Federal funds from prescribe a scope of format for family
involvement that applicants must the selection criteria for the CTC
a variety of other resources, it could do program.
so by entering into a group application follow.
Changes: None. Discussion: While we recognize the
with other eligible entities in
value of the experience and
accordance with 34 CFR 75.127–129. Allowable Use of Funds
Changes: None. accomplishments of previous grantees,
Comments: One commenter indicated the Department does not regard it as
Use of Funds that in an effort to support learning and necessary to award extra points for past
Comments: One commenter asked program outreach, food purchases applicants. All projects funded under
that at least a portion of the FY 2004 should be an allowable use of Federal this program by law must serve
funds be made available for adult funds at a minimum for outreach disadvantaged residents of economically
education program activities that do not meetings, refreshments, and after-school distressed communities.
include a mandatory program to reach snacks. Changes: None.
Program Impact CTC program and the requirements of notice of proposed requirements,
Comments: One commenter suggested Priority 1. One commenter sought priorities, and selection criteria to
that the Department may need to clarification regarding the wording of establish Priority 1—a priority for
articulate more specifically the ‘‘partnership between a community- projects that included a partnership
Secretary’s intent for a systematic based organization and a local between a community-based
approach to enhancing and improving educational agency’’ as described in the organization (CBO) and an LEA. Based
education through community learning first paragraph under Proposed Priority on the comments received and our own
while also increasing parental 1 and also asked the Department to internal review, we are clarifying in
involvement and community clarify the statement ‘‘LEAs are eligible Priority 1 that the partnership must be
participation. Similarly, the commenter under the CTC program, but an between a CBO, on the one hand, and
suggested that it might be helpful to individual public school is not an an LEA (including a charter school that
applicants if the Department established eligible applicant.’’ Another commenter meets its State’s definition of an LEA),
a general framework for evaluation and also sought clarification regarding an or a public school or a private school,
assessment of program effectiveness and individual public school not being on the other hand. We did not intend to
impact. considered an eligible applicant. The exclude private schools and individual
Discussion: With regard to the commenter indicated that an individual public schools from this priority.
commenter’s concern for the school is just as capable as a charter or Accordingly, if a CBO applies for a grant
Department to articulate the Secretary’s private school of fulfilling the role set under Priority 1, its project must
intent for a systematic approach to forth in the educational agency propose a partnership with an LEA
enhancing and improving education partnership. (including a charter school that meets
through community learning, Priority 2 A third commenter expressed concern its State’s definition of an LEA), or a
and the Need for the Project criterion that an individual public high school public school or a private school. If an
under the Selection Criteria address this would have access to information LEA (including a charter school that
matter in detail. With respect to the necessary to identify students who are meets its State’s definition of an LEA) or
commenter’s request for the Department most in need of academic support and a private school applies for a grant
to establish a general framework for to ensure that the project’s goals and under Priority 1, its project must
evaluation and assessment of program objectives are consistent with the CTC propose a partnership with a CBO.
effectiveness and impact, such guidance program. The commenter stated that this Because of the general eligibility
is provided to grantees by the contention justifies allowing an restrictions in the law, an individual
Department through its technical individual school to make application public school cannot submit an
assistance provider. We have further for the CTC program. application for the CTC program; its role
developed a set of performance Discussion: We take this opportunity under Priority 1 is limited solely to
measures for the program. These to clarify which entities are eligible to being a partner with a CBO under an
performance measures are provided in apply for grants under this program and application filed by any eligible
the notice inviting applications. how eligible applicants must meet the applicant.
Changes: None. requirements under Priority 1. Changes: Yes. We are making these
Comments: One commenter expressed Pursuant to the statute, the following changes to Priority 1.
concern regarding the Need for the entities are eligible to submit Comments: One commenter indicated
Project criterion in the selection criteria. applications for the CTC program—(a) that Priority 1 should not require
The commenter suggested that the scope an entity, such as a foundation, partnerships between LEAs and CBOs,
of the disadvantaged population and museum, library, for-profit business, as this would stifle innovation and
audience include persons with, and the public or private nonprofit organization program effectiveness. The commenter
families of persons with, disabilities and or community-based organization further stated that allowing institutions
English as a second language needs. (including faith-based organizations), (b) to deliver effective services and
Discussion: We agree that persons an institution of higher education, (c) a programs voluntarily in partnership
with disabilities and those for whom State educational agency (SEA), (d) a with one another would encourage a
English is a second language may local educational agency (LEA), or (e) a better informed knowledge base for ‘‘the
require and can benefit from services consortium of such entities, institutions, broader field’’ and help to deliver on the
that may be offered through a CTC or agencies. With respect to individual promise of flexibility and innovation at
project. We encourage applicants to schools, under these statutory the local level.
demonstrate such a need in the Need for provisions, a charter school that meets Discussion: We have determined that
the Project section of the application. its State’s definition of LEA is an the participation of both CBOs and
Changes: None. eligible applicant. A private school also LEAs (including a charter school that
Comments: One commenter suggested is an eligible applicant. However, an meets its State’s definition of an LEA),
that, in an effort to reduce potential individual public school is not an or a public school or a private school,
costs or increase potential benefits to eligible applicant. Thus, although we pursuant to the clarifications we are
applicants, the Department develop one agree that the individual public school making to Priority 1, is critical to the
standard online application for can play an integral role in the success of CTC projects. Many academic
everyone to complete, thereby reducing execution of a CTC program, the law support programs for adolescents report
the amount of paperwork. does not permit an individual public that securing and maintaining a high
Discussion: In an effort to reduce school to apply for a grant under the level of student participation can be
paperwork and applicant burden, we are CTC program. Instead the law makes challenging. Involving CBOs in service
utilizing e-Application for the CTC grant LEAs, rather than individual public delivery will help projects better master
competition. schools, eligible applicants. this challenge, such as by providing
Changes: None. The fact that an individual public expanded outreach and support to
school is not eligible to apply for a grant students, joint programming, or
Eligibility does not mean that it cannot participate alternative services sites that are in or
Comments: We received a number of in a CTC project with an eligible near the neighborhoods where students
comments about eligibility under the applicant. We had proposed in the live. LEAs (including a charter school
that meets its State’s definition of an a multi-year cycle that includes the 1 would be too cumbersome for novice
LEA), or a public school or a private award of smaller multi-year grants applicants.
school also are essential participants. rather using a one-year grant cycle. Changes: Yes. We are modifying
Their involvement is needed to identify Discussion: While the Department Priority 1 to state specifically that it
the students who are most in need of recognizes that a multi-year cycle would does not apply to novice applicants.
academic support and to ensure that the allow additional time for grantees to
implement and evaluate the Note: This notice of final requirements,
project’s curriculum, assessment, and priorities, and selection criteria does not
instructional practices are consistent effectiveness of their projects, the solicit applications. In any year in which we
with those of the schools the students Department has not requested funds for choose to use these requirements, priorities,
attend. the CTC program for 2005 and, and selection criteria, we invite applications
Changes: None. therefore, does not want to commit a through a notice in the Federal Register.
project to several years of funding and
Priorities
staffing without assurance of continued Requirements
Comments: One commenter indicated support.
that it was unclear in the notice of The Assistant Secretary announces
Changes: None.
proposed requirements, priorities, and Comments: One commenter expressed the following requirements for the CTC
selection criteria whether the four concern regarding the set-aside program. These requirements are in
proposed priorities are absolute designation for the novice applicants. addition to the content that all
priorities and how the funds would be The commenter further indicated that, Community Technology Centers grant
distributed between them. The although novice applicants may be first- applicants include in their applications
commenter also indicated that the time applicants for or recipients of as required by the program statute under
priorities did not appear to be in Federal funding under the CTC Title V, Part D, Subpart 11, Sections
alignment with the descriptions program, they are not necessarily new 5511–13 of the ESEA.
provided under the selection criteria entrants to the field of community A. Targeted Applicants
sections, Need for the Project and technology.
Quality of the Project Design. The Discussion: The Department’s goal in One combined competition will be
commenter then suggested that, if the setting aside a percentage of funding for conducted for both non-novice and
project is to support adult learners and novice applicants is to ensure that novice applicants. The Department will
career development needs, the two applicants with limited experience in rank and fund the two groups
descriptions would need to be expanded administering Federal funds are separately. At least seventy-five percent
to include criteria related to the provided an opportunity to compete for of the funds will be set-aside for non-
respective populations. CTC funds, whatever may be their prior novice applicants and up to twenty-five
Discussion: As indicated in the notice experience in community technology. percent will be set-aside for novice
of proposed requirements, priorities, Changes: None. applicants.
and selection criteria, we will designate B. Range of Awards
Partnering
the priorities as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational in a notice Comments: One commenter expressed The Department establishes $250,000
inviting applications for new awards. concern regarding the requirement as the minimum award and $500,000 as
The decision how to use them is made concerning the minimum number of the maximum award. No grant
each year, see 34 CFR 75.105. After participating educational entities— application will be considered for
considering the proposed comment, the including LEAs and high schools—that funding if it requests an award amount
Secretary believes no action or change must be engaged. Additionally, the outside the funding range of $250,000 to
strengthening the priorities is necessary. commenter indicated that by basing the $500,000.
The notice inviting applications for new number of CTCs involved and requiring C. Matching Funds Requirement
awards for FY 2004, including the partnership with LEAs and secondary
schools, the potential to focus attention Pursuant to section 5512(c) of ESEA,
designation of priorities, is published
on other educational groups (including as amended by the No Child Left Behind
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
middle or elementary schools) is Act of 2001 (NCLB), Federal funds may
Register.
Changes: None. lessened. not be used to pay for more than 50
Comments: One commenter expressed Discussion: We recognize the percent of total CTC project costs. In
concern that the focus of the CTC importance of serving students of other order to receive a grant award under the
program should be not only on the grade levels; however, we are especially competition, each applicant must
increased academic achievement of low- concerned about issues relating to the furnish from non-Federal sources at
achieving high school students but also academic achievement of high school least 50 percent of its total project costs.
on enrichment activities for high school students. Therefore, we have Applicants may satisfy this requirement
students. emphasized secondary schools within in cash or in kind, fairly evaluated,
Discussion: Although Priority 2 Priority 2. including services. Each applicant must
focuses on increased academic Changes: None. provide a dollar-for-dollar match of the
achievement of low-achieving high amount requested from the Federal
Novice Applicants Government. An example of an
schools, recipients also may use grant
funds for academic enrichment Discussion: As part of our internal allowable match would be a situation in
activities pursuant to Section 5513 review of the proposed priorities, we are which an applicant requested $250,000
(b)(3)(A) of the ESEA. further modifying Priority 1 to indicate in Federal funds (the mandatory
Changes: None. that it will not apply to novice minimum request). In that situation, the
applicants. As most novice applicants application would be required to
Funding are applying for Federal funding for the furnish at least $250,000 in cash or in
Comments: One commenter first time, the Department has kind from non-Federal funds, fairly
recommended the Department restore determined that the additional time and evaluated, resulting in a total project
its funding and programmatic scope to administrative requirements of Priority cost of $500,000.
Discussion of Priorities with a CBO when applying for funds; be provided in coordination with an
however, the proposed project must LEA or school. Each applicant must
Note: In any year in which we choose to deliver the educational services in demonstrate how their project’s
use one or more of these priorities, we invite partnership with a CBO. proposed academic approach is aligned
applications through a notice in the Federal An eligible applicant, e.g., an with the secondary school curricula of
Register. When inviting applications we
institution of higher education, that is the school or schools in which the
designate each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational. The not a CBO or an LEA (including a students to be served by the grant are
effect of each type of priority follows: charter school that meets its State’s entering or enrolled.
Absolute priority: Under an absolute definition of an LEA) or a private school
priority we consider only applications that must enter into a partnership that Priority 3
meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)). includes a CBO, on the one hand, and This priority supports projects whose
Competitive preference priority: Under a an LEA (including a charter school that CTC activities focus on adult education
competitive preference priority we give meets its State’s definition of an LEA), and family literacy services.
competitive preference to an application by or a public school or a private school, Under this priority, we give priority to
either (1) awarding additional points,
on the other hand, in the delivery of projects that provide adult education
depending on how well or the extent to
which the application meets the competitive educational services. and family literacy activities through
priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) An individual public school is not technology and the Internet, including
selecting an application that meets the eligible to submit an application under adult basic education, adult secondary
competitive priority over an application of the CTC program in general due to the education, and English literacy
comparable merit that does not meet the authorizing statute’s general eligibility instruction.
priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)). restrictions. However, an individual
Invitational priority: Under an invitational public school may be included as a Priority 4
priority we are particularly interested in partner in an eligible applicant’s This priority supports projects whose
applications that meet the invitational proposed project and application. CTC activities focus on career
priority. However, we do not give an This priority does not apply to novice
application that meets the invitational development and job preparation
priority a competitive or absolute preference applicants. In any competition in which activities. Under this priority we give
over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)). the Department establishes this priority priority to projects that provide career
as an absolute priority, novice development and job preparation
Priorities applicants are not required to meet the activities in high-demand occupational
requirements of this priority. areas.
Priority 1
Priority 2 Selection Criteria
This priority supports projects by
eligible applicants that include a This priority supports applicants that The following criteria will be used to
partnership with a community-based meet the following criteria: evaluate applications submitted for
organization, on the one hand, and a Applicants must state whether they grants under the CTC program.
local educational agency (including a are proposing a local or State project. A (a) Need for the Project. In evaluating
charter school that meets its State’s local project must include one or more the need for the proposed project, we
definition of an LEA), or a public school CTCs; a State project must include two will consider the extent to which the
or a private school, on the other hand. or more CTCs. In addition, the project proposed project will:
To meet the priority, an applicant must must be coordinated with one or more (1) Serve students from low-income
clearly identify the partnering agencies LEAs (including a charter school that families;
and include a detailed plan of their meets its State’s definition of an LEA), (2) Serve students entering or enrolled
working relationship, including a or a public school or a private school in high schools (9th through 12th
project budget that reflects fund that provides supplementary instruction grades) that are among the high schools
disbursements to the various partnering in the core academic subjects of reading in the State that have the highest
agencies. Thus, the Secretary gives or language arts, or mathematics, to low- numbers or percentages of students who
priority to projects in which the achieving high school students. Projects have not achieved proficiency on the
delivery of instructional services must serve students who are entering or State academic assessments required by
includes: enrolled in grades 9 through 12 and Title I of ESEA, or who have academic
1. A community-based organization who: (1) Have academic skills skills in reading or language arts, or
(CBO), which may be a faith-based significantly below grade level, or (2) mathematics, that are significantly
organization, and have not attained proficiency on the below grade level;
2. A local educational agency (LEA) State academic assessments conducted (3) Serve students who have the
(including a charter school that meets under Title I of the ESEA. greatest need for supplementary
its State’s definition of an LEA), or a Supplementary instruction may be instruction, as indicated by their scores
public school or a private school. delivered before or after school or at on State or local standardized
A CBO is not required to submit a other times when school is not in assessments in reading or language arts,
joint application with its proposed session. Instruction may also be or mathematics, or some other local
partners when applying for funds; provided while school is in session, measure of performance in reading or
however, the proposed project must provided that it increases the amount of language arts, or mathematics; and
deliver the educational services in time students receive instruction in core (4) Create or expand access to
partnership with an LEA (including a academic subjects and does not require information technology and related
charter school that meets its State’s their removal from class. The training for disadvantaged residents of
definition of an LEA), or a public school instructional strategies used must be distressed urban or rural communities.
or a private school. based on practices that have proven (b) Quality of the Project Design. In
An LEA (including a charter school effective for improving the academic evaluating the quality of the project
that meets its State’s definition of an performance of low-achieving students. design, we will consider the extent to
LEA) or a private school also is not If these services are not provided which the proposed project will
required to submit a joint application directly by an LEA or school, they must adequately and effectively investigate
and incorporate in its implementation evaluation, we consider the extent to Electronic Access to This Document
plan the following elements: which the application: You may view this document, as well
(1) Provide instructional services that (1) Includes a plan that utilizes as all other Department of Education
will be of sufficient size, scope, and evaluation methods that are feasible and documents published in the Federal
intensity to improve the academic appropriate to the goals and outcomes of Register, in text or Adobe Portable
performance of participating students; the project; Document Format (PDF) on the Internet
(2) Incorporate strategies that have (2) Will regularly examine the at the following site: www.ed.gov/news/
proven effective for improving the progress and outcomes of participating fedregister.
academic performance of low-achieving students on a range of appropriate To use PDF you must have Adobe
students; performance measures and has a plan Acrobat Reader, which is available free
(3) Implement strategies in recruiting for utilizing such information to at this site. If you have questions about
and retaining students that have proven improve project activities and using PDF, call the U.S. Government
effective; instruction; Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
(4) Provide instruction that is aligned (3) Will use an independent, external 888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
with the high school curricula of the evaluator with the necessary DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
schools in which the students to be background and technical expertise to
served by the grant are entering or assess the performance of the project; Note: The official version of this document
enrolled; and is the document published in the Federal
and
Register. Free Internet access to the official
(5) Provide high-quality, sustained, (4) Effectively demonstrates that the edition of the Federal Register and the Code
and intensive professional development applicant has adopted a rigorous of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
for personnel who provide instruction evaluation design. Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
to students. index.html.
(c) Quality of the Management Plan. Executive Order 12866
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
In evaluating the quality of the This notice of final requirements, Number 84.341A, Community Technology
management plan, we consider the priorities, and selection criteria has Centers Program)
extent to which the proposed project: been reviewed in accordance with
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7263–7263b.
(1) Outlines specific, measurable Executive Order 12866. Under the terms
goals, objectives, and outcomes to be of the order, we have assessed the Dated: April 12, 2004.
achieved by the proposed project; potential costs and benefits of this Susan Sclafani,
(2) Assigns responsibility for the regulatory action. Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult
accomplishment of project tasks to The potential costs associated with Education.
specific project personnel, and provides the notice of final requirements, [FR Doc. 04–8659 Filed 4–15–04; 8:45 am]
timelines for the accomplishment of priorities, and selection criteria are BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
project tasks; those resulting from statutory
(3) Requires appropriate and adequate requirements and those we have
time commitments of the project determined as necessary for DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
director and other key personnel to administering this program effectively
achieve the objectives of the proposed and efficiently. Office of Vocational and Adult
project; and In assessing the potential costs and Education; Overview Information;
(4) Includes key project personnel, benefits-both quantitative and Community Technology Centers (CTC)
including the project director and other qualitative—of this notice of final Program; Notice Inviting Applications
staff, with appropriate qualifications requirements, priorities and selection for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY)
and relevant training and experience. criteria, we have determined that the 2004 for Novice and Non-Novice
(d) Adequacy of Resources. In benefits of the final requirements, Applicants for the Community
determining the adequacy of the priorities, and selection criteria justify Technology Centers Program
resources for the proposed project, we the costs.
consider the following factors: We have also determined that this Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(1) The adequacy of support, regulatory action does not unduly (CFDA) Number: 84.341A.
including facilities, equipment, interfere with State, local and tribal Dates:
supplies, and other resources, from the governments in the exercise of their Applications Available: April 16,
applicant; governmental functions. 2004.
(2) The extent to which a We summarized the costs and benefits Deadline for Transmittal of
preponderance of project resources will in the notice of proposed requirements, Applications: June 1, 2004.
be used for activities designed to priorities, and selection criteria. Deadline for Intergovernmental
improve the academic performance of Review: June 16, 2004.
Intergovernmental Review Eligible Applicants: Eligible
low-achieving students in grades 9
through 12 in reading and/or This program is subject to Executive applicants shall be an entity, such as a
mathematics; Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 foundation, museum, library, for-profit
(3) The extent to which the budget is CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the business, public or private nonprofit
adequate and costs are reasonable in Executive order is to foster an organization or community-based
relation to the objectives and design of intergovernmental partnership and a organization (including faith-based
the proposed project; and strengthened federalism. The Executive organizations), an institution of higher
(4) The potential for continued order relies on processes developed by education, a State educational agency
support of the project after Federal State and local governments for (SEA), a local educational agency (LEA)
funding ends, including, as appropriate, coordination and review of proposed (including a charter school that meets
the demonstrated commitment of Federal financial assistance. its State’s definition of an LEA), a
appropriate entities to such support. This document provides early private school, or a consortium of such
(e) Quality of the Evaluation. In notification of our specific plans and entities, institutions, or agencies. To be
determining the quality of the project actions for this program. eligible, an applicant must have the

Description: Tags: 041604c

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Description: Tags: 041604c

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Friday,

April 16, 2004

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION education policy in a generation. It is award a ‘‘community-based

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi