[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 80 (Friday, April 24, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22972-22977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08554]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter III
[Docket ID ED-2019-OSERS-0156]
Proposed Priority and Definitions--State Personnel Development
Grants
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 84.323A.
AGENCY: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services,
Department of Education.
ACTION: Proposed priority and definitions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
(OSERS) proposes a funding priority and definitions under the State
Personnel Development Grants (SPDG) program, which assists States in
reforming and improving their systems for personnel preparation and
personnel development in order to improve results for children with
disabilities. We take this action to focus attention on the need to
improve results for children with disabilities by empowering personnel
to select professional development activities to improve their ability
to serve children with disabilities. The Department may use the
proposed priority and definitions for competitions in fiscal year (FY)
2020 and later years.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 26, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal
or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. We will not
accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after
the comment period. To ensure that we do not receive duplicate copies,
please submit your comments only once. In addition, please include the
Docket ID at the top of your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically. Information on using
Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing agency documents,
submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on the site
under ``How to use Regulations.gov'' in the Help section.
Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, or Hand Delivery: If you
mail or deliver your comments about the proposed priority and
definitions, address them to Jennifer Coffey, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5161, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076.
Privacy Note: The Department's policy is to make all comments
received from members of the public available for public viewing in
their entirety on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, commenters should be careful to include
in their comments only information that they wish to make publicly
available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Coffey, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5161, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-5076. Telephone: (202) 245-6673. Email:
[email protected].
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-
800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding
the proposed priority and definitions. To ensure that your comments
have maximum effect in developing the notice of final priority and
definitions, we urge you to identify clearly the specific section of
the proposed priority or definition that each comment addresses.
We are particularly interested in comments about whether the
proposed priority would be challenging for new grantees to meet and, if
so, how the proposed priority could be revised to address potential
challenges for new grantees and reduce burden.
Directed Question 1: The Department seeks information on the extent
to which State educational agencies (SEAs) and local educational
agencies (LEAs) under Part B of IDEA, and, if appropriate, lead
agencies (LAs) or local agencies under Part C of IDEA provide special
education teachers and other personnel autonomy in selecting their
professional development options.
Directed Question 2: The Department seeks information on State and
local professional development policies and requirements for special
education teachers and other personnel, such as the number of hours of
professional development personnel must fulfill or the competencies
personnel must acquire to obtain or maintain applicable certifications.
In responding to these questions, the Secretary specifically
invites comments on how this proposed priority would change existing
professional development requirements, policies, and practices and if
it could increase the effectiveness of professional development for
teachers and other personnel. When responding, commenters should keep
in mind that the professional development provided must be consistent
with the State personnel development plan (hereinafter referred to as a
``State plan'') under section 653 of IDEA and the use of SPDG funds to
implement authorized professional development activities under section
654 of IDEA.
We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific
requirements of Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771 and their
overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result
from the proposed priority and definitions. Please let us know of any
further ways we could reduce potential costs or increase potential
benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of
the program.
During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public
comments about the proposed priority and definitions by accessing
Regulations.gov. You may also inspect the comments in person in Room
5161, 550 12th Street SW, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC, between
the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the
Rulemaking Record: On request, we will provide an appropriate
accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who
needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the
public rulemaking record for the proposed priority and definitions. If
you want to schedule an appointment for this type of accommodation or
auxiliary aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
Purpose of Program: The purpose of this program is to assist SEAs
in
[[Page 22973]]
reforming and improving their systems for personnel preparation and
professional development in early intervention, educational, and
transition services in order to improve results for children with
disabilities.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1451-1455.
Proposed Priority
This notice contains one proposed priority.
Choice in Professional Development
Background: The purpose of this proposed priority is to increase
the learning and engagement of personnel \1\ in their professional
development experiences by empowering them to select professional
development activities based on their individual needs in order to
improve results for children with disabilities. Funds would be awarded
competitively to SEAs to develop personalized professional development
pilots to carry out the State plan under section 653 of IDEA and
implement professional development activities that are authorized under
the use of funds provisions under section 654 of IDEA. These
professional development pilots would include stipends or other
mechanisms, such as competency-based personalized learning, that
provide teachers and other personnel choice in their professional
development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Personnel'' means special education teachers, regular
education teachers, principals, administrators, related services
personnel, paraprofessionals, and early intervention personnel
serving infants, toddlers, preschoolers, or children with
disabilities, except where a particular category of personnel, such
as related services personnel, is identified. Section 651(b) of
IDEA; 20 U.S.C. 1451(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: To carry out the State plan under section 653 of IDEA
described in its application, the SEA also may award contracts,
subgrants, or both to other public and private entities, including, if
appropriate, the LA under Part C of IDEA.
SEAs, LEAs, LAs, or local agencies under Part C, if appropriate,
would have flexibility in selecting the individual(s) or groups of
personnel who would be provided with professional development options.
For example, stipends could be targeted for personnel who teach
children with disabilities in specific subjects such as math and
science; personnel in schools identified for comprehensive support and
improvement or targeted support and improvement under the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA); personnel
preparing for leadership roles in or out of the classroom; or, if
appropriate, personnel providing early intervention services.
Applicants would describe how they will prioritize selecting
individuals or groups of personnel serving rural children with
disabilities or disadvantaged children with disabilities, such as
children from low-income families and ensure there is an equitable
distributions across these groups if demand for professional
development exceeds what available funds can support.
Personnel could then use the stipends or other mechanisms based on
their individual needs to select evidence-based professional
development that is designed to improve outcomes for children with
disabilities.
Although school-related factors such as curriculum, family
engagement, and funding contribute to student academic performance,
research suggests that the single most important school-based factor
impacting students' achievement is their teacher (Hanushek, 2016;
Stronge & Tucker, 2000). Accordingly, creating every opportunity for
teachers and other education personnel to be fully engaged in high-
quality professional development that increases their knowledge and
skills and is aligned to students' academic and other learning needs
holds promise in boosting student achievement.
Alignment of professional development to personnel needs is also
critical. Research on adult learning (andragogy) posits that adults
engage more deeply with learning opportunities when those opportunities
are aligned to their interests (Trotter, 2006). Among educators, those
interests can vary in the different phases of their careers. For
example, novice teachers may seek to improve classroom management
skills, content knowledge, and pedagogy. In contrast, more experienced
teachers may want to develop the advanced skills necessary to take on
new leadership roles or increase intensive intervention skills.
Andragogy suggests that adult learning can be differentiated by the
learner's need--that is, personalized--and indeed should be in order to
maximize engagement in learning (Trotter, 2006).
Leveraging the power of personalization, and the deep engagement
with learning it promotes, is critical if professional development is
to have an impact on educator practice. The Learning Policy Institute
(2017) identifies a set of seven pillars for effective professional
development. Among them are: (1) Active learning, (2) collaboration,
(3) coaching and support, (4) feedback and reflection, and (5) training
of a sustained duration (Learning Policy Institute, 2017). A common
thread among each of these practices is that they require personnel to
invest meaningful effort and attention. No matter how well designed by
the provider, the promise of these pillars to improve personnel
practice is only realized when educators engage fully with the content.
Adult learning theory suggests personalization is one way to make this
engagement more likely (Trotter, 2006).
Giving educators the financial and other resources needed to
personalize their professional development, consistent with their needs
and the needs of their students, has the potential to maximize benefits
for them and their students. Research indicates that having educators
create professional learning plans and giving them the freedom to
select the activities that will support them in achieving the goals
outlined in those plans could have positive effects on student
achievement and attainment (Rabbitt, et al., 2015). Thus, it may be the
case that a stipend program or other mechanisms to provide personnel
with choice in selecting professional development options could magnify
the efficacy of other personalization efforts by giving teachers access
to options that otherwise may have been inaccessible due to
professional development requirements or that were cost prohibitive.
For these reasons, this proposed priority would support innovative
projects that develop and test approaches to providing personnel with
professional learning stipends or other mechanisms to provide personnel
with choice in selecting professional development options. With the
autonomy to identify instructionally relevant professional learning,
teachers and other personnel can improve their knowledge and skills and
better support student achievement and other desirable outcomes for
children with disabilities.
We intend for this proposed priority to supplement the absolute
priority 2, the SPDG statutory priority, published in the Federal
Register on February 13, 2017 (82 FR 10470),\2\ as well as other
relevant statutory and regulatory priorities established by the
Department. Specifically, all applicants must meet the statutory
requirements in sections 651 through 655 of the IDEA, 20 U.S.C. 1451-
1455. Applicants may apply for this proposed priority as well, but
would not be required to do so to be eligible for an award.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/02/13/2017-02895/applications-for-new-awards-state-personnel-development-grants-spdg-program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 22974]]
Projects must be awarded and operated in a manner consistent with
nondiscrimination requirements contained in the U.S. Constitution and
the Federal civil rights laws.
Proposed Priority: The purpose of this proposed priority is to fund
SPDG grants to SEAs that empower teachers and other personnel to select
professional development that meets their individual needs in order to
improve results for children with disabilities. States will meet the
priority if they describe in their application how they will develop
personalized professional development projects to carry out their State
plan under section 653 of IDEA and to implement professional
development activities that are consistent with the use of funds
provisions in section 654 of IDEA. This would be accomplished by using
funds under the SPDG program for stipends or other mechanisms to
provide personnel with choice in selecting professional development
options that will count toward State or local professional development
requirements, as appropriate, such as the number of hours personnel
must fill or the competencies they must acquire to obtain or retain
certification, and that are designed to meet their individual needs and
thus improve results for children with disabilities.
Applicants must--
(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under
``Significance,'' how the proposed project will develop personalized
professional development activities using stipends or other mechanisms
that provide personnel choice in professional development options
designed to meet their individual needs and count toward State or local
professional development requirements and thus improve results for
children with disabilities;
(b) Describe how the State will select the individual(s) or groups
of personnel that will be provided with professional development
options, including the extent to which applicants will prioritize
selecting individuals or groups of personnel serving rural children
with disabilities or disadvantaged children with disabilities, such as
children from low-income families. If applicable, applicants should
specify how they will prioritize personnel if demand for professional
development among the individuals or groups of personnel that the
applicant proposes to serve exceed what available funds can support.
(c) Describe how the State will create a list of approved
professional development options that meet the requirements of the SPDG
program. This description should include how the applicant will engage
with a range of stakeholders, including school administrators,
personnel serving students with disabilities, families of students with
disabilities and individuals with disabilities, and other State or
local agencies serving individuals with disabilities, such as juvenile
justice agencies, to determine which professional development options
it will offer. Specifically, professional development options must--
(1) Use evidence-based (as defined in this notice) professional
development methods that will increase implementation of evidence-based
practices and result in improved outcomes for children with
disabilities;
(2) Include ongoing assistance that supports the implementation of
evidence-based practices with fidelity (as defined in this notice); and
(3) Use technology to more efficiently and effectively provide
ongoing professional development to personnel, including to personnel
in rural areas and in urban or high-need local educational agencies
(LEAs) (as defined in this notice); and
(d) If applicable, describe the steps that personnel would need to
take to request professional development options not already on a list
of approved professional development options, the justification that
personnel would need to provide to demonstrate how the selected options
would improve results for children with disabilities, and how personnel
would be notified if their request was approved or disapproved in
writing and within 14 days.
Types of Priorities
When inviting applications for a competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute,
competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal
Register. The effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only
applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference
priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1)
awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the
application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2)
selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of
comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are
particularly interested in applications that meet the priority.
However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
Definitions
We propose the following definitions for use with this proposed
priority and with the SPDG program. We propose these definitions to
ensure that applicants have a clear understanding of how we are using
these terms. We propose to use definitions the Department has adopted
elsewhere and provide the source of existing definitions in
parentheses.
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. (34 CFR 77.1)
Experimental study means a study that is designed to compare
outcomes between two groups of individuals (such as students) that are
otherwise equivalent except for their assignment to either a treatment
group receiving a project component or a control group that does not.
Randomized controlled trials, regression discontinuity design studies,
and single-case design studies are the specific types of experimental
studies that, depending on their design and implementation (e.g.,
sample attrition in randomized controlled trials and regression
discontinuity design studies), can meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)
standards without reservations as described in the WWC Handbook:
(i) A randomized controlled trial employs random assignment of, for
example, students, teachers, classrooms, or schools to receive the
project component being evaluated (the treatment group) or not to
receive the project component (the control group).
(ii) A regression discontinuity design study assigns the project
component being evaluated using a measured variable (e.g., assigning
students reading below a cutoff score to tutoring or developmental
education classes) and controls for that variable in the analysis of
outcomes.
(iii) A single-case design study uses observations of a single case
(e.g., a student eligible for a behavioral intervention) over time in
the absence and presence of a controlled treatment manipulation to
determine whether the outcome is systematically related to the
treatment. (34 CFR 77.1)
[[Page 22975]]
Fidelity means the delivery of instruction in the way in which it
was designed to be delivered. (77 FR 45944)
High-need LEA means, in accordance with section 2102(3) of the
ESEA, an LEA--
(a) That serves not fewer than 10,000 children from families with
incomes below the poverty line (as that term is defined in section
8101(41) of the ESEA), or for which not less than 20 percent of the
children served by the LEA are from families with incomes below the
poverty line; and
(b) For which there is (1) a high percentage of teachers not
teaching in the academic subjects or grade levels that the teachers
were trained to teach, or (2) a high percentage of teachers with
emergency, provisional, or temporary certification or licensing.
Lead agency means the agency designated by the State's Governor
under section 635(a)(10) of IDEA and 34 CFR 303.120 that receives funds
under section 643 of IDEA to administer the State's responsibilities
under part C of IDEA. (34 CFR 303.22)
Local educational agency means a public board of education or other
public authority legally constituted within a State for either
administrative control or direction of, or to perform a service
function for, public elementary schools or secondary schools in a city,
county, township, school district, or other political subdivision of a
State, or for such combination of school districts or counties as are
recognized in a State as an administrative agency for its public
elementary schools or secondary schools. (Section 602(19) of IDEA (20
U.S.C. 1401(19)))
Project component means an activity, strategy, intervention,
process, product, practice, or policy included in a project. Evidence
may pertain to an individual project component or to a combination of
project components (e.g., training teachers on instructional practices
for English learners and follow-on coaching for these teachers). (34
CFR 77.1)
Promising evidence means that there is evidence of the
effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant
outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by WWC reporting a ``strong evidence
base'' or ``moderate evidence base'' for the corresponding practice
guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a
``positive effect'' or ``potentially positive effect'' on a relevant
outcome with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially
negative effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate,
that--
(A) Is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or
a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with
statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression
methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a
comparison group); and
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome. (34 CFR 77.1)
Quasi-experimental design study means a study using a design that
attempts to approximate an experimental study by identifying a
comparison group that is similar to the treatment group in important
respects. This type of study, depending on design and implementation
(e.g., establishment of baseline equivalence of the groups being
compared), can meet WWC standards with reservations, but cannot meet
WWC standards without reservations, as described in the WWC Handbook.
(34 CFR 77.1)
Relevant outcome means the student outcome(s) or other outcome(s)
the key project component is designed to improve, consistent with the
specific goals of the program. (34 CFR 77.1)
State educational agency means the State board of education or
other agency or officer primarily responsible for the State supervision
of public elementary schools and secondary schools, or, if there is no
such officer or agency, an officer or agency designated by the Governor
or by State law. (Section 602(32) of IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1401(32)))
Strong evidence means that there is evidence of the effectiveness
of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome for a sample
that overlaps with the populations and settings proposed to receive
that component, based on a relevant finding from one of the following:
(i) A practice guide prepared by the WWC using version 2.1 or 3.0
of the WWC Handbook reporting a ``strong evidence base'' for the
corresponding practice guide recommendation;
(ii) An intervention report prepared by the WWC using version 2.1
or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook reporting a ``positive effect'' on a
relevant outcome based on a ``medium to large'' extent of evidence,
with no reporting of a ``negative effect'' or ``potentially negative
effect'' on a relevant outcome; or
(iii) A single experimental study reviewed and reported by the WWC
using version 2.1 or 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, or otherwise assessed by
the Department using version 3.0 of the WWC Handbook, as appropriate,
and that--
(A) Meets WWC standards without reservations;
(B) Includes at least one statistically significant and positive
(i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome;
(C) Includes no overriding statistically significant and negative
effects on relevant outcomes reported in the study or in a
corresponding WWC intervention report prepared under version 2.1 or 3.0
of the WWC Handbook; and
(D) Is based on a sample from more than one site (e.g., State,
county, city, school district, or postsecondary campus) and includes at
least 350 students or other individuals across sites. Multiple studies
of the same project component that each meet requirements in paragraphs
(iii)(A), (B), and (C) of this definition may together satisfy this
requirement. (34 CFR 77.1)
What Works Clearinghouse Handbook (WWC Handbook) means the
standards and procedures set forth in the WWC Procedures and Standards
Handbook, Version 3.0 or Version 2.1 (incorporated by reference, see 34
CFR 77.2). Study findings eligible for review under WWC standards can
meet WWC standards without reservations, meet WWC standards with
reservations, or not meet WWC standards. WWC practice guides and
intervention reports include findings from systematic reviews of
evidence as described in the Handbook documentation. (34 CFR 77.1)
References
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., and Gardner, M., with assistance
from Espinoza, D. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development. Learning Policy Institute.
Hanushek, E.A. (2016). What matters for student achievement.
Education Next, 16(2), 18-26.
Ingersoll, R., & May, H. (2012). The magnitude, destinations, and
determinants of mathematics and science teacher turnover.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 435-464.
Rabbitt, B., Finegan, J., & Kellogg, N. (2019). Research-Based,
online learning for teachers: What the research literature tells us
about the design of platforms and virtual experiences for working
adult learners. The Learning Accelerator.
Stronge, J.H., & Tucker, P.D. (2000). Teacher evaluation and student
achievement. National Education Association.
Trotter, Y. (2006). Adult learning theories: Impacting professional
development programs. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 72(2), 8-13.
Final Priority and Definitions
We will announce the final priority and definitions in a document
in the
[[Page 22976]]
Federal Register. We will determine the final priority and definitions
after considering responses to this document and other information
available to the Department. This document does not preclude us from
proposing additional priorities, requirements, definitions, or
selection criteria, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking
requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit applications. In any year in
which we choose to use the proposed priority and definitions, we invite
applications through a notice in the Federal Register.
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 13771
Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) determines whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and
subject to review by OMB. Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines
a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely to result in a
rule that may--
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or
Tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the
Executive order.
OMB has determined that this proposed regulatory action is not a
significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Under Executive Order 13771, for each new rule that the Department
proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates that is a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and that
imposes total costs greater than zero, it must identify two
deregulatory actions. For FY 2020, any new incremental costs associated
with a new rule must be fully offset by the elimination of existing
costs through deregulatory actions. However, Executive Order 13771 does
not apply to ``transfer rules'' that cause only income transfers
between taxpayers and program beneficiaries, such as those regarding
discretionary grant programs. Because the proposed priority and
definitions would be utilized in connection with a discretionary grant
program, Executive Order 13771 does not apply.
We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under
Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the
principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review
established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law,
Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency--
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits
and costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of
cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must
adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide
information that enables the public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes.''
We are issuing the proposed priority and definitions only on a
reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those
approaches that maximize net benefits. The Department believes that
this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive
Order 13563.
We have also determined that this regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal governments in the exercise of
their governmental functions.
In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs are those
resulting from statutory requirements and those we have determined as
necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.
In addition, we have considered the potential benefits of this
regulatory action and have noted these benefits in the background
section of this document.
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification: The Secretary certifies
that this proposed regulatory action would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The U.S.
Small Business Administration Size Standards define ``small entities''
as for-profit or nonprofit institutions with total annual revenue below
$7,000,000 or, if they are institutions controlled by small
governmental jurisdictions (that are comprised of cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts),
with a population of less than 50,000.
Participation in the SPDG program is voluntary. In addition, the
only eligible entities for this program are SEAs, which do not meet the
definition of a small entity. For these reasons, the proposed priority
and definitions would impose no burden on small entities.
We invite comments from small eligible entities as to whether they
believe this proposed regulatory action would have a significant
economic impact on them and, if so, request evidence to support that
belief.
Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive
Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the
objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental
partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies
on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination
and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print,
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the contact person listed
[[Page 22977]]
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this
document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may
access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of
Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can view this
document, as well as all other documents of this Department 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 documents of the Department published in the
Federal Register by using the article search feature at
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published
by the Department.
Mark Schultz,
Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration. Delegated the
authority to perform the functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
[FR Doc. 2020-08554 Filed 4-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P