95-31009. Local Research Partnerships for Early Head Start Programs: Availability of Funds and Request for Applications  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 245 (Thursday, December 21, 1995)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 66276-66314]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-31009]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
    Administration on Children and Families
    
    
    Local Research Partnerships for Early Head Start Programs: 
    Availability of Funds and Request for Applications
    
    AGENCY: Head Start Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and 
    Families (ACYF), Administration for Children and Families (ACF).
    
    ACTION: Availability of funds and request for applications to conduct 
    research in Early Head Start programs.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Head Start Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and 
    Families has recently awarded grants to provide comprehensive services 
    to families with infants and toddlers. A cross-site evaluation of a 
    subsample of the total 68 Early Head Start programs will be performed 
    by Mathematica Policy Research Institute which was designated as the 
    National Early Head Start Evaluation contractor. Additional site-
    specific research will be conducted by research partners who reside in 
    or near the same subset of Early Head Start programs and will attempt 
    to determine the interrelationships of child, family, program and 
    community variables and program outcomes (local research). This 
    announcement describes the requirements to be met by applicants seeking 
    to conduct the local research.
    
    DATES: The closing time and date for receipt of applications is 5 p.m. 
    (Eastern Time Zone) February 20, 1996. Applications received after 5 
    p.m. will be classified as late.
    
    ADDRESSES: Mail applications to: Early Head Start Local Research, 
    Department of Health and Human Services, ACF/Division of Discretionary 
    Grants, 6th floor, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Washington, DC 20447, 
    Mail Stop 6c-462, Attn: Application for Early Head Start Local 
    Research. 
    
    [[Page 66277]]
    
        Hand Delivered, Courier or Overnight Delivery applications are 
    accepted during the normal working hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday 
    through Friday, on or prior to the established closing date at: Program 
    Announcement: ACYF/HS, Administration for Children and Families, 
    Division of Discretionary Grants, ACF Mailroom, 2nd Floor Loading Dock, 
    Aerospace Center, 901 D Street, SW, Washington, DC 20024.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The ACYF Operations Center, Technical 
    Assistance Team (1-800-351-2293), is available to answer questions 
    regarding application requirements and to refer you to the appropriate 
    contact person in ACYF for programmatic questions.
        In order to determine the number of expert reviewers that will be 
    necessary, if you are going to submit an application, please send a 
    post card with or call in the following information: the name, address, 
    and telephone and fax number of the contact person and the name of the 
    organization four weeks prior to the submission deadline date to: 
    Administration on Children, Youth and Families Operations Center, 
    Ellsworth Associates, Inc., 3030 Clarendon Blvd., Suite 240, Arlington, 
    VA 22201, (1-800-351-2293).
        If you decide to submit after the notification date, you may still 
    submit a proposal.
    
    Part I. General Information
    
    A. Table of Contents
    
        This announcement is divided into four parts, plus appendices:
        Part I provides information on the purpose of the local research 
    effort and a discussion of issues particularly relevant to the local 
    research under this announcement.
    
    A. Table of Contents
    B. Definitions
    C. Purpose
    D. Background
    E. Local Research Studies
    
        Part II contains key information such as eligible applicants, 
    project periods, special conditions and other information.
    
    A. Statutory Authority
    B. Eligible Applicants
    C. Special Conditions
    D. Cooperative Agreements
    E. Project Duration and Federal Share
    
        Part III presents the criteria upon which the proposals will be 
    reviewed and evaluated.
    
    A. Criteria
    B. Review Process
    
     Part IV contains information for preparing the fiscal year 
    1996 application.
    
    A. Availability of Forms
    B. Proposal limits
    C. Check List for a Complete Application
    D. Due Date
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
    F. Required Notification of State Single Point of Contact
    
        Appendix A contains a list of the Early Head Start grantees.
        Appendix B-1 contains the Request for Proposal for contract to 
    conduct the evaluation of Early Head Start as originally published and 
    now funded.
        Appendix B-2 contains the tentative measures proposed for the 
    cross-site evaluation.
        Appendix C includes the relevant forms necessary for completing the 
    application.
    
    B. Definitions
    
        Research Partner: The initial university or non-profit organization 
    designated in the Early Head Start grantee's proposal or a university 
    or non-profit organization which formed a partnership with an Early 
    Head Start grantee for the purpose of conducting the research under 
    this announcement after the Early Head Start grant was awarded.
        Cooperative Agreement: A cooperative agreement is a funding 
    mechanism which allows substantial Federal involvement in the 
    activities undertaken with Federal financial support. Details of the 
    responsibilities, relationships, and governance of the cooperative 
    agreement will be spelled out in the terms and conditions of the award. 
    The specific responsibilities of the Federal staff and grantee staff 
    are tentatively listed in Part II-D and will be agreed upon prior to 
    the award of each cooperative agreement.
    
    C. Purpose
    
        The purpose of this announcement is to invite universities and non-
    profit organizations who agree to be the research partners of Early 
    Head Start program grantees to submit proposals for competitive 
    Cooperative Agreements to (1) conduct local research studies on issues 
    related to Early Head Start which will enrich and expand the National 
    Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Study and benefit the field, 
    and (2) establish the foundation for a possible longitudinal study of 
    the mediating and moderating influences on the developmental progress 
    of Early Head Start and Head Start children and families.
    
    D. Background
    
        On March 17, 1995, ACF announced the availability of funds on a 
    competitive basis for Early Head Start Programs. Sixty-eight applicants 
    were successful and became Early Head Start grantees on the effective 
    date of September 30, 1995. (Applicants should be familiar with this 
    document in order to prepare a responsive proposal. Copies of this 
    announcement are available from the Technical Assistance Team at (1-800 
    351-2293.) Along with the development of the program specifications for 
    Early Head Start, ACYF designed a set of research and evaluation 
    initiatives to establish the efficacy of the Early Head Start program 
    and to contribute new knowledge to the field on factors which influence 
    the developmental progress of low-income infant and toddlers and their 
    families. The plan for the Early Head Start research and evaluation 
    activities is based on the premise that the first set of Early Head 
    Start programs are prototypes of the Early Head Start concept of state-
    of-the-art services for families with infants and toddlers. They will 
    operate during a period which will almost assuredly see major social 
    reforms and reconfigurations in services including welfare, health and 
    child care. Therefore, the lessons learned and the models that will be 
    developed will shape the direction of services for families with 
    infants and toddlers well into the 21st century. The plan features (1) 
    a dynamic and iterative formative evaluation process, designed to be 
    used in subsequent Early Head Start programs, that will serve as the 
    instrument for continuous program improvement; (2) an impact evaluation 
    to determine whether and under what conditions program prototypes were 
    effective, and (3) an integrated research base consisting of local 
    research studies as well as the cross-site study for generating further 
    hypotheses around a broad array of potential development and service 
    issues and possibilities; and (4) an intended longitudinal study of 
    both Early Head Start and Head Start.
        On May 19, 1995, the first phase of the competitive award process 
    for the conduct of the research and evaluation activities was initiated 
    as a Request for Proposal for a national contractor to perform the 
    cross-site evaluation of Early Head Start (Appendix B-1). The contract 
    resulting from the competition for the national contractor was awarded 
    to Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. This announcement is the second 
    phase, in which cooperative agreements will be awarded on a competitive 
    basis to the research partners of Early Head Start grantees to conduct 
    local research studies.
    
    [[Page 66278]]
    
    
    E. Local Research Studies
    
    1. Local Research Under This Announcement
    a. Role of Local Researchers
        Under the total Early Head Start Research and Evaluation effort 
    local researchers will have two significant roles:
        (1) Under this announcement they will conduct research relevant to 
    the issues addressed in section E.2.b. below; and (2) under a 
    subcontract to the national contractor they will be responsible for the 
    collection of data for the cross-site study. The local researchers will 
    form a consortium with the other local researchers and the national 
    contractor to insure that all the parts of this study form a cohesive 
    whole. A Technical Review Panel will by appointed by ACYF to review all 
    the research and evaluation efforts as a whole and provide additional 
    input. (See Appendix B-1 for a more detailed description.) In order to 
    ensure the minimum of intrusion for the Early Head Start programs and 
    to ensure a cohesive study, no applicants will be considered for an 
    award under this announcement unless they agree to serve as 
    subcontractors to the national contractor.
    b. Concepts
        Local research studies are intended to supplement, complement and 
    enrich the research that will be conducted in the cross-site study. 
    (See Appendix B-1 The Statement of Work for the Cross-site Evaluation 
    and Appendix B-2 for a list of the tentative measures proposed for the 
    cross-site evaluation.) With full access to the cross-site data 
    collected in their respective sites, local investigators will have an 
    opportunity to explore mediating events or the theoretical pathways 
    that explain the results that are obtained. In addition, local research 
    provides an opportunity to identify outcomes, that because of data 
    constraints, are not explored in the cross-site study or are specific 
    to an individual site. It also expands the possibilities for multiple 
    measures of the same construct. Another advantage of local research is 
    the enhanced opportunity for the use of observational, ethnographic, 
    case study and other qualitative approaches that inform our 
    understanding of how the program functions and explain the particular 
    outcomes that are achieved.
        Four outcome domains and specific outcomes under each were 
    preliminarily identified by the Advisory Committee on Services for 
    Families with Infants and Toddlers for Early Head Start. Although no 
    one program is expected to be equally successful across all outcomes, 
    these outcomes were identified by the Committee as particularly 
    important for continued child, family and program development.
        Child: Health and physical development; social competency; secure 
    attachments with parents and other caregivers; language and cognitive 
    development; resiliency factors; benefits to siblings.
        Family: Attitudes towards parenting; parent-child interaction; 
    reduction in teenage pregnancy and positive birth outcomes; having a 
    medical home; parenting, employability and progress towards self-
    sufficiency; training and education; housing; physical and mental 
    health; substance abuse; home environment; safety; involvement in the 
    Early Head Start program; knowledge of child development; child 
    guidance beliefs and practices.
        Community: Collaboration among agencies serving children and 
    families; seamlessness in referrals and actual service provision; 
    quality of services for children and families; increase in services for 
    infants and toddlers; safety.
        Staff: Staff-parent/child relationships; staff continuity; staff 
    professional development; staff compensation; staff physical and mental 
    health; staff qualifications; and staffing patterns.
        The major question for the local studies is ``What mediates and 
    moderates positive child and family development within the context of 
    the specific Early Head Start program and the local community?'' Each 
    of the local research studies may focus on variables within one of the 
    four outcome domains listed above. Positive child and family 
    development are the ultimate objectives of Early Head Start, and thus, 
    must have a prominent focus. However, well-designed local research 
    studies which focus on particular staff or community outcomes will be 
    considered if their relationship to the well-being of children and 
    families can be theoretically linked through the existing literature 
    and investigated within the time frame of the five-year cooperative 
    agreement. Investigators focusing on the same outcome domain may find 
    additional opportunities for cooperative research. Depending on the 
    questions for the local research, investigators may choose or not 
    choose to incorporate the control group, which will be part of the 
    cross-site evaluation, in the local research study.
        Within the framework of the Early Head Start program design, each 
    site represents a unique model based upon the needs, values, resources 
    and cultural climate of its community. Therefore, within the array of 
    possible outcomes, it is highly likely that each program will place 
    different emphases among them and work toward additional objectives 
    that are unique to the particular local site. It is therefore important 
    for the local research studies to identify site-specific outcomes which 
    are not explored in the cross-site study and to study intra-site 
    differential impacts and the reasons for them. The local studies will 
    enhance the cross-site analysis by the provision of additional 
    explanatory material for inter-site differences and by the 
    identification of additional effects of Early Head Start programs. The 
    first data collection point for the child's developmental status, 
    attachment, mother/child interaction and other child and family 
    measures for the cross-site analysis will be around the time of the 
    child's first birthday. ( See Appendix B-2 for a list of tentative 
    measures.) If applicants see a need for earlier data collection for 
    their local research studies, they may propose such data collection 
    using the same or other measures as part of the local research data 
    collection and analyses.
    c. Study Parameters
    --Design
    
        The program sites whose local research partners receive awards 
    under this announcement will be sites in which both local research and 
    the national cross-site evaluation are conducted. However, if less than 
    12 proposals receive an acceptable rating, additional sites may be 
    selected to participate only in the national cross-site evaluation to 
    ensure 12 sites for the cross-site effort. The sites with local 
    researchers will become the potential sites to continue on with the 
    follow-up longitudinal studies. For the cross-site evaluation, all 12 
    sites, whether they are additionally local research sites or not, will 
    be required to participate in random assignment of those families who 
    have applied to the Early Head Start program and in which there is a 
    pregnant woman or a child under one year of age. Such families will be 
    randomly assigned to either the program or control group under a system 
    designed by the national contractor with participation from the local 
    researchers. The Early Head Start program must agree to fully cooperate 
    with the random assignment as a condition for the research partner to 
    receive an award under this announcement.
        As noted above, applicants are not required to utilize the control 
    group in their local research designs unless the proposed research 
    questions require such a design. However, since the cost 
    
    [[Page 66279]]
    of the data collection on a number of child and family measures for the 
    program and control group will be covered by the national contractor, 
    the applicant may wish to consider adding an additional sample, such as 
    a random sample of the Early Head Start eligible population, or other 
    types of scientifically sound samples. These samples could contribute 
    valuable information to the Early Head Start research and evaluation 
    effort and would considerably strengthen longitudinal follow-up 
    efforts.
    
    --Sample
    
        In order to be considered for an Early Head Start research 
    cooperative agreement, the applicants must be able to guarantee that 
    their Early Head Start program partners have the ability to recruit a 
    minimum of 150 families meeting the designated criteria for the random 
    assignment pool. Specifically, the families to be recruited must 
    include a child who is born between June 1, 1995 and June 30,1997 and 
    must not have had a child enrolled in Head Start and PCC (Parent and 
    Child Centers) within the last 12 months, or, in the case of CCDP 
    (Comprehensive Child Development Program), the last five years. Neither 
    may the families to be recruited have been enrolled in any other 
    Federal, State or local program with similar comprehensive services for 
    the last 12 months. Exceptions to these requirements will be considered 
    on a site by site, or family basis after the research sites have been 
    selected. (Note: Enrollment in other programs is defined as 
    participating for a minimum of three months.) The families in the 
    random assignment pool, as the term implies, will be randomly assigned 
    to either the program or the control group. (A minimum of 75 in each.) 
    Therefore the Early Head Start program must have the ability to enroll 
    a minimum of 75 families who meet the research requirements during the 
    research recruitment period of March 1, 1996 and June 1, 1998 (27 
    months). The families must be enrolled some time during the mother's 
    pregnancy or before the child is one year of age. The Early Head Start 
    programs will be continuously enrolling families during the course of 
    their operation. Therefore, the research sample will be an additive 
    sample rather than a cohort sample. However, no family will be 
    recruited into the research sample if the child is born before June 1, 
    1995 or after June 30, 1997. If a research sample family leaves the 
    program during the 27 month research recruitment period, replacement of 
    families can only be made within the parameters stated above.
        Although there is a 27 month recruitment and enrollment period for 
    the research sample, sites may wish to use all or part of that period 
    to recruit the requisite sample in accordance with what works best for 
    their program. (For example, some programs may not be ready to recruit 
    or enroll families by March and other programs may wish to enroll the 
    majority of their research sample families as early as possible.) 
    However, to ensure that the site will reach the requisite sample size, 
    the earliest possible enrollment of the full research sample is 
    encouraged. In addition, any site which anticipates that it can secure 
    a sample of over 75 program families and 75 control families over the 
    recruitment period that meet the research criteria, may enroll other 
    families, in excess of the 75 families, which do not meet the research 
    criteria. These additional families will not be included in the 
    research sample. Programs are encouraged, however, to achieve the 
    largest research sample possible, up to 125 families each for the 
    program and comparison group. Larger samples would be a major advantage 
    for any future longitudinal research.
    
    2. Considerations for the Longitudinal Studies
    
        Longitudinal studies beyond the five years of the Early Head Start 
    research and evaluation effort are outside the scope of the present 
    announcement. However, it is ACYF's intent to engage in such 
    longitudinal studies, given availability of future funds and the 
    feasibility of such efforts in five years time. It will be necessary to 
    lay the groundwork for such studies from the beginning of the Early 
    Head Start research and evaluation effort in order to ensure that early 
    data necessary for the longer effort is collected.
        Although the longitudinal studies are related to and embedded in 
    the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Study, they have a number 
    of sufficiently unique considerations to warrant a separate discussion.
        a. Eligibility--It is anticipated that universities and non-profit 
    organizations which receive Early Head Start research grants under this 
    announcement will be potential candidates for follow-on longitudinal 
    research grants. The exact number of grants that will be awarded for 
    the follow-on longitudinal studies will depend on the availability of 
    funds and other criteria such as the size of the sample left at the 
    site, the quality of the research conducted to date, and the level of 
    program implementation.
        b. Studies--The longitudinal follow-ons can be conceptualized as 
    two studies which serve different purposes.
    
    Longitudinal Studies of Early Head Start
    
        Longitudinal studies of Early Head Start will address the 
    contributions of earlier intervention to the child and family's later 
    development.
    
    Longitudinal Studies of Head Start
    
        Since Early Head Start programs are required to establish formal 
    linkages with local Head Start programs in order to provide for the 
    continuity of services for children and families, the Early Head Start 
    research sites provide a unique opportunity for the conduct of 
    longitudinal studies of Head Start. Presently, there are no existing 
    studies of Head Start where the early service patterns and experiences 
    of children and families either enrolling in Head Start or serving as 
    comparisons or controls are known to the extent that they will be known 
    in Early Head Start. That data will be available, at least for part of 
    the Head Start population, in the Early Head Start research sites by 
    the time Longitudinal Studies of Head Start are underway. In addition, 
    the studies can make progress in addressing the question of whom among 
    the Head Start population Head Start serves.
        Design and sampling issues for both studies will need careful 
    consideration.
    
    Part II  Program Information and Requirements
    
    A. Statutory Authority
    
        The Head Start Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq.
    
    B. Eligible Applicants
    
        Universities and other non-profit institutions which have been 
    designated by the Early Head Start grantees listed in Appendix A as 
    their research partner for the purposes of the impact evaluation.
        A research partner may be the institution identified in the Early 
    Head Start grantee's proposal or a new or additional research partner 
    that the Early Head Start grantee has selected for the purposes of 
    conducting the research under this announcement.
    
        Note: Only one university or non-profit institution per each 
    Early Head Start grantee may apply. An applicant must be certified 
    by the Early Head Start grantee as the designated research partner. 
    In addition, if a university or non-profit institution applies on 
    behalf of one or more investigators as the research partner of an 
    Early Head Start grantee, the university or non-profit institution 
    may only apply as the partner of any other Early Head Start grantee 
    if applying in behalf of different investigators. 
    
    [[Page 66280]]
    
    
    C. Additional Special Requirements
    
        1. In order to be accepted for review, applications must contain a 
    letter from the Program Director of the Early Head Start program 
    certifying that the applicant is the designated research partner of 
    that program.
        2. The proposed local research study must not overlay additional 
    interventions for children, families or staff which are designed by the 
    local research partner for research purposes beyond the existing Early 
    Head Start intervention designed by the program for that site. (For 
    example, the local research may not investigate research hypotheses 
    that would require the assignment of families enrolled in the program 
    to treatment and control groups.
        3. Applicants must agree to enter a subcontractual or other 
    arrangement with the national contractor for the purposes of collecting 
    the data for the cross-site study and for site-specific analysis of the 
    cross-site data. The subcontract with the national contractor will be 
    in addition to the funds received under this announcement and will 
    primarily consist of providing input to the cross-site design; 
    supervision of cross-site data collection at the local site; ensuring 
    quality control; and site specific data analyses of the cross-site 
    data.
        4. Applicants must agree to work in a consortium with the other 
    local researchers and the national contractor in order to produce an 
    integrated set of studies.
        5. Applicants must present their proposal to and receive approval 
    from the Early Head Start program policy councils (or other appropriate 
    policy group) prior to submission.
        6. Successful applicants must form a local advisory committee 
    consisting of staff and parents of the Early Head Start program, other 
    community agencies and researchers with expertise in areas relevant to 
    the local research.
        7. Applicants' Early Head Start program partner must be able to 
    recruit and enroll the required number and types of families as 
    described in Part I, section E-1-c above.
        8. The principal investigator and at least one other key research 
    team member must attend a minimum of one two-day meeting of the local 
    researchers in Washington, DC in addition to the two-day meetings with 
    the national contractor and the Technical Review Panel. A third day 
    will be provided at the national contractor meetings in order for the 
    local researchers to meet on the issues and coordination of the local 
    research projects. Successful applicants must also plan to attend Head 
    Start's Third National Research Conference in Washington, DC June 20-
    23, 1996. The applicant will be responsible for all travel expenses 
    related to these meetings. These travel expenses may be included in the 
    applicant's budget.
        9. Since the research will be conducted at the Early Head Start 
    program site, applicants must use their off-campus research rates for 
    indirect costs. If the applicant is a non-profit organization, the 
    applicant is limited to an indirect cost rate of no more than 15 
    percent.
        10. In submitting an application, the applicant understands that 
    the data resulting from the local research is the property of the ACYF. 
    Therefore, a copy of the raw data set with accompanying documentation 
    must be submitted to the Government in a manner and frequency that will 
    be specified in consultation with the consortium during the first year 
    of the cooperative agreement. It is not the intention of the Government 
    to inhibit or restrict presentations and publications of the results of 
    the local research by the grantee beyond any publishing restrictions 
    that will be agreed upon by the Consortium and ACYF.
        12. The applicant must provide all required assurances and 
    certifications including a Protection of Human Subject Assurance as 
    specified in the policy described on the HHS Form 596 (attached in 
    Appendix A).
    
    D. Cooperative Agreements
    
        ACYF is utilizing a cooperative agreement mechanism to support 
    local research as a means of ensuring close cooperation and 
    coordination between and among local researchers, Early Head Start 
    programs and the National contractor. Together, these three entities 
    form the research team. Although the three entities have equal status 
    on the research team, each has an area of primary responsibility: (1) 
    The Early Head Start program has primary responsibility for the design 
    and implementation of program services and activities; (2) the National 
    contractor has primary responsibility for the cross-site study; and (3) 
    the local researcher has primary responsibility for the local research 
    study. In applying for a cooperative agreement under this announcement, 
    the applicant pledges close cooperation and coordination with the other 
    research partners.
    1. Responsibilities of the Grantee
    The Grantee
         Conducts a local research study which enhances, enriches 
    or expands the cross-site data and focuses on one of the four Early 
    Head Start outcome domains.
         Designs and conducts the preliminary research for the 
    Longitudinal Study of Early Head Start and the Longitudinal Study of 
    Head Start.
         Participates as a member of the consortium of local 
    researchers and the national contractor.
         Conducts local analyses and interpretations of the cross-
    site data.
         Agrees to enter a subcontract or other financial 
    arrangement with the national contractor for purposes of collecting 
    data for the cross-site study.
         Agrees to work as a member of the research team consisting 
    of the Early Head Start program, the national contractor and the local 
    researcher.
    2. Responsibilities of the Federal Staff
    Federal Staff
         Provide guidance in the development of the final study 
    design.
         Participate as members of the national consortium or any 
    policy, steering or other working groups established at the consortium 
    level to facilitate accomplishment of the project goals.
         Facilitate communication among consortium members, Early 
    Head Start grantees and the Federal staff.
         Provide logistical support to facilitate meetings of the 
    local researchers.
    
    E. Project Duration and Federal Share
    
    1. Project Duration
        Awards, on a competitive basis, are for a project period of five 
    years. Continuation applications beyond the first 12 month budget 
    period, but within the five-year project period, will be entertained in 
    subsequent years on a non-competitive basis, subject to availability of 
    funds, satisfactory progress and a determination that continued funding 
    is in the best interests of the Government.
    2. Federal Share of Project Costs
        Federal share of project costs shall not exceed $150,000 for the 
    first 12-month budget period inclusive of indirect costs and shall not 
    exceed $150,000 for the second and third 12-month budget period. The 
    Federal share of the fourth and fifth budget period shall be negotiated 
    prior to the fourth and/or fifth year of funding.
    3. Matching Requirements
        There is no matching requirement; however, applicants must apply 
    their indirect cost rate for off-campus 
    
    [[Page 66281]]
    research or no more than 15 percent for non-profit research 
    institutions.
    4. Anticipated Number of Projects to be Funded
        It is anticipated that 12 projects will be funded.
    
    Part III  Evaluation Criteria
    
        The criteria presented below will be applied by the reviewers to 
    the applicants submission in order to select the successful applicants. 
    ACYF has prepared a document entitled ``Helpful Tips for Preparing a 
    Successful Research Grant Application.'' This document can be obtained 
    from the Technical Assistance Team at (1-800-351-2293).
    
    A. Criteria
    
    1. Objectives and Significance  25 points
    
         The extent to which the objectives of the local research 
    are important and relevant to the overall Early Head Start Research and 
    Evaluation effort.
         The extent to which the local research study makes a 
    significant contribution to the overall study and to the broader field.
         The extent to which the related literature review supports 
    the study objectives, the questions to be addressed or the hypotheses 
    to be tested.
         The extent to which the questions that will be addressed 
    or the hypotheses that will be tested are sufficient for meeting the 
    stated objectives.
    
    2. Approach  40 points
    
         The extent to which the planned approach reflects 
    sufficient input from and partnership with the Early Head Start 
    program.
         The extent to which the research design is appropriate and 
    sufficient for addressing the questions of the study.
         The extent to which the planned approach allows for the 
    identification and differentiation of site-specific outcomes.
         The extent to which the planned research includes 
    quantitative and qualitative methods.
         The extent to which the planned measures and analyses both 
    reflect knowledge and use of state-of-the-art measures and analytic 
    techniques and advance the state-of-the-art.
         The adequacy of the anticipated research sample size for 
    the requirements of the cross-site study and for the local research 
    study.
         The extent to which the site in which the research will be 
    conducted has a recruitment and enrollment strategy that meets the 
    requirements set forth in the design section of the announcement.
         The extent to which planned site activities are sufficient 
    preparation for potential longitudinal studies.
         The extent to which the applicant's proposals for 
    resolution of the data collection issues as a result of the two types 
    of data collection are realistic and feasible.
         The applicant has provided all required assurances.
         The reasonableness of the budget for the work proposed.
    
    3. Staffing  35 points
    
         The extent to which the principal investigator and other 
    key research staff possess the research expertise necessary to conduct 
    the local research including infant/toddler and family development; the 
    application of advanced statistical analysis for quantitative and 
    qualitative data; and the use of quantitative and qualitative methods 
    as demonstrated by the technical portions of the applications and the 
    information contained in their vitae.
         The extent to which the proposed staff reflect an 
    understanding of and sensitivity to the issues of working in a 
    community setting and in partnership with program staff and parents.
         The extent to which the proposed staff reflect a multi-
    disciplinary team.
         The adequacy of the time devoted to this project by the 
    principal investigator and other key staff in order to ensure a high 
    level of professional input and attention.
         The extent to which the staffing is sufficient for 
    conducting the local research and the data collection and site analysis 
    of the cross-site evaluation.
    
    B. The Review Process
    
        Applications received by the due date will be reviewed and scored 
    competitively. Experts in the field, generally persons from outside the 
    Federal government, will use the evaluation criteria listed in Part III 
    of this announcement to review and score the applications. The results 
    of this review are a primary factor in making funding decisions. ACYF 
    may also solicit comments from ACF Regional Office staff and other 
    Federal agencies. These comments, along with those of the expert 
    reviewers, will be considered in making funding decisions. In selecting 
    successful applicants, consideration may be given to achieving an 
    equitable distribution among geographic regions of the country and 
    other considerations necessary to achieve, to the greatest extent 
    possible, a research and evaluation sample that is representative of 
    all Early Head Start programs.
    
    Part IV  Instructions for Submitting Applications
    
    A. Availability of Forms
    
        Eligible applicants interested in applying for funds must submit a 
    complete application including the required forms included at the end 
    of this program announcement in Appendix C. In order to be considered 
    for a grant under this announcement, an application must be submitted 
    on the Standard Form 424 (approved by the Office of Management and 
    Budget under Control Number 0348-0043). A copy has been provided. Each 
    application must be signed by an individual authorized to act for the 
    applicant and to assume responsibility for the obligations imposed by 
    the terms and conditions of the grant award. Applicants requesting 
    financial assistance for non-construction projects must file the 
    Standard Form 424B, ``Assurances: Non-Construction Programs'' (approved 
    by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0348-0340). 
    Applicants must sign and return the Standard Form 424B with their 
    application. Applicants must provide a certification concerning 
    lobbying. Prior to receiving an award in excess of $100,000, applicants 
    shall furnish an executed copy of the lobbying certification (approved 
    by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0348-0046). 
    Applicants must sign and return the certification with their 
    application.
        Applicants must make the appropriate certification of their 
    compliance with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. By signing and 
    submitting the application, applicants are providing the certification 
    and need not mail back the certification with the application.
        Applicants must make the appropriate certification that they are 
    not presently debarred, suspended or otherwise ineligible for award. By 
    signing and submitting the application, applicants are providing the 
    certification and need not mail back the certification with the 
    application.
        Applicants must also understand that they will be held accountable 
    for the smoking prohibition included within Pub.L. 103-227, Part C 
    Environmental Tobacco Smoke (also known as The Pro-Children's Act of 
    1994). A copy of the Federal Register notice which implements the 
    smoking prohibition is included with the forms. By signing and 
    submitting the application, applicants are providing the certification 
    and need not mail back the certification with the application.
        All applicants for research projects must provide a Protection of 
    Human 
    
    [[Page 66282]]
    Subjects Assurance as specified in the policy described on the HHS Form 
    596 (approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control 
    number 0925-0137) in Appendix C. If there is a question regarding the 
    applicability of this assurance, contact the Office for Protection from 
    Research Risks of the National Institutes of Health at (301)-496-7041. 
    Those applying for or currently conducting research projects are 
    further advised of the availability of a Certificate of Confidentiality 
    through the National Institute of Mental Health of the Department of 
    Health and Human Services. To obtain more information and to apply for 
    a Certificate of Confidentiality, contact the Division of Extramural 
    Activities of the National Institute of Mental Health at (301) 443-
    4673.
    
    B. Proposal Limits
    
        The proposal should be double-spaced and single-sided on 8\1/
    2\'' x 11'' plain white paper, with 1'' margins on all sides. Use only 
    a standard size font such as 10 or 12 pitch throughout the 
    announcement. All pages of the narrative (including appendices, 
    resumes, charts, references/footnotes, tables, maps and exhibits) must 
    be sequentially numbered, beginning on the first page after the budget 
    justification as page number one. Applicants should not submit 
    reproductions of larger sized paper that is reduced to meet the size 
    requirement. Applicants are requested not to send pamphlets, brochures, 
    or other printed material along with their applications as these pose 
    copying difficulties. These materials, if submitted, will not be 
    included in the review process. In addition, applicants must not submit 
    any additional letters of endorsement beyond any that may be required.
        The length of the narrative section, including appendices, should 
    not exceed 60 pages. Anything over 60 pages will be removed and not 
    considered by the reviewers. Applicants are encouraged to submit 
    curriculum vita using ``Biographical Sketch'' forms used by some 
    government agencies.
        Please note that applicants that do not comply with the 
    requirements in the section on ``Eligible Applicants'' will not be 
    included in the review process.
    
    C. Checklist for a Complete Application
    
        The checklist below is for your use to ensure that the application 
    package has been properly prepared.
    
    --One original, signed and dated application plus two copies.
    --Attachments/Appendices, when included, should be used only to provide 
    supporting documentation such as resumes, and letters of agreement/
    support.
    --A complete application consists of the following items in this order:
    
        (1) Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424, REV. 4-88);
        (2) Budget information--Non-Construction Programs (SF424A&B REV.4-
    88);
        (3) Budget Justification, including subcontract agency budgets;
        (4) Letter from the Director of the Early Head Start program 
    certifying that the applicant is the designated research partner of the 
    respective program;
        (5) Application Narrative and Appendices (not to exceed 60 pages);
        (6) Proof of non-profit status. Any non-profit organization 
    submitting an application must submit proof of its non-profit status in 
    its application at the time of submission. The non-profit organization 
    can accomplish this by providing a copy of the applicant's listing in 
    the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) most recent list of tax-exempt 
    organizations described in Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code or by 
    providing a copy of the currently valid IRS tax exemption certificate, 
    or by providing a copy of the articles of incorporation bearing the 
    seal of incorporation of the State in which the corporation or 
    association is domiciled.
        (7) Assurances Non-Construction Programs;
        (8) Certification Regarding Lobbying;
        (9) Where appropriate, a completed SPOC certification with the date 
    of SPOC contact entered in line 16, page 1 of the SF 424, REV.4-88;
        (10) Certification of Protection of Human Subjects.
    
    D. Due Date for the Receipt of Applications
    
        1. Deadline: Mailed applications shall be considered as meeting an 
    announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline time 
    and date at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 
    Administration for Children and Families, Division of Discretionary 
    Grants, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Mail Stop 6c-462, Washington, DC 
    20447, Attention: Early Head Start Local Research, Applicants are 
    responsible for mailing applications well in advance, when using all 
    mail services, to ensure that the applications are received on or 
    before the deadline time and date.
        Applications handcarried by applicants, applicant couriers, or by 
    overnight/express mail couriers shall be considered as meeting an 
    announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline date, 
    between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., at the U.S. Department of 
    Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, 
    Division of Discretionary Grants, ACF Mailroom, 2nd Floor Loading Dock, 
    Aerospace Center, 901 D Street, SW., Washington, DC 20024, between 
    Monday and Friday (excluding Federal Holidays). (Applicants are 
    cautioned that express/overnight mail services do not always deliver as 
    agreed.) ACF cannot accomodate transmission of applications by fax. 
    Therefore, applications faxed to ACF will not be accepted regardless of 
    date or time of submission and time of receipt.
        2. Late applications: Applications which do not meet the criteria 
    above are considered late applications. ACF shall notify each late 
    applicant that its application will not be considered in the current 
    competition.
        3. Extension of deadlines: ACF may extend the deadline for all 
    applicants because of acts of God such as floods, hurricanes, etc., 
    widespread disruption of the mails or when it is anticipated that many 
    of the applications will caome from rural or remote areas. However, if 
    ACF does not extend the deadline for all applicants, it may not waive 
    or extend the deadline for any applicants.
    
    E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
    
        Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Public Law 96-511, the 
    Department is required to submit to OMB for review and approval any 
    reporting and record keeping requirements in regulations including 
    program announcements. This program announcement does not contain 
    information collection requirements beyond those approved under OMB 
    Control Numbers 0348-0043, 0348-0044, 0348-0046 and 0925-0137.
    
    F. Required Notification of the State Single Point of Contact
    
        This program is covered under Executive Order 12372, 
    ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,'' and 45 CFR part 100, 
    ``Intergovernmental Review of Department of Health and Human Services 
    Program and Activities.'' Under the Order, States may design their own 
    processes for reviewing and commenting on proposed Federal assistance 
    under covered programs.
        * All States and Territories except Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, 
    Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, 
    Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, 
    Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, American Samoa and Palau have elected 
    to participate in the Executive Order process and have 
    
    [[Page 66283]]
    established Single Points of Contact (SPOCs). Applicants from these 
    twenty-one jurisdictions need take no action regarding E.O. 12372. 
    Applicants for projects to be administered by Federally-recognized 
    Indian Tribes are also exempt from the requirements of E.O. 12372. 
    Otherwise, applicants should contact their SPOCs as soon as possible to 
    alert them of the prospective applications and receive any necessary 
    instructions. Applicants must submit any required material to the SPOCs 
    as soon as possible so that the program office can obtain and review 
    SPOC comments as part of the award process. It is imperative that the 
    applicant submit all required materials, if any, to the SPOC and 
    indicate the date of this submittal (or the date of contact if no 
    submittal is required) on the Standard Form 424, item 16a.
        Under 45 CFR 100.8(a)(2), a SPOC has 60 days from the application 
    deadline to comment on proposed new or competing continuation awards.
        SPOCs are encouraged to eliminate the submission of routine 
    endorsements as official recommendations.
        Additionally, SPOCs are requested to clearly differentiate between 
    mere advisory comments and those official State process recommendations 
    which may trigger the ``accommodate or explain'' rule.
        When comments are submitted directly to ACF, they should be 
    addressed to: Department of Health and Human Services, Administration 
    for Children and Families, Division of Discretionary Grants, 370 
    L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447. A list of the Single 
    Points of Contact for each State and Territory is included as an 
    Appendix to this announcement.
    
        Dated: December 14, 1995.
    Olivia A. Golden,
    Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
    
    Appendix A--List of Early Head Start Grantees
    
    Alaska
    
    Rural CAP Child Development, Karen King, P.O. Box 200908, Anchorage, AK 
    99520-0908, Telephone: (907) 279-2511, Fax: (907) 279-6343, E-mail: 
    None
    
    Arizona
    
    Southwest Human Development Ginger Ward, 202 E. Earll, Suite 140, 
    Phoenix, AZ 85012, Telephone: (602) 266-5976, Fax: (602) 274-8952, E-
    mail: [email protected]
    
    Arkansas
    
    Child Development Inc., JoAnn Williams, P.O. Box 2110, Russellville, AR 
    72811, Telephone: (501) 968-6493, Fax: (501) 968-7825, E-mail: 
    [email protected]
    
    California
    
    The Children First, Manuel Castellanos Jr., Venice Family Clinic, 604 
    Rose Avenue, Venice, CA 90291, Telephone: (310) 314-7320 x670, Fax: 
    (310) 314-7641, E-mail: None
    Northcoast Children's Services (NCS), Siddiq Kilkenny, P.O. Box 1165, 
    Arcata, CA 95521, Telephone: (707) 822-7206, Fax: (707) 822-7962, E-
    mail: None
    Sacramento Employment Training Agency (SETA), Head Start, Catherine 
    Goins, 3750 Rosin Court, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95834, Telephone: 
    (916) 263-5342, Fax: (916) 263-3779, E-mail: None
    
    Colorado
    
    Clayton Mile High Family Futures Project, Mitzi Kennedy/Adele Phelan, 
    3801 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Denver, CO 80205, Telephone: (303) 
    355-2008, Fax: (303) 331-0248, E-mail: None
    Community Partnership for Child Development, Terry Schwartz, 2132 E. 
    Bijou, Colorado Springs, CO 80909, Telephone: (719) 635-1536 x217, Fax: 
    (719) 634-8086, E-mail: Later date
    Family Star, Lereen Castellano/Alicia Sheridan, 1331 E. 33rd Avenue, 
    Denver, CO 80205, Telephone: (303) 295-7711, Fax: (303) 295-0958, E-
    mail: None
    
    District of Columbia
    
    Edward C. Mazique Parent Child Center, Cynthia Faust, 1719-13th Street, 
    NW, Washington, DC 20009, Telephone: (202) 462-3375, Fax: (202) 939-
    8696, E-mail: None
    United Cerebral Palsy of Washington and Northern VA (UCP), Stanley L. 
    Pryor, 3135 Eighth Street, NE, Washington, DC 20017, Telephone: (202) 
    269-1500, Fax: (202) 526-0519, E-mail: [email protected]
    
    Florida
    
    Alachua County School District, Donna Omer, School Board of Alachua 
    County, 620 East University Avenue, Gainesville, FL 32601, Telephone: 
    (904) 955-7605, Fax: (904) 955-6700, E-mail: None
    Metro Dade Community Action Agency, Regina M. Grace, 395 NW. 1st 
    Street, Miami, FL 33128, Telephone: (305) 347-4640, Fax: (305) 372-
    8745, E-mail: None
    
    Georgia
    
    Berry Chattooga Early Development Center, Nancy Daniel, 702 South 
    Congress Street, Summerville, GA 30747, Telephone: (706) 857-1651, Fax: 
    (706) 857-6610, E-mail: None
    Clark Atlanta University Head Start, Linda Hassan, 350 Autumn Lane, 
    SW., Atlanta, GA 30314, Telephone: (404) 696-9585 x104, Fax: (404) 696-
    9524, E-mail: None
    Georgia Early Head Start Network, Donna Overcash, Save the Children 
    Child Care Support Ctr., 1447 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 700, Atlanta, 
    GA 30309, Telephone: (404) 885-1578, Fax: (404) 874-7427, E-mail: 
    [email protected]
    
    Illinois
    
    City of Chicago, Dept. of Human Services, Frank McGehee, 510 North 
    Peshtigo Court, 8th Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, Telephone: (312) 744-
    0251, Fax: (312) 744-7530, E-mail: None
    The Ounce of Prevention Fund, Portia Kennel, 188 W. Randolph Street, 
    #2200, Chicago, IL 60601, Telephone: (312) 853-6080, Fax: (312) 853-
    3337, E-mail: None
    Wabash Area Development, Inc., Donna Emmons, 100 N. Latham, Enfield, IL 
    62835, Telephone: (618) 963-2387, Fax: (618) 963-2525, E-mail: None
    
    Indiana
    
    Healthy Beginnings, Hamilton Center, Anita Lascelles, 620 8th Avenue, 
    Terre Haute, IN 47804, Telephone: (812) 231-8335, Fax: (812) 232-8228, 
    E-mail: None
    
    Iowa
    
    Mid-Iowa Community Action, Susan Fessler, 1001 South 18th Street, 
    Marshalltown, IA 50158, Telephone: (515) 752-7162, Fax: (515) 752-9724, 
    E-mail: None
    Upper Des Moines Opportunity, Inc., Mary Jo Madvig, P.O. 519, 101 
    Robbins Avenue, Graettinger, IA 51342-0519, Telephone: (712) 859-3885, 
    Fax: (712) 859-3892, E-mail: None
    
    Kansas
    
    Head Start Parent & Child Center, Glenda Wilcox, 931 South St. Francis, 
    Wichita, KS 67211, Telephone: (316) 267-8314, Fax: (316) 267-7185, E-
    mail: None
    Project EAGLE of the University of Kansas Medical Center, Martha 
    Staker, Gateway Centre Tower II, Suite 1001, 4th & State Avenue, Kansas 
    City, KS 66101, Telephone: (913) 281-2648, Fax: (913) 281-2680, E-mail: 
    None 
    
    [[Page 66284]]
    
    Salina USD #305, Korey Powell-Hensley, 700 Jupiter, Salina, KS 67401, 
    Telephone: (913) 826-4868, Fax: (913) 826-4867, E-mail: None
    
    Kentucky
    
    Breckinridge-Grayson Programs, Inc., Cleo Lowery, P.O. Box 63, 
    Leitchfield, KY 42755, Telephone: (502) 259-4054, Fax: (502) 259-4055 
    E-mail: None
    Murray Head Start, Judy Whitten, 208 S. 13th Street, Murray, KY 42074, 
    Telephone: (502) 753-6031, Fax: (502) 759-4906, E-mail: None
    
    Maryland
    
    The Family Services Agency, Inc., Mary C. Jackson, 640 E. Diamond 
    Avenue, Suite A, Gaithersburg, MD 20877, Telephone: (301) 840-2000 
    x205, Fax: (301) 840-9621, E-mail: None
    Friends of the Family, Inc., Linda R. Gaither, 1001 Eastern Avenue--2nd 
    Floor, Baltimore, MD 21202-4364, Telephone: (410) 659-7701, Fax: (410) 
    783-0814, E-mail: None
    
    Michigan
    
    Region II Community Action Agency, Martha York, Center for Family, 817 
    W. High Street, Jackson, MI 49203, Telephone: (517) 784-2895, Fax: 
    (517) 788-5998; 784-9226, E-mail: None
    
    Mississippi
    
    Friends of Children of Mississippi, Inc., Cathy Gaston/Marvin Hogan, 
    4880 McWillie Drive, Jackson, MS 39206, Telephone: (601) 362-1541, Fax: 
    (601) 362-1613, E-mail: None
    
    Missouri
    
    Human Development Corporation, Lois A. Harris, 929 North Spring Avenue, 
    St. Louis, MO 63108, Telephone: (314) 652-5100 x285, Fax: (314) 652-
    0813, E-mail: None
    KCMC Child Development Corporation, Shirley Stubbs-Gillette, 2104 East 
    18th, Kansas City, MO 64127, Telephone: (816) 474-3751 x603, Fax: (816) 
    474-1818, E-mail: None
    
    Nebraska
    
    Central Nebraska Community Services, Suzan Obermiller, P.O. Box 509, 
    Loup City, NE 68853, Telephone: (308) 745-0780, Fax: (308) 745-0824, E-
    mail: None
    
    New Hampshire
    
    Community Action Program Belknap-Merrimack Counties, Inc., Rebecca 
    Johnson, P.O. Box 1016, Concord, NH 03302-1016, Telephone: (603) 225-
    3295, Fax: (603) 228-1898, E-mail: None
    
    New Jersey
    
    Babyland Nursery, Inc., Mary Smith/Martin Schneider, 755 South Orange 
    Avenue Newark, NJ 07106, Telephone: (201) 399-3400, Fax: (201) 399-
    2076, E-mail: None
    NORWESCAP Head Start Administration, Linda Kane, 481 Memorial Parkway, 
    Phillipsburg, NJ 08865, Telephone: (908) 454-8830, Fax: (908) 859-0729, 
    E-mail: None
    
    New York
    
    The Astor Home for Children, Elizabeth Colkin, 50 Delafield Street, 
    Poughkeepsie, NY 12601, Telephone: (914) 452-4167, Fax: (914) 452-0718, 
    E-mail: None
    Chautauqua Opportunities, Inc. Head Start, Grace Knaak, Municipal 
    Bldg--5th Floor, 200 E. Third Street, Jamestown, NY 14701, Telephone: 
    (716) 661-9430 Fax: (716) 661-9436 E-mail: [email protected]
    Educational Alliance, Marion Lazar, 197 East Broadway, New York, NY 
    10002, Telephone: (212) 475-6200 x6200, Fax: (212) 982-0932, E-mail: 
    None
    Parent & Child Center, Coleen A. Meehan, 175 Hudson Street, Syracuse, 
    NY 13204, Telephone: (315) 470-3324, Fax: (315) 474-6863, E-mail: None
    Project Chance Early Head Start, Bart O'Conner, 136 Lawrence Street, 
    Brooklyn, NY 11201, Telephone: (718) 330-0845, Fax: (718) 330-0846, E-
    mail: None
    
    North Carolina
    
    Asheville City Schools Preschool and Family Literacy Center, Robbie H. 
    Angell 441 Haywood Road, Asheville, NC 28806, Telephone: (704) 255-
    5423, Fax: (704) 251-4913, E-mail: None
    
    North Dakota
    
    Little Hoop Community College, Beverly Graywater, P.O. Box 89, Fort 
    Totten, ND 58335, Telephone: (701) 766-4070, Fax: (701) 766-1357, E-
    mail: None
    
    Ohio
    
     Child Focus--Clermont County Head Start, Terrie Hare, 1088 Hospital 
    Drive, Suite A, Batavia, OH 45103, Telephone: (513) 732-5432, Fax: 
    (513) 732-5440, E-mail: None
    Cincinnati-Hamilton County Community, Action Agency, Verline Dotson, 
    2904 Woodburn Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45206, Telephone: (513) 569-1840, 
    Fax: (513) 569-1251, E-mail: None
    
    Oregon
    
    Southern Oregon Child and Family Council, Inc., Blair Johnson, 505 Oak 
    Street, P.O. Box 3819, Central Point, OR 97502, Telephone: (503) 664-
    4730; 857-9255, Fax: (503) 664-6620, E-mail: Pending
    
    Pennsylvania
    
    Family Foundations, Laurie Mulvey/Heather Fisher, 1811 Boulevard of the 
    Allies, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, Telephone: (412) 281-3511 Fax: (412) 281-
    3254, E-mail: [email protected]
    Philadelphia Parent Child Center, Inc., Jewel Morrissette-Ndulula, 2515 
    Germantown Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19133, Telephone: (215) 229-1800, 
    Fax: (215) 229-5860, E-mail: None
    
    Puerto Rico
    
    Aspira Inc. of Puerto Rico, Edme Ruiz Torres, Box 29132, 65th Infantry 
    Station, Rio Piedras, PR 00929, Telephone: (809) 768-1968, Fax: (809) 
    257-2725, E-mail: None
    New York Foundling Hospital, Zaida Fernandez, P.O. Box 191274, San 
    Juan, PR 00919-1274, Telephone: (809) 753-9082; 753-1321; 753-9080, 
    Fax: (809) 763-9209, E-mail: None
    
    South Carolina
    
    District #17 Schools, Anita E. Kieslich, P.O. Box 1180, Sumter, SC 
    29150, Telephone: (803) 778-6433, Fax: (803) 469-6006, E-mail: None
    SHARE Greenville-Pickens Head Start, Rubye H. Jones, 652 Rutherford 
    Road, Greenville, SC 29609, Telephone: (803) 233-4128, Fax: (803) 233-
    4019, E-mail: None
    
    Tennessee
    
    Chattanooga Human Services, Head Start/PCC, Donna Ginn, 2302 Ocoee 
    Street, Chattanooga, TN 37406, Telephone: (423) 493-9750, Fax: (423) 
    493-9754, E-mail: None
    Tennessee CAREs, Barbara Nye, Tennessee State University, 330 Tenth 
    Avenue N., Box 141, Nashville, TN 37203, Telephone: (615) 963-7231, 
    Fax: (615) 963-7214 E-mail: None
    
    Texas
    
    Avance San Antonio Inc., Rebecca C. Cervantez, 2300 W. Commerce, Suite 
    304, San Antonio, TX 78207, Telephone: (210) 220-1788, Fax: (210) 220-
    3795, E-mail: None
    Head Start of Greater Dallas, Inc., Rob Massonneau, 1349 Empire 
    Central, Suite 900, Dallas, TX 75247, Telephone: (214) 634-8704 x484, 
    Fax: (214) 631-5417, E-mail: None
    
    [[Page 66285]]
    
    Parent/Child Incorporated, Blanche A. Russ-Glover, 1000 West Harriman 
    Place, San Antonio, TX 78207-7900, Telephone: (210) 226-6232, Fax: 
    (210) 228-0071, E-mail: None
    Texas Migrant Council, Inc., John E. Gonzales, 5102 N. Bartlett Avenue, 
    P.O. Box 2579, Laredo, TX 78041, Telephone: (210) 722-5174, Fax: (210) 
    726-1301, E-mail: None
    
    Utah
    
    Bear River Head Start, Glenna Markey, 75 South 400 West, Logan, UT 
    84321, Telephone: (801) 753-0951, Fax: (801) 753-1101, E-mail: None
    
    Vermont
    
    CVCAC Head Start, Marianne Miller, PO. Box 747, 36 Barre-Montepelier 
    Road, Barre, VT 05641, Telephone: (802) 479-1053, Fax: (802) 479-5353, 
    E-mail: None
    Early Education Services, Judith Jerald, 218 Canal Street, Brattleboro, 
    VT 05301, Telephone: (802) 254-3742, Fax: (802) 254-3750, E-mail: None
    
    Washington
    
    Families First, Peg Mazen, P.O. Box 1997, Auburn, WA 98071, Telephone: 
    (206) 850-2582, Fax: (206) 850-0220, E-mail: None
    Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, Jaclyn Haight, 31912 Little Boston Road, 
    NE, Kingston, WA 98346, Telephone: (360) 297-6258, Fax: (360) 297-7097, 
    E-mail: None
    Spokane County Head Start/ECEAP, Washington State Community College 
    #17, Patt Earley, 4410 North Market, Spokane, WA 99202, Telephone: 
    (509) 533-8500, Fax: (509) 533-8599, E-mail: None
    Washington State Migrant Council, Carlos Trevino, 312 Division, 
    Grandview, WA 98930, Telephone: (509) 882-5800, Fax: (509) 882-1605,E-
    mail: None
    
    West Virginia
    
    Monongalia County Head Start, Marie Alsop/Cheryl Wienke,1433 Dorsey 
    Avenue,Morgantown, WV 26505, Telephone: (304) 291-9330, Fax: (304) 291-
    9324,E-mail: [email protected]
    
    Wisconsin
    
    Renewal Unlimited, Inc. - Head Start of Central Wisconsin, Suzanne 
    Hoppe, N6510 Hwy. 51 South, Portage, WI 53901-9603, Telephone: (608) 
    742-5329, Fax: (608) 742-5481, E-mail: None
    
    Appendix B-1--Statement of Work for the Early Head Start Evaluation 
    Contract
    
    Request for Contract--The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation 
    Project
    
    I. Background
    
        The Head Start Act, as amended May, 1994 (42 usc 9801 et seg.) 
    established a new program for families with infants and toddlers within 
    the framework of Head Start. Section 645A of the Head Start Act, 
    Programs for Families with Infants and Toddlers states that (a) ``The 
    Secretary shall make grants in accordance with the provisions of this 
    section for--(1) programs providing family-centered services for low-
    income families with very young children designed to promote the 
    development of the children and to enable their parents to fulfill 
    their roles as parents and to move toward self-sufficiency.''
        The Department of Health and Human Services calls this new program 
    Early Head Start. In developing Early Head Start, the Administration on 
    Children, Youth and Families (ACYF)/Administration for Children and 
    Families (ACF) engaged in an intensive consultation process to learn 
    from parents, practitioners, researchers and academics about the state 
    of the art of quality programming for pregnant women and families with 
    infants and toddlers. As part of the consultation process, the 
    Secretary of Health and Human Services formed the Advisory Committee on 
    Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers. That committee issued 
    a report in September, 1994, that provides the blueprint for the design 
    of the Early Head Start program. The ACF issued a Program Announcement 
    of in March, 1995, and is expected to begin funding programs by 
    September 30, 1995.
        The award of this contract will be followed by a competition among 
    Early Head Start program research partners to establish a limited 
    number of local research sites. The first part of this section 
    describes the overall Early Head Start research and evaluation design, 
    including activities to be completed both by the national Contractor 
    and local researchers; the second part details the scope of work for 
    the national evaluation contract.
    
    The Need for Early Head Start Research and Evaluation
    
        It will be important for the proposed evaluation, mandated by the 
    Head Start legislation, to build upon the substantial body of knowledge 
    that exists and to expand upon findings from related studies. The CCDP 
    evaluation will present results of a rigorous evaluation of an 
    intensive, comprehensive, multi-service intervention program for 
    families of infants and toddlers, implemented across a number of 
    communities nationwide. Additional studies currently underway, such as 
    the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) 
    Child Care study and the Healthy Start evaluation will provide findings 
    and methods that will contribute to the Early Head Start research and 
    evaluation. However, Early Head Start, while related programmatically 
    to many predecessors, combines and/or extends elements in previous 
    programs to present a unique program for evaluation. The Early Head 
    Start program is individualized; intense; comprehensive; child-service 
    oriented; two-generational; locally-adapted, utilizing parents in 
    decision making, and designed to have four levels of effect, on infants 
    and toddlers, families, communities and staff.
    
    II. The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Plan
    
        The research and evaluation plan highlights the first Early Head 
    Start programs as prototypes of the Early Head Start concept. The plan 
    features (1) a dynamic formative evaluation process, designed to be 
    used in subsequent Early Head Start programs, that will serve 
    continuous program improvement; (2) an impact evaluation that will 
    enable determination of whether and under what conditions program 
    prototypes were effective, and (3) an integrated research base for 
    generating further hypotheses around the broad array of potential 
    program issues and possibilities.
        This research and evaluation plan features an integrated local and 
    national evaluation design with nested levels of program involvement. 
    Level I, continuous program improvement, is for all sites; Level II, 
    cross-site impact evaluation and site-specific, related research will 
    occur at selected sites. The impact evaluation is designed to determine 
    the attribution of outcomes to the intervention. The research portion 
    of the study will examine the causally modeled and directional 
    relationships among specific child, family, program and community 
    variables and outcomes.
    
    A. Purposes
    
        Elaboration of the purposes and the proposed approach proposed for 
    each follow:
        1. Continuous Program Improvement. The Advisory Committee on 
    Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers proposed a new role for 
    program 
    
    [[Page 66286]]
    evaluation that would be useful to programs seeking to develop to a 
    standard of high quality. A systematic feedback procedure utilizing 
    formative evaluation techniques will be developed as a tool for dynamic 
    program improvement, and as a prototype formative evaluation tool in 
    the event of Early Head Start program expansion. Thus, the first 
    purpose of this effort is to support a process for generating and 
    utilizing program qualitative and quantitative data, including 
    management information system data, in continuous program improvement. 
    This feature will be addressed programmatically at all Early Head Start 
    sites, in most cases with the aid of local research partners. The 
    national Contractor will provide support for this evaluation function 
    through development of formative evaluation formats for continuous 
    improvement.
        2. Impact. The Head Start Act and the Advisory Committee on 
    Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers called for a study of 
    program effectiveness. A cross-site impact study will be conducted by a 
    national Contractor in a sample of selected sites. Site-specific 
    analyses, conducted by local research partners, will identify local 
    program impacts and elucidate the processes, pathways, and conditions 
    under which the program had an effect. Cross-site and local studies 
    will complement each other.
        3. Additional Research. The Advisory Committee on Services for 
    Families with Infants and Toddlers sought to stimulate the research 
    community to address the many questions we have about how best to 
    enhance the development of low-income infants and toddlers and their 
    families under conditions of changing policies and programmatic 
    variations. The potential for research under the broad umbrella of the 
    Early Head Start purposes and in connection with impact and continuous 
    programmatic improvement is great. The Early Head Start research and 
    evaluation plan thus seeks to bring forth a new generation of solid 
    research to enhance current understandings of optimal developmental 
    circumstances for low-income infants/toddlers, their families and 
    communities. Further, questions related to the program are expected to 
    be fitted to theoretical frameworks to encompass and extend beyond the 
    realm of impact evaluation. This research will be conducted primarily 
    at selected research sites by local research partners
        4. Longitudinal Study. Early Head Start presents a unique 
    opportunity to conduct longitudinal research on Early Head Start, Head 
    Start and beyond. Thus, the research and evaluation plan emphasizes the 
    underlying longitudinal nature of the study of Early Head Start, and is 
    the beginning of a longitudinal study of Early Head Start children and 
    families.
    
    B. Studies
    
        The specific studies this project is expected to generate and the 
    approximate sequence are as follows:
    
    Studies to Describe Early Head Start Programs
    Studies of Program Quality and Program Implementation
    Studies of Program Impact
    Studies of Program Variation
    Studies Directed Towards Specific Policy Concerns
    Studies of Program Impact in a Longitudinal Context
    Studies by Local Researchers on Multiple Topics Pertaining to Early 
    Head Start
    
    C. Questions
    
        A series of preliminary research questions have been developed to 
    guide the formation of the research and evaluation design.
        What are the characteristics of Early Head Start children and 
    families, communities and staff and programs? What are the origins of 
    Early Head Start programs? Who attends Early Head Start? How 
    representative are the children and families who attend Early Head 
    Start of the Early Head Start-eligible population within their 
    communities? What types of communities are Early Head Start programs 
    in? What types of services are delivered? What are the characteristics 
    and emphases of local programs?
        What are the pathways to quality in Early Head Start Programs? How 
    do programs achieve full implementation? How is quality in Early Head 
    Start program components defined? What is the quality of Early Head 
    Start programs and program components? How long does it take to attain 
    quality in Early Head Start programs? What outcomes are associated with 
    various aspects of program quality?
        Is Early Head Start effective in supporting the development of 
    children, family, communities and staff? Which Early Head Start 
    practices maximize benefits for children, families, communities and 
    staff under what kinds of circumstances? What are the collective and 
    differentiated impacts of Early Head Start? How does Early Head Start 
    support development under varying conditions of risk? Are there diffuse 
    effects of the program? Are there effects that can be attributed to 
    targeted programs or services in Early Head Start? Are there mediators 
    between services and outcomes that can be identified? What are the 
    benefits of Early Head Start that translate into dollars saved?
        What child, family, program and community variables contribute to 
    the optimal development of low-income children in Early Head Start 
    programs? Which Early Head Start practices maximize benefits for which 
    children under what conditions? What factors contribute to resiliency 
    of children in Early Head Start? What factors associated with Early 
    Head Start contribute to optimizing health, social or cognitive 
    development? Is targeting specific services for children effective? Are 
    there strategies that are particularly effective with high-risk 
    infants? What are the programs that are achieving positive outcomes for 
    children doing? What are the barriers to attaining positive outcomes 
    for children in Early Head Start programs?
        What Early Head Start factors, community, family and personal 
    factors contribute to parent and family-level outcomes? What factors, 
    under what conditions, enhance parenting skills including parent/child 
    interactions for which parents? What factors contribute to the parents' 
    ability to make progress toward self-sufficiency? What factors 
    contribute to the health and well-being of Early Head Start parents? 
    What factors contribute to male involvement in the lives of Early Head 
    Start children? What factors contribute to parental involvement for 
    which parents in the Early Head Start program? What family outcomes are 
    associated with positive child outcomes, and what are the pathways from 
    parent to child development in the context of Early Head Start? Are 
    there targeted strategies that specifically benefit some parents?
        What changes in communities occur as a result of the Early Head 
    Start program? What were the baseline characteristics of Early Head 
    Start communities at the time programs began? What Early Head Start 
    practices maximize benefits for which communities under what types of 
    circumstances? What new collaborations were established? What community 
    factors supplemented or supplanted the Early Head Start success with 
    families and children? How strong was the community effect on Early 
    Head Start programs? Did Early Head Start have a positive effect on 
    child care services, or on any other services, throughout the 
    community?
        What is the role of staffing in Early Head Start programs? What is 
    the role of staffing and staff development in creating effective 
    program processes and 
    
    [[Page 66287]]
    bringing about positive outcomes for children, families and 
    communities? What enables staff to create the environments and 
    relationships that promote infant/toddler and family development? What 
    factors contribute to staff continuity with children and families? What 
    role does Early Head Start professional development play in staff 
    effectiveness?
        What are the effects of program variations? What are the 
    identifiable program variations in Early Head Start? What can be said 
    about the types of variations and their effects?
        What can we learn through Early Head Start to maximize collective 
    effectiveness of policies and programs that promote the development of 
    low-income children and their families? What is the role of Early Head 
    Start for promoting parents' pathways to work? How do comprehensive 
    Early Head Start services add to the effects of child care on children 
    and families? What are the barriers and pathways to the successful 
    integration of children with special needs into Early Head Start? These 
    questions will be addressed in a report directed towards specific 
    policy concerns by the national Contractor and the Contractor may be 
    asked to provide additional special reports around related issues.
        How do Early Head Start and Head Start families and comparable 
    groups who do not participate in Early Head Start develop over time? 
    What are the developmental trajectories of Early Head Start and 
    comparison group children and families under varying experiences and 
    varying degrees of risk?
    
    D. Design
    
        The Early Head Start program is designed as a prototype of an on-
    going service program as opposed to an intervention designed by an 
    investigator for theory building or hypothesis testing. Thus, while 
    Early Head Start was planned to accommodate evaluation, the evaluation 
    design primarily has been fitted to the program. This programmatic 
    emphasis has shaped numerous research and evaluation design elements as 
    well as the overall two-tier nature of the research and evaluation 
    plan. All Early Head Start programs will participate in either one or 
    both levels of the research and evaluation.
        Level I: All program sites will participate in formative evaluation 
    activities which are designed to assist programs in continuous 
    improvement towards program quality. The Level I evaluation activities 
    also will be instituted for all subsequent Early Head Start programs 
    under conditions of program expansion. The following are features of 
    Level I.
         Sites will use data from a uniform management information 
    system, together with local qualitative and quantitative data in a 
    formative evaluation process.
         In most cases, sites will utilize a local research partner 
    for this aspect of the evaluation.
         The national Contractor will provide standard formats for 
    the use of these data during the first year of the project, and will 
    make the characteristics of this format available to sites added in 
    subsequent years through collaboration with the Training and Technical 
    Assistance Contractor.
        Level II: A sample of sites (12) will participate in Level II 
    activities focusing on evaluating the effectiveness of the Early Head 
    Start utilizing approaches to generate both breadth and depth in impact 
    evaluation . The following are characteristics of Level II activities.
         There will be a cross-site impact study, conducted by a 
    national Contractor, that will be complemented by local studies of 
    program impact.
         The local research partners may apply through a 
    competitive process for grants to carry out research studies at their 
    local sites. The sites whose local research partners receive these 
    grants will become sites for the cross-site impact evaluation. In the 
    event that there are not sufficient numbers of sites whose local 
    research partners have submitted an acceptable proposal or if a better 
    distribution of Early Head Start programs is required than the research 
    site pool represents, as programs were alerted in the Early Head Start 
    program announcement, ACYF may select further sites for evaluation. 
    Data collection at these sites would be conducted directly by the 
    national Contractor.
         The impact evaluation will follow an experimental model. 
    The program will recruit double the number of families needed to fill 
    program openings. Families then will be assigned into program and 
    comparison groups by random assignment, most likely midway through the 
    first fiscal year. The recruitment and random assignment process will 
    continue until October 1, 1996, when programs are expected to attain 
    full enrollment, and, thereafter, as openings occur.
         Only those programs that are fully implemented and 
    operating as the program was designed, with criteria to be determined 
    as an evaluation task, will be included in the final impact evaluation. 
    Additional criteria for impact evaluation may be proposed by ACYF as 
    well. It is anticipated that 12 sites will participate in the final 
    impact evaluation, however, 15 sites will be selected as preliminary 
    impact sites to provide an ample pool of sites for impact evaluation.
         To fit the service emphasis of the program, subjects will 
    be continuously recruited into the program to fill program openings as 
    they occur. That is, this is not a cohort study. Sample sizes will 
    build over time.
         While programs are encouraged to give preference to 
    subjects who are pregnant and have infants under a year of age, they 
    may serve children up to three years of age. However, to focus the 
    sample and to have a potential longitudinal sample of children who 
    began the program early, the research sample will be comprised only of 
    pregnant women and families with infants up to one year of age. This 
    requirement will apply to families recruited at the time the program 
    begins as well as to replacement families.
         Programs will range in size from 75 to 150 families. The 
    impact evaluation sample, due to continuous recruitment, may exceed 150 
    program (and an equal number of comparison group) families but shall be 
    capped at 175 program (and an equal number of comparison group) 
    families for any one site. Site samples need to include at least 50 
    program families (with an equal number of comparison families).
         In addition to documenting the services received by 
    program families in the Early Head Start program, it will be necessary 
    to document the needs and service use by comparison families to 
    determine if the individualized services provided by the Early Head 
    Start program had an impact beyond what comparison families received in 
    their communities. Therefore, the same needs assessment will need to be 
    conducted on control families and their service usage will need to be 
    tracked in a manner as similar to the experimental group as possible.
         Comparison group families will be given an annotated list 
    of community services. Pregnant women will receive an initial referral 
    to prenatal care. All families, program and comparison, participating 
    in the evaluation study will receive approximately $20/interview period 
    for their participation in the study. Both the national Contractor and 
    local researchers are encouraged to solicit material goods to give to 
    families for completing interviews. These goods may be donated locally 
    or nationally and could include diapers, infant clothing, or 
    educational toys.
         Program families who drop out will be followed, to the 
    extent possible. An 
    
    [[Page 66288]]
    evaluation task will be to develop a plan for tracking comparison and 
    program group dropout research sample families and for defining the 
    minimum amount of time that constitutes program involvement.
    
    E. Desired Outcomes
    
        The Early Head Start program targets specific outcome variables in 
    the four program areas. It will be important for this evaluation to 
    focus on those outcomes likely to be associated with involvement in 
    Early Head Start, outcomes that realistically could be expected in a 
    program of this nature. It will also be important to target potential 
    interim outcomes, outcomes most likely to be apparent after the first 
    2-3 years of the study. Preliminary outcomes as proposed by the 
    Advisory Committee on Services for Families with Infants and Toddlers 
    include:
        Child: Health and physical development; social competency; secure 
    attachments with parents and other caregivers; language and cognitive 
    development; resiliency factors; benefits to siblings.
        Family: Attitudes towards parenting; parent-child interaction; 
    reproductive sequelae; having a medical home; parenting employability 
    and progress towards self-sufficiency; training and education; housing; 
    physical and mental health; substance abuse; home environment; safety; 
    involvement in the Early Head Start program; knowledge of child 
    development; child guidance beliefs and practices.
        Community: Collaboration among agencies serving children and 
    families; seamlessness in referrals and actual service provision; 
    quality of services for children and families; increase in services for 
    infants and toddlers; safety.
        Staff: Staff-parent/child relationships; staff continuity; staff 
    professional development; staff compensation; staff physical and mental 
    health.
    
    F. Data Sources
    
        For purposes of definition and discussion, data are referred to as 
    either (1) process or (2) outcome data. Process data refer to those 
    data that document program use and other experiences of families; 
    outcome data refer to those qualities the program seeks to bring about. 
    These data may be thought of, respectively, as independent and 
    dependent variables. It is recognized that some data fit both 
    definitions and that under different circumstances the same data 
    element could be either process or product, independent or dependent, 
    or, mediating, variables.
        A family-level management information system will be introduced, 
    with technical assistance, at the outset of Early Head Start. This 
    information system, known as the Head Start Family Information System 
    (HSFIS) will include data elements focused on intake; needs assessment; 
    use of direct and referred services; family and child health 
    information and other information related to parent employment, 
    housing, education and services. Primarily, HSFIS data will be referred 
    to as process data, however, some of the HSFIS data also can be viewed 
    as interim outcome and outcome data. Program staff will enter and 
    utilize HSFIS data. Program staff will enter initial family background 
    data for all Early Head Start families prior to the random assignment 
    process. HSFIS data will be available for the evaluation of the Early 
    Head Start program.
        Comparison family services use and health data will be recorded 
    frequently in a special HSFIS module that will be identical to or 
    parallel to HSFIS-entered program data. It is proposed that these data 
    will be entered by a Community Family Coordinator/s, who will form a 
    relationship with the comparison group families, paralleling to some 
    extent the context in which HSFIS data for program families will be 
    entered by program staff. The Community Family Coordinator services 
    will be subcontracted by the national Contractor, as feasible, through 
    the local researchers.
        Additional process data (qualitative and quantitative) may be 
    collected locally or nationally as determined by researchers at either 
    level. This may include process data that cannot be collected through 
    the HSFIS in comparable ways for the comparison and program families 
    and will therefore have to be collected using the same, vs. parallel 
    data collection procedures.
        Outcome variables and the measurement for those variables will be 
    identified and developed for the cross-site evaluation, for both 
    project and comparison families, by the national Contractor with input 
    from the local research team. Collection will be contracted through the 
    national Contractor to the local researchers.
        Local research data will be collected by local researchers through 
    grants made directly from ACYF to the local researcher.
    
    G. The Structure
    
        In this research and evaluation design the primary responsibility 
    of the national Contractor will be to coordinate and administer the 
    cross-site evaluation in the 12 impact evaluation sites. This includes 
    financial and administrative responsibility for all data collected for 
    the cross-site-evaluation, including both process and outcome data for 
    both comparison and project families. The national Contractor may use 
    as much program-collected data (HSFIS) as the Contractor and ACYF deem 
    appropriate and, as feasible, is encouraged to subcontract other local 
    data collection to local researchers. The national Contractor has an 
    additional responsibility to provide a standard format for continuous 
    programmatic improvement.
        The local program research partners will be responsible for 
    designing and conducting local research in areas relating to the 
    overall research and evaluation questions. Local researchers will be 
    funded through individual grants with ACYF to carry out locally-
    relevant research. Local researchers will be expected to be reliable 
    subcontractors for the cross-site project. These same local researchers 
    will be expected to serve the continuous improvement needs of their 
    sites and to provide local impact evaluation reports to accompany the 
    cross-site reports required by this research and evaluation design.
        A consortium will provide the mechanism for the coordination 
    required by the project. A Technical Work Group, meeting with the 
    consortium, will advise both the cross-site studies and the local 
    research projects.
    
    H. Challenges to the Evaluation
    
        The unique design for the Early Head Start program and the 
    requirements for research and evaluation present specific interesting 
    challenges that both local researchers and the national Contractor will 
    need to address. These include:
    
    --Program variation within and between sites. The evaluation is 
    expected to stimulate unique approaches for process data measurement to 
    meet the challenge of documenting the variety of programs that will be 
    offered across sites and the individualized nature of services within 
    sites.
    --Changing conditions over time. The evaluation is expected to take 
    into account a shifting range of ages. The age range will shift from a 
    less-than-two year range at the outset to nearly five years towards 
    program completion, due to continuous enrollment. Further, the 
    evaluation will need to accommodate the transition of children out of 
    the program at age 3 into Head Start or other programs and to plan for 
    extending this study longitudinally.
    --Decoupling of parent and child data collection. Because Early Head 
    Start is not a cohort study, the periodicity of child assessments by 
    child age may 
    
    [[Page 66289]]
    need to be decoupled from periodicity in assessing parent variables.
    --Measuring the true nature of services delivered by Early Head Start 
    at both the child and family levels. This challenge requires assessing 
    a number of features associated with services, such as professional 
    standards of quality, duration, intensity, quality of relationships and 
    goodness of fit between the program services and individual needs.
    --Delineating whether the services received are a function of the 
    program or of the families' own initiative from other sources in the 
    community. Since this study is not conducted in the isolation of a 
    laboratory, families may seek and receive services from other community 
    service providers. Therefore, it is important to determine what 
    services families receive outside the program.
    --Documenting services received by the comparison group. We cannot 
    assume a no-treatment comparison group. While some comparison group 
    data has been collected through parent interview, in other studies 
    these data are usually collected at fairly long intervals with limited 
    checking of reliability. The current study requires a careful 
    documentation of comparison group services for interpretation of study 
    findings.
    --Framing the role of relationships. For very young children the 
    relationships with parents and caregivers are central to development 
    and these relationships are often influenced by the relationships 
    between parents and program staff and the relationships of both to the 
    community at large. The evaluation is challenged to assess the central 
    role of relationships in this program.
    --Measuring the effect of Early Head Start on communities and the 
    effect of communities on Early Head Start. Early Head Start is designed 
    to impact not only children and families but also communities. It is 
    designed to have a ripple effect on all the programs for young children 
    in a community. It is an important challenge for the evaluation to 
    determine how to measure the community at baseline and how to measure 
    change. Reciprocally, Early Head Start programs are nested in 
    communities. The evaluation is challenged to reflect the variance of 
    communities and to document the effect these communities have on Early 
    Head Start's ability to carry out its purposes.
    --Conducting impact evaluation exclusively at fully-implemented 
    programs. The evaluation is challenged to determine criteria and timing 
    for assessing full implementation in order to focus the evaluation on 
    programs that are fulfilling the intent of the Early Head Start 
    program.
    --Determining meaningful effects. It will be important for the national 
    Contractor and local researchers to go beyond the question of whether 
    Early Head Start had a simple effect. Researchers are challenged to 
    conceptualize the Early Head Start data set for use with complex 
    analytical approaches involving meaningful aggregations and pattern 
    analyses to account for varying degrees of risk, program variation and 
    time.
    --Fitting national and local evaluations together. The evaluation is 
    challenged to bring two kinds of knowledge about Early Head Start 
    together--that gathered across sites and that gathered from in-depth 
    analyses within sites. A number of premises have been already made 
    about this feature of the evaluation. For example, it is central to 
    this project that local researchers and the national Contractor be 
    equals in evaluating this project. It is presumed that there are 
    questions that each can answer best from their unique perspectives. 
    Local researchers are in a position to truly delve into the causes and 
    effects and pathways to outcomes. They can use in depth and 
    observational as well as qualitative measures to determine a program's 
    effect. The local researchers are expected to address ``what's in the 
    box'' at their site using multiple measures and methods in site-
    specific studies. The local researchers will also need to work together 
    to lay the groundwork for continuation of the study beyond the five-
    year funding period. The national evaluation Contractor, on the other 
    hand, will need to address those questions that cross-site data will 
    enable answering, including those focused on program variation, and 
    those requiring large samples for ample cells sizes required for 
    examination of how the program worked for which children and families 
    under which conditions. The research and evaluation was designed to 
    bring forth both types of studies, and both types of studies are 
    important to the story this evaluation is expected to tell. It will be 
    necessary for every report to reflect this dual and complementary input 
    and for the researchers at both levels to affirm the role of the other. 
    Their task as partners in this evaluation will be to determine at each 
    step of the project how their two efforts fit together.
    --Attrition. Given the five year nature of this program and the 
    intention to continue to follow the original Early Head Start families, 
    it will be important for the partners in this project to coordinate to 
    keep families in the sample. The evaluation is challenged to develop an 
    array of sample-retention ideas that may range from local solicitation 
    of gifts, newsletters and birthday cards to relationship-building to 
    maintain subjects' interest. It will also be necessary to develop a 
    clear plan for determination of which families who leave the project 
    will be followed for research purposes under what conditions.
    
    C-2  Scope of Work for the National Contractor
    
        Specifically, the national Contractor will:
        1. Provide a description of Early Head Start, from its inception 
    through Year 1 for the Early Head Start programs, in all sites, with 
    special emphasis on the 12 research sites, relying primarily on HSFIS 
    data, but complemented by site profiles from research sites.
        2. Conduct a study of program quality and implementation in Early 
    Head Start (preliminary) impact study sites programs (estimate 12). 
    This study will be used in the selection of fully-implemented sites for 
    inclusion in the final impact evaluation, and to present a story of the 
    development of quality for future Early Head Start programs;
        3. Design and carry out an effective cross-site impact evaluation 
    (estimate 12 sites) that addresses evaluation challenges and determines 
    whether Early Head Start had an impact on children, families, 
    communities or staff, and that addresses differential effectiveness by 
    age of entry, need, sub-population, and by program features, duration 
    and intensity;
        4. Conduct a study of program variation in the impact evaluation 
    sites (estimate 12 sites) and its effects;
        5. Establish an infant sample for future longitudinal study in 
    impact evaluation sites (estimate 12 sites), to carefully track all 
    subjects to minimize attrition for the longitudinal study and to 
    include cross-site analyses of data in a longitudinal context in the 
    Final Report of this project;
        6. Conduct timely analyses and reports (in all years) with Early 
    Head Start data in the context of critical policy issues, e.g., 
    examining the value added of Early Head Start comprehensive services 
    for children in full-time child care and in the transition from welfare 
    to work, as requested by 
    
    [[Page 66290]]
    the ACYF and/or the Technical Work Group; and
        7. Prepare an Interim Report in September, 1997, and a Final Report 
    for this project which fully integrate the cross-site and local 
    studies, drawing upon the strengths of each.
    
    C-3  Tasks
    
        As part of this Early Head Start evaluation effort, the Contractor 
    shall access, collect, utilize, analyze and synthesize information 
    regarding the implementation, operation and effectiveness of Early Head 
    Start programs.
        The work for this contract will be conducted in five sequential 12 
    month phases and the activities that will be accomplished include the 
    following:
        In Phase I, the Contractor shall:
        (1) Participate in an orientation meeting;
        (2) Develop a coordination strategy for working with other 
    Contractors involved with Early Head Start;
        (3) Conduct a literature review;
        (4) Select a cadre of consultants;
        (5) Select a Technical Work Group;
        (6) Prepare a revised study design;
        (7) Prepare a process data collection plan;
        (8) Conduct a feasibility study;
        (9) Prepare a logistical proposal for the consortium;
        (10) Prepare a site visit protocol;
        (11) Convene the consortium;
        (12) Prepare a final study design;
        (13) Conduct site visits to all impact evaluation sites;
        (14) Prepare a protocol for the data collection instruments;
        (15) Prepare a data collection and analysis plan;
        (16) Prepare an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance 
    package;
        (17) Prepare a revised work plan;
        (18) Develop criteria for selection of impact sites.
        In Phases II-V, the Contractor shall:
        (19) Conduct annual site visits to impact evaluation sites.
        In ALL Phases, the Contractor shall:
        (20) Conduct cross-site data collection;
        (21) Conduct a minimum of two consortium meetings a year in 
    Washington, DC;
        (22) Establish a protocol of all new or additional data collection 
    instruments and prepare OMB clearance packages for all new or 
    additional data collection instruments;
        (23) Provide timely data entry and return of data disks to sites;
        (24) Process and analyze the data collected;
        (25) Provide a format for continuous program improvement and 
    support its use.
        In addition, in all phases the Contractor shall prepare 
    deliverables as necessary for the work completed in each Phase, 
    including monthly progress reports and in-depth annual progress 
    reports, and the following reports within an agreed-upon time: ``Report 
    of Characteristics of Early Head Start Programs,'' ``Pathways to 
    Quality Study,'' ``Impact Study,'' ``Study of Program Variations,'' 
    ``Studies Directed Toward Specific Policy Concerns,'' an Interim 
    Report, and a Final Report which shall include a synthesis of the 
    results of the final data analyses, reports of site researchers and a 
    summary of the five-year project. In all Phase reports, the national 
    impact study will be supplemented and integrated with the studies from 
    the local research sites.
    
    A. PHASE I
    
        Task 1--Orientation Meeting With the Federal Project Officer (FPO)
        Within one week of the effective date of the contract, the 
    Contractor shall meet with the Federal Project Officer (FPO), and other 
    relevant Federal staff to review the background of the project, and the 
    work to be conducted. The FPO will provide the Contractor with 
    available copies of the relevant grant proposals for ACYF-funded Early 
    Head Start grantees. The Contractor shall propose an agenda for the 
    meeting, indicate who would attend on behalf of the Contractor, list 
    the types of study design modifications or other problems that would 
    require FPO decisions at that meeting, and shall provide a project 
    summary for distribution to ACYF staff. Specific topics to be discussed 
    at the meeting include: Revisions to the proposed work plan in the 
    Contractor's proposal; arrangements for maintaining regular contact 
    with the FPO and relevant Federal staff via the INTERNET network and 
    other means of communication; arrangements for initial contacts and 
    ongoing cooperation with program sites; arrangements for information to 
    be supplied upon selection of research sites and plans for carrying out 
    the Phase I tasks. The meeting shall provide an opportunity to discuss 
    any clarifications of the Contractor's proposed approach, the nature of 
    the project, the schedule of work, and the progress report requirements 
    and other deliverables. There shall be an additional meeting with the 
    consortium in the second half of Phase I.
    
    TASK 2--DEVELOP A COORDINATION STRATEGY FOR WORKING WITH OTHER 
    CONTRACTORS--HSFIS and TRAINING/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACTORS
    
        During all phases of the project, effective coordination with the 
    Federal staff, Federal Contractors working on related projects and 
    evaluations and outside stakeholders will be important to the success 
    of the project. The Contractor shall work with the FPO and other 
    Federal staff to establish and maintain cooperative working 
    arrangements and in weeks two through six of Phase I shall establish a 
    list of tasks and a communication plan for approval by ACYF. It is 
    particularly important that procedures be coordinated with the HSFIS 
    Contractor, including procedures for communication and bi-annual 
    meetings in Washington, DC; procedures for ensuring readiness of 
    grantees to utilize the HSFIS at the outset of Early Head Start; 
    feasibility of HSFIS process data collection for project and comparison 
    groups; procedures for transferring HSFIS reports to the national 
    evaluation Contractor and for reports to the HSFIS Contractor. It will 
    also be necessary to coordinate with Training and Technical Assistance 
    personnel at ACYF and with the Contractor for Early Head Start Training 
    and Technical Assistance, planning for two yearly meetings with that 
    Contractor and ACYF staff in Washington, DC. Reports shall be given to 
    ACYF from each of the meetings.
    
    TASK 3--PREPARE A LITERATURE REVIEW
    
        The Contractor shall conduct a thorough review of the existing 
    literature on programs and evaluations of services to families with 
    infants and toddlers, including documents produced by ACYF, foundations 
    and reports of evaluations, published and not published. To place this 
    evaluation in a national context, the Contractor shall review and 
    synthesize relevant research and evaluation findings based on reliable 
    research methodologies about the effects of services to families with 
    infants and toddlers. This report shall synthesize findings from 
    services to families for infants and toddlers and those from services 
    related to any portion of Early Head Start, present methodological 
    issues and creative solutions to those issues, identify gaps in the 
    findings and methodologies and outline how this study will fill those 
    gaps. This report shall also include the Contractor's recommendations 
    for adding to or refining the evaluation research questions. The draft 
    report 
    
    [[Page 66291]]
    shall be submitted by the beginning of the second month of Phase I and 
    the final report shall be submitted at the beginning of the third month 
    of Phase I. The Contractor shall provide ACYF with copies of each 
    document referenced in the literature review and shall deliver a an IBM 
    PC-compatible 3-\1/2\ inch diskette. ACYF shall reserve the right to 
    make the literature review, or parts of the document, available to the 
    public.
    
    TASK 4--SELECT A CADRE OF CONSULTANTS
    
        The Contractor shall establish a cadre of consultants from relevant 
    academic, professional, consulting and service-provider communities and 
    recommend names within two weeks of the contract effective date. The 
    intent is to have a cadre of professionals available for more intensive 
    involvement on the design and implementation than is feasible with the 
    Technical Work Group (TASK 5). Contractor shall provide the names and 
    vitaes of potential consultants.
        The Contractor shall not secure their formal commitment prior to 
    the award of the contract, and without prior approval of ACYF. The 
    Contractor shall provide the names and vitae of potential consultants, 
    including their specific qualifications relevant to this study. Prior 
    to final approval, the Contractor shall provide a sufficiently detailed 
    description of the specific work (including total projected hours per 
    task or subtask to be done by this cadre, and a timeline for its 
    completion). The Contractor will be responsible for all expenses of 
    these consultants, including air fare, per diem and honorarium. The 
    number of persons in the cadre and the quantity of consultation shall 
    be the decision of the Contractor in cooperation with ACYF. The 
    Contractor shall propose an estimate of consultant use.
        The Contractor shall report on expenditures for professional 
    consultants as a separate line item in monthly expense vouchers and 
    shall provide a separate monthly report on activities of consultants.
    
    TASK 5: SELECT AND CONVENE A TECHNICAL WORK GROUP
    
        The Technical Work Group will advise the entire Early Head Start 
    research and evaluation project, including national impact and local 
    research activities. Within two weeks following the contract effective 
    date, the evaluation Contractor shall recommend eighteen experts in 
    relevant fields, such as: Infant and toddler development; home 
    visitation; child care; Head Start; parent-child relationships; family 
    systems; teen parenting; services research; prevention and intervention 
    research; ethnic diversity and minority issues; health delivery 
    systems; parent education; mental health; adult education; family 
    ecology; community development; staff development; assessment of child 
    development; research methodology; statistics, instrument development, 
    tests and measurement. The Contractor shall be prepared to make 
    modifications in the list, as suggested by ACYF, based on additional 
    and/or alternative candidates who might bring additional strengths to 
    the Technical Work Group and to complete a group of twelve. All 
    Technical Work Group members will require the approval of the ACYF 
    Commissioner. In addition, the Technical Work Group must include 
    rotating representation from research and program sites. Technical Work 
    Group meetings will be held in conjunction with national-local research 
    consortium meetings but there may be additional meetings called by the 
    Contractor as needed. The Technical Work Group will provide guidance 
    for this entire project, advising the cross-site evaluation study and 
    local research, to produce a comprehensive picture of the complex story 
    of the impact of Early Head Start. Therefore, available time of the 
    Technical Work Group will need to be appropriated accordingly. A 
    portion of each Technical Work Group meeting shall be allotted to local 
    researchers issues.
        Phase I meeting schedule: During Phase I of the project the 
    Contractor shall convene the meetings of the Technical Work Group. With 
    the exception of the first meeting, these meetings shall be held during 
    the consortium meetings. Within two months, or earlier if determined 
    advisable in the orientation session, of Phase I a meeting will be 
    convened to solicit initial comments and suggestions regarding the 
    overall scope of the evaluation and issues related to implementing the 
    set of proposed evaluation activities; to review the draft of the 
    literature and resource review plan; to review the draft design and 
    sampling plan and process data collection plans and for consultation in 
    selection of local research partners. Within six months (with final 
    determination to be set by the Early Head Start program timetable) but 
    as early as within four months of Phase I the Technical Work Group will 
    convene in the consortium to be introduced to local researchers and 
    their projects; advise local projects; establish representation from 
    the consortium for the Technical Work Group; establish sampling plans; 
    plan site visits; and to establish the preliminary data collection 
    instruments protocol. Nine months following the beginning of Phase I, 
    members will participate in and report on site visits, including 
    creating site profiles; consult for process evaluation; recommend a 
    final design; recommend a data collection instruments protocol for the 
    cross-site studies; meet with local researchers to plan specifications 
    for their studies; and review the overall research and evaluation plan 
    for Early Head Start. All expenses of the Technical Work Group 
    including honorarium, per diem, travel and lodging to Technical Work 
    Group or consortium meetings shall be covered by the national 
    Contractor. Any site-specific consulting done by the Technical Work 
    Group at site locations, with the exception of that done during site 
    visits, shall not be the responsibility of the national Contractor.
    
    TASK 6--PREPARE A REVISED STUDY DESIGN
    
        Within four and one half months after the beginning of Phase I, the 
    Contractor shall prepare a revised design and sampling plan.
        Design and Sampling Plan: The Contractor shall develop a design and 
    sampling plan based on random assignment methodology. The design and 
    sampling plan also shall specifically include:
         A discussion of the issues and approach the Contractor 
    will use to manage and coordinate with program and research staff, the 
    recruitment and random assignment of families into project and 
    comparison groups in 12 (preliminary) evaluation sites, including 
    discussion of issues pertaining to the implementation of experimental 
    design in low-income communities, steps that will be taken to ensure 
    comparability of program and comparison families and how to ensure 
    minimization of differential response rates and bias, over time;
         A discussion of how the Contractor will meet ethical 
    challenges for comparison families presented by an experimental design, 
    to be addressed, to some extent by presenting an annotated list of 
    community services to comparison families, by a referral process for 
    families that have identified crises, and for pregnant women to receive 
    a focused initial referral for prenatal services;
         A discussion of how the Contractor will resolve challenges 
    related to the burden on families, compensation, and attrition, and a 
    discussion of procedures to be put into place to maintain families' 
    interest, including predetermined plans 
    
    [[Page 66292]]
    for Contractor to provide a payment of approximately $20/interview 
    period for project and comparison families; efforts of the national 
    Contractor or efforts to encourage local sites to leverage additional 
    material resources (such as diapers, infants clothing or toys); efforts 
    of a part-time Community Family Coordinator at each site, who will be 
    subcontracted by the national Contractor, to form relationships with 
    and collect data from the comparison group families (and to some 
    extent, program families). (See TASK 7, for elaboration);
         A discussion of how the Contractor will address the 
    challenge of documenting the nature of services received by the program 
    families, given program variation between and within sites in type of 
    program delivered, quality, duration, intensity, and goodness of fit 
    between program and need; and a discussion of how the Contractor will 
    address the challenge of documenting the types of services comparison 
    group families received.
         A discussion of how the Contractor will meet other 
    challenges to the design as presented in Section C-1-II-H Challenges to 
    the Evaluation, on page 19 of this document, and not directly addressed 
    in any other segment of the Contractor's proposal, including measuring 
    changing conditions over time; framing the role of relationships; 
    measuring and determining full program implementation (See also TASK 
    18);
         A discussion of the importance of the Contractor's plan 
    for determining the representativeness of the Early Head Start sample 
    in impact evaluation communities, utilizing existing data sources;
         A discussion of the implications of the design and how the 
    Contractor will collect data to place impact evaluation programs in a 
    community context, including a baseline measure of community 
    infrastructure; and
         A discussion of any other challenges the Contractor 
    identifies for this evaluation and the Contractor's proposal for 
    resolving those challenges.
    
    TASK 7--PREPARE A PROCESS EVALUATION PLAN
    
        There are multiple challenges to the process evaluation of the 
    Early Head Start program that shall be addressed in a process 
    evaluation plan to accompany the study design (TASK 6) four months 
    after the beginning of Phase I. (1) In Level I sites the Contractor 
    shall develop a process report, ``Characteristics of Early Head Start 
    Programs Report,'' which will be a description of FY '95 and FY '96 
    programs, using HSFIS data. (2) In Level II sites it will be necessary 
    to begin documenting the characteristics, needs and the nature of 
    services for both program and comparison group families, including the 
    characteristics of programs and communities from the outset of Early 
    Head Start.
        The Contractor shall have overall responsibility for collecting the 
    process data required for this study, but shall coordinate with local 
    researchers and program personnel. It is recommended that a part-time 
    Community Family Coordinator be employed or subcontracted at each site 
    who will coordinate local process data collection; maintain a 
    relationship with comparison families; document the service use and 
    provide emergency services for comparison families; and track families 
    who have moved or have left the program. The Contractor shall also be 
    responsible for the collection of:
         A baseline intake interview for comparison and program 
    families in Level II sites. The baseline intake interview may be 
    completed by program staff using the HSFIS, before random assignment of 
    recruited families.
         A needs assessment for comparison and project groups, 
    which may be gathered by the program personnel (program) and a 
    Community Family Coordinator (comparison) families using identical 
    formats, or utilizing an alternative format proposed by the Contractor.
         Establishing comparability of process data between program 
    and comparison groups, utilizing a program-entered HSFIS data and 
    parallel comparison group HSFIS data entry. It is anticipated that 
    collection of service-use and health data will be conducted by the 
    program personnel (for program families) and that a Community Family 
    Coordinator will form a relationship with and enter such data for 
    comparison group families, using a special module of HSFIS. However, 
    the Community Family Coordinator will interview both project and 
    comparison families for data for which comparability of parallel entry 
    cannot be established or the Contractor shall propose an alternative 
    format.
         Additional data collection procedures and a timetable for 
    process data collection from comparison and project families.
         A plan for developing site-specific profiles that will 
    characterize each of the FY '95 impact evaluation sites. This task may 
    cross reference with TASK 10, PREPARE A SITE VISIT PROTOCOL. Year 1 
    site profiles for impact evaluation sites will be jointly authored by 
    national and local researchers and local program personnel.
         An approach that would be used in drawing up a cross-site 
    descriptive study of the FY '95 and FY '96 Early Head Start programs 
    utilizing HSFIS data, supplemented by site profiles from research 
    sites.
         Within two months after the beginning of Phase I, the 
    Contractor shall be prepared to submit an OMB package. See TASK 16, 
    PREPARE AN OMB CLEARANCE PACKAGE) of process data collection 
    instruments in the eventuality all or part of a HSFIS evaluation module 
    is not deemed comprehensive or desirable for process data collection.
         An approach that would be used in drawing up a cross-site 
    descriptive study of FY 95 programs with special emphasis on describing 
    the 12 research sites, using HSFIS data supplement by site profiles 
    from research sites.
    
    TASK 8--CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY STUDY IN 3 SITES
    
        Within two months of the beginning of Phase I, the Contractor shall 
    discuss rationale for and submit a protocol for an evaluation 
    feasibility study protocol and within three months of Phase I shall 
    conduct a feasibility study in 3 sites in order to determine if 
    assumptions about the evaluation design are valid. This study shall 
    involve site visits which shall have tasks to: determine the status of 
    the HSFIS in the site; determine program-use needs assessment; 
    determine viability of entering comparison and project group data with 
    HSFIS software; determine feasibility of establishing adequate sample 
    size for experimental design; and estimate the feasibility of measuring 
    the level and quality of services available in the community for 
    referral services. A report from this study shall be submitted within 
    four months of Phase I.
    
    TASK 9-- PREPARE A LOGISTICAL PROPOSAL FOR A NATIONAL-LOCAL RESEARCH 
    CONSORTIUM
    
        Within three months of Phase I, the Contractor shall be responsible 
    for proposing a consortium logistics plan which shall be submitted to 
    ACYF for approval the seventh month after the beginning of Phase I, 
    following review by the consortium members. This plan shall include the 
    logistical approach to bi-annual consortium meetings in Washington, DC, 
    to be attended by the Contractor, the Technical Work Group and local 
    researchers from impact evaluation sites; a discussion of time-use 
    divided into equal day-long segments in order to meet the three needs 
    of the consortium (impact study planning; local research, and Technical 
    
    
    [[Page 66293]]
    Work Group consultation); a discussion of areas of the impact study for 
    which the Contractor will seek input from the local researchers, i.e., 
    site visit protocols; data collection instruments; data collection 
    procedures; workplan; a discussion of the areas for which the national 
    Contractor, the Technical Work Group and the local researchers will 
    need to work closely together as partners, i.e., preventing attrition, 
    integrating the national and local research efforts, publication 
    issues, and data use. The Contractor is encouraged in preparing these 
    discussions to review other consortium arrangements such as that 
    utilized by LONGSCAN. The Contractor will be responsible for logistical 
    expenses associated with the consortium, as well as for all of the 
    expenses of the Technical Work Group. Local researchers will cover 
    their own travel, lodging, registration and other expenses. The 
    national Contractor shall also provide for honoraria and expenses of 
    any speakers, if necessary, and subject to prior approval from the FPO.
    
    TASK 10-- PREPARE A SITE VISIT PROTOCOL
    
        The third month of Phase I, the Contractor shall develop a draft 
    site visit protocol which details procedures for site visits. The 
    purposes of the site visits will be to review continuous program 
    improvement evaluation procedures at all FY '95 (and FY '96 research 
    sites). In impact evaluation sites, additional purposes will be to 
    establish site profiles, to review staffing for Community Family 
    Coordinators; to establish relationships with the local researchers and 
    to understand the local research projects; to establish the procedures 
    for random assignment, and to establish local procedures for data 
    collection. The FPO and other ACYF representatives will review the 
    draft protocol and return it within one week to the Contractor who 
    shall present a final protocol to ACYF by the fourth month of Phase I. 
    As part of the protocol development process by the third month of Phase 
    I the Contractor shall provide the FPO with a draft letter of 
    introduction for the ACYF Commissioner to send to Early Head Start 
    sites that will participate in site visits. The letter shall identify 
    the Contractor, describe the purpose of the project, and inform the 
    Early Head Start programs about plans for the site visits and specify 
    other contacts, including community and research representatives. A 
    letter shall also be provided to the FPO for the researchers at the 
    sites, identifying their roles in the site visit and describing the 
    purpose of the visit. Prior to conducting the site visits, the 
    Contractor shall submit a memorandum to the FPO outlining a schedule 
    for the visits and an outline of a standardized format for site visit 
    reports that shall be submitted to the FPO within two weeks after each 
    visit. Each proposed three-person site visit team shall be comprised 
    of, but not limited to, representatives of the national Contractor; the 
    Technical Work Group, and program or research staff from other sites. 
    ACYF staff may be represented as well.
    
    TASK 11--CONVENE THE CONSORTIUM
    
        Upon selection of research sites, within four months of Phase I 
    and/or within one month of the selection of research sites, the 
    Contractor shall convene a meeting of the consortium in Washington, DC, 
    including ACYF, the national Contractor, local researchers and the 
    Technical Work Group. The Contractor shall carry out the logistical 
    plan as proposed previously, dividing the consortium time into thirds 
    for addressing needs of the cross-site impact evaluation, local 
    research development and advise for both from the Technical Work Group. 
    At the initial consortium meeting, the Contractor shall provide 
    opportunities for identification of each of the local research sites' 
    research purposes; discuss the logistical plan with the consortium; 
    establish committees as identified by the logistical plan; establish a 
    work plan; establish any subcommittees; discuss issues for immediate 
    and future data collection; review process data to be collected by 
    HSFIS and otherwise; review sample selection procedures; review the 
    preliminary site visit protocol; and name site visit teams. The 
    national Contractor shall communicate about this meeting with ACYF for 
    a potential joint meeting with program staff. The national Contractor 
    is responsible for all costs associated with consortium meetings, 
    including hotel, break out rooms, expenses of Technical Work Group, 
    except for the direct expenses of the local researchers and federal 
    staff.
    
    TASK 12--CONDUCT SITE VISITS TO ALL FY '95 EARLY HEAD START IMPACT 
    EVALUATION SITES
    
        From the fifth through seventh month of Phase I and/or within two 
    months of the selection of research sites, the Contractor shall begin 
    site visits as specified in the Site Visit Protocol. A draft report and 
    sample site profiles shall be submitted to the FPO by the sixth month 
    of Phase I. Site visit reports and profiles on every Early Head Start 
    site evaluation site shall be submitted to ACYF by the seventh month of 
    Phase I. For planning purposes, the Contractor shall allow for site 
    visits of 2 days in length for each site (with the actual length of the 
    visits varying somewhat as a function of the size and complexity of the 
    program, as well as the intended tasks to be accomplished.) All 
    expenses from the site visits shall be handled through the national 
    contract.
    
    TASK 13--PREPARE A FINAL DESIGN
    
        It is anticipated that information provided by the Early Head Start 
    site visits, by the interactions with the local researchers and by the 
    meetings with the consortium, Technical Work Group and the FPO will 
    call for changes and clarifications in the evaluation design and 
    implementation plan. Based on this information the Contractor shall 
    prepare a draft revised technical evaluation design and analysis report 
    by the seventh month of Phase I and final plan by the eighth month of 
    Phase I which consists of the following components:
    A. Statement of Evaluation Outcomes
        A list of research and policy questions, both general and specific, 
    that the study shall address. Each specific question shall be logically 
    connected with the general question to which it relates, as well as 
    being organized according to the overall conceptual model of the study.
        For each specific question the theoretical hypothesis, required 
    data elements and data source(s) shall be identified.
        For each specific question, a discussion of any measurement issues 
    for obtaining realistic and valid outcomes and the approach to 
    resolving those measurement issues shall be included.
    B. Revised Study Design (See TASK 6)
    C. Revised Process Data Collection Plan (See TASK 7)
    
    TASK 14--ESTABLISH A PROTOCOL FOR ALL DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS
    
        By the ninth month following the award of this contract, the 
    Contractor shall submit to the FPO a complete draft protocol for data 
    collection instruments for studies for Phase II of the evaluation and a 
    proposed protocol for data collection instruments for Phases III-V of 
    this study. It is expected that the Contractor will seek input from 
    local researchers through the consortium but that final responsibility 
    for this protocol rests with the Contractor. This protocol will have 
    multiple sets of data collection instruments (or interview guides). The 
    first set includes 
    
    [[Page 66294]]
    instruments to assess quality in site program activities and the second 
    set will include instruments to measure the programs' impact on 
    children, families, communities and staff. A third set will include 
    instruments to determine the variations in programs and may overlap 
    with other sets. It is anticipated that information shall be gathered 
    through interviews with parents and staff as well as through 
    observation of children, parents, home environments, and staff.
        The Contractor's approach to measurement, including discussion of 
    measurement issues, for the several studies of this evaluation shall be 
    presented. The Contractor shall identify strategies for searching for 
    measurement instruments, for including measurement instruments utilized 
    in related studies of infant/toddler development or family services; 
    and for pilot testing the data collection instruments. It is 
    anticipated that community-level outcomes may involve the development 
    of new data collection instruments. It is possible that some of the 
    quality, variations or policy-related data may be collected by the 
    national Contractor using cross-site survey methods or qualitative 
    assessments.
        The instruments selected or developed shall be clearly linked to 
    the conceptual design of the study, services delivered and expected 
    outcomes. The set of instruments for the quality study shall generate 
    information in critical areas such as:
         Child relationships with caregivers.
         Child and parent continuity in relationship with program 
    providers.
         Parent perceptions of, expectations of, and satisfaction 
    with the program.
         Staff perceptions of the quality of their program.
         Parent relationships with case managers and other key 
    Staff.
         Goodness of fit between parent/child needs and services 
    delivered.
         Availability, access and quality of services in the 
    community.
         Availability, access and quality of parent education 
    activities.
         Quality of home visitation.
         Perceptions of the program by community members.
         Child care environment.
        The studies of impact shall generate information in critical areas 
    not contained in the HSFIS or gathered as process data and including:
         Child development.
         Child security of attachment.
         Child risk and resiliency factors.
         Home environment.
         Child care environments.
         Parent-child relationships.
         Other caregiver-child relationships.
         Parenting attitudes.
         Parent knowledge of child development.
         Parent attitudes about guidance.
         Support for parenting.
         Perceptions of conflict and/or violence in the 
    neighborhood.
         Perception of parent involvement activities.
         Community collaboration.
         Community development of services.
         Staff professional development.
         Staff-children/family relationships.
         Sibling health and development.
        For each of the proposed data collection instruments, the 
    Contractor shall attach an analysis of the instruments with regard to 
    any prior use in other studies of a similar nature, their psychometric 
    properties and their acceptance by experts in the field as appropriate 
    measures. The Contractor shall attach the results from pilot studies of 
    each of the instruments in the final protocol. The Contractor shall 
    prepare complete protocols of all instruments, and a training plan for 
    all data collectors. The Contractor shall revise the instruments plan 
    based on input from the FPO and the consortium, including the Technical 
    Work Group, and shall submit final data collection instruments to the 
    FPO for approval by the end of the tenth month of Phase I.
    
    TASK 15--SUBMIT A DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS PLAN
    
        The Contractor shall prepare a data collection and analysis plan 
    that links each study question to the data collection instruments, 
    proposed respondents/data sources and study methods and the final 
    design and sampling plan (TASK 11). The Contractor shall provide a 
    graphic that displays this information.
        The national Contractor shall be responsible for all the costs of 
    data collection for all of the national studies as described in this 
    document, including the cost of compensating families for interviews. 
    Local researchers will also be encouraged to generate additional 
    material resources for families. Impact data collection may be, and it 
    is anticipated in most cases, will be, subcontracted to the local 
    researcher, in response to the Contractor's call for an application 
    containing data collection plan and qualifications of staff. The local 
    researcher shall have first subcontracting opportunity at the first 
    collection period. However, if, after that, due to a lack of quality or 
    timeliness in previous data collection; or the local researcher does 
    not want to subcontract; or there is no local researcher at the site, 
    the national Contractor may subcontract with other qualified 
    researchers for local data collection. Subcontracts shall be renewed on 
    an annual basis.
        The Contractor shall develop an overall data collection plan which 
    clearly outlines timelines for all proposed data collection activities, 
    including a theoretically-based justification for each proposed data 
    collection activity. The data collection plan shall include:
         A discussion of issues around the timing of data 
    collection and a proposed timetable for data collection. It is also 
    anticipated that the impact data shall be collected at multiple points 
    in time, to correspond with predetermined targets around children's age 
    and parent and staff length of time in the program. Thus, data 
    collection activities involving parents and children may need to be 
    decoupled, leading to the likelihood that data collection in any one 
    site may be relatively continuous. The Contractor shall discuss a 
    preferred approach to this issue;
         Procedures for contacting and tracking families over time;
         A discussion of recommended procedures for the follow-up 
    of incomplete data;
         Theoretical justification, procedures and timelines for 
    assessment strategies proposed by the Contractor in additional areas 
    not already mentioned in the presentation related to data collection of 
    the program process;
         Theoretical justification, procedures and timelines for 
    assessment strategies proposed by the Contractor related to data 
    collection of child, family, community or staff outcomes;
         Theoretical justification, procedures and timelines for 
    conducting observations and other data collection focused on program 
    quality or variations;
         A discussion of a quality control component which 
    addresses the training of data collection staff at the local Early Head 
    Start program sites, continuity of data collection staff and methods 
    for ascertaining reliability and effectiveness of data collectors;
         Procedures for identifying and assessing the quality of 
    existing data, as well as procedures for negotiating with sites to 
    access and utilize existing sources of data, particularly as they 
    pertain to community data for determining the representativeness of the 
    Early Head Start recruited families; and
         Procedures for establishing, maintaining and overseeing 
    the subcontractors cooperative relationships with the Early Head Start 
    programs that shall maintain the independence and objectivity required 
    for a third party 
    
    [[Page 66295]]
    evaluation, but will allow for the effective management of data 
    collection activities.
        The Contractor shall discuss the data analysis challenge (Section 
    I-I), including a discussion focused on determining the magnitude of 
    effect across diffuse program services, and propose solutions to these 
    challenges. The Contractor shall identify the specific types of data 
    analyses that will be employed for each phase of data collection and 
    for each data element, within the context of the revised study design, 
    including the unit of analysis, possible aggregations and method of 
    display in the final report.
        The draft data collection and analysis plan shall be submitted to 
    the FPO by the end of the eleventh month after contract effective date. 
    The FPO will review this plan with other ACYF staff and submit comments 
    to the Contractor within one week. The Contractor shall make the 
    required corrections and resubmit the plan in final form to the FPO by 
    the end of twelfth month after contract effective date.
    
    TASK 16--PREPARE AN OMB CLEARANCE PACKAGE
    
        The Contractor shall develop an Office of Management and Budget 
    (OMB) clearance package for the study, including all data collection 
    instruments and transmittal memorandum in accordance with OMB and the 
    ACF guidelines. The package shall include, but not be limited to, the 
    following:
         A justification and introduction to the study. This 
    includes a justification of why the study is needed; how, by whom and 
    for what purpose the information will be used; why existing information 
    cannot be used and a summary of study components;
         Data collection plan. This includes both a description of 
    and a justification for the study design, including the sample plan; 
    design of data collection instruments with a question by question 
    justification; results of pretesting data collection instruments; and a 
    data analysis plan;
         Tabulation and publication plans;
         Consultation with outside agencies;
         Respondent burden estimate;
         Confidentiality statement.
        The OMB package shall be submitted to the FPO by the end of the 
    eleventh month of Phase I. The FPO will provide up to four sets of 
    comments to the Contractor over a period of three weeks. The Contractor 
    shall then submit the final OMB package to the FPO by the end of the 
    twelfth month of Phase II. The Contractor shall allow at least 120 days 
    for OMB approval.
    
    TASK 17--REVISE THE INITIAL WORK PLAN INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSAL
    
        Based on the progress of work covered by Tasks 1-16, the Contractor 
    shall produce a revised work plan for each of the remaining Phases of 
    the contract (Phases II-V), by the twelfth month after the contract 
    effective date. Key issues to be addressed in both the initial and 
    revised work plan shall include:
         Effective coordination of this project with Federal staff 
    and designated Contractors, including HSFIS Contractor; Training and 
    Technical Assistance Coordinator; Early Head Start sites, the 
    consortium and the Technical Work Group;
         Identification of issues to be resolved for data 
    collection with plans and timelines for how those issues will be 
    addressed;
         Identification of logistical issues in the workings of the 
    consortium and plans for addressing these issues. A schedule of 
    consortium meetings;
         A proposed protocol of measures with timelines and 
    identification of data collectors for each data collection point;
         Data collection, analyses and reporting plans for later 
    phases of this project;
         A schedule for subsequent site visits;
         Any other remaining tasks.
    
    TASK 18--SELECT FINAL CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION IN IMPACT EVALUATION
    
        The Advisory Committee on Services to Families with Infants and 
    Toddlers recommended establishing criteria for Early Head Start program 
    evaluation, including the recommendation that no Early Head Start 
    program shall be evaluated that is not fully implemented. Twelve months 
    after the beginning of Phase I, the Contractor, with input from the 
    Technical Work Group, shall submit a draft plan for determining whether 
    sites demonstrate viability for impact evaluation. This plan shall 
    include criteria for defining the minimum threshold for program 
    implementation; standards for demonstrating whether comparability 
    between comparison and project families was maintained; adequate power, 
    and any other criterion deemed important to a valid evaluation of 
    impact, i.e., absence of saturation of Head Start-like services in the 
    community. As criteria for full implementation, the review shall 
    include consideration of measures of implementation associated with the 
    Early Head Performance Standards; Head Start Performance Measures; and 
    program quality in general. This review and the plan shall be submitted 
    to ACYF. On approval of the criteria, site visit teams will rate sites, 
    beginning with research sites, on each criterion; this rating shall 
    involve a site visit which may be combined with a previously scheduled 
    site visit or with other planned data collection. Ratings will be 
    forwarded to ACYF, who will make the final determination of which sites 
    shall be included in the evaluation. Three months after the beginning 
    of Phase II or on a modified timetable as proposed by ACYF or the 
    national Contractor and approved by ACYF, final determination shall be 
    made by ACYF regarding which and how many sites to include in the final 
    impact evaluation. As a conservative estimate, the Contractor shall 
    plan to conduct an impact evaluation at 12 sites.
    
    B. PHASES II-V
    
    TASK 19--CONDUCT ANNUAL SITE VISITS
    
        Within one month of each new Phase, the Contractor shall develop a 
    revised protocol for annual site visits to, at a minimum, all sites 
    included in the evaluation. Protocols for the site visits shall be 
    developed with input from the consortium, including the Technical Work 
    Group, and be submitted to ACYF for final approval within three months 
    of each new Phase. Site visits shall follow the approved protocol and 
    shall include verification of data collection procedures; availability 
    and use of program data, including HSFIS data, for continuous program 
    improvement; follow through on research plans, and continued 
    documentation of the nature of the program. Written reports shall be 
    submitted to ACYF and the site within three weeks of each visit. The 
    written report shall include an updated site profile, authored jointly 
    by the Contractor and the local researcher, where applicable. The 
    Contractor may be asked to conduct site visits to new Early Head Start 
    sites for purposes the same as for FY '95 program sites. The proposal 
    shall include a per-site cost to cover the possibility of additional 
    Early Head Start program site visits in subsequent years.
    
    C. ALL PHASES
    
    TASK 20--CONDUCT CROSS-SITE DATA COLLECTION
    
        The Contractor shall conduct cross-site data collection for the 
    national impact studies (for both the project and comparison groups) in 
    an estimated 12 selected Early Head Start sites, either directly 
    providing for data collection or by subcontracting with local 
    evaluators, as determined on an annual basis. 
    
    [[Page 66296]]
    
        Upon approval of the OMB Clearance Package, the Contractor shall 
    conduct the appropriate data collection activities (outlined in the OMB 
    clearance package) at the selected Early Head Start programs. The 
    Contractor shall develop a plan to have senior evaluation staff conduct 
    periodic site visits during data collection periods for the purpose of 
    monitoring on-site evaluation staff, ensuring quality control and 
    maintaining good working relationships with local research and program 
    staff. The Contractor shall develop procedures for monitoring local 
    staff to make sure they carry out their evaluation responsibilities.
        Where appropriate, the Contractor also shall consider the potential 
    need for the use of security guards to accompany researchers in cases 
    where their safety is at risk.
        As the data collection in this project has a longitudinal nature, 
    whenever possible, data collectors with demonstrated effectiveness 
    shall maintain continuity with families; the Contractor shall have 
    developed compensatory procedures for maintaining reliability of 
    measurement.
        In each site, the Contractor shall continue to design and implement 
    methods for understanding the services provided to both the treatment 
    and comparison groups and at the community level. The Contractor shall 
    continue to build the profile begun at each site to describe the 
    general character of each program and shall continue to examine methods 
    for documenting the program. Finally, the Contractor shall continue to 
    explore methods for understanding the communities' impacts on and from 
    Early Head Start programs. The Contractor shall work closely with 
    researchers at local sites in these tasks.
    
    TASK 21--CONDUCT A MINIMUM OF TWO MEETINGS A YEAR WITH THE CONSORTIUM
    
        Within the first three months following the beginning of each new 
    phase, the Contractor shall convene the consortium, including the local 
    researchers and the Technical Work Group, in Washington, DC., to 
    conduct the business of the consortium according to the consortium 
    workplan. A minimum of two consortium meetings shall be convened each 
    year, and no six month period shall pass without a consortium meeting. 
    The possibility of meeting in connection with Early Head Start program 
    personnel shall be considered for at least one of the two meetings and 
    ACYF shall guide the decision on whether a program-research meeting is 
    advised. There shall be support for at least two meetings of each of 
    the consortium subcommittees per year, as necessary. The Contractor 
    shall deliver ACYF consortium reports with embedded Technical Work 
    Group reports within one month following each consortium meeting. The 
    Contractor shall be responsible for all costs associated with 
    consortium meetings (See TASK 11), except for the direct costs of local 
    researchers and the federal staff. If the Contractor coordinates with 
    program personnel, only the research and evaluation portion of the 
    costs of the consortium shall be the responsibility of the national 
    Contractor.
    
    TASK 22--ESTABLISH A PROTOCOL OF ALL MEASURES FOR EACH NEW PHASE OF THE 
    PROJECT AND PREPARE AND SUBMIT NEW CLEARANCE PACKAGES FOR SUBMISSION TO 
    THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB), AS NECESSARY
    
        Within the first three months of each new phase, and as needed, the 
    Contractor shall review the work plan to determine acceptability of the 
    protocol for each new phase of measurement and the need to obtain OMB 
    clearance. Measures added shall be submitted with input from the local 
    researchers and the Technical Work Group, to ACYF, pilot tested and 
    approved by the consortium according to procedures developed in the 
    original protocol before being submitted to OMB. Procedures under TASK 
    14, TASK 15 and TASK 16 shall be adopted for subsequent measures.
    
    TASK 23--PROVIDE SITES WITH DATA FILES AND SUMMARY REPORTS
    
        The objective of continuous program improvement necessitates the 
    timely turnaround of all data. Therefore, it will be necessary for 
    impact data submitted from local sites to the national Contractor to be 
    cleaned, entered and returned on disk to the local site within three 
    months of its submission to the national Contractor. The national 
    Contractor will need to develop procedures for working with sites that 
    do not maintain quality and timeliness standards within the 
    subcontracting structure.
        Within six months of each Phase, a site-level printout for all 
    impact evaluation sites shall be generated with sites identified only 
    by number to maintain confidentiality, presenting the data, as 
    predetermined in the data analysis plan, in summary form for each site 
    and summed or averaged, as appropriate, across sites. From these 
    printouts, sites shall be able to compare their own results with those 
    of other sites. This report shall include HSFIS data. The national 
    Contractor shall be required to submit, receive and report to ACYF a 
    brief assessment of their own activities in the task of timely data 
    turn around. To this end, initiated by the national Contractor, local 
    programs will briefly evaluate the Contractor's timeliness and 
    formatting of returned data. This brief report shall be due to ACYF by 
    the eleventh month of each Phase, and will be submitted to the ACYF 
    together with printouts of data returned to sites.
    
    TASK 24--PROVIDE FORMATS FOR CONTINUOUS PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT
    
        All Level I sites are expected to utilize formative evaluation 
    procedures for continuous program improvement as a component of program 
    management. Many Level I sites will identify a local university or 
    research institution partner to assist them in completing this task; 
    Level II sites will be expected to participate in continuous program 
    improvement activities in addition to conducting research. The national 
    Contractor shall be a partner in formative evaluation tasks for 
    continuous program improvement by: Conducting site visits to all 12 
    evaluation sites in order to informally assess site preparedness for 
    continuous program improvement and to provide on-site guidance for 
    initiating this function at the local level; developing a standard 
    format for orienting subsequent Early Head Start sites (FY '96 and 
    beyond) to continuous program improvement activities; providing annual 
    formative evaluation training, either directly or through the Training 
    and Technical Assistance Contractor, to all program sites, during 
    annual program consortium meetings in Washington, DC. or utilizing an 
    alternative format; participating in bi-annual coordination meetings 
    with the Training and Technical Assistance Contractor to ascertain that 
    capacity for this new management function develops in all sites, and 
    coordinating with the HSFIS Contractor through bi-annual meetings to 
    assure that HSFIS data are being utilized for continuous program 
    improvement. The Contractor shall provide a continuous program 
    improvement report in the twelfth month of each Phase.
    
    TASK 25--ANALYZE THE DATA
    
        The Contractor shall conduct and complete analyses of national 
    evaluation data on a timetable jointly agreed upon by ACYF and the 
    Contractor, and based on the 
    
    [[Page 66297]]
    methodology approved under TASK 15. After preliminary analyses during 
    each Phase, the Contractor may revise the analytical plan based on the 
    quality and completeness of the database or on refinements of the 
    conceptual hypotheses. Procedures for data analysis shall be reviewed 
    by the Technical Work Group after each Phase of data collection and 
    analysis. Recommendations for any revisions in the data analysis plan 
    shall be submitted to the FPO for review and approval. In addition, the 
    Contractor shall reserve 5% of the budget for analyses requested by 
    ACYF or the Technical Work Group for analyses focused on policy or not 
    specified in the contract.
    
    C-4  Deliverables
    
        a. Literature and Research Review, Draft and Final: The Contractor 
    shall produce a draft and final literature review. The draft report 
    shall be submitted to the FPO by November 1, 1995. The FPO shall 
    provide comments within two weeks. The final version of the revised 
    literature review shall be submitted to the FPO by December 1, 1995.
        b. Revised Draft Study Design and Process Data Plan: The Contractor 
    shall submit a revised study design and sampling plan and process data 
    plan by January 31, 1996. This shall be an updated version of the 
    design and sampling plan submitted in the Contractor's Best and Final 
    proposal and shall reflect input from the Technical Work Group and 
    ACYF. It shall be in draft form. The process data plan shall reflect 
    the progress of HSFIS implementation as well.
        c. Feasibility Study to Test Assumptions of the Design--Protocol 
    and Report: By November 31, 1995, the Contractor shall submit a 
    feasibility protocol, updated from the proposal to reflect knowledge of 
    sites available for the feasibility study. This shall be a pilot study 
    of the sampling, design and process evaluation procedures proposed. 
    Working with ACYF, program sites for this study will be selected and 
    the Contractor shall report findings by January 31, 1996.
        d. Consortium Logistics Plan, Draft and Final: The draft and final 
    Logistics Plan shall be submitted, respectively, by December 31, 1995 
    and April 30, 1996. This document shall be an update from procedures 
    submitted with this contract and shall propose operations procedures 
    that will guide the coordination of consortium logistics for the 
    cooperative aspects of this project.
        e. Site Visit Draft and Final Protocols, Draft and Reports: After 
    review by the Technical Work Group, the draft of the site visit 
    protocol shall be submitted to the FPO by the end of December 1995. 
    ACYF will make recommendations, and the final site visit protocol shall 
    be submitted to the FPO for approval by January 31, 1996. By the 
    beginning of the March 1996, (the week after the first site visit), the 
    Contractor shall submit a draft site visit report for approval by the 
    FPO. The draft report shall include a schedule of events, an analysis 
    of data from interviews and assessments, a summary of any additional 
    issues raised, and an updated and expanded profile of the program and 
    its evaluation. The FPO shall provide feedback to clarify expectations 
    about content and format within two weeks. The final version of the 
    first site visit report shall be submitted to the FPO for approval by 
    the end of the March 1996. For each remaining site visit, a draft of 
    the site visit report shall be submitted to the FPO one week after the 
    site visit. The final version of each report shall be submitted to the 
    FPO for approval three weeks after the site visit. The report for the 
    last of the site visits shall be submitted no later then the end of 
    April 1996.
        f. Study Design, Draft and Final: The study design report shall be 
    due April 30, 1996, reflecting input from the Technical Work Group, the 
    consortium, and from site visits. The FPO shall review the design, 
    obtain comments from other ACYF staff, and provide comments to the 
    Contractor within two weeks. The Contractor shall then make corrections 
    to the design and submit a final study design for review and approval 
    by the FPO. The final study design shall be submitted by May 31, 1996.
        g. Data Collection Instruments Protocol, Draft and Final: With 
    input from the consortium including the Technical Work Group, the 
    Contractor shall develop, or select existing data collection 
    instruments to be submitted to the FPO by the end of the June 1996. The 
    Contractor shall attach an analysis of the instruments with regard to 
    any prior use in other studies of a similar nature, their psychometric 
    properties, their acceptance by experts in the field as appropriate 
    measures, and their performance in pre-tests and field testing. The FPO 
    shall provide comments to the Contractor within two weeks. The 
    Contractor shall revise the instruments based on the comments by the 
    FPO and shall submit final data collection instruments to the FPO for 
    approval by July 31,1996.
        i. Data Collection and Analysis Plan, Draft and Final: With input 
    from the consortium including the Technical Work Group, the Contractor 
    shall present a draft data collection and analysis plan to the FPO by 
    August 31, 1996 that shall be a complete plan for the data collection 
    for this project and shall present a plan for analysis to answer the 
    original study questions. The FPO shall review this plan, returning it 
    to the Contractor for revisions and request its return by the September 
    30, 1996.
        j. Revised Work Plan, Draft and Final: A draft of the Phase I 
    Revised Work Plan shall be submitted to the FPO for approval by July 
    31, 1996. The FPO shall provide feedback within one week. The final 
    version shall be submitted by September 30, 1996. The work plan may be 
    revised once the data collection is underway to make use of new 
    information or strategies which emerge over time. Proposed changes 
    shall be indicated in the monthly technical progress reports and shall 
    require the prior written approval of the FPO before changes are 
    implemented.
        k. OMB Clearance Package: The draft OMB package shall be submitted 
    to the FPO by August 31, 1996. The FPO shall provide up to four 
    separate sets of comments to the Contractor over a period of two weeks. 
    The Contractor shall then submit the final OMB package to the FPO for 
    approval by the end of the September 1996. The Contractor shall allow 
    at least 120 days for OMB approval. An early OMB package shall be 
    developed within the first several months on a schedule to be 
    determined by the Contractor and FPO.
        l. Report of Site Qualifications for Evaluation: The draft 
    criteria, finalized criteria and report of sites' qualification for 
    criteria shall be submitted to ACYF respectively, September 30, 1996, 
    November 30 and December 31, 1996.
        m. Phase II--V Site Visit Protocols, Reports: Following the 
    schedule established for the Phase I site visit reports, a draft of the 
    site visit protocol shall be submitted to the FPO by the third month of 
    each Phase and a draft report shall be submitted one week after the 
    first site visit. The final version of each report shall be submitted 
    to the FPO three weeks after the site visit.
        n. Monthly and Annual Progress Reports: The Contractor shall 
    provide brief monthly technical progress reports to the FPO which 
    clearly indicate the contract tasks which were to be performed in the 
    prior month, a description of the progress made in completing these 
    tasks, problems encountered or remaining from the prior month, expected 
    approach to resolve problems from the prior month, tasks for the 
    current month, and any budgeting implications or significant concerns 
    to 
    
    [[Page 66298]]
    be addressed by the FPO. In addition, the monthly progress reports 
    shall provide a brief review of the status of the contract budget for 
    the respective Phase, with separate presentations (by tasks and 
    subtasks) of the original amount budgeted, funds expended to date, 
    funds expended in the prior month, and the remaining balance of funds 
    in the contract. The first two monthly progress reports shall contain a 
    communication plan which details how all relevant parties shall be 
    updated regarding project activities. This communication plan shall be 
    updated as necessary in the monthly progress report.
        At the end of each project year, the Contractor shall prepare an 
    in-depth annual progress report, summarizing the status of the 
    evaluation cross sites and in each site as well as activities of the 
    evaluation and the consortium, accomplishments, and problems 
    encountered during the year. This report shall also include a detailed 
    plan for activities in each site during the coming year. Within one 
    month of submitting the annual report for approval, the Contractor 
    shall provide an in-depth briefing on the progress of the study and 
    initial findings in Washington, DC, for ACYF staff. Following those 
    briefings, after receiving input from ACYF staff, the Contractor may be 
    required to present a similar briefing for a Congressional audience. In 
    all briefings, the Contractor may be required to collaborate with local 
    researchers involved with Early Head Start evaluation.
        o. New Data Collection Instruments Protocols and OMB Clearance: 
    Within three months of the beginning of each new phase or as is 
    necessary, the Contractor shall submit a protocol and OMB clearance for 
    any new measures to be added to or changed from the originally approved 
    protocols. The form of these deliverables shall be similar to form 
    specified above for Data Collection Instruments Protocol, Draft and 
    Final, and OMB Clearance Package.
        p. Consortium and Technical Work Group Reports: Within one month 
    after each consortium meeting and subcommittee meetings and within one 
    month of each Technical Work Group meeting a written report shall be 
    submitted to ACYF. All meetings of these bodies shall be reported in 
    separate reports, even though Technical Work Group meetings may be 
    embedded in the consortium meetings.
        q. Collaborative Contractor Coordination Reports: One week 
    following each meeting with the HSFIS or Training and Technical 
    Assistance Contractor, a report shall be submitted to ACYF and to the 
    relevant Contractor.
        r. Reports of Data Returned to Sites: Timeliness and Usefulness of 
    Data Turnaround: Reports of data disks returned to sites, site 
    printouts, and reports of assessments of the Contractor's activities at 
    local sites shall be submitted to ACYF by August 31st of each Phase.
        s. Reports of Activities to Support Continuous Program Improvement: 
    By September 30th of each Phase, a report shall be submitted 
    summarizing the Contractor's role in Continuous Program Improvement 
    activities and progress.
        t. Phase Reports: For each Phase, the Contractor shall produce 
    Draft and Final Report/s that shall incorporate data collected and 
    analyzed around the intended purposes and plan of the project. These 
    reports shall be due in draft form August 31 and in final form 
    September 30 of each Phase, or as determined between ACYF and the 
    Contractor. Each report shall have attached relevant local researchers' 
    reports, and provide an overview that integrates national and local 
    findings. The reports shall be presented in the following approximate 
    sequence:
        ``Report of Characteristics of Early Head Start Programs'' which 
    shall be an analysis of first year HSFIS data together with site 
    profiles from impact evaluation sites, co-authored by local researchers 
    and program staff.
        ``Pathways to Quality Study'' which shall be an analysis of quality 
    data from sites in describing the various procedures and successes of 
    programs in attaining program quality. There shall be attached local 
    studies focused on improving program quality. The national Contractor 
    shall provide an overview that integrates findings from the national 
    and local studies.
        ``Impact Studies'' of this project shall compare program to 
    comparison groups and also address the question: for which children and 
    families were there impacts under which conditions? Local research 
    studies focused on this question shall be attached and the national 
    Contractor shall provide an overview that integrates findings from the 
    national and local studies.
        The ``Study of Program Variations'' shall first describe, then 
    examine in depth the site profiles in relation to impact data collected 
    to examine the questions pertaining to which children and families 
    benefitted under what conditions of Early Head Start program 
    variations. Local research reports that address the question shall be 
    included and integrated.
        ``Studies Directed Towards Specific Policy Concerns,'' shall 
    examine potential studies nested in the data set, i.e., analyzing 
    across sites the added effect of Early Head Start to child care and in 
    transition from welfare to work.
        ``Studies of Impact in a Longitudinal Context'' shall be an 
    analysis of findings in a longitudinal context. Local research reports 
    that address the question of change over.
        u. Interim Report: The Contractor shall produce an Interim Report, 
    due September 1, 1997, which will summarize findings to date for the 
    study. This report may require integration with other studies and 
    evaluations of services for infants and toddlers, such as the CCDP 
    evaluation.
        v. Final National Report: The Contractor shall produce a Final 
    Report which provides a national assessment of Early Head Start program 
    implementation and program impacts across the programs examined. This 
    report shall be comprehensive of the entire 5-year duration of the 
    project and shall include and integrate findings from local studies, 
    but maintaining the integrity of the separate studies.
        The Report shall draw conclusions about the following issues (as 
    well as other relevant issues raised during the course of the 
    evaluation):
        (1) Were nationally-defined Early Head Start objectives met?
        (2) Were program implementation objectives realized?
        (3) To what extent were continuous improvement objectives realized?
        (4) To what extent and under what conditions were programs able to 
    implement quality services?
        (5) What short- and long-term impacts did Early Head Start programs 
    have on children, families, communities and staff?
        (6) For which children, families, communities and staff under which 
    conditions was Early Head Start able to realize its objectives? What 
    else was learned about child, family, community, staff effects through 
    Early Head Start?
        (7) To what extent did different prototypes of Early Head Start 
    variation emerge and what kinds of outcomes were associated with 
    various prototypes?
        (8) What was learned through analyses of subgroups in Early Head 
    Start with additional implications for public policy;
        (9) What were the longitudinal effects of Early Head Start under a 
    variety of conditions, including risk and program variation;
        (10) How did the study of Early Head Start programs advance the 
    methods of program evaluation?
        In the Report, the Contractor shall discuss how the contents of 
    this Report 
    
    [[Page 66299]]
    relate to any findings and recommendations presented in previous work 
    produced under this contract. The Contractor also shall provide a 
    discussion of the findings in relation to the literature in the field. 
    The discussion of the literature shall be based on a revised version of 
    the preliminary literature review. These revisions shall take into 
    account new work in the field as well as information produced by 
    Contractors under related studies.
        The Contractor shall submit a draft outline of the final report to 
    the FPO by the end of the ninth month before the end of Phase V. The 
    FPO will have four weeks to review and approve the outline. The outline 
    shall include a framework for a stand-alone Executive Summary. The 
    draft final report based on the approved outline shall be submitted by 
    the end of the tenth month before the end of Phase V. The FPO shall 
    have four weeks to comment on the report and to obtain comments from 
    other HHS staff and the Technical Work Group and the consortium. The 
    Contractor shall plan to revise the draft at least twice based on 
    comments from the FPO and other ACYF staff prior to submitting the 
    final report to the FPO for approval. The Contractor shall make a 
    presentation to Federal staff four weeks after submission of the draft 
    final report. Issues raised in response to the presentation shall be 
    considered in preparing the final version of the report. The final 
    report and a camera ready copy of the final report shall be submitted 
    to the FPO for approval by the end of the 60th month after contract 
    effective date. The final report shall include a stand-alone Executive 
    Summary which must not exceed fifteen pages in length. A copy of the 
    Report of Evaluation Outcomes and of the Executive Summary shall be 
    submitted on IBM PC compatible 3.5 inch 1.4 megabyte DS/HD diskettes in 
    Wordperfect 5.1. In order to accommodate a publishing plan, the 
    Contractor shall submit line item quotes reflecting the exact costs of 
    research, writing, editing and copy preparation associated with the 
    copies of the Final National Report and the Executive Summary 
    (including one unbound camera-ready copy of each report).
        w. Data Files: The Contractor shall produce a public use data 
    diskette for an IBM PC Compatible 3.5 inch 1.4 MB DS/HD diskette at the 
    conclusion of each Phase and at the end of the project for purposes of 
    data archiving. Documentation shall include file and record layout, 
    data dictionary including coding keys, a dump of the first and last 20 
    records of the data set and a summary of the processing including edit 
    conditions and software used for analysis. The file shall contain no 
    personal identifiers or confidential information.
        It is the intent of ACYF that data should be publicly available for 
    secondary analysis and publication of results as soon as possible 
    following the completion of the contract. Prior to the end of the five 
    year project, however, approval of the FPO and consideration by the 
    consortium shall be required for publications, presentations or other 
    uses of the data that are based on that national evaluation, at either 
    a national or local level. Data tapes may be released for analyses by 
    phases with first priority for a six-month period of time going to the 
    Technical Work Group and researchers involved with the project.
    
    Appendix B-2
    
          Table 1.--Components of Proposed Child and Family Assessments     
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Assessment point (child's age)     
                                   -----------------------------------------
                                      14 months     24 months     36 months 
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Direct Child Assessments:                                               
        Cognitive and Language                                              
         Development:                                                       
            Bayley Scales of                                                
             Infant Development...            X             X             X 
            Expressive Language...  ............  ............            X 
            Receptive Language....  ............  ............            X 
        Social Competence:                                                  
            Bayley Behavioral                                               
             Rating Scale.........            X             X             X 
        Emotional and Self                                                  
         Regulation:                                                        
            Bayley Behavioral                                               
             Rating Scale.........            X             X             X 
    Maternal Interview:                                                     
        Parenting and the Home                                              
         Environment a............            X             X             X 
        Social Support Networks                                             
         for Families b...........            X             X             X 
        Child's Social and                                                  
         Emotional Outcomes c.....            X             X             X 
        Child's Language                                                    
         Development (MacArthur                                             
         Communicative                                                      
         Development).............            X             X   ............
        Quality of Parent-                                                  
         Caregiver Relationship...            X             X             X 
    Home and Family Observations:                                           
        Home Observation for                                                
         Measurement of the.......            X             X             X 
        Attachment Q-Sort (Mother-                                          
         Child)...................            X             X             X 
        Videotaping--Mother-Child                                           
         Tasks....................  ............            X   ............
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    a Proposed measures include Concepts of Development Questionnaire,      
      Knowledge of Infant Development Inventory, Aggravation Related to     
      Parenting Scale, Parent Attitude toward Child Expressiveness Scale,   
      Parent Attributions Test, Home Observation for Measurement of the     
      Environment, Family Functioning Style, and Family Environment Rating  
      Scale.                                                                
    b Proposed measures include Social Support Scale and Family Social      
      Network Scale.                                                        
    c Proposed measures include Infant Characteristics Questionnaire,       
      Adaptive Social Behavior Inventory, and a behavioral problem          
      checklist.                                                            
    
    
                               Table 2.--Components of Proposed Parent Services Interviews                          
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Timing (months since enrollment)                         
          Parent interviews      -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Baseline          6            12            18            24            36     
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Service Needs and Use.......            X             X             X             X             X             X 
    Family Health Outcomes......  ............            X             X             X             X             X 
    Parent Involvement..........  ............  ............            X   ............            X             X 
    Progress Toward Economic                                                                                        
     Self-Sufficiency...........  ............  ............            X   ............            X             X 
    
    [[Page 66300]]
                                                                                                                    
    Perceptions of Community....  ............  ............            X   ............            X             X 
    Child Health and Physical                                                                                       
     Development Outcomes.......            X             X             X             X             X             X 
    Benefits to Siblings--Health            X             X             X             X             X             X 
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
         Table 3.--Components of Proposed Child Care Quality Assessments    
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Assessment point (child's age)     
                                   -----------------------------------------
                                      14 months     24 months     36 months 
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Observation of Child Care                                               
     Setting and Provider-Child                                             
     Interactions a...............            X             X             X 
    Provider Survey...............            X             X             X 
    Attachment Q-Sort (Caregiver-                                           
     Child).......................            X             X            X  
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    a Proposed measures include Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale,    
      Family Day Care Rating Scale, Early Childhood Environment Rating      
      Scale, Adult Involvement Scale, and Arnett Scale of Provider          
      Sensitivity.                                                          
    
    
    [[Page 66301]]
    
    
    Appendix C
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.002
    
    
    [[Page 66302]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.003
    
    
    
    [[Page 66303]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.004
    
    
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-C
    
    [[Page 66304]]
    
    
    Instructions for the SF 424
    
        This is a standard form used by applicants as a required 
    facesheet for preapplications and applications submitted for Federal 
    assistance. It will be used by Federal agencies to obtain applicant 
    certification that States which have established a review and 
    comment procedure in response to Executive Order 12372 and have 
    selected the program to be included in their process, have been 
    given an opportunity to review the applicant's submission.
    
    Item and Entry
    
        1. Self-explanatory.
        2. Date application submitted to Federal agency (or State if 
    applicable) and applicant's control number (if applicable).
        3. State use only (if applicable).
        4. If this application is to continue or revise an existing 
    award, enter present Federal identifier number. If for a new 
    project, leave blank.
        5. Legal name of applicant, name of primary organizational unit 
    which will undertake the assistance activity, complete address of 
    the applicant, and name and telephone number of the person to 
    contact on matters related to this application.
        6. Enter Employer Identification Number (EIN) as assigned by the 
    Internal Revenue Service.
        7. Enter the appropriate letter in the space provided.
        8. Check appropriate box and enter appropriate letter(s) in the 
    space(s) provided:
    
    --``New'' means a new assistance award.
    --``Continuation'' means an extension for an additional funding/
    budget period for a project with a projected completion date.
    --``Revision'' means any change in the Federal Government's 
    financial obligation or contingent liability from an existing 
    obligation.
    
        9. Name of Federal agency from which assistance is being 
    requested with this application.
        10. Use the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number and 
    title of the program under which assistance is requested.
        11. Enter a brief descriptive title of the project. If more than 
    one program is involved, you should append an explanation on a 
    separate sheet. If appropriate (e.g., construction or real property 
    projects), attach a map showing project location. For 
    preapplications, use a separate sheet to provide a summary 
    description of this project.
        12. List only the largest political entities affected (e.g., 
    State, counties, cities).
        13. Self-explanatory.
        14. List the applicant's Congressional District and any 
    District(s) affected by the program or project.
        15. Amount requested or to be contributed during the first 
    funding/budget period by each contributor. Value of in-kind 
    contributions should be included on appropriate lines as applicable. 
    If the action will result in a dollar change to an existing award, 
    indicate only the amount of the change. For decreases, enclose the 
    amounts in parentheses. If both basic and supplemental amounts are 
    included, show breakdown on an attached sheet. For multiple program 
    funding, use totals and show breakdown using same categories as item 
    15.
        16. Applicants should contact the State Single Point of Contact 
    (SPOC) for Federal Executive Order 12372 to determine whether the 
    application is subject to the State intergovernmental review 
    process.
        17. This question applies to the applicant organization, not the 
    person who signs as the authorized representative. Categories of 
    debt include delinquent audit disallowances, loans and taxes.
        18. To be signed by the authorized representative of the 
    applicant. A copy of the governing body's authorization for you to 
    sign this application as official representative must be on file in 
    the applicant's office. (Certain Federal agencies may require that 
    this authorization be submitted as part of the application.)
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    [[Page 66305]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.005
    
    
    
    [[Page 66306]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.006
    
    
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-C
    
    [[Page 66307]]
    
    
    Instructions for the SF-424A
    
    General Instructions
    
        This form is designed so that application can be made for funds 
    from one or more grant programs. In preparing the budget, adhere to 
    any existing Federal grantor agency guidelines which prescribe how 
    and whether budgeted amounts should be separately shown for 
    different functions or activities within the program. For some 
    programs, grantor agencies may require budgets to be separately 
    shown by function or activity. For other programs, grantor agencies 
    may require a breakdown by function or activity. Sections A,B,C, and 
    D should include budget estimates for the whole project except when 
    applying for assistance which requires Federal authorization in 
    annual or other funding period increments. In the latter case, 
    Sections A,B,C, and D should provide the budget for the first budget 
    period (usually a year) and Section E should present the need for 
    Federal assistance in the subsequent budget periods. All 
    applications should contain a breakdown by the object class 
    categories shown in Lines a-k of Section B.
    
    Section A. Budget Summary
    
    Lines 1-4, Columns (a) and (b)
    
        For applications pertaining to a single Federal grant program 
    (Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog number) and not requiring a 
    functional or activity breakdown, enter on Line 1 under Column (a) 
    the catalog program title and the catalog number in Column (b).
        For applications pertaining to a single program requiring budget 
    amounts by multiple functions or activities, enter the name of each 
    activity or function on each line in Column (a), and enter the 
    catalog number in Column (b). For applications pertaining to 
    multiple programs where none of the programs require a breakdown by 
    function or activity, enter the catalog program title on each line 
    in Column (a) and the respective catalog number on each line in 
    Column (b).
        For applications pertaining to multiple programs where one or 
    more programs require a breakdown by function or activity, prepare a 
    separate sheet for each program requiring the breakdown. Additional 
    sheets should be used when one form does not provide adequate space 
    for all breakdown of data required. However, when more than one 
    sheet is used, the first page should provide the summary totals by 
    programs.
    
    Lines 1-4, Columns (c) Through (g.)
    
        For new applications, leave Column (c) and (d) blank. For each 
    line entry in Columns (a) and (b), enter in Columns (e), (f), and 
    (g) the appropriate amounts of funds needed to support the project 
    for the first funding period (usually a year).
        For continuing grant program applications, submit these forms 
    before the end of each funding period as required by the grantor 
    agency. Enter in Columns (c) and (d) the estimated amounts of funds 
    which will remain unobligated at the end of the grant funding period 
    only if the Federal grantor agency instructions provide for this. 
    Otherwise, leave these columns blank. Enter in columns (e) and (f) 
    the amounts of funds needed for the upcoming period. The amount(s) 
    in Column (g) should be the sum of amounts in Column (e) and (f).
        For supplemental grants and changes to existing grants, do not 
    use Column (c) and (d). Enter in Column (e) the amount of the 
    increase or decrease of Federal funds and enter in Column (f) the 
    amount of the increase or decrease of non-Federal funds. In Column 
    (g) enter the new total budgeted amount (Federal and non-Federal) 
    which includes the total previous authorized budgeted amounts plus 
    or minus, as appropriate, the amounts shown in Columns (e) and (f). 
    The amount(s) in Column (g) should not equal the sum of amounts in 
    Column (e) and (f).
        Line 5--Show the totals for all columns used.
    
    Section B. Budget Categories
    
        In the column headings (1) through (4), enter the titles of the 
    same programs, functions, and activities shown on Lines 1-4, Column 
    (a), Section A. When additional sheets are prepared for Section A, 
    provide similar column headings on each sheet. For each program, 
    function or activity, fill in the total requirements for funds (both 
    Federal and non-Federal) by object class categories.
        Lines 6a-i--Show the totals of Lines 6a to 6h in each column.
        Line 6j--Show the amount of indirect cost.
        Line 6k--Enter the total of amounts on Lines 6i and 6j. For all 
    applications for new grants and continuation grants the total amount 
    in column (5), Line 6k, should be the same as the total amount shown 
    in Section A, Column (g), Line 5. For supplemental grants and 
    changes to grants, the total amount of the increase or decrease as 
    shown in Columns (1)-(4), Line 6k should be the same as the sum of 
    the amounts in Section A, Columns (e) and (f) on Line 5.
        Line 7--Enter the estimated amount of income, if any, expected 
    to be generated from this project. Do not add or subtract this 
    amount from the total project amount. Show under the program 
    narrative statement the nature and source of income. The estimated 
    amount of program income may be considered by the federal grantor 
    agency in determining the total amount of the grant.
    
    Secton C. Non-Federal-Resources
    
        Lines 8-11--Enter amounts of non-Federal resources that will be 
    used on the grant. If in-kind contributions are included, provide a 
    brief explanation on a separate sheet.
        Column (a)--Enter the program titles identical to Column (a), 
    Section A. A breakdown by function or activity is not necessary.
        Column (b)--Enter the contribution to be made by the applicant.
        Column (c)--Enter the amount of the State's cash and in-kind 
    contribution if the applicant is not a State or State agency. 
    Applicants which are a State or State agencies should leave this 
    column blank.
        Column (d)--Enter the amount of cash and in-kind contributions 
    to be made from all other sources.
        Column (e)--Enter totals of Columns (b), (c), and (d).
        Line 12--Enter the total for each of Columns (b)-(e). The amount 
    in Column (e) should be equal to the amount on Line 5, Column (f), 
    Section A.
    
    Secton D. Forecasted Cash Needs
    
        Line 13--Enter the amount of cash needed by quarter from the 
    grantor agency during the first year.
        Line 14--Enter the amount of cash from all other sources needed 
    by quarter during the first year.
        Line 15--Enter the totals of amounts on Lines 13 and 14.
    
    Section E. Budget Estimates of Federal Funds Needed for Balance of 
    the Project
    
        Line 16-19--Enter in Column (a) the same grant program titles 
    shown in Column (a), Section A. A breakdown by function or activity 
    is not necessary. For new applications and continuation grant 
    applications, enter in the proper columns amounts of Federal funds 
    which will be needed to complete the program or project over the 
    succeeding funding periods (usually in years). This section need to 
    be completed for revisions (amendments, changes, or supplements) to 
    funds for the current year of existing grants.
        If more than four lines are needed to list the program titles, 
    submit additional schedules as necessary.
        Line 20--Enter the total for each of the Columns (b)-(e). When 
    additional schedules are prepared for this Section, annotate 
    accordingly and show the overall totals on this line.
    
    Section F. Other Budget Information
    
        Line 21--Use this space to explain amounts for individual direct 
    object-class cost categories that may appear to be out of the 
    ordinary or to explain the details as required by the Federal 
    grantor agency.
        Line 22--Enter the type of indirect rate (provisional, 
    predetermined, final or fixed) that will be in effect during the 
    funding period, the estimated amount of the base to which the rate 
    is applied, and the total indirect expense.
        Line 23--Provides any other explanations or comments deemed 
    necessary.
    
    Assurances--Non-Construction Programs
    
        Note: Certain of these assurances may not be applicable to your 
    project or program. If you have questions, please contact the 
    awarding agency. Further, certain Federal awarding agencies may 
    require applicants to certify to additional assurances. If such is 
    the case, you will be notified.
    
        As the duly authorized representative of the applicant I certify 
    that the applicant:
        1. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assistance, and 
    the institutional, managerial and financial capability (including 
    funds sufficient to pay the non-Federal share of project costs) to 
    ensure proper planning, management and completion of the project 
    described in this application.
        2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the 
    United States, and if appropriate, the State, through any authorized 
    representative, access to and the right to examine all records, 
    books, papers, or documents related to the award; and will 
    
    [[Page 66308]]
    establish a proper accounting system in accordance with generally 
    accepted accounting standards or agency directives.
        3. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using 
    their positions for a purpose that constitutes or presents the 
    appearance of personal or organizational conflict of interest, or 
    personal gain.
        4. Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable 
    time frame after receipt of approval of the awarding agency.
        5. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 
    (42 U.S.C. Secs. 4728-4763) relating to prescribed standards for 
    merit systems for programs funded under one of the nineteen statutes 
    or regulations specified in Appendix A of OPM's Standards for a 
    Merit System of Personnel Administration (5 C.F.R. 900, Subpart F).
        6. Will comply with all Federal statutes relating to 
    nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: (a) Title 
    VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) which prohibits 
    discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin; (b) 
    Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 
    Secs. 1681-1683, and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on 
    the basis of sex; (c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 
    as amended (29 U.S.C. Sec. 794), which prohibits discrimination on 
    the basis of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as 
    amended (42 U.S.C. Secs. 6101-6107), which prohibits discrimination 
    on the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 
    1972 (P.L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the 
    basis of drug abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and 
    Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 
    (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the 
    basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) Secs. 523 and 527 of the 
    Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290 dd-3 and 290 ee-3), 
    as amended, relating to confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse 
    patient records; (h) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 
    U.S.C. Sec. 3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination 
    in the sale, rental or financing of housing; (i) any other 
    nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which 
    application for Federal assistance is being made; and (j) the 
    requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s) which may 
    apply to the application.
        7. Will comply, or has already complied, with the requirements 
    of Titles II and III of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real 
    Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646) which 
    provide for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or 
    whose property is acquired as a result of Federal or federally 
    assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real 
    property acquired for project purposes regardless of Federal 
    participation in purchases.
        8. Will comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 
    Secs. 1501-1508 and 7324-7328) which limit the political activities 
    of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in 
    whole or in part with Federal funds.
        9. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-
    Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. Secs. 276a to 276a-7), the Copeland Act (40 
    U.S.C. Sec. 276c and 18 U.S.C. Secs. 874), and the Contract Work 
    Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. Secs. 327-333), regarding 
    labor standards for federally assisted construction subagreements.
        10. Will comply, if applicable, with flood insurance purchase 
    requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act 
    of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) which requires recipients in a special flood 
    hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood 
    insurance if the total cost of insurable construction and 
    acquisition is $10,000 or more.
        11. Will comply with environmental standards which may be 
    prescribed pursuant to the following: (a) institution of 
    environmental quality control measures under the National 
    Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) and Executive Order 
    (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating facilities pursuant to EO 
    11738; (c) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d) 
    evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordance with EO 
    11988; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved State 
    management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act 
    of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.); (f) conformity of Federal actions 
    to State (Clear Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of 
    the Clear Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.); (g) 
    protection of underground sources of drinking water under the Safe 
    Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93-523); and (h) 
    protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 
    1973, as amended (P.L. 93-205).
        12. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 
    U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) related to protecting components or potential 
    components of the national wild and scenic rivers system.
        13. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with 
    Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 
    amended (16 U.S.C. 470), EO 11593 (identification and protection of 
    historic properties), and the Archaeological and Historic 
    Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 469a-1 et seq.).
        14. Will comply with P.L. 93-348 regarding the protection of 
    human subjects involved in research, development, and related 
    activities supported by this award of assistance.
        15. Will comply with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 
    (P.L. 89-544, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) pertaining to the 
    care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals held for 
    research, teaching, or other activities supported by this award of 
    assistance.
        16. Will comply with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention 
    Act (42 U.S.C. Secs.  4801 et seq.) which prohibits the use of lead 
    based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residence 
    structures.
        17. Will cause to be performed the required financial and 
    compliance audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984.
        18. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other 
    Federal laws, executive orders, regulations and policies governing 
    this program.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Signature of Authorized Certifying Official
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Title
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Applicant Organization
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Date Submitted
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01P
    
    [[Page 66309]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.007
    
    
    
    [[Page 66310]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.008
    
    
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    [[Page 66311]]
    
    
    Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility 
    Matters--Primary Covered Transactions
    
        By signing and submitting this proposal, the applicant, defined 
    as the primary participant in accordance with 45 CFR Part 76, 
    certifies to the best of its knowledge and believe that it and its 
    principals:
        (a) are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for 
    debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered 
    transactions by any Federal Department or agency;
        (b) have not within a 3-year period preceding this proposal been 
    convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for 
    commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with 
    obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, 
    State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; 
    violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of 
    embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction 
    of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property;
        (c) are not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or 
    civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State of local) 
    with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1) 
    (b) of this certification; and
        (d) have not within a 3-year period preceding this application/
    proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or 
    local) terminated for cause or default.
        The inability of a person to provide the certification required 
    above will not necessarily result in denial of participation in this 
    covered transaction. If necessary, the prospective participant shall 
    submit an explanation of why it cannot provide the certification. 
    The certification or explanation will be considered in connection 
    with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) determination 
    whether to enter into this transaction. However, failure of the 
    prospective primary participant to furnish a certification or an 
    explanation shall disqualify such person from participation in this 
    transaction.
        The prospective primary participant agrees that by submitting 
    this proposal, it will include the clause entitled ``Certification 
    Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and Voluntary 
    Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transaction.'' provided below without 
    modification in all lower tier covered transactions and in all 
    solicitations for lower tier covered transactions.
    
    Certificatin Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and 
    Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions
    
    (To Be Supplied to Lower Tire Participants)
    
        By signing and submitting this lower tier proposal, the 
    prospective lower tier participant, as defined in 45 CFR Part 76, 
    certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief that it and its 
    principals:
        (a) are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for 
    debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from 
    participation in this transaction by any federal department or 
    agency.
        (b) where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to 
    certify to any of the above, such prospective participant shall 
    attach an explanation to this proposal.
        The prospective lower tier participant further agrees by 
    submitting this proposal that it will include this clause entitled 
    ``certificatin Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility, and 
    Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions.'' Without 
    modification in all lower tier covered transactions and in all 
    solicitations for lower tier covered transactions.
    
    Certification Regarding Lobbying
    
    Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative 
    Agreements
    
        The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge 
    and relief, that:
        (1) No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be 
    paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for 
    influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any 
    agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or 
    an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding 
    of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making 
    of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, 
    and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification 
    of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
        (2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been 
    paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to 
    influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of 
    Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a 
    Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, 
    loan or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and 
    submit Standard Form-LLL, ``Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,'' in 
    accordance with its instructions.
        (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this 
    certification be included in the award documents for all subawards 
    at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under 
    grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all 
    subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.
        This certification is a material representation of fact upon 
    which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered 
    into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making 
    or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, 
    U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification 
    shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not 
    more than $100,000 for each such failure.
    
    State for Loan Guarantee and Loan Insurance
    
        The undersigned states, to the best of his or her knowledge and 
    belief, that:
        If any funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for 
    influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any 
    agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or 
    an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this 
    commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a 
    loan, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL 
    ``Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,'' in accordance with its 
    instructions.
        Submission of this statement is a prerequisite for making or 
    entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, 
    U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required statement shall 
    be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more 
    than $100,000 for each such failure.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Signature
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Title
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Organization
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Date
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    [[Page 66312]]
    [GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN21DE95.009
    
    
    
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    [[Page 66313]]
    
    
    Certification Regarding Environmental Tobacco Smoke
    
        Public Law 103-227, Part C--Environmental Tobacco Smoke, also 
    known as the Pro-Children Act of 1994 (Act), requires that smoking 
    not be permitted in any portion of any indoor facility owned or 
    leased or contracted for by an entity and used routinely or 
    regularly for the provision of health, day care, education, or 
    library services to children under the age of 18, if the services 
    are funded by Federal programs either directly or through State or 
    local governments, by Federal grant, contract, loan, or loan 
    guarantee. The law does not apply to children's services provided in 
    private residences, facilities funded solely by Medicare or Medicaid 
    funds, and portions of facilities used for inpatient drug or alcohol 
    treatment. Failure to comply with the provisions of the law may 
    result in the imposition of a civil monetary penalty of up to $1,000 
    per day and/or the imposition of an administrative compliance order 
    on the responsible entity.
        By signing and submitting this application the applicant/grantee 
    certifies that it will comply with the requirements of the Act. The 
    applicant/grantee further agrees that it will require the language 
    of this certification be included in any subawards which contain 
    provisions for children's services and that all subgrantees shall 
    certify accordingly.
    
    OMB STATE SINGLE POINT OF CONTACT LISTING*
    
    ARIZONA
        Janice Dunn, Arizona State Clearinghouse, 3800 N. Central Avenue, 
    Fourteenth Floor, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, Telephone: (602) 280-1315, 
    FAX: (602) 280-1305
    ARKANSAS
        Mr. Tracy L. Copeland, Manager, State Clearinghouse, Office of 
    Intergovernmental Services, Department of Finance and Administration, 
    1515 W. 7th St., Room 412, Little Rock, Arkansas 72203, Telephone: 
    (501) 682-1074, FAX: (501) 682-5206
    ALABAMA
        Jon C. Strickland, Alabama Department of Economic and Community 
    Affairs, Planning and Economic Development Division, 401 Adams Avenue, 
    Montgomery, AL 36103-5690, Telephone: (205) 242-5483, FAX: (205) 242-
    5515
    CALIFORNIA
        Grants Coordinator, Office of Planning and Research, 1400 Tenth 
    Street, Room 121, Sacramento, California 95814, Telephone: (916) 323-
    7480, FAX: (916) 323-3018
    DELAWARE
        Francine Booth, State Single Point of Contact, Executive 
    Department, Thomas Collins Building, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, Delaware 
    19903, Telephone: (302) 739-3326, FAX: (302) 739-5661
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
        Charles Nichols, State Single Point of Contact, Office of Grants 
    Mgmt. and Dev., 717 14th Street, N.W.--Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 
    20005, Telephone: (202) 727-6554, FAX: (202) 727-1617
    FLORIDA
        Suzanne Traub-Metlay, Florida State Clearinghouse, 
    Intergovernmental Affairs Policy Unit, Executive Office of the 
    Governor, The Capitol (Room 1603), Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0001, 
    Telephone: (904) 488-8114, FAX: (904) 488-9005
    GEORGIA
        Tom L. Reid, III, Administrator, Georgia State Clearinghouse, 254 
    Washington Street, S.W.--Room 401J, Atlanta, Georgia 30334, Telephone: 
    (404) 656-3855 or (404) 656-3829, FAX: (404) 656-7938
    ILLINOIS
        Tim Golemo, State Single Point of Contact, Department of Commerce 
    and Community Affairs, 620 East Adams, Springfield, Illinois 62701, 
    Telephone: (217) 782-1671, FAX: (217) 782-6620
    INDIANA
        Frances E. Williams, State Budget Agency, 212 State House, 
    Indianapolis, Indiana 46204, Telephone: (317) 232-2972, FAX: (317) 233-
    3323
    IOWA
        Steven R. McCann, Division for Community Assistance, Iowa 
    Department of Economic Development, 200 East Grand Avenue, Des Moines, 
    Iowa 50309, Telephone: (515) 242-4719, FAX: (515) 242-4859
    KENTUCKY
        Ronald W. Cook, Office of the Governor, Department of Local 
    Government, 1024 Capitol Center Drive, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-8204, 
    Telephone: (502) 573-2382, FAX: (502) 573-2512
    MAINE
        Joyce Benson, State Planning Office, State House Station #38, 
    Augusta, Maine 04333, Telephone: (207) 287-3261, FAX: (207) 287-6489
    MARYLAND
        William G. Carroll, Manager, State Clearinghouse for 
    Intergovernmental Assistance, Maryland Office of Planning, 301 W. 
    Preston Street--Room 1104, Baltimore, Maryland 21201-2365, Staff 
    Contact: Linda Janey, Telephone: (410) 225-4490, FAX: (410) 225-4480
    MISSISSIPPI
        Cathy Mallette, Clearinghouse Officer, Department of Finance and 
    Administration, 455 North Lamar Street, Jackson, Mississippi 39202-
    3087, Telephone: (601) 359-6762, FAX: (601) 359-6764
    MISSOURI
        Lois Pohl, Federal Assistance Clearinghouse, Office of 
    Administration, P.O. Box 809, Room 760, Truman Building, Jefferson 
    City, Missouri 65102 Telephone: (314) 751-4834, FAX: (314) 751-7819
    NEVADA
        Department of Administration, State Clearinghouse, Capitol Complex, 
    Carson City, Nevada 89710, Telephone: (701) 687-4065, FAX: (702) 687-
    3983
    NEW HAMPSHIRE
        Jeffrey H. Taylor, Director, New Hampshire Office of State 
    Planning, Attn: Intergovernmental Review Process
        Mike Blake, 2\1/2\ Beacon Street, Concord, New Hampshire 03301, 
    Telephone: (603) 271-2155, FAX: (603) 271-1728
    NEW JERSEY
        Gregory W. Adkins, Assistant Commissioner, New Jersey Department of 
    Community Affairs
    
        Please direct all correspondence and questions about 
    intergovernmental review to:
    
        Andrew J. Jaskolka, State Review Process, Intergovernmental Review 
    Unit, CN 800, Room 813A, Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0800, Telephone: 
    (609) 292-9025, FAX: (609) 633-2132
    NEW MEXICO
        Robert Peters, State Budget Division, Room 190 Bataan Memorial 
    Building, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503, Telephone: (505) 827-3640
    NEW YORK
        New York State Clearinghouse, Division of the Budget, State 
    Capitol, Albany, New York 12224, Telephone: (518) 474-1605
    NORTH CAROLINA
        Chrys Baggett, Director, N.C. State Clearinghouse, Office of the 
    Secretary of Admin., 116 West Jones Street, Raleigh North Carolina 
    27603-8003, Telephone: (919) 733-7232, FAX: (919) 733-9571
    NORTH DAKOTA
        North Dakota Single Point of Contact, Office of Intergovernmental 
    Assistance, 600 East Boulevard Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota 58505-
    0170, Telephone: (701) 224-2094, FAX: (701) 224-2308
    OHIO
        Larry Weaver, State Single Point of Contact, State Clearinghouse, 
    Office of Budget and Management, 30 East Broad Street, 34th Floor, 
    Columbus, 
    
    [[Page 66314]]
    Ohio 43266-0411
    
        Please direct correspondence and questions about intergovernmental 
    review to:
    
        Linda Wise, Telephone: (614) 466-0698, FAX: (614) 466-5400
    RHODE ISLAND
        Daniel W. Varin, Associate Director, Department of Administration, 
    Division of Planning, One Capitol Hill, 4th Floor, Providence, Rhode 
    Island 02908-5870, Telephone: (401) 277-2656, FAX: (401) 277-2083
        Please direct correspondence and questions to:
    
        Review Coordinator, Office of Strategic Planning
    SOUTH CAROLINA,
        Omeagia Burgess, State Single Point of Contact, Grant Services, 
    Office of the Governor, 1205 Pendleton Street--Room 477, Columbia, 
    South Carolina 29201, Telephone: (803) 734-0494, FAX: (803) 734-0385
    TEXAS
        Tom Adams, Governors, Officer, Director, Intergovernmental 
    Coordination, P.O. Box 12428, Austin, Texas 78711, Telephone: (512) 
    463-1771, FAX: (512) 463-1888
    UTAH
        Carolyn Wright, Utah State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and 
    Budget, Room 116 State Capitol, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Telephone: 
    (801) 538-1535, FAX: (801) 538-1547
    VERMONT
        Nancy McAvoy, State Single Point of Contact, Pavilion Office 
    Building, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609 Telephone: (802) 
    828-3326, FAX: (802) 828-3339
    WEST VIRGINIA
        Fred Cutlip, Director, Community Development Division, W. Virginia 
    Development Office, Building #6, Room 553, Charleston, West Virginia 
    25305, Telephone: (304) 558-4010, FAX: (304) 558-3248
    WISCONSIN
        Martha Kerner, Section Chief, State/Federal Relations, Wisconsin 
    Department of Administration, 101 East Wilson Street--6th Floor, P.O. 
    Box 7868, Madison, Wisconsin 53707, Telephone: (608) 266-2125, FAX: 
    (608) 267-6931
    WYOMING
        Sheryl Jeffries, State Single Point of Contract, Herschler 
    Building, 4th Floor, East Wing, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82002, Telephone: 
    (307) 777-7574, FAX: (307) 638-8967
    
    TERRITORIES
    
    GUAM
        Mr. Giovanni T. Sgambelluri, Director, Bureau of Budget and 
    Management Research, Office of the Governor, P.O. Box 2950, Agana, Guam 
    96910, Telephone: 011-671-472-2285, FAX: 011-671-472-2825
    PUERTO RICO
        Norma Burgos/Jose E. Caro, Chairwoman/Director, Puerto Rico 
    Planning Board, Federal Proposals Review Office, Minillas Government 
    Center, P.O. Box 41119, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00940-1119, Telephone 
    (809) 727-4444, (809) 723-6190, FAX: (809) 724-3270, (809) 724-3103
    NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS
        State Single Point of Contact, Planning and Budget Office, Office 
    of the Governor, Saipan, CM, Northern Mariana Islands 96590
    VIRGIN ISLANDS
        Jose George, Director, Office of Management and Budget, #41 
    Norregade Emancipation Garden Station, Second Floor, Saint Thomas, 
    Virgin Islands 00802
    
        Please direct all questions and correspondence about 
    intergovernmental review to:
    
        Linda Clarke, Telephone: (809) 774-0750, FAX: (809) 776-0069
    
    [FR Doc. 95-31009 Filed 12-20-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/21/1995
Department:
Children and Families Administration
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Availability of funds and request for applications to conduct research in Early Head Start programs.
Document Number:
95-31009
Dates:
The closing time and date for receipt of applications is 5 p.m. (Eastern Time Zone) February 20, 1996. Applications received after 5 p.m. will be classified as late.
Pages:
66276-66314 (39 pages)
PDF File:
95-31009.Pdf