99-15324. Office of Elementary and Secondary EducationSafe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National ProgramsFederal ActivitiesState and Regional Coalition Grant Competition To Prevent High-Risk Drinking Among College Students  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 16, 1999)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 32364-32366]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-15324]
    
    
    
    [[Page 32363]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part V
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of Education
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Safe and Drug-Free 
    Schools and Communities National Programs, Federal Activities, State 
    and Regional Coalition Grant Competition To Prevent High-Risk Drinking 
    Among College Students; Notices
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 1999 / 
    Notices
    
    [[Page 32364]]
    
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
    
    
    Office of Elementary and Secondary Education--Safe and Drug-Free 
    Schools and Communities National Programs--Federal Activities--State 
    and Regional Coalition Grant Competition To Prevent High-Risk Drinking 
    Among College Students
    
    AGENCY: Department of Education.
    
    ACTION: Notice of final priority, eligible applicants, and selection 
    criteria for fiscal year 1999 and subsequent years.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Secretary announces a final priority, eligible applicants, 
    and selection criteria for fiscal year (FY) 1999 and, at the discretion 
    of the Secretary, for subsequent years under the Safe and Drug-Free 
    Schools and Communities National Programs--Federal Activities--State 
    and Regional Coalition Grant Competition to Prevent High-Risk Drinking 
    Among College Students. The Secretary takes this action to focus 
    Federal financial assistance on an identified national need. This 
    competition seeks to reduce and prevent high-risk drinking among 
    college students by funding State or regional coalitions for a two-year 
    period to bring together institutions of higher education (IHEs) to 
    share ideas and develop, implement, and evaluate collaborative 
    strategies.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: These priorities take effect July 16, 1999.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Light, Safe and Drug-Free 
    Schools Program, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, 
    Washington, DC 20202-6123. Telephone: (202) 260-3954. FAX (202) 260-
    7767. Internet: http://www.ed.gov/OESE/SDFS.
        Individuals who use a telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD) 
    may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339. 
    Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternate 
    format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on 
    request to the contact person listed above.
    
        Note: This notice of final priority does not solicit 
    applications. A notice inviting applications under this competition 
    is published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: High-risk drinking, including ``binge'' 
    drinking, continues to affect the health, learning, and safety of 
    college students. Excessive use of alcohol has resulted in deaths, 
    serious injuries, vandalism, and sexual assault on college campuses. 
    There is strong evidence that environmental factors, including alcohol 
    availability, high-risk alcohol use norms, and the restrictiveness of 
    State drunk driving laws, play a major role in student alcohol use. 
    Different IHEs may have high-risk drinking problems that are affected 
    by similar environmental concerns; therefore, developing partnerships 
    with other IHEs can provide a forum to develop common solutions as well 
    as a mechanism to create the ``critical mass'' of concerned 
    stakeholders needed to influence broader environmental changes. The 
    recent development of a number of IHE coalitions across the country 
    suggests that such partnerships may be an effective method for IHEs 
    with common environmental concerns to build local capacity to address 
    high-risk drinking within their campus-communities. In addition, these 
    efforts can have an impact within a larger community context, such as 
    geographic regions within States (e.g., a large metropolitan area), 
    similar institutions within States (e.g., all public universities), or 
    institutions in States that share common borders. This competition 
    seeks to encourage these collaborative efforts and evaluate their 
    effectiveness so that other IHEs may adopt effective strategies.
        This notice contains a final priority, eligible applicants, and 
    related selection criteria for fiscal year 1999 and subsequent years. 
    Under this absolute priority, the Secretary may make awards for up to 
    24 months.
        On April 20, 1999, the Secretary published the proposed priorities 
    for this competition in a Notice of Proposed Priority in the Federal 
    Register (64 FR 19347-19349). In response to the comments received, the 
    Secretary made no modifications, as noted in the following section--
    Analysis of Comments and Changes--of this notice of final priorities.
    
    Analysis of Comments and Changes
    
        In response to the Secretary's invitation to comment on the 
    proposed priorities, the Department received two responses from 
    institutions of higher education. Most of the comments were related to 
    the proposed selection criteria, which were selected from the 
    established selection criteria published in the Education Department 
    General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR). An analysis of the 
    comments, organized by topic, follows:
    
    Focus of Priority
    
        Comment: One commenter suggested that the priority include not only 
    binge drinking, but also other patterns of abusive drinking that have 
    negative consequences for student life. The commenter indicated that 
    other patterns of abusive drinking are seen at historically Black IHEs.
        Discussion: The existing language in the priority is specifically 
    designed to include a range of high-risk drinking problems. Although 
    ``binge'' drinking is a significant type of high-risk drinking, the 
    priority would not preclude a focus on other types of abusive drinking.
        Changes: None.
    
    Selection Criteria--Need for Project
    
        Comment: One commenter proposed points be reassigned under this 
    criterion to place more emphasis on identifying and addressing gaps and 
    weaknesses in services, rather than on the magnitude and severity of 
    the problem to be addressed, in order to reflect the amount of 
    additional work required by applicants to identify gaps and weaknesses.
        Discussion: The points assigned for this selection criterion are 
    intended to place greater emphasis on the magnitude and severity of the 
    high-risk drinking problem to be addressed by the coalition. Because of 
    the limited funds available for this initiative, emphasis is placed on 
    directing funds to areas with the greatest need.
        Changes: None.
    
    Selection Criteria--Significance and Quality of the Project Design
    
        Comment: One commenter proposed that the subcriterion under Quality 
    of the Project Design addressing capacity building be combined with the 
    subcriterion under Significance addressing system change and 
    improvement. The commenter suggested that system change, by definition, 
    will build capacity and yield results beyond the period of Federal 
    financial assistance.
        Discussion: These subcriteria were selected to address two 
    different, but related, aspects of project impact. Capacity building 
    may not necessarily lead to system change and improvement, and system 
    change and improvement may not necessarily include capacity building. 
    Therefore, both of these selection criteria help select projects that 
    have the greatest potential to continue the work of the project after 
    the Federal project period ends.
        Changes: None.
    
    Selection Criteria--Quality of Project Design
    
        Comment: One commenter suggested that the number of points be 
    increased under the subcriterion addressing clearly specified and 
    measurable goals, objectives and outcomes, because the
    
    [[Page 32365]]
    
    organization's goals, objectives and outcomes have a major impact on 
    the functioning of the project. In addition, this commenter proposed 
    that this subcriterion be expanded to include proposed activities for 
    achieving the stated goals, objectives and outcomes.
        Discussion: Clearly specified and measurable goals, objectives and 
    outcomes are an important part of the design of a project; however, the 
    quality of the content of the goals, objectives and outcomes is most 
    important to the design of projects under this program, and is 
    therefore more heavily weighted. The subcriterion on the extent to 
    which the design of the project reflects up-to-date knowledge from 
    research and effective practice will allow reviewers to assess the 
    quality of the project goals, objectives and outcomes, including the 
    proposed project activities.
        Changes: None.
        Selection Criteria--Quality of the Project Personnel and Quality of 
    the Management Plan
        Comment: One commenter suggested that the Quality of the Project 
    Personnel criterion and the Quality of the Management Plan criterion be 
    combined and renamed ``management and organizational capability.''
        Discussion: The selection criteria Quality of Project Personnel and 
    Quality of the Management Plan need to be handled separately because 
    they address different aspects of an application. For example, an 
    applicant could have well qualified personnel but the management plan 
    may be poorly designed or written. Both the plan and personnel are 
    critical to the success of the grant.
        Changes: None.
    
    Selection Criteria--Quality of the Management Plan
    
        Comment: One commenter proposed that the subcriterion on bringing a 
    diversity of perspectives to bear on the operation of the proposed 
    project be expanded to specify which faculty/student leaders should be 
    included. This commenter also suggested that this subcriterion include 
    both receiving input from and providing information to key 
    stakeholders.
        Discussion: Applicants are encouraged to bring a wide variety of 
    perspectives to the operation of their proposed projects. The specific 
    individuals who are included may vary depending on the project goals 
    and design. This subcriterion does not preclude applicants from both 
    receiving input from and providing information to key stakeholders.
        Changes: None.
        Comment: One commenter suggested a subcriterion be included to 
    require a one-page organization chart to graphically portray the 
    management structure of the project.
        Discussion: Illustrating the management structure with an 
    organization chart is deemed to be the prerogative of the applicant.
        Changes: None.
    
    Selection Criteria--Adequacy of Resources
    
        Comment: One commenter proposed that a criterion be added that 
    addresses the level of networking between the applicant and members of 
    national, statewide and regional college consortiums and related 
    collaborations.
        Discussion: The level of networking by applicants will vary 
    depending on the design and scope of their projects.
        Changes: None.
        Comment: One commenter suggested the expansion of the subcriterion 
    on reasonable costs by adding that the proposed budget be complete, 
    detailed, and allowable. This commenter also suggested that this 
    criterion require a description of how non-Federal resources will be 
    utilized.
        Discussion: Administration of Federal grants is governed by Federal 
    cost principles that will be referenced in the application package 
    information. These cost principles provide information on allowable 
    costs. In addition, applicants will be required to submit a budget form 
    and narrative detailing their plans for the use of funds.
        Changes: None.
    
    Absolute Priority
    
        Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) and the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and 
    Communities Act of 1994, the Secretary gives an absolute preference to 
    applications that meet the following priority. The Secretary funds 
    under this competition only applications that meet the following 
    absolute priority:
    
    Implement and Evaluate the Impact of a State or Regional Coalition to 
    Develop Strategies for Reducing and Preventing High-Risk Drinking Among 
    College Students
    
        Applicants proposing a project under this priority must:
        (1) Propose to expand an existing or establish a new State or 
    regional coalition of IHEs and other relevant organizations that 
    includes key stakeholders who will have an impact on the development 
    and implementation of State, local, and campus policies and programs to 
    reduce and prevent high-risk drinking;
        (2) Explain how coalition members will work together on a regular 
    basis, including meeting to discuss common problems and share effective 
    strategies;
        (3) Use community collaboration prevention approaches, including 
    involvement of students, that research or evaluation has shown to be 
    effective in preventing or reducing high-risk drinking;
        (4) Use a qualified evaluator to design and implement an evaluation 
    of the project using outcomes-based (summative) performance indicators 
    in addition to process (formative) measures that documents strategies 
    used and measures the effectiveness of the coalition;
        (5) Demonstrate the ability to start the project within 60 days 
    after receiving Federal funding in order to maximize the time available 
    to show impact within the grant period; and
        (6) Share information about their projects with the Department of 
    Education or its agents.
    
    Eligible Applicants
    
        Eligible applicants under this competition are IHEs, consortia of 
    IHEs, and other public and private nonprofit organizations.
    
    Selection Criteria
    
        The following selection criteria will be used to evaluate 
    applications for new grants under this competition. The maximum score 
    for all of these criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each 
    criterion or factor under that criterion is indicated in parentheses.
        (1) Need for project (15 points)
        In determining the need for the proposed project, the following 
    factors are considered:
        (a) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the 
    proposed project. (10 points)
        (b) The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, 
    infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be 
    addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude 
    of those gaps or weaknesses. (5 points)
        (2) Significance (14 points)
        In determining the significance of the proposed project, the 
    following factors are considered:
        (a) The likelihood that the proposed project will result in system 
    change or improvement. (10 points)
        (b) The potential replicability of the proposed project or 
    strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation 
    in a variety of settings. (4 points)
        (3) Quality of the project design (15 Points)
        In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, 
    the following factors are considered:
        (a) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
    achieved
    
    [[Page 32366]]
    
    by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. (4 
    points)
        (b) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects 
    up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (6 points)
        (c) The extent to which the proposed project is designed to build 
    capacity and yield results that will extend beyond the period of 
    Federal financial assistance. (5 points)
        (4) Quality of the project personnel (15 points)
        In determining the quality of project personnel, the following 
    factors are considered:
        (a) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
    employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
    traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national 
    origin, gender, age, or disability. (3 points)
        (b) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
    of key project personnel. (12 points)
        (5) Adequacy of resources (16 points)
        In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, 
    the following factors are considered:
        (a) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
    the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project. 
    (8 points)
        (b) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the 
    number of persons to be served and to the anticipated results and 
    benefits. (4 points)
        (c) The potential for continued support of the project after 
    Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated 
    commitment of appropriate entities to such support. (4 points)
        (6) Quality of the management plan (14 points)
        In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed 
    project, the following factors are considered:
        (a) How the applicant will ensure that a diversity of perspectives 
    are brought to bear in the operation of the proposed project, including 
    those of students, faculty, parents, the business community, a variety 
    of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or beneficiaries of 
    services, or others, as appropriate. (10 points)
        (b) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
    of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
    defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing 
    project tasks. (4 points)
        (7) Quality of the project evaluation (11 points)
        In determining the quality of the evaluation, the following factors 
    are considered:
        (a) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
    feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives and outcomes of the 
    proposed project. (4 points)
        (b) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
    performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
    achieving intended outcomes. (3 points)
        (c) The extent to which the methods of evaluation include the use 
    of objective performance measures that are clearly related to the 
    intended outcomes of the project and will produce quantitative and 
    qualitative data to the extent possible. (4 points)
    
    Intergovernmental Review
    
        This program is subject to the requirements of Executive Order 
    12372 and the regulations of 34 CFR part 79. The objective of the 
    Executive Order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a 
    strengthened federalism by relying on processes developed by State and 
    local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
    financial assistance.
        In accordance with this order, this document is intended to provide 
    early notification of the Department's specific plans and actions for 
    this program.
    
    Electronic Access to This Document
    
        Anyone may view this document, as well as all other Department of 
    Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or 
    portable document format (pdf) on the World Wide Web at either of the 
    following sites:
    
    http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
    http://www.ed.gov/news.html
    
    To use the pdf you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with 
    Search, which is available free at either of the preceding sites. If 
    you have questions about using the pdf, call the U.S. Government 
    Printing Office toll free at 1-888-293-6498.
    
        Note: The official version of this document is the document 
    published in the Federal Register.
    
    (Catalog of Federal Domestic assistance Number 84.184H, Safe and 
    Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Programs--Federal 
    Activities--State and Regional Coalition Grant Competition to 
    Prevent High-Risk Drinking Among College Students)
    
        Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131.
    Judith Johnson,
    Acting Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 99-15324 Filed 6-15-99; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/16/1999
Published:
06/16/1999
Department:
Education Department
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of final priority, eligible applicants, and selection criteria for fiscal year 1999 and subsequent years.
Document Number:
99-15324
Dates:
These priorities take effect July 16, 1999.
Pages:
32364-32366 (3 pages)
PDF File:
99-15324.pdf