98-15361. Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Programs Grants to Institutions of Higher Education (Validation Competition)  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 1998)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 31586-31589]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-15361]
    
    
    
    [[Page 31585]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part II
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of Education
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Programs--Grants to 
    Institutions of Higher Education (Validation Competition); Notice
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 / Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / 
    Notices
    
    [[Page 31586]]
    
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
    
    
    Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Programs--
    Grants to Institutions of Higher Education (Validation Competition)
    
    AGENCY: Department of Education.
    
    ACTION: Notice of Proposed Priorities and Selection Criteria for Fiscal 
    Year 1998.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Secretary announces proposed priorities and selection 
    criteria for fiscal year (FY) 1998 under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools 
    and Communities (SDFSC) National Programs Grants to Institutions of 
    Higher Education (IHEs) Validation Competition. The Secretary takes 
    this action to focus Federal financial assistance on an identified 
    national need. The priorities are intended to increase knowledge about 
    effective programs by validating and disseminating model programs and 
    strategies to promote the safety of students attending IHEs by 
    preventing violent behavior and the illegal use of alcohol and other 
    drugs by college students.
    INVITATION TO COMMENT: Interested persons are invited to submit 
    comments and recommendations regarding these proposed priorities. All 
    comments submitted in response to this notice will be available for 
    public inspection, during and after the comment period, in Room 604, 
    Portals Buildings, 1250 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, between 
    the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through 
    Friday of each week except Federal holidays.
        On request the Department supplies an appropriate aid, such as a 
    reader or print magnifier, to an individual with a disability that 
    needs assistance to review the comments. An individual with a 
    disability who wants to schedule an appointment for this type of aid 
    may call (202) 205-8113 or (202) 260-9895. An individual who uses a TDD 
    may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-
    8339, between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.
    
    DATES: Comments must be received by the Department on or before July 9, 
    1998.
    
    ADDRESSES: All comments concerning these proposed priorities should be 
    addressed to Tina McCrary, U.S. Department of Education, 600 
    Independence Avenue, Portals Building--Room 604, Washington, DC 20202-
    6123. Comments may also be sent through the Internet: comments@ed.gov.
        You must include the term ``Alcohol, Other Drug, Violence 
    Prevention for IHEs'' in the subject line of your electronic message.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tina McCrary, (202) 260-3954. 
    Individuals who use a telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD) may 
    call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 
    8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday. 
    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 proposed priorities does not solicit 
    applications. A notice inviting applications under this competition 
    will be published in the Federal Register concurrent with or 
    following the publication of the notice of final priorities.
    
    Priorities
    
        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 one or all of the following priorities. The 
    Secretary funds under this competition only applications that meet one 
    or all of these absolute priorities:
    
    Absolute Priority 1
    
        Correcting misperceptions of student alcohol and other drug use 
    among a large or influential subpopulation of students attending 
    institutions of higher education.
        Applicants must:
        (1) Identify one large or influential student subpopulation (e.g. 
    student athletes, members of fraternities and sororities) who will 
    receive the intervention;
        (2) Justify the selection of the subpopulation, and design the 
    intervention, based on an assessment of objective data (such as needs 
    assessments, student use surveys, assessment of students' dispositions 
    toward drug use);
        (3) Propose activities designed to correct misperceptions of this 
    subpopulation about levels of student campus alcohol and drug use, 
    student alcohol and drug use norms, and the consequences of student 
    alcohol and drug use;
        (4) Use a campus and community coalition to plan and implement the 
    project;
        (5) Develop measurable goals and objectives linked to the 
    identified needs;
        (6) Use a qualified evaluator to implement a rigorous evaluation of 
    the project using outcomes-based (summative) performance indicators in 
    addition to process (formative) measures, that document strategies used 
    and measure the effectiveness of the program or strategy in reducing 
    student drug use and violent behavior, and utilize a reference group or 
    comparison group at the grantee's own or similar campus;
        (7) Share information about their projects with Department of 
    Education staff or their agents in order to assist grantees in the 
    development of an evaluation strategy and to coordinate cross project 
    site comparisons;
        (8) Demonstrate ability to start the project within 60 days after 
    receiving Federal funding in order to maximize the time available to 
    show impact or prepare an article for pubilcation within the grant 
    period; and
        (9) Provide statistics and information on crimes occurring on 
    campus, especially liquor law violations, drug abuse violations, and 
    weapons possession; and, at the request of the Secretary, coordinate 
    with any report being prepared under section 204(a)(4)(B) of the 
    Student Right-to-Know and Campus Security Act on policies, procedures 
    and practices which have proven effective in the reduction of campus 
    crime.
    
    Absolute Priority 2
    
        Assess the impact of an existing or new consortium (such as 
    coalitions and other partnerships at the community, State, or regional 
    levels) on limiting illegal alcohol and other drug use, and preventing 
    intoxication and violence.
    
    Applicants must:
    
        (1) Establish a new, or expand an existing consortium at the 
    community, State, or regional level by working together in partnership 
    with key stakeholders to share information and to impact campus and 
    public policy;
        (2) Demonstrate evidence of commitment of consortium members and 
    explain how the IHE will create or sustain opportunities for members to 
    meet and work together on a regular basis;
        (3) Describe proposed consortium activities and justify how such 
    activities will bring about improvements in drug prevention programs 
    and policies affecting AOD use decisions, and violence on campus;
        (4) Provide criteria for membership, and how any potential 
    expansion of membership would be carried out if additional individuals 
    or organizations seek to join the consortium;
        (5) Develop measurable goals and objectives for consortia linked to 
    identified needs;
    
    [[Page 31587]]
    
        (6) Use prevention approaches that research or evaluation has shown 
    to be effective in preventing or reducing violent behavior or the 
    illegal use of alcohol and other drugs;
        (7) Use a qualified evaluator to design and implement a rigorous 
    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 consortium;
        (8) Share information about their projects with Department of 
    Education staff or their agents in order to assist grantees in the 
    development of an evaluation strategy and to coordinate cross project 
    sites;
        (9) Design a program based on assessment of objective data (such as 
    needs assessments, student use surveys, assessments of students' 
    dispositions toward drug use, environmental assessments);
        (10) 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
        (11) At the request of the Secretary, coordinate with any report 
    being prepared under section 204(a)(4)(B) of the Student Right-to-Know 
    and Campus Security Act on policies, procedures and practices which 
    have proven effective in the reduction of campus crime.
    
    Absolute Priority 3
    
        Disseminate knowledge of existing model programs, new prevention 
    theories, or new application of theories, theoretical models, or 
    conceptual approaches (theories) to alcohol and other drug or violence 
    prevention or both.
    
    Applicants must:
    
        (1) If proposing to disseminate knowledge on an existing model 
    program, (a) document how the program was proven effective by 
    explaining the needs assessment, implementation, evaluation, and 
    outcomes of the program; (b) document how the model program effectively 
    changed the campus and/or community; (c) explain how the model program 
    advanced prevention thinking and activities; (d) discuss the type of 
    institution(s) and student demographics to which the model program 
    would be most replicable or adaptable; and (e) provide a timeline for 
    the submission of the draft and final papers with appropriate 
    attachments.
        (2) If proposing a new theory or approach, (a) provide evidence 
    that the theory/approach is based on an assessment of objective data 
    (such as needs assessments, student use surveys, assessment of student 
    dispositions toward drug use, statistics and information on crimes 
    occurring on campus(es); (b) document how the theory/approach can be 
    applied effectively to change the campus and/or community; (c) explain 
    how the theory/approach will advance prevention thinking and 
    activities; (d) discuss the type of institution(s) and student 
    demographics to which the theory would be most replicable or adaptable; 
    and (e) provide a timeline for the submission of the draft and final 
    papers with appropriate attachments;
        (3) Provide a letter of support from the applicant's direct 
    supervisor and demonstrate the ability to start the project within 30 
    days after receiving Federal funding in order to maximize the time 
    available to prepare an article for publication within the grant 
    period; and
        (4) At the request of the Secretary, coordinate with any report 
    being prepared under section 204(a)(4)(B) of the Student Right-to-Know 
    and Campus Security Act on policies, procedures and practices which 
    have proven effective in the reduction of campus crime.
    
    Selection Criteria for Absolute Priority 1 and Absolute Priority 2
    
        (a)(1) The Secretary uses the following selection criteria to 
    evaluate applications for new grants under this competition.
        (2) The maximum score for all of these criteria is 100 points.
        (3) The maximum score for each criterion or factor under that 
    criterion is indicated in parentheses.
        (b) The criteria.
        (1) Need for project. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the need for the proposed project, the 
    Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the 
    proposed project. (5 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. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed 
    project.
        (ii) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the 
    Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the 
    development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in the 
    field of study. (5 points)
        (B) The potential replicability of the proposed project or 
    strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation 
    in a variety of settings. (5 points)
        (3) Quality of the project design. (20 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the 
    proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
    project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
    achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. 
    (5 points)
        (B) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying 
    the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of 
    that framework. (10 points)
        (C) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects 
    up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (5 points)
        (4) Quality of the project personnel. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will 
    carry out the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary 
    considers the following factors:
        (A) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
    employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
    traditionally been under represented based on race, color, national 
    origin, gender, age, or disability. (2 points)
        (B) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
    of key project personnel. (8 points)
        (5) Adequacy of resource. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
    proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed 
    project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in 
    the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project. 
    (5 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. (5 points)
        (6) Quality of the management plan. (15 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for 
    the proposed project.
    
    [[Page 31588]]
    
        (ii) In determining the quality of the management plan for the 
    proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) 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. (5 points)
        (B) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
    and services from the proposed project. (5 points)
        (C) 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. (5 points)
        (7) Quality of the project evaluation. (25 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be 
    conducted of the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary 
    considers the following factors:
        (A) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, 
    feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives and outcomes of the 
    proposed project. (10 points)
        (B) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide 
    performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward 
    achieving intended outcomes. (5 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. (10 points)
    
    Selection Criteria for Absolute Priority 3
    
        (1) Need for project. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the need for the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the need for the proposed project, the 
    Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The magnitude or severity of the problem to be addressed by the 
    proposed project. (5 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. (25 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed 
    project.
        (ii) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the 
    Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The potential contribution of the proposed project to the 
    development and advancement of theory, knowledge, and practices in the 
    field of study. (5 points)
        (B) The extent to which the proposed project involves the 
    development or demonstration of promising new strategies that build on, 
    or are alternatives to, existing strategies. (15 points)
        (C) The potential replicability of the proposed project or 
    strategies, including, as appropriate, the potential for implementation 
    in a variety of settings. (5 points)
        (3) Quality of the project design. (20 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the design of the 
    proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of the design of the proposed 
    project, the Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be 
    achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. 
    (5 points)
        (B) The extent to which there is a conceptual framework underlying 
    the proposed research or demonstration activities and the quality of 
    that framework. (10 points)
        (C) The extent to which the design of the proposed project reflects 
    up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice. (5 points)
        (4) Quality of the project personnel. (20 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the personnel who will 
    carry out the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of the project personnel, the 
    Secretary considers the following factors:
        (A) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for 
    employment from persons who are members of groups that have 
    traditionally been under represented based on race, color, national 
    origin, gender, age, or disability. (2 points)
        (B) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, 
    of key project personnel. (18 points)
        (5) Adequacy of resources. (10 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the 
    proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed 
    project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the costs are 
    reasonable in relation to the number of persons to be served and the 
    anticipated results and benefits. (10 points)
        (6) Quality of the management plan. (15 points)
        (i) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for 
    the proposed project.
        (ii) In determining the quality of the management plan for the 
    proposed project, the Secretary considers one or more of the following 
    factors:
        (A) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives 
    of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly 
    defined responsibilities, time lines, and milestones for accomplishing 
    project tasks. (5 points)
        (B) The adequacy of mechanisms for ensuring high-quality products 
    and services from the proposed project. (5 points)
        (C) 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. (5 points)
    
    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 officer toll free at 1-888-293-6498. Anyone may also view 
    these documents in text copy only on an electronic bulletin board of 
    the Department. Telephone: (202) 219-1511 or, toll free, 1-800-222-
    4922. The documents are located under Option G--Files/Announcements, 
    Bulletins and Press Releases.
    
        Note: The official version of this document is the document 
    published in the Federal Register.
    
        Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7132.
    
    (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 84.184H Safe and 
    Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act National Programs--Grants to 
    Institutions of Higher Education Program)
    
    
    [[Page 31589]]
    
    
        Dated: June 4, 1998.
    Gerald N. Tirozzi,
    Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education.
    [FR Doc. 98-15361 Filed 6-8-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
06/09/1998
Department:
Education Department
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Notice of Proposed Priorities and Selection Criteria for Fiscal Year 1998.
Document Number:
98-15361
Dates:
Comments must be received by the Department on or before July 9, 1998.
Pages:
31586-31589 (4 pages)
PDF File:
98-15361.pdf