Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program–-Stepping-up Technology Implementation (ETechM2 Program)

Overview

The purpose of the Educational Technology, Media, and Materials for Individuals with Disabilities Program (ETechM2 Program) is to improve results for children with disabilities by (1) promoting the development, demonstration, and use of technology; (2) supporting educational activities designed to be of educational value in the classroom for children with disabilities; (3) providing support for captioning and video description that is appropriate for use in the classroom; and (4) providing accessible educational materials to children with disabilities in a timely manner.

This competition includes one absolute priority and one competitive preference priority.
Absolute Priority: Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Meet Individual Needs of Students with Disabilities Through Learning and Assessment. The purpose of this priority is to fund four cooperative agreements to establish and operate projects that achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes: (a) Improved student outcomes using an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach that integrates AI; (b) Improved educator use and knowledge of an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI to deliver effective instruction to students with disabilities; (c) Improved educator collaboration and professional learning opportunities focusing on improving outcomes for student with disabilities using an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI; (d) Improved educator and family engagement regarding the use of an evidence-based technology-based tool or approach using AI to support student learning; and (e) Sustained use of the evidence-based technology-based tool or 
approach using AI by aligning its use with existing instructional priorities and initiatives.

For the purposes of this priority, projects must meet at least the definition of ‘‘promising evidence,’’ which means that there is evidence of the effectiveness of a key project component in improving a relevant outcome, based on a relevant finding from one of the following: (a) a practice guide prepared by the that Works Clearinghouse (WWC) reporting a ‘‘strong evidence base’’ or ‘‘moderate evidence base’’ for the corresponding practice recommendation; (b) an intervention report prepared by the WWC reporting a ‘‘positive effect’’ or ‘‘potentially positive effect’’ on a relevant outcome with no reporting of a ‘‘negative effect’’ or ‘‘potentially negative effect’’ on a relevant outcome; or (c) a single study assessed by the Department, as appropriate, that is an experimental study, a quasi-experimental design study, or a well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (e.g., a study using regression methods to account for differences between a treatment group and a comparison group); and includes at least one statistically significant and positive (i.e., favorable) effect on a relevant outcome. See 34 CFR 77.1 for definitions of ‘‘project component,’’ ‘‘promising evidence,’’ 
‘‘experimental study,’’ ‘‘moderate evidence,’’ ‘‘quasi-experimental design study,’’ ‘‘relevant 
outcome,’’ and ‘‘strong evidence.’’

Competitive Preference Priority: Applications from New Potential Grantees (0 or 3 points). (a) Under this priority, an applicant must demonstrate that the applicant has not had an active discretionary grant under the 84.327S program from which it seeks funds, including through membership in a group application submitted in accordance with 34 CFR 75.127–75.129, in the five years before the deadline date for submission of applications under the program. (b) For the purpose of this priority, a grant or contract is active until the end of the grant’s or contract’s project or funding period, including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee’s or contractor’s authority to obligate funds. Applicants should indicate in the abstract if the competitive preference priority is addressed and must address the competitive preference priority in the narrative section.

A site may not serve in more than one category (i.e., development, pilot, dissemination).

Type of Award: Cooperative agreements. 
Estimated Available Funds: The Administration has requested $41,433,000 for the ETechM2 Program for FY 2024, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,500,000 for this competition.
Estimated Range of Awards: $350,000 to $375,000 per year. 
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $375,000 per year. 
Maximum Award: We will not make an award exceeding $375,000 for a single budget period of 12 months. 
Estimated Number of Awards: 4. 
Project Period: Up to 60 months