Nfp

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
application for a stay with the
Commission within 3 days of the
Administrative Law Judge’s denial. An
expedited application for a stay is
limited to 1,000 words and must be
served on the Authority in accordance
with the provisions of 16 CFR 4.4(b) that
are applicable to service in review
proceedings under this part. The
Authority may file an opposition,
limited to 1,000 words, within 3 days of
service of the expedited application.
The application and opposition should
address the factors in paragraph (d) of
this section the Commission considers
in resolving a stay application. The
Commission will issue its decision on
the stay application as soon as
practicable.
(ii) Application for a stay after the
Commission decides to review the
Administrative Law Judge’s decision. If
the Commission grants the application
for review of the decision of the
Administrative Law Judge, or orders
review of the decision on its own
motion, the person subject to the
sanction may apply to the Commission
for a stay of the sanction pending the
Commission’s decision. In this
circumstance, the aggrieved person may
seek a stay of the sanction before the
Commission a second time under this
paragraph (b)(2)(ii) even if the person
was previously denied an expedited
application for a stay under paragraph
(b)(2)(i) of this section. The application
for a stay, limited to 1,000 words, must
be filed within 7 days of the
Commission’s order granting the
application for review or ordering
review under § 1.147(a), and must be
served on the Authority in accordance
with the provisions of 16 CFR 4.4(b) that
are applicable to service in review
proceedings under this part. The
Authority may file an opposition,
limited to 1,000 words, within 7 days of
being served with the stay application.
(c) Content of stay application and
opposition. An application for a stay of
the sanction, and any opposition to the
application, must provide the reasons a
stay is or is not warranted by addressing
the factors described in paragraph (d) of
this section, and the facts relied upon,
and may include supporting affidavits
or other sworn statements, and a copy
of the relevant portions of the record.
(d) Factors considered in deciding a
stay application. The parties, the
Administrative Law Judge, and the
Commission must address the following
factors, in advocating for or against, or
in resolving, a stay application:
(1) The likelihood of the applicant’s
success on review;
(2) Whether the applicant will suffer
irreparable harm if a stay is not granted;

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

(3) The degree of injury to other
parties or third parties if a stay is
granted; and
(4) Whether the stay is in the public
interest.
§ 1.149

Adoption of miscellaneous rules.

Part 4 of this subchapter is adopted
into this subpart and governs
proceedings under this subpart, and,
within §§ 4.2 and 4.4, references to
‘‘part 3’’ shall include this subpart.
By direction of the Commission.
April J. Tabor,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022–20785 Filed 10–3–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2022–OESE–0094]

Final Priorities, Requirements, and
Definitions—Mental Health Service
Professional Demonstration Grant
Program
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final priorities, requirements,
and definitions.
AGENCY:

The Department of Education
(Department) announces final priorities,
requirements, and definitions under the
Mental Health Service Professional
Demonstration Grant Program (MHSP),
Assistance Listing Number 84.184X. We
may use one or more of these priorities,
requirements, and definitions for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2022
and later years. These final priorities,
requirements, and definitions are
designed to allow the Department to
provide competitive grants to support
and demonstrate innovative
partnerships between one or more high
need local educational agencies (LEAs)
(as defined in this notice,) or a State
educational agency (SEA) on behalf of
one or more high-need LEAs, and an
eligible Institution of Higher Education
(eligible IHEs) (as defined in this notice)
to train school-based mental health
services providers (services providers)
for employment in schools and local
educational agencies (LEAs). The goal of
the program is to increase the number
and diversity of high-quality, trained
providers available to address the
shortages of mental health services
professionals in schools served by highneed LEAs.

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

60083

These priorities, requirements,
and definitions are effective November
3, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tawanda Avery, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 3E357, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 987–1782. Email:
[email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:

Executive Summary
Purpose of This Regulatory Action: As
defined by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), ‘‘Mental
health includes our emotional,
psychological, and social well-being. It
affects how we think, feel, and act. It
also helps determine how we handle
stress, relate to others, and make healthy
choices. Mental health is important at
every stage of life, from childhood and
adolescence through adulthood.’’ 1
Support for the mental health of
children and youth advances
educational opportunities by creating
conditions where students can fully
engage in learning. The Novel
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19)
pandemic presented additional
challenges to the well-being of children
and youth. The disruption to routines,
relationships, and the learning
environment for many has led to
increased stress and trauma, social
isolation, and anxiety that can have both
immediate and long-term adverse
impacts on the physical, social,
emotional, and academic well-being of
children and youth.
These final priorities, requirements,
and definitions aim to address these
challenges by increasing the number of
school-based mental health services
providers in high-need LEAs, increasing
the number of services providers from
diverse backgrounds or from the
communities they serve, and ensuring
that all services providers are trained in
inclusive practices, including
supporting services providers in
ensuring access to services for children
and youth who are English learners.
Summary of the Major Provisions of
This Regulatory Action: Through this
regulatory action, we establish four
priorities, program and application
requirements, and definitions. You may
find further details on these provisions
in the Final Priorities, Final
1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm.
Accessed on September 17, 2022.

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

60084

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

Requirements and Final Definitions
sections of this notice.
Costs and Benefits: The final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
will impose minimal costs on entities
that seek assistance through the MHSP
program. Application submissions and
participation in this program are
voluntary. The Secretary believes that
the costs imposed on applicants by the
final priorities are limited to paperwork
burden related to preparing an
application for an MHSP grant
competition that uses one or more of the
final priorities. Because the costs of
carrying out activities will be paid for
with program funds, the costs of
implementation will not be a burden for
any eligible applicants, including small
entities. We believe that the benefits of
this regulatory action outweigh any
associated costs because it will result in
the submission of a greater number of
high-quality discretionary grant
applications likely to result in the
achievement of program objectives.
Purpose of Program: The MHSP
program provides competitive grants to
support and demonstrate innovative
partnerships to train school-based
mental health services providers (as
defined in section 4102 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA)) for
employment in schools and LEAs. The
goal of this program is to increase the
number and diversity of high-quality,
trained providers to address the
shortages of mental health services
professionals in schools served by highneed LEAs. The partnerships must
include (1) one or more high-need LEAs
or a State educational agency (SEA) on
behalf of one or more high-need LEAs
and (2) one or more eligible IHEs.
Partnerships must provide opportunities
to place postsecondary education
graduate students in school-based
mental health fields into high-need
schools served by the participating highneed LEAs to complete required field
work, credit hours, internships, or
related training necessary to complete
their degree or obtain a credential as a
school-based mental health services
provider. In addition to the placement
of graduate students, grantees may also
use these funds to develop mental
health career pathways as early as
secondary school, through career and
technical education opportunities, or
through paraprofessional support degree
programs at local community or
technical colleges.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7281.
We published a notice of proposed
priorities, requirements, and definitions
(NPP) in the Federal Register on August
2, 2022 (87 FR 47159). The NPP

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

contained background information and
our reasons for proposing the priorities,
requirements, and definitions. As
discussed in the Analysis of Comments
and Changes section, we made
substantive changes to Priorities 1–3, we
added a fourth priority, and we made
both substantive and editorial changes
to the application requirements and
definitions.
Public Comment: In response to our
invitation in the NPP, 12 parties
submitted comments that, in total,
addressed all of the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions. One
comment was not relevant to the
proposed priorities, requirements, or
definitions and is not included in the
discussions below. We do not address
general comments that raise concerns
not directly related to the proposed
priorities, requirements, or definitions.
Generally, we do not address technical
and other minor changes, or suggested
changes that the law does not authorize
us to make under the applicable
statutory authority. However, we made
a change to clarify a technical error in
the NPP where we used two different
terms in two definitions that are
intended to be linked. Specifically, we
are replacing ‘‘low-income families’’
with ‘‘low-income backgrounds’’ in the
definition of ‘‘high-need LEA.’’ This
change provides consistency with the
use of the term ‘‘low-income
backgrounds’’ in the definitions of
‘‘high-need school’’ and ‘‘students/
children from low-income
backgrounds.’’
Analysis of Comments and Changes:
An analysis of the comments and of any
changes in the proposed priorities,
requirements, and definitions follows.
General Comments
Comment: Many commenters
expressed general support for the
program.
Discussion: We appreciate this
support and the efforts commenters
made to submit comments.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters
provided general comments. One
commenter, a current grantee, described
current grant work, asked for an
extension to the grant period, and
suggested informing applicants during
the application process about the
performance measures we would expect
grantees to meet under the program.
Another commenter asked if LEAs could
apply for a grant under this program as
well as under the School-Based Mental
Health Services (SBMH) Grant Program.
A third commenter asked that we allow
grantees to use funds to support the
expansion of a young adult peer

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

recovery support workforce and to
include peer support providers and
recovery specialists.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates hearing about current
grantee successes. Extension requests
should be discussed with the Federal
project officer. Additionally, the
Department will publish the
performance measures for the MHSP
program in the notice inviting
applications for any competition.
LEAs may apply to both the MHSP
and SBMH competitions so long as they
are considered an ‘‘eligible applicant’’
and meet all requirements described in
the application requirements, and the
projects (e.g., activities and participants)
are distinct from one another.
The Department agrees with the need
for a variety of support services and the
value of peer support providers. To the
extent the young adult peer recovery
support providers are postsecondary
education graduate students in schoolbased mental health fields, the schoolbased mental health services
partnership can place these individuals
into high-need schools served by the
participating high-need LEAs to
complete required field work, credit
hours, internships, or related training
necessary to complete their degree or
credential as a school-based mental
health services provider.
Changes: None.
Priorities
Comment: There were several general
comments of support for the priorities.
In addition, one commenter asked if
funds could be used to support tuition
and other fees for students. Another
commenter suggested adding evidencebased approaches related to traumainformed care and learner-centered
approaches. This same commenter
suggested adding the ability to partner
with nonprofit organizations. Three
commenters suggested adding the
following new priorities: a new priority
to increase the capacity of current
personnel through training focused on
attending to mental health needs;
prioritizing services to underserved
students and students with disabilities;
and requiring LEAs or SEAs to prioritize
Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (HBCUs), Minority-Serving
Institutions (MSIs), and Tribal Colleges
and Universities (TCUs) when
establishing partnerships.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates the comment about support
services. Support services including
tuition, paid internships, transportation,
childcare, and other costs necessary to
carry out grant activities, such as
background check fees, can be

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
supported and are encouraged under
these grants, especially to support
individuals from low-income
backgrounds who are pursuing careers
as school-based mental health services
providers.
We do not think it is necessary to
prescribe specific practices, such as
trauma-informed care and learnercentered approaches. We believe that
applicants should propose the evidencebased strategies that they believe will
best meet their training needs and
accomplish the goals of their projects.
The Department does not believe it is
necessary to add language specific to
nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit
organizations are included under
community agencies, which are
included in application requirement
(e)(2).
In response to the suggestions for new
priorities, the Department agrees that
partnerships with HBCUs, MSIs, and
TCUs would be beneficial to increasing
credentialed services providers to serve
in high-need LEAs and schools. We
added a new priority for applicants that
are either HBCUs, MSIs, or TCUs, or for
LEA applicants that propose a
partnership with these institutions.
The Department does not think it is
necessary to add a priority for services
for underserved students and students
with disabilities. This program focuses
on increasing the number of
credentialed school-based mental health
services providers in high-need LEAs,
which we believe already includes most
underserved students given the
indicators of poverty, small and rural
schools, and student-to-provider ratios.
Additionally, while the Department
agrees with the importance of increasing
the skills of all personnel to better
address mental health needs, the focus
of this program is to increase the
number of credentialed services
providers, not to provide general
training to all personnel.
Changes: We added a new priority for
projects that will be implemented by or
in partnership with HBCUs, MSIs, or
TCUs to emphasize their role as
valuable partners.
Comment: One commenter
recommended changes to Priority 1 to
better align the priority with the stated
purpose of the grant and the
terminology used by SEAs and IHEs.
The commenter also suggested
conforming edits to application
requirements (c) and (d) and the
definition of ‘‘eligible IHE.’’
Discussion: We agree with the
recommended changes and added
language to specify that graduate
students must be in a school-based
mental health services field. We also

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

deleted the word ‘‘license’’ and revised
the priority to specify that training,
credit hours, field work, internships or
related training must be in support of a
degree or credential with the purpose of
increasing the number of school-based
mental health services providers.
Changes: We revised Priority 1 to
specify that we are referring to schoolbased mental health services fields of
study, to delete ‘‘license,’’ and to require
that the training must be in support of
a degree or credential with the purpose
of increasing the number of schoolbased mental health services providers.
We also made conforming edits to
application requirements (c) and (d),
and the definition of ‘‘eligible IHE.’’
Comment: One commenter suggested
clarifying in Priority 2 that diversity is
more than racial and ethnic diversity.
Discussion: The Department agrees
with the commenter; however, we
believe applicants are best suited to
determine what diversity is in the
context of their proposed projects.
Changes: We revised Priority 2 to
include a parenthetical that describes
the different aspects of diversity that
could be considered.
Comment: We received two comments
on Priority 3. Both offered their support
of the priority. One of the two also
suggested adding the term ‘‘evidencebased’’ as a descriptor to ‘‘pedagogical
practices’’ and adding a definition of
‘‘evidence-based.’’
Discussion: The Department agrees
that this change strengthens the priority
and will support higher quality projects.
Changes: We revised Priority 3 and
added reference to the definition of
‘‘evidence-based’’ in section 8101 of the
ESEA.
Comments: One comment suggested
adding to Proposed Priority 3 a
requirement for IHEs to detail how the
existing graduate preparation program(s)
prepares graduates to provide inclusive
practices in the school setting.
Discussion: We appreciate this
comment and agree that this addition
will clarify how applicants are expected
to address the priority.
Changes: We revised Priority 3 to
state that applicants must provide a
description of how their preparation
program will prepare services providers
to provide inclusive practices and to
create culturally and linguistically
inclusive and identity-safe
environments for students.
Application Requirements
Comment: Four commenters
suggested adding new application
requirements. One commenter suggested
requiring a plan for periodic evaluation
of effectiveness and improvement. A

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

60085

second commenter suggested requiring
applicants to describe how school
leaders will be included in providing
feedback on implementation. Two other
commenters recommended requiring
applicants to submit disaggregated data
for providers and students to determine
the impact of the program. One of the
two commenters specifically suggested
data on diversity (racial, ethnic, and
LGBTQ+ identity and linguistic
diversity) of existing providers and how
it compares with students.
Discussion: The Department
appreciates the commenters’ desire to
understand the performance of
individual projects as well as the
program overall. When inviting
applications for this program, we will
consider for each competition whether
to add selection criteria that require
applicants to describe their plan for
project evaluation including
performance feedback and periodic
assessment of progress. In addition, the
Department will work with successful
applicants post-award to develop and
implement effective evaluation plans.
The Department agrees that including
the feedback of school leaders could
enhance implementation efforts;
however, we believe applicants should
propose feedback loops that best meet
the structure of the project, which may
include school leaders, if appropriate.
The Department agrees with the
importance of disaggregating data to
determine the impact of the program on
disparities in access to mental health
services but we do not think an
application requirement is necessary.
Rather, we encourage applicants to
propose objectives that best represent
the intended outcomes of the project
(which may include data disaggregated
by profession and student) for
consideration by peer reviewers.
Further, we are developing our
evidence-building strategy, which will
include considerations of equitable
access to mental health services.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter requested
the Department consider non-graduate
pathways to increase school-based
mental health services providers in the
application requirements.
Discussion: Establishing non-graduate
pathways is an allowable activity
applicants can include in their
applications. The Department
encourages applicants to engage in
activities such as grow your own
programs that promote and recruit
potential school-based mental health
services providers into the profession as
early as secondary school and support
their interest and training to obtain a
degree and State credential. However,

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

60086

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

the goal of the program is to train
graduate students in school-based
mental health services fields and to
place them in high-need LEAs.
Therefore, non-graduate pathways
activities must be in support of, and in
addition to, the training and placement
of graduate students required to meet
the priority.
Changes: None.
Comment: The Department received
three comments on application
requirement (b). All three commenters
suggested requiring additional data to
more fully convey the nature and
magnitude of the program. One
commenter suggested requiring
applicants to disaggregate ratios by
students based on race, gender,
disability, and other identifiers, as well
as requiring at least one additional data
set such as LEA-level or school-level
demographic data, school climate data,
or descriptions of barriers to hiring and
retaining services providers. The second
commenter suggested requiring the
perspectives of school leaders in
describing the nature and magnitude of
the problem. The final commenter
recommended requiring applicants to
report on substance use and misuse
data.
Discussion: We appreciate these
recommendations; however, we do not
believe it is necessary to require
applicants to disaggregate ratios or to
include at least one of the other data
sets listed in application requirement (b)
as part of their application. Rather, we
believe applicants, in addressing the
application requirement and responding
to the selection criteria, should include
the data they think best describes the
nature and magnitude of the problem,
which may include the suggested data
listed in requirement (b).
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters provided
comments on application requirement
(c). One commenter recommended
adding a requirement to include school
leaders in the plan for enhancing LEA
capacity. The second commenter
suggested including requirements for
trauma-informed and whole learner
practices.
Discussion: The Department agrees
with the importance and value of
including school leader perspectives,
and we encourage applicants to
incorporate their voices as appropriate.
We believe it is stronger to embed this
engagement in the requirement for a
memorandum of understanding (MOU),
memorandum of agreement (MOA), or
letter of agreement, as reflected in
application requirement (d).
The Department also appreciates the
importance of training teachers in

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

trauma-informed practices and
strategies for supporting the whole
learner. However, as stated previously,
we encourage the applicant partnerships
to determine what best meets their
needs and we decline to prescribe
specific approaches.
Changes: None.
Comment: Three commenters
commented on application requirement
(e). Two commenters suggested
including additional collaboration
partners. One of these commenters
suggested nonprofit organizations and
the other suggested the Departmentfunded Regional Education Laboratories
(REL) and the Comprehensive Centers
(CC). The second commenter also
suggested requiring collaboration with
the RELs and CCs to evaluate the
effectiveness of these grants. The third
commenter suggested broadening (e)(1)
given the small number of local
professional organizations available for
collaboration. Additionally, this
commenter questioned whether it is
appropriate for applicants focused on
training services providers to also
collaborate with local mental health and
other community agencies and
requested clarification of the kinds of
collaboration with these entities that
would meet the purpose of the grant.
Discussion: We appreciate these
thoughtful comments. Section (e)(2)
already references community
organizations, which includes nonprofit
organizations; therefore, we are not
proposing any changes in response to
this comment. Additionally, applicants
are encouraged to collaborate with the
RELs and CCs as well as other
Federally-funded technical assistance
centers in accordance with the language
in (e)(2) as appropriate, however, we do
not see a need to require this specific
collaboration over others.
The Department agrees with the
suggestion to broaden the list of entities
with which applicants can collaborate
for the reasons stated by the commenter.
We also think it is appropriate to make
similar changes to section (e)(2) for the
same reasons. However, we do not
believe it is necessary to add language
clarifying the kinds of collaboration. For
application requirement (e), applicants
must propose any one of four activities
listed and are not required to coordinate
specifically with local mental health or
other community agencies. However, we
are encouraging more field-based,
practical training in these grants which
may include knowledge of, and work
with, community agencies.
Changes: We broadened section (e)(1)
to require that applicants coordinate
with at least one national, State, or local
professional organization. We also

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

broadened (e)(2) to include national,
State, or local.
Comment: Two commenters suggested
clarifying who is involved in the
process of identifying students for
mental health services under
application requirement (f). One of the
two commenters suggested requiring the
perspectives and needs of school leaders
as well as the engagement of parents
and families. The other commenter
recommended ensuring that only
qualified professionals identify students
for mental health services. This same
commenter recommended requiring
applicants to describe their process for
ensuring that identified students are not
excluded from schools and classrooms
and the recourse students and families
have if they disagree with the
identification for services.
One of the two commenters also
expressed support for requiring
applicants to describe how they will
ensure services are evidence-based and
inclusive.
Another commenter recommended
including homelessness in the list of
characteristics for inclusion.
Discussion: The Department agrees
that it is important for school leaders as
well as other educators to be involved
in identifying students for mental health
supports and that the professionals
identifying students and determining
support needs must be qualified.
However, we note that all educators and
staff should know the process for
identifying students and be able to refer
students who may need additional
mental health supports to the
appropriate professionals. School and
LEA professionals, in consultation with
families as appropriate, make
determinations regarding the supports
and services a student needs to fully
participate in the learning environment.
We also remind applicants that section
4001(a) of the ESEA applies to this
program. Therefore, any entity receiving
MHSP funds must obtain prior written,
informed consent from the parent of any
child who is under 18 years of age to
participate in any mental health
assessment or service funded under the
program. We also appreciate the
recommendation to include students
experiencing homelessness in the list of
characteristics for inclusion and agree
this is an important group of students to
include.
Changes: We revised requirement (f)
to clarify that identification for mental
health services must be done by
qualified personnel in consultation with
educators, school leaders, parents, and
families. We also added homelessness to
the characteristics listed.

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Definitions
Comment: One commenter asked the
Department to consider providers of
services for substance use and misuse as
part of the mental health workforce. The
same commenter recommended
including a definition of ‘‘diverse
backgrounds’’ to clarify the focus of our
efforts in Priority 2.
Discussion: We appreciate the
commenter’s suggestions and agree that
providers of services for substance use
and misuse may be considered schoolbased mental health services providers
to the extent they meet the definition in
the ESEA.
Given the breadth of diversity that
exists across LEAs nationwide, we
decline the recommendation to add a
definition for this term. Applicants may
set diversity goals based on, for
example, district or community
demographics. We also added more
detail to Priority 2 to demonstrate the
range of diversity we anticipate being
considered among applicants.
Changes: We revised Priority 2 to
include additional detail about diverse
backgrounds that reflect the
communities, identities, races,
ethnicities, abilities, and cultures of the
students in the high-need LEAs,
including underserved students.
Comment: Two commenters offered
considerations for the definition of
‘‘eligible IHEs.’’ One of the two
commenters recommended limiting the
definition to Section 101 institutions
under the Higher Education Act of 1965
(HEA). The other commenter supported
the base definition but suggested
changes to paragraphs (a) and (d).
Specifically, in regard to school
psychology, the commenter
recommended referencing specific
accrediting bodies and also suggested
deleting the language about a State
licensing or certification examination in
school-based psychology noting that a
specific exam in this field does not
exist. Regarding paragraph (d), the
commenter noted that the inclusion of
school nurses goes against the Joint
Explanatory Statement for the FY 2022
Appropriations Act which specifically
stated that Congress does not intend for
MHSP funds to include school nurses
because their needs are addressed
elsewhere in the Federal budget. The
commenter also disagreed with the
Department’s proposal to consider
behavioral health aides and clinical
psychologists under contract with LEAs
to be ‘‘another school-based mental
health field’’ stating that there are no
graduate programs of study to become a
behavioral health aide and that clinical
psychology alone is not sufficient to

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

qualify someone as a school-based
mental health services provider.
Discussion: Regarding the comment
on ‘‘limiting the definition to Section
101 institutions,’’ ‘‘eligible IHEs’’ are
those institutions that meet the
requirements of Section 101(a) of the
HEA—that is, educational institutions
that are public or private, nonprofit
institutions and that meet the other
requirements of the provision. Section
8101(29) of the ESEA expressly provides
that the term ‘‘institution of higher
education’’ as referenced in the ESEA
has the same meaning given that term in
section 101(a) of the HEA except as
otherwise provided in the ESEA. Given
that the MHSP program is established
under Title IV, Part F of the ESEA (the
school safety national activities
authority) and the authority does not
‘‘otherwise provide’’ a different IHE
definition, the applicable definition of
‘‘institution of higher education’’ is ‘‘an
educational institution in any State that
is . . . a public or other nonprofit
institution’’ and otherwise meets the
requirements of section 101(a). We
decline to reference specific
credentialing entities given that
credentialing is a State determination.
The Department appreciates the
commenter identifying potential
inconsistencies between the definition
of ‘‘eligible IHE’’ and the Joint
Explanatory Statement for the FY 2022
Appropriations Act. To align the
definition with congressional intent
about the scope of available funds, we
revised paragraph (d) of the definition to
exclude school nurses. Also, we
recognize there is variation in the
education and training requirements for
behavioral health aides and clinical
psychologists. In order to meet the
purpose of training personnel to provide
school-based mental health services, we
revised paragraph (d) to say that other
school-based mental health fields of
study may be included to the extent
they result in a State credential to
deliver school-based mental health
services.
Changes: We revised paragraphs (a)–
(d) of the definition of ‘‘eligible IHE’’ to
align the definition with changes
referenced previously about
credentialing. We will also adopt the
HEA Section 101 definition of IHE when
publishing the notice inviting
applications. We also revised paragraph
(d) of the definition to exclude school
nurses and to specify that other schoolbased mental health fields of study are
included to the extent they prepare
students for a State credential to deliver
school-based mental health services.
Comment: Two commenters suggested
additional indicators for demonstrating

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

60087

that an LEA meets the definition of
‘‘high-need LEA.’’ One suggested adding
indicators that the Department proposed
for the SBMH program. The other
commenter suggested specifying in the
definition of ‘‘high-need LEA’’ that there
is a high underserved student-to
provider-ratio.
Discussion: The Department declines
the suggestion to add indicators from
the SBMH program to the definition of
‘‘high-need LEA.’’ We intentionally use
a different indicator for this program
because the focus of this program is on
increasing the number of services
providers for underserved students in
high-poverty schools or small and rural
schools. We also believe the current
indicators of poverty, small and rural
schools, and high student to provider
ratios are sufficient to focus this
program on underserved students
without over-limiting eligibility.
Changes: None.
Comment: One commenter suggested
adding an indicator about traumatic
events or adverse childhood experiences
to the definition of ‘‘high-need school.’’
Discussion: We do not believe adding
these indicators is necessary. The
current indicators are based on poverty
in order to focus the program on
underserved students.
Changes: None.
Comment: Two commenters suggested
changes to the definition of ‘‘schoolbased mental health partnerships.’’ One
of the two commenters suggested
clarifying that eligible IHEs include
HBCUs, MSIs, and TCUs. The second
commenter suggested including school
leaders in the creation of the
partnership.
Discussion: The Department agrees
that calling out HBCUs, MSIs, and TCUs
as IHE partners supports the
Department’s overarching goal of
increasing the number of services
providers from diverse backgrounds.
The Department also agrees that
engaging leaders at all levels of the
project in the creation of the partnership
will lead to a stronger partnership.
However, rather than revise the
definition of ‘‘school-based mental
health partnership,’’ we believe it is
more effective to incorporate the leader
role in the MOU, MOA, or letter of
agreement.
Changes: We added a reference to
HBCUs, MSIs, and TCUs in paragraph
(b) of the definition of ‘‘school-based
mental health partnerships’’. For clarity,
we also cite, in the rule text, the specific
authority for the definition of each
entity. We also revised application
requirement (d) to emphasize the
engagement of leaders when developing
the MOU, MOA, or letter of agreement.

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

60088

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

Final Priorities
Priority 1—Expand Capacity of HighNeed LEAs.
Projects that propose to expand the
capacity of high-need LEAs (as defined
in this notice) in partnership with
eligible IHEs (as defined in this notice)
to train school-based mental health
services providers (as defined in this
notice), with the goal of expanding the
number of these professionals available
to address the shortages of school-based
mental health services providers in
high-need schools.
To meet this priority, the applicant
must propose a school-based mental
health partnership (as defined in this
notice) to place the IHE’s graduate
students in school-based mental health
services fields into high-need schools
served by the participating high-need
LEAs for the purpose of completing
required field work, credit hours,
internships, or related training
necessary to complete their degree or
obtain a credential as a school-based
mental health services provider.
Priority 2—Increase the Number of
Qualified School-Based Mental Health
Services Providers in High-Need LEAs
Who Are from Diverse Backgrounds or
from Communities Served by the HighNeed LEAs.
Projects that propose to increase the
number of qualified school-based
mental health services providers in
high-need LEAs who are from diverse
backgrounds (i.e., backgrounds that
reflect the communities, identities,
races, ethnicities, abilities, and cultures
of the students in the high-need LEA,
including underserved students) or who
are from communities served by the
high-need LEAs.2
Applicants must describe how their
proposal to increase the number of
school-based mental health services
providers who are from diverse
backgrounds or who are from the
communities served by the high-need
LEA will help increase access to mental
health services for students within the
high-need LEA and best meet the mental
health needs of the diverse populations
of students to be served.
Priority 3—Promote Inclusive
Practices.
Projects that propose to provide
evidence-based (as defined in section
8101 of the ESEA) pedagogical practices
in mental health services provider
preparation programs or professional
development programs that are
inclusive with regard to race, ethnicity,
2 All strategies to increase the diversity of
providers must comply with applicable Federal
civil rights laws, including Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:01 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

culture, language, disability, and for
students who identify as LGBTQI+, and
that prepare school-based mental health
services providers to create culturally
and linguistically inclusive and
identity-safe 3 environments for students
when providing services.
Applicants must describe how their
proposal to provide evidence-based
pedagogical practices in mental health
services provider preparation programs
or professional development programs
will prepare school-based mental health
services providers to provide inclusive
practices and to create culturally and
linguistically inclusive and identity-safe
environments for students when
providing services.
Priority 4—Partnerships with HBCUs,
TCUs, and other MSIs.
Applicants that propose to implement
their projects by or in partnership with
one or more of the following entities:
(1) Historically Black Colleges and
Universities (as defined in 34 CFR
608.2).
(2) Tribal Colleges and Universities
(as defined in section 316(b)(3) of the
HEA).
(3) Minority-Serving Institutions (as
defined in sections 316 through 320 of
part A of title III, under part B of title
III, or under title V of the HEA).
Types of Priorities:
When inviting applications for a
competition using one or more
priorities, we designate the type of each
priority as absolute, competitive
preference, or invitational through a
notice in the Federal Register. The
effect of each type of priority follows:
Absolute priority: Under an absolute
priority, we consider only applications
that meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(3)).
Competitive preference priority:
Under a competitive preference priority,
we give competitive preference to an
application by (1) awarding additional
points, depending on the extent to
which the application meets the priority
(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)) or (2) selecting
an application that meets the priority
over an application of comparable merit
that does not meet the priority (34 CFR
75.105(c)(2)(ii)).
Invitational priority: Under an
invitational priority we are particularly
interested in applications that meet the
priority. However, we do not give an
application that meets the priority a
preference over other applications (34
CFR 75.105(c)(1)).
3 An identity-safe environment is a place where
every student feels physically and emotionally safe.
Perceptions of safety often differ across different
groups of students, and each intervention and
support measure should be designed to ensure the
safety and belonging of all students.

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

Final Requirement
The following are application
requirements for this program. We may
apply one or more of these requirements
in any year in which the program is in
effect.
Eligible Applicants:
Eligible applicants for this program
are high-need LEAs, SEAs on behalf of
one or more high-need LEAs, and IHEs.
High-need LEA applicants and SEA
applicants on behalf of one or more
high-need LEAs must propose to work
in partnership with an eligible
institution of higher education (eligible
IHE), which may include institutions
that serve diverse learners such as an
HBCU (as defined in 34 CFR 608.2),
TCU (as defined in section 316(b)(3) of
the HEA), or other MSI (as defined in
sections 316 through 320 of part A of
title III, under part B of title III, or under
title V of the HEA). Eligible IHE
applicants must propose to work in
partnership with one or more high-need
LEAs or an SEA.
Application Requirements:
(a) Identification of schools to be
served by the proposed project.
Applicants must identify or describe
how they will identify the high-need
schools to be served in each high-need
LEA that is part of the school-based
mental health partnership.
(b) A description of the nature and
magnitude of the problem.
Applicants must describe how the
lack of school-based mental health
services providers is specifically
affecting students in the high-need
schools to be served by project
activities. Applicants must describe the
nature of the problem for the LEA, based
on, but not limited to, the most recent
available ratios of school-based mental
health services providers to students
enrolled in the schools in each highneed LEA that is part of the schoolbased mental health partnership (in the
aggregate and disaggregated by
profession (e.g., school social workers,
school psychologists, and school
counselors)). The description may also
include LEA and school-level
demographic data, including chronic
absenteeism and discipline data, school
climate surveys, school violence/crime
data, data related to suicide rates, and
descriptions of barriers to hiring and
retaining services providers in the LEA.
(c) A plan to enhance LEA capacity to
provide mental health services to
students.
Applicants must describe the specific
activities they will conduct to expand
and improve LEA capacity to provide
mental health services to students in
high-need LEAs and ensure that

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
students receive appropriate, evidencebased (as defined in section 8101 of the
ESEA), and culturally and linguistically
inclusive mental health services. To
meet this requirement, the applicant
must propose a school-based mental
health partnership (as defined in this
notice) established for the purpose of
placing the IHE’s graduate students in
school-based mental health fields into
high-need schools served by the
participating high-need LEAs to
complete required field work, credit
hours, internships, or related training as
applicable for the degree or credential
program of each student. If the applicant
intends to establish a program that
directly benefits an individual graduate
student, such as through a stipend or
tuition credit, the applicant must
describe its approach to implementing a
service obligation for such graduate
student as a school-based mental health
services provider in a high-need LEA
commensurate with the level of support
the graduate student receives.
(d) A memorandum of understanding
(MOU), a memorandum of agreement
(MOA), or letter of agreement between
the LEA or SEA, and the IHE.
Applicants must include with their
application an MOU, MOA, or letter of
agreement that is signed by the
authorized representatives of the LEA or
SEA, and the IHE. The MOU, MOA, or
letter of agreement must provide details
regarding the roles and responsibilities
of each entity in the partnership, and
include a description of how the
partnership will place graduate students
into high-need schools served by the
participating high-need LEAs to
complete required field work, credit
hours, internships, or related training
necessary to complete their degree or
obtain a credential as a school-based
mental health services provider.
Additionally, SEA and LEA applicants
must describe in the MOU, MOA, or
letter of agreement how leaders across
all levels of the project will be engaged
in the implementation and evaluation of
the project. The MOU, MOA, or letter of
agreement must also include the
estimated number of mental health
services providers that will be placed
into employment in high-need schools
and high-need LEAs on an annual basis.
(e) A plan for collaboration and
coordination with related Federal, State,
and local initiatives.
Applicants must propose a plan that
describes one or more of the following:
(1) How they will collaborate with at
least one national, State, or local
professional organization (to include a
regional professional organization, if
appropriate), such as a school social
worker association, school psychologist

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

association, or school counselor
association;
(2) The activities to be carried out in
coordination with the national, State, or
local mental health, public health, child
welfare, and other community agencies,
which may include school-based health
centers, to achieve the plan goals and
objectives of establishing a pipeline
program to train and expand the
capacity of school-based mental health
services providers in high-need LEAs;
(3) How they will leverage other
available Federal, State, and local
resources to achieve project goals and
objectives and sustain investments
beyond the budget period. Applicants
must identify these other available
resources and describe how they will be
used to promote success across
programs; and
(4) How they will use the MHSP
funds to expand and enhance existing
efforts or put in place new measures to
increase the number of qualified schoolbased mental health services providers
to be employed by eligible schools and
LEAs qualified to provide school-based
mental health services.
Evidence of collaboration and
coordination described in paragraphs
(e)(1) and (2) must be provided through
letters of support or MOAs/MOUs from
State or local organizations or agencies,
where applicable.
(f) A description of the process to
identify students for mental health
services.
Applicants must describe the specific
process and activities they will use to
ensure students in high-need LEAs who
need school-based mental health
services are properly identified,
assessed, and provided the appropriate
school-based mental health services by
qualified personnel in consultation with
educators, including school leaders, and
parents and families, as appropriate. To
meet this requirement, applicants must
also describe how they will ensure that
services are evidence-based and
inclusive with regard to race, ethnicity,
culture, language, disability,
homelessness, and for students who
identify as LGBTQI+, and are accessible
to all. Further, applicants must describe
how LEAs will engage parents and
families for the purposes of raising
awareness about the availability of
services and connecting students to
services.
Final Definitions
The Department establishes
definitions of ‘‘eligible institution of
higher education,’’ ‘‘high-need LEA,’’
‘‘high-need school,’’ ‘‘school-based
mental health partnership,’’and
‘‘students/children from low-income

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

60089

backgrounds,’’for use in this program.
We may apply the definitions in any
year in which this program is in effect.
Eligible institution of higher
education means an institution of
higher education that offers a program
of study that leads to a master’s degree
or other graduate degree—
(a) In school psychology that prepares
students in such program for a State
credential as a school psychologist;
(b) In school counseling that prepares
students in such program for a State
credential in school counseling;
(c) In school social work that prepares
students in such program for a State
credential in school social work;
(d) In another school-based mental
health field that prepares students in
such program for a State credential to
deliver school-based mental health
services; or
(e) In any combination of study
described in paragraphs (a) through (d).
High-need LEA means a local
educational agency—
(a)(1) For which at least 20 percent of
the children served by the agency are
children from low-income backgrounds;
(2) That serves at least 10,000
children from low-income backgrounds;
(3) That meets the eligibility
requirements for funding under the
Small, Rural School Achievement
(SRSA) program under section 5211(b)
of the ESEA; or
(4) That meets the eligibility
requirements for funding under the
Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS)
program under section 5221(b) of the
ESEA; and
(b) For which there is a high student
to qualified mental health services
provider ratio as compared to other
LEAs statewide or nationally.
High-need school means a school that,
based on the most recent data available,
meets at least one of the following:
(a) The school is in the highest
quartile of all schools served by an LEA
ranked in descending order by
percentage of students from low-income
backgrounds enrolled in such schools,
as determined by the LEA based on one
of the following measures of poverty:
(1) The percentage of students aged 5
through 17 in poverty counted in the
most recent census data approved by the
Secretary.
(2) The percentage of students eligible
for a free or reduced-price school lunch
under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act based on the most
recently available data.
(3) The percentage of students in
families receiving assistance under the
State program funded under part A of
title IV of the Social Security Act.

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

60090

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

(4) The percentage of students eligible
to receive medical assistance under the
Medicaid program.
(5) A composite of two or more of the
measures described in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (4).
(b) In the case of—
(1) An elementary school, the school
serves students not less than 60 percent
of whom are eligible for a free or
reduced-price school lunch under the
Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act based on the most recently
available data; or
(2) Any other school that is not an
elementary school, the other school
serves students not less than 45 percent
of whom are eligible for a free or
reduced-price school lunch under the
Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act based on the most recently
available data.
School-based mental health
partnership means the formal
relationship, established for the purpose
of training school-based mental health
services providers for employment in
schools and LEAs, between—
(a) One or more high-need LEAs or an
SEA on behalf of one or more high-need
LEAs; and
(b) One or more eligible IHEs,
including HBCUs (as defined in 34 CFR
608.2), MSIs (as defined in sections 316
through 320 of part A of title III, under
part B of title III, or under title V of the
HEA), and TCUs (as defined in section
316(b)(3) of the HEA).
Students/children from low-income
backgrounds means students whose
families meet any of the poverty
thresholds established in section 1113
of the ESEA for the relevant grade level.
This document does not preclude us
from proposing additional priorities,
requirements, definitions, or selection
criteria, subject to meeting applicable
rulemaking requirements.
Note: This document does not solicit
applications. In any year in which we choose
to use these priorities, requirements, and
definitions, we invite applications through a
notice in the Federal Register.

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Regulatory Impact Analysis
Under Executive Order 12866, it must
be determined whether this regulatory
action is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore,
subject to the requirements of the
Executive order and subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866 defines a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as an action likely to result in
a rule that may—
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

adversely affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities in a material way (also
referred to as an ‘‘economically
significant’’ rule);
(2) Create serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impacts of entitlement grants, user fees,
or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
stated in the Executive order.
This final regulatory action will have
an annual effect on the economy of
more than $100 million because
approximately $143 million is available
under this program from FY 2022
appropriations actions, and $100
million is available each year from FY
2023 to FY 2026. Therefore, this final
action is ‘‘economically significant’’ and
subject to review by OMB under section
3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866.
Notwithstanding this determination, we
have assessed the potential costs and
benefits, both quantitative and
qualitative, of this final regulatory
action and have determined that the
benefits justify the costs.
We have also reviewed this final
regulatory action under Executive Order
13563, which supplements and
explicitly reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing
regulatory review established in
Executive Order 12866. To the extent
permitted by law, Executive Order
13563 requires that an agency—
(1) Propose or adopt regulations only
upon a reasoned determination that
their benefits justify their costs
(recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify);
(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives and
taking into account—among other things
and to the extent practicable—the costs
of cumulative regulations;
(3) In choosing among alternative
regulatory approaches, select those
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity);
(4) To the extent feasible, specify
performance objectives, rather than the
behavior or manner of compliance a
regulated entity must adopt; and
(5) Identify and assess available
alternatives to direct regulation,
including economic incentives—such as

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

user fees or marketable permits—to
encourage the desired behavior, or
provide information that enables the
public to make choices.
Executive Order 13563 also requires
an agency ‘‘to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated
present and future benefits and costs as
accurately as possible.’’ The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB has emphasized that these
techniques may include ‘‘identifying
changing future compliance costs that
might result from technological
innovation or anticipated behavioral
changes.’’
We are issuing these final priorities,
requirements, and definitions only on a
reasoned determination that their
benefits would justify their costs. In
choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, we selected those
approaches that would maximize net
benefits. Based on an analysis of
anticipated costs and benefits, we
believe that the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions are
consistent with the principles in
Executive Order 13563.
We also have determined that this
regulatory action does not unduly
interfere with State, local, and Tribal
governments in the exercise of their
governmental functions. In this
regulatory impact analysis (RIA) we
discuss the need for regulatory action,
the potential costs and benefits, net
budget impacts, assumptions,
limitations, and data sources, as well as
regulatory alternatives we considered.
Costs and Benefits: The priorities,
requirements, and definitions are
necessary for the implementation of
MHSP consistent with the requirements
established by Congress in the
Department of Education
Appropriations Act, 2022, and the
Explanatory Statement accompanying
that Act. It is important to note that
implementation of MHSP would almost
exclusively confer benefits on the
recipients of Federal funds subject to
the final priorities, requirements, and
definitions, whose voluntary
participation in MHSP would entail
minimal costs except for those paid
with Federal funds, and the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) section of this
document discusses the burden
estimates for preparing an application.
This program was established under a
statute with broad authority and only
non-binding report language
establishing program purpose,
eligibility, or requirements;
consequently, this rulemaking action is
necessary to ensure program funds are
used for their intended purpose. More
specifically, the final priorities,

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

60091

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
requirements, and definitions would
ensure that the Department may collect
from applicants for MHSP funding the
information necessary for competitive
review of applications by peer
reviewers, and to fund high-quality
applications that will lead to the
implementation of projects consistent
with congressional intent. Absent this
rulemaking action, there is no
alternative means of meeting these
objectives.
The specific benefits of establishing a
menu of final priorities include
ensuring that funds are used consistent
with congressional intent and providing
flexibility to the Department for
supporting multiple strategies designed
to address the shortage of mental health
services providers in schools. The first
strategy, embedded in Final Priority 1,
is to focus grant activities on the
expansion of school-based mental
health services providers in ‘‘high-need
LEAs.’’ The definition of high-need
LEA,incorporated into these priorities,
provides flexibility for an LEA to show
need in various ways, including through
poverty rates or size. Although the total
number of LEAs is large (over 13,000 in
school year 2018–19), the available
funding will only support a limited
number of multiyear projects. Absent
the targeting of MHSP funds to highneed LEAs, the program may allocate
scarce Federal resources to highcapacity LEAs that already meet the
mental health needs of their students.
Moreover, ensuring that funds are
targeted to high-need LEAs was a
requirement of the FY 2019 MHSP
competition, and Congress directed the
Department, through the Explanatory
Statement accompanying the
Department of Education
Appropriations Act, 2022, to
incorporate the same requirement into
the FY 2022 MHSP competition.
Final Priority 2 supports a strategy for
expanding the workforce of schoolbased mental health services providers.
Currently, the psychology and school
counselor workforces are significantly
less diverse than the student

population. Increasing the number of
qualified school-based mental health
services providers who are from diverse
backgrounds and from communities
served by the high-need LEAs, and who
can provide culturally and linguistically
appropriate services, would expand not
only the numbers of these providers but
also provide better access to and
improve the quality of mental health
services available to students. This
priority has the additional benefit of
promoting equity for students, in
keeping with the Administration’s
agenda and the Department’s mission to
support equity and excellence.
Final Priority 3 seeks to increase the
number of school-based mental health
services providers who can provide
services that are culturally and
linguistically inclusive and who can
provide identity-safe environments for
students. Given the diversity of the
student population, every school-based
mental health services provider should
be able to implement inclusive practices
and be able to provide services to all
students. This priority also supports the
Administration’s equity agenda and the
Department’s mission to support equity
and excellence.
Final Priority 4 complements Final
Priority 2 by recognizing the role that
MSIs, including HBCUs and TCUs, can
play in meeting the diversity goals of
the MHSP program. Such institutions
are uniquely positioned to increase the
number of qualified school-based
mental health services providers who
are from diverse backgrounds and from
communities served by the high-need
LEAs, and who can provide culturally
and linguistically appropriate services
to underserved students in high-need
schools and LEAs. Finally, Priority 4
can create an incentive for the inclusion
of such institutions in the innovative
partnerships and pathways supported
by the MHSP program.
The Department believes that this
final regulatory action would not
impose significant costs on eligible
entities, whose participation in our
programs is voluntary, and whose costs
can generally be covered with grant

funds. As a result, the final priorities,
requirements, and definitions would not
impose a significant burden, except
when an entity voluntarily elects to
apply for a grant. Moreover, the
Department believes the benefits
associated with the grant application
would outweigh any associated costs.
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
section of this RIA discusses the burden
estimates for preparing an application.
The potential benefits of receiving
Federal funds under this program to
expand the pool of, and hire, schoolbased mental health services providers
outweigh the application costs detailed
in the PRA section. The costs of
implementing the requirements
established in this notice generally can
be paid for with grant funds.
Regulatory Alternatives Considered
The Department believes that the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
in this notice are needed to administer
the program effectively. The priorities
will enable the Department to
administer a competitive grant program
consistent with the intent of Congress as
expressed in the Explanatory Statement
accompanying the Department of
Education Appropriations Act, 2022
(Pub. L. 117–103), which provided
funding for the program in fiscal year
2022, and the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act (Pub. L. 117–159),
which provided additional funding for
fiscal years 2022 through 2026.
Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A–4
(available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/informationfor-agencies/circulars/), in the following
table we have prepared an accounting
statement showing the classification of
the expenditures associated with the
provisions of this regulatory action. This
table provides our best estimate of the
changes in annual monetized transfers
as a result of this regulatory action.
Expenditures are classified as
transfers from the Federal Government
to LEAs and IHEs.

ACCOUNTING STATEMENT CLASSIFICATION OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
[In millions]
Transfers
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Category
3 percent
Annualized monetized transfers ..............................................................................................................................
From whom to whom? .............................................................................................................................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1

$108.6

7 percent
$108.6

From the Federal government
to LEAs and IHEs.

60092

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 191 / Tuesday, October 4, 2022 / Rules and Regulations

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Secretary certifies that this final
regulatory action does not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Small Business Administration
Size Standards define proprietary
institutions as small businesses if they
are independently owned and operated,
are not dominant in their field of
operation, and have total annual
revenue below $7,000,000. Nonprofit
institutions are defined as small entities
if they are independently owned and
operated and not dominant in their field
of operation. Public institutions are
defined as small organizations if they
are operated by a government
overseeing a population below 50,000.
The small entities that this final
regulatory action would affect are
school districts and IHEs applying for
and receiving funds under this program.
The Secretary believes that the costs
imposed on applicants by the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions,
would be limited to paperwork burden
related to preparing an application and
that the benefits of implementing these
proposals would outweigh any costs
incurred by applicants.
Participation in this program is
voluntary. For this reason, the final
priorities, requirements, and definitions
would impose no burden on small
entities in general. Eligible applicants
would determine whether to apply for
funds and have the opportunity to
weigh the requirements for preparing
applications, and any associated costs,
against the likelihood of receiving
funding and the requirements for
implementing projects under the
program. Eligible applicants most likely
would apply only if they determine that
the likely benefits exceed the costs of
preparing an application. The likely
benefits include the potential receipt of
a grant as well as other benefits that may
accrue to an entity through its
development of an application, such as
the use of that application to seek
funding from other sources to address a
shortage in mental health providers.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
does not require you to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a valid OMB control number.
We display the valid OMB control
number assigned to the collection of
information in this notice of final
priorities, regulations, and definitions at
the end of the affected sections of the
requirements.
The final priorities, requirements, and
definitions contain information

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:56 Oct 03, 2022

Jkt 259001

collection requirements that are
approved by OMB. The final priorities,
requirements, and definitions do not
affect the currently approved data
collection. An FY 2022 competition
would require applicants to complete
and submit an application for Federal
assistance using Department standard
application forms. We estimate that for
the FY 2022 MHSP competition and
later competitions, each applicant will
spend approximately 40 hours of staff
time to address these priorities,
requirements, and definitions. We
estimate that we will receive
approximately 500 applications for
these funds. The total number of burden
hours for all applicants to review
instructions, search existing data
sources, gather and maintain the data
needed, and complete and review the
application is estimated to be 20,000
hours.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of Federal
financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document in an accessible format.
The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can
view this document, as well as all other
documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register in text
or Portable Document Format (PDF). To
use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat
Reader, which is available free at the
site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

your search to documents published by
the Department.
James F. Lane,
Senior Advisor, Office of the Secretary,
Delegated the Authority to Perform the
Functions and Duties of the Assistant
Secretary for the Office Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2022–21633 Filed 10–3–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
34 CFR Chapter II
[Docket ID ED–2021–OESE–0122]

Final Priorities, Requirements, and
Definitions—School-Based Mental
Health Services Grant Program
Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Final priorities, requirements,
and definitions.
AGENCY:

The Department of Education
(Department) announces final priorities,
requirements, and definitions under the
School-Based Mental Health Services
(SBMH) Grant Program, Assistance
Listing Number (ALN) 84.184H. We may
use one or more of these priorities,
requirements, and definitions for
competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2022
and later years. These final priorities,
requirements, and definitions are
designed to direct funds to increase the
number of credentialed school-based
mental health services providers (as
defined in 20 U.S.C. 7112(6)) in local
educational agencies (LEAs) with
demonstrated need (as defined in this
document), in order to meet student
mental health needs.
DATES: These priorities, requirements,
and definitions are effective November
3, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Banks, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW,
Room 3E357, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 453–6704. Email:
[email protected].
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or
have a speech disability and wish to
access telecommunications relay
services, please dial 7–1–1.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:

Executive Summary
Purpose of this Regulatory Action: As
defined by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), ‘‘Mental
health includes our emotional,
psychological, and social well-being. It
affects how we think, feel, and act. It

E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM

04OCR1