Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) Interventions to Promote Community Living Among Individuals with Disabilities CFDA Number 84.133B 1 | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1) What is this grant opportunity?

This is a discretionary U.S. Department of Education competition administered through the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR) under the Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and Centers Program (CFDA 84.133). It funds a Rehabilitation Research and Training Center (RRTC) focused on interventions that promote community living among individuals with disabilities.

2) What is the purpose of the funded RRTC?

The purpose is to support a national-level center that conducts advanced research and also provides training, technical assistance, and broad dissemination. The goal is to improve how disability and rehabilitation services work so that people with disabilities, particularly those with the most significant support needs, can live more fully in their communities.

3) What topic area is this competition focused on?

The general problem area specified for this competition is interventions that support community living for individuals with disabilities.

4) What makes the RRTC mechanism different from basic research funding?

The RRTC mechanism is designed to go beyond producing research findings. The intent is to generate usable knowledge and tools that directly improve the effectiveness of services authorized under the Rehabilitation Act, and to help service systems and providers adopt evidence-based interventions through training and technical assistance, with active dissemination to stakeholders.

5) What kinds of activities are expected from the funded center?

Based on the synopsis, the funded RRTC is expected to: (a) produce evidence about what interventions work to support community living, (b) provide training and technical assistance to support adoption and implementation in service systems, and (c) disseminate results in targeted ways so practitioners, people with disabilities, and families or representatives can access and use the findings.

6) What law or statutory authority underpins this program?

The work is grounded in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 701 et seq.), with emphasis on inclusion, integration, employment, independent living, family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency.

7) What is the CFDA number, and how should it be searched in Grants.gov?

The CFDA number is 84.133. Applicants were instructed to search Grants.gov using "84.133" (without the letter suffix), meaning they would search the numeric CFDA identifier rather than "84.133B" or similar variants.

8) How were applications required to be submitted?

Applications had to be submitted electronically through Grants.gov using the downloadable application package for CFDA 84.133.

9) Could applicants submit by emailing an electronic copy to the agency?

No. The notice specifically stressed that applications could not be submitted by emailing an electronic copy to the agency; submission through Grants.gov was required.

10) Who was listed as the contact for Grants.gov or system access help?

The contact listed for systems and Grants.gov assistance was Julius Cotton (ED Grants.gov FIND Systems Admin).

11) What was the corrected funding amount for this competition?

The Department of Education issued a correction to the initial Federal Register publication. The original notice mistakenly listed $700,000, but the corrected amount for estimated available funds was $850,000.

12) What was the maximum award amount (award ceiling)?

As corrected, the maximum award (award ceiling) was $850,000 for a single 12-month budget period.

13) What happens if an application proposed a budget above the maximum?

The notice states that any application proposing a budget over $850,000 for the 12-month period would be rejected.

14) Could the maximum award amount change?

Yes. The notice indicates the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services could change the maximum amount later through another Federal Register notice.

15) How many awards were expected to be made?

The opportunity anticipated making one award.

16) What was the project budget period referenced in the notice?

The notice references a single 12-month budget period for purposes of the award ceiling and budget submission limit.

17) When were applications available and when were they due?

Applications became available on June 27, 2011. The deadline for transmittal of applications was August 11, 2011.

18) What does it mean that the opportunity was archived?

The synopsis notes the opportunity was later archived on September 10, 2011, reflecting that the competition timeline was tied to the FY 2011 cycle described in the announcement.

19) Was there a pre-application meeting?

Yes. A pre-application meeting was scheduled for July 18, 2011, offered by conference call with NIDRR staff from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Washington, DC time.

20) Were individual consultations offered in connection with the pre-application meeting?

Yes. The notice described an additional window for individual telephone consultations from 3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Washington, DC time on July 18, 2011.

21) Who were the listed program contacts for the pre-application meeting and consultations?

The listed program contacts were Lynn Medley and Marlene Spencer at the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The notice included their phone numbers and email addresses for arranging participation.

22) Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was broad. It included states and public or private agencies and organizations (including for-profit entities), institutions of higher education (both public/state-controlled and private), and Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations. The eligibility references also included many governmental and nonprofit categories (such as local governments, special district governments, independent school districts, public housing authorities/Indian housing authorities, and nonprofits with or without 501(c)(3) status).

23) Does the eligibility language indicate nonprofits must have 501(c)(3) status?

No. The eligibility list references nonprofits with or without 501(c)(3) status.

24) Was cost sharing or matching required?

No cost sharing or matching requirement was indicated in the synopsis provided.

25) What audiences are expected to benefit from dissemination?

The synopsis indicates dissemination is meant to make results accessible to practitioners, people with disabilities, and families or representatives, so the knowledge can be used in real-world settings.

26) What service outcomes or values are emphasized in the program description?

The emphasis includes inclusion and integration in the community, employment, independent living, family support, and economic and social self-sufficiency.

27) Where should applicants look for the authoritative requirements and full details?

The synopsis emphasizes that authoritative requirements, priorities, submission rules, and performance measures are those in the official Federal Register notice, and that applicants should rely on that official publication for full instructions and compliance details.