[Federal Register: July 12, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 135)]
[Notices]
[Page 36715-36719]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA No: 84.278e]
Office of Vocational and Adult Education
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year (FY)
1996 for School-to-Work Opportunities State Implementation Grants
(State Implementation Grants)
Purpose of Program: State Implementation Grants will enable States
to implement their plans for statewide School-to-Work Opportunities
systems. Such systems will offer young Americans access to programs
designed to prepare them for a first job in high-skill, high-wage
careers, and for further education and training. Funds awarded under
section 212 of the School-to-Work Opportunities Act will serve as
``venture capital'' to allow States to build comprehensive School-to-
Work Opportunities systems which provide all youth with high-quality
education that integrates school-based learning, work-based learning
and connecting activities, prepares young Americans for success in
high-skill, high-wage careers, and increases their opportunities for
further education and training.
Eligible Applicants: All States, including the District of Columbia
and Puerto Rico, that did not receive a State
[[Page 36716]]
Implementation Grant in FY 1994 or 1995 are eligible for Implementation
Grants under this competition. In accordance with the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act, the Governor must submit the application on behalf
of the State.
Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: August 30, 1996.
Telefacsimile (FAX) applications will not be accepted.
Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: October 29, 1996.
Applications Available: Application packages will be mailed
directly to both the Governor and the State School-to-Work Development
Grant contact of each eligible applicant. Applications will be mailed
to applicants, via overnight mail, within one day of the publication of
this notice in the Federal Register.
Available Funds: Approximately $55.5 million (funding for the first
twelve months).
Estimated Range of Awards: The Departments expect the minimum award
to be approximately $1.5 million and the maximum award to be
approximately $20 million. The Departments wish to emphasize that, in
accordance with sections 212, 213, 214, and 216 of the Act, the actual
amount of each award made under this competition will depend on such
factors as the scope and quality of the State plan and application, the
number of projected participants in programs operating within each
State's School-to-Work Opportunities system, and the State's youth
population. Therefore, the Departments strongly encourage applicants to
consider these factors, the estimated average grant award amount, and
the amount of awards made to Implementation States in prior rounds in
deciding what funds to request. Applicants are discouraged from
requesting significantly more funds than States with similar numbers of
school-age youth received last year without a strong programmatic basis
for doing so. Information on last years' awards is contained in the
application package.
Estimated Average Size of Awards: $4.5 million.
Estimated Number of Awards: Up to 13.
Note: The Departments are not bound by any estimates in this
notice.
Project Period: Up to five years (five twelve-month grant periods).
Applicable Regulations: In accordance with the authority provided
in the Act, the Departments have determined that the administrative
provisions contained in the Education Department General Administrative
Regulations, 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 82, 85, and 86, will
apply to grants awarded to State partnerships under this competition.
The selection criteria and definition published in this notice, as well
as the instructions contained in the application package and the
eligibility and other requirements specified in the Act, apply to this
competition.
Definition
All definitions in the Act apply to School-to-Work Opportunities
systems funded under this and future State Implementation Grant
competitions. Since the Act does not contain a definition of the term
``administrative costs'' as used in section 217 of the Act, the
Departments apply the following definition to competitions for State
Implementation Grants:
The term ``administrative costs'' means the activities of a State
or local partnership that are necessary for the proper and efficient
performance of its duties under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act
and that are not directly related to the provision of services to
participants or otherwise allocable to the system's allowable
activities listed in section 215(b)(4) and section 215(c) of the Act.
Administrative costs may be either personnel costs or non-personnel
costs, and direct or indirect. Costs of administration shall include,
but not be limited, to--
(a) Costs of salaries, wages, and related costs of the grantee's
staff engaged in--
(1) Overall system management, system coordination, and general
administrative functions;
(2) Preparing program plans, budgets, and schedules, as well as
applicable amendments;
(3) Monitoring of local initiatives, pilot projects, subrecipients,
and related systems and processes;
(4) Procurement activities, including the award of specific
subgrants, contracts, and purchase orders;
(5) Developing systems and procedures, including management
information systems, for assuring compliance with the requirements
under the Act;
(6) Preparing reports and other documents related to the Act; and
(7) Coordinating the resolution of audit findings.
(b) Costs for goods and services required for administration of the
system;
(c) Costs of system-wide management functions; and
(d) Travel costs incurred for official business in carrying out
grant management or administrative activities.
Note on Administrative Cost Cap: In accordance with section
215(b)(6) of the Act, a local partnership receiving a subgrant from
State Implementation Grant funds awarded under the competition may use
no more than 10 percent of that subgrant for administrative costs
associated with carrying out School-to-Work program activities in one
fiscal year. This notice clarifies that a 10 percent cap on
administrative costs applies to both State Implementation grantees and
all State-funded local partnerships.
Selection Criteria and Review Process
Under this School-to-Work Opportunities Implementation Grant
competition, the Departments will use the following selection criteria
in evaluating applications. These criteria were published in final in
the Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for School-to-Work
State Implementation Grants in FY 1995 (60 FR 26812). The Departments
will utilize a two-phase review process. In the first phase, review
teams, including peer reviewers, will evaluate applications using the
selection criteria and the associated point values. In the second
phase, review teams, including peers, will visit high-ranking States to
gain additional information and further assess State plans. The
following selection criteria will apply to both review phases. The
Departments will base final funding decisions on information obtained
during the site visits, the ranking of applications as a result of the
first-phase review, and such other factors as replicability,
sustainability, innovation, and geographic balance and diversity of
program approaches.
Note: If the initial round of site visits yields fewer States in
the competitive range than the Departments anticipated funding, and
funds remain to finance additional awards, a second round of visits
may be conducted. Candidates for site visits will be selected from
States for which site visits have not been previously conducted,
according to the scores following the peer review of applications.
All site visit determinations will be made in a manner consistent
with the process outlined above, and one or more of these States may
also be recommended for funding.
Selection Criterion 1: Comprehensive Statewide System.
Points: 35.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will
consider--
(a) 20 points. The extent to which the State has designed a
comprehensive statewide School-to-Work Opportunities plan that--
(1) Includes effective strategies for integrating school-based and
work-
[[Page 36717]]
based learning, integrating academic and vocational education, and
establishing linkages between secondary and postsecondary education;
(2) Is likely to produce systemic change in the way youth are
educated and prepared for work and for further education, across all
geographic areas of the State, including urban and rural areas, within
a reasonable period of time;
(3) Includes strategic plans for effectively aligning other
statewide priorities, such as education reform, economic development,
and workforce development into a comprehensive system that includes the
School-to-Work Opportunities system and supports its implementation at
all levels--State, regional and local;
(4) Ensures that all students, including school dropouts, will have
a range of options, including options for higher education, additional
training and employment in high-skill, high-wage jobs; and
(5) Ensures coordination and integration with existing local
education and training programs and resources, including those School-
to-Work Opportunities systems established through local partnership
grants and Urban/Rural Opportunities grants funded under Title III of
the School-to-Work Opportunities Act, and related Federal, State, and
local programs.
(b) 15 points. The extent to which the State plan demonstrates the
State's capability to achieve the statutory requirements and to
effectively put in place the system components in Title I of the
School-to-Work Opportunities Act, including--
(1) The work-based learning component that includes the statutory
mandatory activities and that contributes to the transformation of
workplaces into active learning components of the education system
through an array of learning experiences, such as mentoring, job-
shadowing, unpaid work experiences, school-sponsored enterprises,
supported work experiences, and paid work experiences;
(2) The school-based learning component that will provide students,
as well as school dropouts, with high level academic skills consistent
with academic standards that the State establishes for all students,
including, where applicable, standards established under the Goals
2000: Educate America Act;
(3) A connecting activities component to provide a functional link
between school and work activities and employers and educators for both
students and school dropouts; and
(4) A plan for an effective process for assessing students' skills
and knowledge required in career majors, and the process for issuing
portable skill certificates that are benchmarked to high quality
standards such as those the State establishes under the Goals 2000:
Educate America Act, and for periodically assessing and collecting
information on student outcomes, as well as a realistic strategy and
timetable for implementing the process.
Selection Criterion 2: Commitment of Employers and Other Interested
Parties.
Points: 15.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will consider
the following:
(a) The extent to which the State has obtained the active
involvement of employers and other interested parties listed in section
213(d)(5) of the Act, such as locally elected officials, secondary
schools and postsecondary educational institutions (or related
agencies), business associations, industrial extension centers,
employees, labor organizations or associations of such organizations,
teachers, related services personnel, students, parents, community-
based organizations, rehabilitation agencies and organizations,
registered apprenticeship agencies, local vocational education
agencies, vocational student organizations, State or regional
cooperative education associations, and human service agencies, as well
as State legislators.
(b) Whether the State plan demonstrates an effective and convincing
strategy for continuing the involvement of employers and other
interested parties in the statewide system, such as the parties listed
in section 213(d)(5) of the Act, as well as State legislators.
(c) The extent to which the State plan proposes to include private
sector representatives as joint partners with educators in the
oversight and governance of the overall School-to-Work Opportunities
system.
(d) The extent to which the State has developed strategies to
provide a range of opportunities for employers to participate in the
design and implementation of the School-to-Work Opportunities system,
including membership on councils and partnerships; assistance in
setting standards, designing curricula and determining outcomes;
providing worksite experience for teachers; helping to recruit other
employers; and providing worksite learning activities for students,
such as mentoring, job shadowing, unpaid work experiences, supported
work experiences, and paid work experiences.
Selection Criterion 3: Participation of All Students.
Points: 15.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will refer to
the definition of the term ``all students'' in section 4(2) of the Act,
and consider the following:
(a) The extent to which the State will implement effective
strategies and systems to--
(1) Provide all students with equal access to the full range of
program components specified in sections 102 through 104 of the Act and
related activities such as recruitment, enrollment and placement
activities; and
(2) Ensure that all students have meaningful opportunities to
participate in School-to-Work Opportunities programs.
(b) Whether the plan identifies potential barriers to the
participation of any students, and the degree to which the plan
proposes effective ways of overcoming these barriers.
(c) The degree to which the State has developed realistic goals and
methods for assisting young women to participate in School-to-Work
Opportunities programs leading to employment in high-performance, high-
paying jobs, including nontraditional jobs and has developed realistic
goals to ensure an environment free from racial and sexual harassment.
(d) The feasibility and effectiveness of the State's strategy for
serving students from rural communities with low population densities.
(e) The State's methods for ensuring safe and healthy work
environments for students, including strategies for encouraging schools
to provide students with general awareness training in occupational
safety and health as part of the school-based learning component, and
for encouraging employers to provide risk-specific training as part of
the work-based learning component.
Note: Experience with the FY 1994 and FY 1995 School-to-Work
Opportunities State Implementation Grant applications has shown that
many applicants do not give adequate attention to designing programs
that will serve school dropouts and programs that will serve
students with disabilities. Therefore, the Departments would like to
remind applicants that reviewers will consider whether an
application includes strategies to specifically identify the
barriers to participation of dropouts and students with disabilities
and proposes specific methods for effectively overcoming such
barriers and for integrating academic and vocational learning,
integrating work-based learning and school-based learning, and
[[Page 36718]]
linking secondary and postsecondary education for dropouts and
students with disabilities. Applicants are reminded that JTPA Title
II funds may be used to design and provide services to students who
meet the appropriate JTPA eligibility criteria.
Selection Criterion 4: Stimulating and Supporting Local School-to-
Work Opportunities Systems.
Points: 15.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will consider
the following:
(a) The effectiveness of the State's plan for ensuring that local
partnerships include employers, representatives of local educational
agencies and local postsecondary educational institutions (including
representatives of area vocational education schools, where
applicable), local educators (such as teachers, counselors, or
administrators), representatives of labor organizations or
nonmanagerial employee representatives, and students, and others such
as those included in section 4(11)(B) of the Act.
(b) The extent to which the State assists local entities to form
and sustain effective local partnerships serving communities in all
parts of the State.
(c) Whether the plan includes an effective strategy for addressing
the specific labor market needs of localities that will be implementing
School-to-Work Opportunities systems.
(d) The effectiveness of the State's strategy for building the
capacity of local partnerships to design and implement local School-to-
Work Opportunities systems that meet the requirements of the Act.
(e) The extent to which the State will provide a variety of
assistance to local partnerships, as well as the effectiveness of the
strategies proposed for providing this assistance, including such
services as: developing model curricula and innovative instructional
methodologies, such as creative strategies for meeting the needs of
school dropouts; expanding and improving career and academic counseling
services; and assisting localities in the use of technology-based
instructional techniques.
(f) The effectiveness of the State's strategy for providing staff
development to teachers, employers, mentors, counselors, related
services personnel, and others who are critical to successful
implementation of School-to-Work Opportunities systems for all youth,
such as staff in alternative learning environments.
(g) The ability of the State to provide constructive assistance to
local partnerships in identifying critical and emerging industries and
occupational clusters.
Selection Criterion 5: Resources.
Points: 10.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will consider
the following:
(a) The amount and variety of other Federal, State, and local
resources the State will commit to implementing its School-to-Work
Opportunities plan, as well as the specific use of these funds,
including funds for JTPA Summer and Year-Round Youth programs and
Perkins Act programs.
(b) The feasibility and effectiveness of the State's long-term
strategy for using other resources, including private sector resources,
to maintain the statewide system when Federal resources under the
School-to-Work Opportunities Act are no longer available.
(c) The extent to which the State is able to limit administrative
costs in order to maximize the funds spent on the delivery of services
to students, as required in section 214(b)(3)(B) of the Act, while
ensuring the efficient administration of the School-to-Work
Opportunities system.
Criterion 6: Management Plan.
Points: 10.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will consider
the following:
(a) The adequacy of the management structure that the State
proposes for the School-to-Work Opportunities system.
(b) The extent to which the State's management plan anticipates
barriers to implementation and proposes effective methods for
addressing barriers as they arise.
(c) Whether the application includes an evaluation plan containing
feasible, measurable goals for the School-to-Work Opportunities system,
based on performance measures contained in section 402(a) of the Act.
(d) The extent to which the evaluation plan includes an effective
method for collecting information relevant to the State's progress in
meeting its goals, and is likely to assist the State to meet its
School-to-Work Opportunities system objectives, to gauge the success of
the system in achieving those objectives, to continuously improve the
system's effectiveness, and to contribute to the review of results
across all States.
(e) Whether the plan includes a feasible workplan for the School-
to-Work Opportunities system that includes major planned objectives
over a five-year period.
Additional Priority Points
As required by section 214(a)(1) and (a)(2) of the Act, the
Departments will give priority to applications that demonstrate the
highest level of concurrence among State partners with the State plan,
and to applications that require paid, high quality work-based learning
experiences as an integral part of the School-to-Work Opportunities
system by assigning additional points--above the 100 points described
in the criteria--as follows:
(a) Highest Levels of Concurrence--5 Points
Up to 5 points will be awarded to applications that can fully
demonstrate that each of the State partners listed in section 213(b)(4)
of the Act concurs with the State School-to-Work Opportunities plan,
and that the State partners' concurrence is backed by a commitment of
time and resources to implement the plan.
(b) Paid, High-quality Work-based Learning--10 Points
Up to 10 points will be awarded to applications that demonstrate
that the State--
(1) Has developed effective plans for requiring, to the maximum
extent feasible, paid, high-quality work experience as an integral part
of the State's School-to-Work Opportunities system, and for offering
the paid, high-quality work experiences to the largest number of
participating students and school dropouts as is feasible; and
(2) Has established methods for ensuring consistently high quality
work-based learning experiences across the State.
For Applications or Information Contact: Karen Clark, National
School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.
20024. Telephone: (202) 401-6222 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (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.
Information about the Department's funding opportunities, including
copies of application notices for discretionary grant competitions, can
be viewed on the Department's electronic bulletin board (ED Board),
telephone (202) 260-9950; or on the Internet Gopher Server at
GOPHER.ED.GOV (under Announcements, Bulletins and Press Releases).
However, the official application notice for a discretionary grant
competition is the notice published in the Federal Register.
Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.
[[Page 36719]]
Dated: July 9, 1996.
Timothy M. Barnicle,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Department of Labor.
Patricia W. McNeil,
Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education, Department of
Education.
[FR Doc. 96-17870 Filed 7-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P