[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 207 (Thursday, October 27, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-26588]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 27, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL SERVICE

 

AmeriCorps State and Direct Grant Program, Learn and Serve 
America K-12 Grant Program, and Learn and Serve America Higher Ed Grant 
Program 1995 Policies and Priorities

action: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

summary: The Corporation for National and Community Service (the 
Corporation) is proposing changes and inviting comments with regard to 
three of its main programs: AmeriCorps*USA, Learn & Serve America K-12, 
and Learn & Serve America Higher Education. This notice is divided into 
three parts corresponding to these programs. The proposed changes--
which would apply to the FY 1995 grant cycle--were developed in 
response to lessons learned with the completion of the Corporation's 
first grant cycle and are non-regulatory in nature. A broad range of 
areas is covered, including the following: a revised timeline; revised 
applications; proposed criteria for the renewal of grants; revised 
priorities within the main issue areas of education, public safety, 
human needs and the environment; guidelines for the continued 
improvement of programs; revisions to the selection criteria for 
programs; and additional priorities that will be given in the selection 
processes. The Corporation invites all interested parties to comment on 
the issues discussed in this notice. Any comments received will be 
given careful consideration in the development of final FY 1995 
policies and grant applications.

dates:  Comments on the Corporation's AmeriCorps State and Direct Grant 
Program, and Learn and Serve America Higher Ed Grant Program 1995 
policies and priorities must be received no later than November 28, 
1994. Due to application deadlines, comments on the Learn and Serve 
America K-12 Grant Program 1995 policies and priorities must be 
received no later than November 14, 1994.

addresses: Responses to this notice may be mailed to the Office of 
AmeriCorps Programs, The Corporation for National Service, 1110 Vermont 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20525, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.

for further information contact: Rusty Greiff, General Counsel's 
office, at (202) 606-5000 x. 256 between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. 
Eastern Standard Time. For individuals with disabilities, information 
will be made available in alternative formats, upon request.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applications

    The Corporation invites comments on the following FY 1994 
applications. Interested parties who do not have copies of these 
applications should obtain one through their State Commissions:

AmeriCorps

National Direct Application
State Application

Learn and Serve America--K-12

School-Based Programs--State Educational Agencies
School-Based Programs--Grantmaking Entities
School-Based Programs--Indian Tribes and U.S. Territories
School-Based Programs--Chief Executive Officer's Fund for the 
Advancement of Service Learning
School-Based Programs--Local Educational Agencies
Community-Based Programs--State Commissions and Grantmaking Entities

Learn and Serve America--Higher Education

                                               1995 Grant Timeline                                              
                                            [Revised 10/18/94, 4 pm]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Distribute          Application due                                              
                              applications              dates             Notification         Program startup  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AmeriCorps State:                                                                                               
  Renewals..............  Dec. 5..............  March 31............  June 15.............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
  New Applications......  Dec. 5..............  March 31............  June 15.............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
AmeriCorps Direct:                                                                                              
  Renewals/Expansions...  Dec .5..............  March 1.............  May 10..............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
  New Applications        Dec. 5..............  March 15............  May 10..............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
   (Includes Planning                                                                                           
   Grants).                                                                                                     
Learn & Serve--HE:                                                                                              
  Renewals..............  Dec. 5..............  Feb. 28 (Progress     May 15..............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
                                                 Report).                                                       
  New Applications......  Dec. 5..............  March 21............  May 15..............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
Learn & Serve--K-12:                                                                                            
  Renewals..............  Nov. 15.............  Jan. 20.............  April 10............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
  New Applications......  Nov. 15.............  Jan. 20.............  April 10............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
Subtitle H Innovative     Jan. 15.............  April 13............  July 1..............  Sept. 1, 1995.      
 and Demonstration                                                                                              
 Programs.                                                                                                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Copies of these applications are available through the individual 
State Commissions and the Corporation for those who wish to review them 
and provide feedback to the Corporation.

AmeriCorps State and National Direct Federal Grant Programs

I. Policies and Guidelines for Renewals of Existing Grantees

A. Renewals
    The Corporation in general anticipates renewing grants for existing 
programs that meet quality standards. However, renewals are not 
automatic, and will be evaluated on the following renewal criteria:
    1. Year One Progress to Date (80%)
    The degree to which grantees have made reasonable progress towards 
objectives and can articulate problems or issues that occurred in the 
first year. These include objectives related to members, the community 
and the program itself, including:
    a. Development of well-organized service activities which have 
direct and demonstrable results.
    b. Degree of community support and involvement and evidence of 
impact on the community
    c. Quality of financial management and extent to which the match 
has been raised or exceeded.
    d. Quality of program management and the extent to which high-
quality program staff have been selected, trained and placed.
    e. The degree to which recruitment goals have been met and the 
AmeriCorps members have been retained in the program.
    f. National Identity--The extent to which the program is 
recognizable as AmeriCorps in the community and by the members.
    g. State commissions, national non-profits and federal agencies 
serving as grantors will also be evaluated on:
    i. Their success in following the timeline and workplan for getting 
grant awards to programs, monitoring their progress and providing 
technical assistance.
    ii. The extent to which issues and problems have been promptly and 
effectively addressed.
    iii. The extent to which they have implemented plans to evaluate 
programs.
    2. Year Two Plans (20%).
    a. Clear articulation of problems encountered in Year One and how 
they will be addressed in Year Two.
    b. A sound plan for sensible growth and improvement.
    c. If expansion is planned, clear and compelling programmatic 
reasons for doing so and the organization's capacity to expand.
    d. If expansion is planned, the extent to which the organization's 
Year One activities warrant expansion.
    e. Clear and well-thought-out program objectives for Year Two that 
are consistent with Year One.
    f. State commissions, national non-profits and federal agencies 
serving as grantors will also be evaluated on:
    i. the quality of their plans for expansion;
    ii. the quality of the plan for technical assistance and program 
monitoring;
    iii. the degree to which they understand problems they encountered 
in Year One and how they will address them in Year Two;
    4. If, for State Commission grantors only, the state plan has been 
revised, the degree to which it reflects the state's experience with 
AmeriCorps and Learn and Serve programs; and
    5. The quality of the state's framework, for State Commission 
grantors only, within which comprehensive program monitoring and 
evaluations can be made.
B. Conversion of Planning Grants to Operating Grants for Formula-
Funding
    The Corporation is recommending that State Commissions give 
priority to converting Formula-funded planning grants to operational 
programs over new applications, if the proposals meet quality 
standards.
C. Members, Site, Program, Budget Expansion Criteria
    The Corporation will give priority to expanding the number of 
members in existing program sites, and to expanding the number of sites 
themselves, if the program has a solid track record and sound needs and 
plans for expansion and meets the other criteria for renewal. If the 
expansion request exceeds 25% of the Year One budget or the planned 
expansion is to base the program in two different cities, then the 
program expansion will be considered a new application and will not 
receive priority.
D. Issue Area Priorities
    The Corporation has not changed the priority area emphases for 
renewals. This decision reflects the Corporation's belief that the 
extension of these priorities during the renewal process will 
contribute to building successful programs and stronger relationships 
with the field. The priority areas for renewals are:
1. Public Safety
    a. Crime Control and Response--Improving criminal justice services, 
law enforcement, and victim services.
    b. Crime Prevention--Reducing the incidence of violence.
2. Education
    a. School Readiness--Further early childhood development.
    b. School Success--Improve the educational achievement of school-
age youth and adults who lack basic academic skills by utilizing 
comprehensive strategies with potential for long-term impact.
3. Human Needs
    a. Health--Provide comprehensive health prevention, wellness, and 
community-based health care.
    b. Home--Reduce the number of homeless Americans, open housing 
markets to minorities, empower and revitalize rural, suburban and urban 
communities.
4. Environment
    a. Neighborhood Environment--Promote sustainable communities by 
reducing environmental risks, especially in low income neighborhoods, 
and by incorporating environmental design and technologies to conserve 
natural and cultural resources.
    b. Natural Environment--Conserve, restore and sustain natural 
habitats.

II. Policies and Preferences for New State Competitive and National 
Direct Applicants

    In addition to those preferences and objectives described by the 
Corporation's statute and regulations, the Corporation's 
recommendations reflect our objectives of encouraging new applicants to 
focus on our new priorities. The Corporation's recommendations reflect 
our objective to encourage the tailoring of our FY 1994 priorities for 
new applicants. The Corporation will solicit proposals for new programs 
which supplement the existing range of AmeriCorps programs, including 
new models in priority areas not covered by existing programs.
A. Issue Areas To Be Targeted
    Outlined below are staff recommendations on the issue areas to be 
targeted for new state competitive and national direct program 
applications:
    1. Community Policing--Supporting community policing efforts 
through building partnerships with neighborhood residents, identifying 
community problems, and working with police officers to solve these 
problems.
    2. Victim Assistance--Working on programs in public agencies or 
community-based organizations to provide a wide range of support 
services to victims of crime and to help link victims to other 
providers of information and services within the justice system and 
community.
    3. Neighborhood Environment--Initiate innovative grass-roots 
programs in low income neighborhoods that promote sustainable 
communities by reducing environmental risks, and conserving natural 
resources.
    4. Early childhood development--Improve the health and school 
readiness of young children through child care, Head Start, and other 
pre-school programs; programs to improve parenting skills and 
community-based efforts to provide comprehensive services to families 
with young children (including pregnant women).
    5. School Success--Broaden or coordinate the range of services 
available through schools such as tutoring, after-school enrichment 
programs, service-learning, health and child care service and efforts 
to involve parents in their children's education as part of a 
comprehensive strategy to improve school achievement and student 
retention.
B. Programmatic Preferences
    The Corporation will give preferences to new applicants who 
integrate the following into their proposals:
1. Concentration
    The Corporation is encouraging programs to concentrate the efforts 
of AmeriCorps Members. In general, preference will be given to programs 
that propose service activities at fewer sites rather than more sites, 
that focus activities in the priority areas, and that involve groups of 
Corps Members in contrast to individually-placed Corps Members. 
Similarly, programs that regularly bring Corps Members together for 
training, identity, and service will be preferred over those that 
propose more diffused organizations.
2. Specialization
    Programs that propose to develop priority area specializations are 
accorded preference over programs with a more generalist focus. 
Specifically not encouraged are programs that propose to engage Corps 
Members in many activities addressing many priorities.
3. Diversity
    Programs that show a specific strategy for attracting members with 
diverse backgrounds will be given a preference. The Corporation 
encourages programs to treat diversity broadly, searching beyond their 
ordinary participant base to include, for example, individuals from 
other ethnic groups and people with disabilities. Programs are 
encouraged, if appropriate, to include intergenerational components.
4. Education Awards Only
    Because the Corporation has more funds available for education 
awards than for program costs, we continue to urge applicants that have 
adequate resources to cover program costs to request education awards 
only.
C. Localities for Concentration
    Empowerment Zones, Enterprise Communities and areas affected by 
military downsizing. The Corporation will accord special consideration 
to applicants who propose to sponsor AmeriCorps service activities in 
officially-designated empowerment zones or enterprise communities, and 
areas impacted by military downsizing.
D. Selection Criteria
    Selection criteria for new applicants remain those established in 
1994, based on the quality of the proposal and the proposed program's 
ability to:
    1. Get things done in communities.
    2. Strengthen communities.
    3. Expand opportunities for members.
    4. Encourage responsibility.
    5. Be innovative.
    6. Be replicated in other areas.
    7. Be sustained beyond Corporation support.

Learn and Serve America K-12 Grant Program

    All Learn and Serve America: School- and Community-Based Programs 
address needs within at least one of the four priority areas of the 
Corporation: Environment, Education, Human Needs and Public Safety. 
Because the objectives of Learn and Serve America focus more on 
education reform and participant development, however, it is critical 
for us to focus primarily on program improvement and quality 
priorities, rather than issue areas. Therefore the policies and 
priorities for renewals of existing grantees and new applicants are the 
same.

I. Renewals

    In general, the Corporation anticipates renewing grants for 
existing programs that meet quality standards. However, renewals are 
not automatic. Renewal applications for Learn and Serve America K-12 
grants to State Educational Agencies will be evaluated based on the 
following criteria.
A. Quality of the Year Two Plan (60%)
1. Goals and Objectives
    The goals and objectives of the plan are:
    a. Clearly stated.
    b. Measurable.
    c. Achievable.
    d. Time-phased.
    e. Appropriate & effective vehicles for promoting service-learning.
2. Design and Activities
    The design and activities set forth in the plan:
    a. Are clearly related to achieving stated goals and objectives.
    b. Meet community needs and involves individuals from diverse 
backgrounds (including economically disadvantaged youth and individuals 
with physical or cognitive disabilities) who will serve together to 
explore the underlying causes of community problems.
    c. Involve youth in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of 
the plan.
    d. Provide for productive and meaningful educational experiences 
which incorporate service-learning methods.
3. Learn and Serve America Priorities
    The quality and extent to which the goals and objectives and 
program design address the following programmatic priorities:
    a. Infrastructure and capacity-building.
    b. Partnerships with other education reform efforts.
    c. Qualitative/quantitative research and evaluation.
    d. Coordinated streams of service.
4. Organizational Capacity
    The plan describes sound processes for:
    a. Training.
    b. Technical assistance.
    c. Supervision.
    d. Quality control.
    e. Evaluation.
    f. Administration.
    g. Equitable distribution of funds to local grantees.
    h. Ensuring quality and evaluating the efforts of the grantee and 
local subgrantees.
    i. The principal leaders who will implement the plan are well 
qualified for their responsibilities.
5. Evaluation
    The plan includes an adequate process for evaluating:
    a. Overall performance (of the grantee and subgrantees).
    b. Program activities.
    c. Youth development/educational outcomes.
    d. Community impact.
6. Sustainability
    The extent to which the applicant:
    a. Demonstrates the ability and willingness to collaborate with the 
State Commission, Alternative Administrative Entity, or Transitional 
Entity.
    b. Fosters collaborative efforts among local educational agencies, 
local government agencies, community-based agencies, businesses, and 
State agencies.
    c. Has strong, broad-based partnerships and community support.
    d. Presents evidence that financial resources will be available to 
continue the Learn and Serve America effort after the expiration of the 
grant.
7. Innovation and Replicability
    The extent to which the plan:
    a. Advances knowledge about how to do effective and innovative 
community service and service-learning.
    b. Enhances the effort within the broader K-12 field.
    c. Will assist others in learning from experience and replicating 
the program concept.
8. Cost-Effectiveness
    The extent to which the budget:
    a. Correlates with the program narrative.
    b. Details costs by providing justification and appropriate 
calculations for each line item.
    c. Sufficiently supports project activities.
    d. Represents reasonable costs, given current rates.
B. Performance to Date (40%)
    The Corporation recommends that consideration of past performance 
be based on whether the grantee has:
    1. Made reasonable progress toward accomplishing project goals and 
objectives.
    2. Adequately addressed issues or problems that occurred or has 
developed sufficient plans to address them in year two.
    3. Met reporting requirements in a timely manner.
    4. Conducted adequate planning, capacity-building and training 
activities.
    5. Implemented, operated, and expanded service-learning programs 
through grants to local partnerships, as stated in the original 
proposal.
    6. Implemented, operated, and expanded school-based programs 
involving adult volunteers, if applicable.

II. Priority Areas for New Grants and Renewals

    In addition to those objectives and priorities described by the 
Corporation statute and regulations, the Corporation is recommending 
that new and existing grantees be requested to address the following 
priorities in their Learn and Serve America plans.
A. State Infrastructure/Capacity Building
    An effective service-learning state infrastructure includes a 
statewide network of service-learning practitioners, policy makers and 
members who advocate the advancement of service-learning methodology. 
This infrastructure also includes state financial and human resources 
committed to service-learning efforts, as well as state level support 
for service-learning. Infrastructure is key to realizing the full 
potential of service-learning to reform education and rebuild 
communities. There is a need to build both legislative and financial 
support at the state level, especially as future federal funding may 
not be available. Priority will be given to state plans that 
institutionalize service-learning, as well as those that leverage 
dollars at the state and local levels.
B. Partnerships With Other Education Reform Efforts
    To help build the infrastructure needed to support service-learning 
as a methodology for education reform, the Corporation will encourage 
linkages with other education reform efforts, such as Goals 2000, 
School-to-Work transition and middle grades restructuring. States will 
be encouraged to promote such linkages through advocating for the 
inclusion of service-learning language in state education reform 
legislation and school board policies.
    Connections to state and federal education reform efforts help 
promote institutionalization and sustainability. As states consider 
school restructuring or the new methodology of education reformers, the 
Corporation should encourage them to include service-learning in their 
plans. Priority will be given to programs that utilize dollars from 
other federal education legislation or promote linkage with state level 
reform efforts.
C. Qualitative/Quantitative Research and Evaluation
    Up to this point, the service-learning research focus has been 
mainly on personal development with data collection being mostly 
anecdotal. To further expand and sustain service-learning as a 
legitimate pedagogy, the field needs a solid base of research to 
support it. Once academic improvement is solidly documented, more 
members of the education community will support service-learning as a 
legitimate tool for education reform. Priority will be granted to 
proposals which plan to document service-learning outcomes, especially 
those focusing on measurement of improved academic achievement and 
attendance, and reductions in disciplinary actions. This type of solid 
research will be useful during the reauthorization process.
D. Coordinated Streams of Service
    When all CNCS grantees in a given state work together, it is 
possible to ``get things done'' more effectively and efficiently. 
AmeriCorps Members can strengthen Learn and Service programs by serving 
as service-learning coordinators at the school district or individual 
school level. Senior Corps members can offer valuable skills and 
experience to Learn and Serve members through pre-service training and 
post-service reflection activities. Priority will be granted to 
proposing linking the various streams of service in the state.

III. Renewal Period

    The Corporation recommends renewing grants for one year only. This 
will allow Learn and Serve America staff to ensure greater quality in 
plans and to promote program improvement.

IV. Program Components To Be Addressed

    The Corporation recommends that the following program components be 
addressed in FY 1995. These components were identified by staff and 
outside peer reviewers as overall weaknesses in the proposals submitted 
under Learn and Serve America in 1994.
A. Academic Components
    Connections to the curriculum/education reform Proposals submitted 
this year demonstrate the need for the Corporation to work with 
grantees at three levels of the service-learning integration continuum: 
awareness/basic introduction to service-learning methodology; making 
clear connections to the academic curriculum; and articulating clear 
academic outcomes and ways to measure those outcomes. If the 
Corporation is to fund service-learning programs, then we need to work 
with grantees to enhance the academic components of their plans.
B. Evaluation
    The Corporation recommends that grantees be encouraged to consider 
evaluation at three levels: information to be collected for the 
national evaluation; evaluation of the work at the primary grantee 
level, such as State Education Agency, State Commission, or national 
non-profit; and the evaluation of local program (subgrantee) 
activities. Grantees will be encouraged to define clear, measurable 
goals and objectives, as well as to develop or select adequate 
measurement tools.
C. Innovation/Replicability
    The Corporation recommends grantees to seek viable approaches in 
achieving program replicability and innovation. The Corporation 
encourages programs to work closely with the Learn and Serve America K-
12 staff to establish a framework to assist in the development of new 
ideas and the expansion of or building upon proven model programs.
D. Sustainability
    The Corporation encourages grantees to design a clearly defined and 
detailed plan for program sustainability. Grantees should articulate a 
comprehensive long-term plan that not only cites specific monetary and 
in-kind resources, but incorporates state infrastructure and capacity 
building.
E. Coordination With Other Service Streams in the State
    Programs are encouraged to coordinate their service efforts with 
the state's service network, including youth, educators, State 
Commission members, policy makers, parents, representatives from 
community organizations and national nonprofits. Improving 
collaboration strengthens state service-learning efforts, presents a 
stronger, more unified voice for service-learning at the state policy 
level, promotes sustainability and helps states achieve goals with 
fewer dollars through resource sharing.
F. Indian Tribes and U.S. Territories
    The Corporation anticipates that its technical assistance and 
outreach efforts to Indian Tribes and Territories will improve in Year 
Two. The Corporation encourages Indian Tribes and Territories to 
identify specific areas of need so the Corporation may better assess 
less developed program areas and strengthen the overall quality of 
Indian Tribe proposals for Year Two.

V. Guidelines for 1994 Renewals

A. Amount of Funding Requested by Applicants for Renewal
    The Corporation recommends the following guidelines concerning the 
amount of funding that may be requested by year two grantees.
1. State Educational Agencies
    The FY 1995 appropriation for SEA allotment grants will increase 
approximately 25%. The SEAs will be informed of exactly what their 
formula allotments will be in FY 1995 when renewal materials are sent 
to them.
2. State Commissions, Grantmaking Entities (School- and Community-
Based), and Fund for the Advancement of Service-Learning Grantees
    Approximate second year funding levels were determined during the 
year one application process. All applicants in these categories were 
asked to submit three year plans.
3. Indian Tribes/Territories
    Most grants are expected to upgrade from planning to operational 
programs. We plan to limit these requests to an additional 60-75% 
increase over the amount of the FY 1994 planning grant.
B. Information Required in Addition to the Quarterly Report
    The Corporation is requesting that renewal applicants submit the 
following for consideration:
    1. Updated statement of goals and objectives.
    2. Workplan for the second program year.
    a. Program activities as they relate to goals and objectives:
    i. description of subgranting (number of continuation subgrants v. 
number of new subgrants);
    ii. state level infrastructure development;
    iii. plan for addressing Corporation priorities.
    b. Training and technical assistance plans for year two.
    c. Evaluation update.
    d. Program sustainability
    e. Efforts to replicate
    f. Innovative program elements
    3. Updated personnel information (if applicable).
    4. Second year budget narrative and form (Cost effectiveness).

Learn and Serve America: Higher Education FY 1995 Policies and 
Priorities

I. Policies and Guidelines for Renewals of Existing Grantees

    In general, the Corporation anticipates renewing grants for 
existing programs that meet quality standards. Renewal funding will not 
be automatic. Decisions will be based on two factors: progress to date 
(80%) and future plans (20%).
    A. Information on progress to date will be collected primarily 
through the semi-annual progress report (quarterly report for 
demonstration programs) and secondarily through other methods, that 
include informal monitoring, contact with program personnel and site 
visits. Progress reports will include the following information, which 
translate into criteria for renewal decisions:
    1. Number of participants:
    a. The degree to which recruitment goals have been met. The amount 
of attrition observed.
    2. Service and learning activities:
    a. The quality of service placements. The degree to which 
activities are well-supervised, well-suited to participants' skill and 
training, and designed to achieve demonstrable impacts on community 
needs. The quality of reflection activities. The clarity of learning 
objectives associated with these activities.
    3. Implementation:
    a. The extent to which high-quality program staff have been 
recruited, selected, trained, and placed. The degree to which the 
program is following its timeline and implementation plan. The 
reasonableness of explanations for deviations from or adjustments to 
the timeline.
    4. Progress toward objectives:
    a. The degree to which there is quantitative or other evidence of 
progress toward approved objectives related to community, participants, 
and institutional impacts. The degree to which the program has 
developed a system to collect data and demonstrate outcomes.
    5. Progress toward sustainability:
    a. The degree to which the program has explored alternative sources 
of funding and built stronger institutional and community support.
    6. Important findings from internal evaluation and monitoring:
    a. The reliability of mechanisms for feedback and continuous 
improvement. The degree to which participants, service beneficiaries, 
and partners are satisfied with the program. The extent to which the 
program has identified problems, areas for improvement, or lessons 
learned, and taken appropriate action.
    7. Financial management and match:
    a. The extent to which the match has been raised. The extent to 
which a fundraising plan has been developed. The extent to which 
quarterly financial reports and up-to-date records of line-item 
expenditures show balanced and appropriate spending across program 
areas. The reasonableness of explanations for unusually low or high 
expenditures in particular budget lines.
    b. In addition, in making renewal decisions, the Corporation will 
take into account grantees' responsiveness to inquiries and requests 
from program staff and their timeliness in notifying program staff of 
major problems in implementation.
    B. Information on future plans will be collected through a brief 
application for renewal funding. Proposals should build on progress in 
the previous year, reflecting lessons learned and actions that correct 
weakenesses. The information will include:
    1. Clear outcome objectives for the next year, consistent with 
objectives for the current year.
    2. Next year's activities.
    3. Implementation plan and timeline, reflecting lessons learned 
from the current year.
    4. An update on expenditures and obligations under the current 
grant.
    5. Next year's budget with detailed narrative.
    In general, first-year programs (non-demonstration) may apply for 
90 percent of their current grant amounts. Second-year programs may 
apply for 80 percent of their current grant amounts.
    Current demonstration programs with AmeriCorps Members may maintain 
or expand the number of Members (up to 25 percent, in general). In the 
second year application, programs proposing expansion will be required 
to justify the expansion in terms of need, organizational capacity, 
success in first-year implementation, and adequacy of plans for 
managing expansion. Part-time programs with AmeriCorps Members whose 
terms of service are longer than one year may propose a new class of 
AmeriCorps Members in the second year. Such a proposal constitutes an 
expansion.

II. Policies and Guidelines for New Applicants

    A. The Corporation intends to streamline FY 1995 applicants into 
one of three categories that reflect major distinctions in program 
design and activities:
    (1) Individual institution of higher education or partnership,
    (2) Consortium, or
    (3) Demonstration program with AmeriCorps Members. Some proposal 
narrative guidelines and selection criteria will apply to all three 
categories. Other guidelines and criteria will apply specifically to 
one but not the others. Instead of listing specific criteria for public 
comment, the Corporation has decided to invite direct input on what 
criteria should apply to each category. In particular, the Corporation 
welcomes input on the development of criteria appropriate for 
consortium applicants.
    B. Overall, the selection criteria will build on those established 
in the FY 1994 application. The FY 1995 guidelines will reflect the 
following key points:
    1. The Corporation will reaffirm the Learn and Serve America 
program's emphasis on building capacity and strengthening 
infrastructure, in particular by setting clear narrative guidelines and 
selection criteria specifically for consortium applicants.
    2. The Corporation will place added emphasis on the applicant's 
ability to articulate clear objectives with demonstrable outcomes and 
means of assessment.
    3. The Corporation will encourage programs to focus on a single 
issue area or community need, instead of scattering activities among 
several areas.
    C. The Corporation will give priority to applicants according to 
the following guidelines:
    1. The issue areas to be targeted under AmeriCorps*USA also will 
apply to Learn and Serve America: Higher Education. These are community 
policing, victim assistance, neighborhood environment, early childhood 
development, and school success.
    2. In order to fund an array of institutions that reflects the 
diversity of American higher education, the Corporation will give 
priority to programs involving community colleges, HBCUs, Hispanic-
serving institutions, and tribally controlled colleges.
    3. The Corporation may give priority to certain applicants in order 
to achieve geographic diversity among funded programs.
    D. The Corporation will continue to fund demonstration programs 
that involve AmeriCorps Members.
    1. New demonstration programs must have both a strong focus on a 
national priority and an emphasis on building service-learning 
capacity.
    2. The Corporation will give preference to programs that involve at 
least 20 AmeriCorps Members overall, that place Members in teams of two 
or more at each project site, that propose service activities at fewer 
rather than more sites, and that focus activities in a single issue 
area.
    3. The Corporation will structure grants to new demonstration 
programs so that the length of the grant parallels the Members' terms 
of service. For example, if a program engages part-time Members in a 
two-year term, then the FY 1995 grant will include funds for two years, 
with release of funds in the second year contingent upon performance in 
the first year and availability of appropriations. Part-time terms 
spanning three years will be discouraged.

    Dated: October 21, 1994.
Catherine Milton,
Vice President, Corporation for National Service.
[FR Doc. 94-26588 Filed 10-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6050-28-P-M