[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 27 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7755-7758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3301]



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

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE


AmeriCorps*USA State and National Direct, Availability of Funds

AGENCY: Corporation for National and Community Service

ACTION: Notice of availability of funds.

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

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National Service announces the 
availability of approximately $160 million to support new and renewal 
grants to States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, through 
Corporation approved State Commissions, Alternative Administrative 
Entities (AAEs), or Transitional Entities (TEs). Approximately $80 
million will support new and renewal grants through a population-based 
formula. Additionally, up to $80 million in program funds are available 
to States to support new and renewal grants on a competitive basis.
    The Corporation also announces the availability of approximately 
$19 million to support new competitive program grants to national 
nonprofits, professional corps, Federal agencies, and programs 
operating in more than one state through the national direct 
competition. Approximately $55 million is also available through the 
national direct competition to support renewal and expansion grants.
    The Corporation published in the Federal Register on October 27, 
1994, and January 10, 1995, notices describing proposed changes to 
Corporation grant-making guidelines, policies and priorities for 1995 
and inviting comments with regard to three of its main programs: 
AmeriCorps*USA, Learn & Serve America K-12, and Learn & Serve America 
Higher Education. The proposed changes applied to the FY 1995 grant 
cycle and were non-regulatory in nature. In response to those notices, 
the Corporation received comments from over 50 organizations and 
agencies, including states, primary and secondary schools, institutions 
of higher education, community-based organizations, federal agencies 
and non-profit organizations. The second section of this notice will 
address these comments.

DATES: All AmeriCorps*USA State applications must be received by 3:30 
p.m., Daylight Savings Time, May 1, 1995, to be eligible. Applicants 
for new AmeriCorps*USA National Direct grants must be received by 3:30 
p.m., Daylight Savings Time, May 9, 1995, to be eligible. Applications 
for renewal and expansion of existing AmeriCorps*USA National Direct 
grants must be received by 3:30 p.m., Daylight Savings Time, April 18, 
1995, to be eligible.

ADDRESSES: Applications for AmeriCorps*USA State should be submitted to 
The Corporation for National Service, AmeriCorps State, 9th Floor, Box 
AS, 1201 New York Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C., 20525. Facsimiles will 
not be accepted. Applications for AmeriCorps*USA National Direct should 
be submitted to The Corporation for National Service, AmeriCorps 
Direct, 9th Floor, Box AD, 1201 New York Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C., 
20525. Facsimiles will not be accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Persons who have questions about the 
AmeriCorps*USA State application process may call or write the State 
Commission office in their state or the Corporation for National 
Service, AmeriCorps State, 1201 New York Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C., 
20525. Phone: (202) 606-5000, ext. 474; TTD: (202) 565-2799. Persons 
who wish to receive an AmeriCorps*USA State application should contact 
the State Commission office in their state.
    Persons who have questions about the AmeriCorps*USA National Direct 
application process, or who wish to receive a National Direct 
application, may call or write the Corporation for National Service, 
AmeriCorps Direct, 1201 New York Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C., 20525. 
Phone: (202) 606-5000, ext. 474; TTD: (202) 565-2799.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Availability of Funds

1. AmeriCorps*USA State

    Approximately $80 million in program funds are available for new 
and renewal grants to States through the population-based formula 
allotment and approximately $80 million in program funds are available 
to States on a competitive basis for renewals and new grants. The 
following chart details the amount of funding that each State is 
eligible to apply for under the population-based formula allotment. The 
chart also details the number of programs that a State may submit under 
the competitive funding:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        New            Total    
                      State                           Formula       Small state     competitive     competitive 
                                                     allotment       priority      submission\1\  submissions\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.........................................      $1,263,352  ..............               6               7
Alaska..........................................         181,554        $118,446               4               5
Arkansas........................................         734,472  ..............               6               6
Arizona.........................................       1,220,307  ..............               5               7
California......................................       9,412,178  ..............              10              17
Colorado........................................       1,094,713  ..............               5               6
Connecticut.....................................         980,801  ..............               5               6
Delaware........................................         211,523          88,477               5               5
D.C.............................................         170,744         129,256               4               5
Florida.........................................       4,178,254  ..............               8              10
Georgia.........................................       2,112,778  ..............               6               8
Hawaii..........................................         352,931  ..............               4               5
Idaho...........................................         339,296  ..............               5               5
Illinois........................................       3,519,164  ..............               6              9 
[[Page 7756]]                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                
Indiana.........................................       1,722,505  ..............               7               7
Iowa............................................         847,243  ..............               6               6
Kansas..........................................         764,830  ..............               2               6
Kentucky........................................       1,145,965  ..............               4               6
Louisiana.......................................       1,292,187  ..............               6               7
Maine...........................................         371,391  ..............               5               5
Maryland........................................       1,499,167  ..............               4               7
Massachusetts...................................       1,809,063  ..............               5               7
Michigan........................................       2,843,698  ..............               8               9
Minnesota.......................................       1,367,705  ..............               4               7
Mississippi.....................................         799,287  ..............               6               6
Missouri........................................       1,580,432  ..............               5               7
Montana.........................................         256,350          43,650               4               5
Nebraska........................................         485,978  ..............               6               6
Nevada..........................................         436,319  ..............               6               6
New Hampshire...................................         340,430  ..............               4               5
New Jersey......................................       2,366,895  ..............               6               8
New Mexico......................................         495,160  ..............               5               6
New York........................................       5,440,870  ..............               9              12
North Carolina..................................       2,117,120  ..............               6               8
North Dakota....................................         191,051         108,949               5               5
Ohio............................................       3,324,643  ..............               7               9
Oklahoma........................................         975,655  ..............               6               6
Oregon..........................................         924,184  ..............               5               6
Pennsylvania....................................       3,609,179  ..............               7              10
Puerto Rico.....................................       1,072,107  ..............               6               6
Rhode Island....................................         298,487           1,513               3               5
South Carolina..................................       1,097,210  ..............               5               6
South Dakota....................................         215,958          84,042               5               5
Tennessee.......................................       1,549,768  ..............               5               7
Texas...........................................       5,503,497  ..............               7              12
Utah............................................         571,347  ..............               6               6
Vermont.........................................         173,748         126,252               4               5
Virginia........................................       1,961,907  ..............               7               7
Washington......................................       1,600,032  ..............               6               7
West Virginia...................................         545,619  ..............               6               3
Wisconsin.......................................       1,521,744  ..............               7               7
Wyoming.........................................         142,536         157,464               4              5 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This column reflects the maximum number of new programs a State may submit in their competitive application  
  and does not include requests for renewals. However, States may substitute a new program if they decide not to
  submit a currently funded program for renewal.                                                                
\2\This column reflects the total number of programs, both new and renewal, that a State may submit under the   
  competitive funding.                                                                                          

    The Corporation has limited the number of programs a State may 
include in its application for competitive funding to five, plus an 
additional program for each full percentage point of the total State 
population (rounded to the nearest full percentage point) that State 
contains.
    Approximately $4 million has been set aside from the formula funds 
for child care. This amount will be allocated to States on a formula 
basis, and paid directly as needed to the National Association for 
Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA), the Corporations 
national grantee to cover child care costs, up to the States designated 
formula amount. Amounts from this fund which are not needed by the 
State for child care will be given to the State for other approved 
program costs.
    For 1995, the Corporation is committed to renewing 1994 grants, if 
those programs meet quality standards. Renewal applications may request 
year-two funding to expand programs or to continue the same program as 
in year one. If an expansion request exceeds 25% of the year-one 
budget, the portion that exceeds 25% must be submitted as a new 
application following new application instructions. Given this 
commitment to renewals, the Corporation expects that the majority of 
the program funds available will be used for renewal grants. Program 
funds not committed for renewals will be made available to States for 
new grants in both the formula and competitive funding streams.
    The Corporation is committed to supporting only high quality 
AmeriCorps programs, and formula allotments are not an entitlement for 
States. Program quality will be the most important criteria for 
considering both renewal requests and support for new programs. The 
Corporation's requirements for AmeriCorps are set forth in the 
Corporation's regulations and in the applications. In addition to being 
thoroughly familiar with the regulations, prospective applicants should 
read the application carefully because, in some cases, more specific 
information is provided there. The requirements apply to all programs 
that submit applications to States for funding. The regulations for 
AmeriCorps programs were published in the Federal Register on March 23, 
1994 (45 CFR Parts 2510, 2513, et al.) and are available at your public 
library. You may also refer to the Principles for High Quality National 
Service Programs which includes program examples. For copies, contact 
the Corporation at (202) 606-5000, x474.

2. AmeriCorps*USA National Direct

    Approximately $19 million is available for new competitive program 
grants and approximately $55 million is available to support renewal 
and [[Page 7757]] expansion grants, through the national direct 
competition. National nonprofits, Federal agencies, professional corps 
programs, and multi-state programs are eligible to apply directly to 
the Corporation for these funds. This allows the Corporation to fund 
multi-state and multi-site programs that are national in scope and 
build on existing networks of youth and service programs. Eligible 
applicants may apply for operating funds to establish AmeriCorps*USA 
programs, or for education awards only.

II. AmeriCorps*USA State and National Direct Grant Applications 
Guidelines

1. 1995 Issue Area Priorities

    The Corporation received a number of comments suggesting changes to 
the 1995 priorities. Specifically, several comments expressed concern 
that an ``urban bias'' existed in the environment priority. Because 
that was not the Corporation's intent, we have revised the priority to 
read as follows: ``Community/Neighborhood Environment--Initiate 
innovative programs in low-income areas that promote sustainable 
communities by reducing environmental risks and conserving natural 
resources.'' By changing the phrase ``low-income neighborhoods'' to 
``low-income areas'' and by adding the word ``community,'' the priority 
has been broadened to encompass rural environments and communities.
    Other comments suggested that the Corporation include homelessness, 
health care, and/or adult literacy as a priority. The Corporation 
declined to add these as priorities because these issues were 
adequately addressed by 1994 programs, with many of these programs 
expected to be funded in 1995 as renewal programs. In addition, 
homelessness is an AmeriCorps*VISTA priority for 1995, approximately 
15% of AmeriCorps*VISTA are doing health care projects, and 
approximately 25% of AmeriCorps*VISTA are doing adult literacy 
projects. A number of comments opposed the establishment of new 
priorities for the 1995 grant cycle and requested that the Corporation 
retain the 1994 priorities or allow programs to apply under either the 
1994 or the 1995 priorities. The Corporation considered these comments 
but declined to make changes. The 1995 priorities were chosen because 
they address issues and needs that the Corporation believes were 
underrepresented in the 1994 grant competition. Programs funded in 1994 
may continue to address areas covered by the 1994 priorities and need 
not change their focus to meet new priorities. However, new programs 
will be required to apply using the new 1995 priorities.

2. Grant Timeline

    The Corporation received a number of comments suggesting that the 
application deadlines were too short, and that such short time lines 
would adversely affect the quality of the proposals submitted to the 
Corporation. Accordingly, the Corporation has extended the application 
due dates as far as possible and published the new dates in the January 
23, 1995 Federal Register. For purposes of the AmeriCorps*USA State 
grant competition, May 1, 1995 is the new due date for the renewals and 
new applications. For purposes of the AmeriCorps*USA National Direct 
grant competition, new applications are due on May 9, 1995, and renewal 
and expansion applications are due on April 18, 1995.

3. Program Expansion

    The Corporation initially proposed that an AmeriCorps*USA State 
program requesting expansion exceeding 25% of the year-one budget or 
expansion to base the program in two different cities would be 
considered a new program and would not receive a priority. In response 
to public comments, the Corporation has amended its language on this 
policy to clarify that if a program wants to expand beyond 25% of their 
year-one budget, only that portion that exceeds 25% must be submitted 
as a new application, following new application instructions. The 
Corporation's desire to moderate expansion remains for three reasons: 
(1) to stress quality before quantity, (2) to create a solid base for 
future replication, and (3) to ensure, because of the limited funds 
available to the Corporation, that funds remain to support programs 
that meet 1995 priorities.
    The rule for AmeriCorps*USA Direct is similar to rule for 
AmeriCorps*USA State with one exception. Programs may expand up to 25% 
of their year-one budget or $500,000, which ever is greater. Only that 
portion that exceeds 25% or $500,000 must be submitted as a new 
application, following new application instructions.

4. Conversion of Planning Grants to Operating Grants

    Several comments requested clarification of the Corporations policy 
on converting planning grants to operating grants. The Corporation, in 
the October 27, 1994 Federal Register, had proposed the following 
language: ``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.'' In order to give greater clarity, the Corporation has 
amended the language to read as follows:
    The Corporation recommends that State Commissions give a priority 
for funding to converting planning grants to operating programs. As in 
all other cases, this preference should apply only if the programs meet 
quality standards. The Corporation will consider these as new 
applications, and they will be evaluated by peer review panels. If they 
meet quality standards, they will receive preference over other new 
applications. Because they were approved under 1994 priorities, those 
planning grants that the state submits in the competitive pool may 
choose to meet 1994 or 1995 priorities. However, the Corporation 
strongly urges that both formula and competitive proposals meet 1995 
priorities.
    The changes allow flexibility for planning grants to apply under 
either the 1994 or the 1995 priorities and gives them preference over 
new applications.

5. Concentration

    A number of comments recommended that the Corporation revise its 
policy on concentration, stating that the language initially proposed 
in the Federal Register discriminated against rural areas and was 
overly prescriptive. The preference for concentration is designed to 
achieve significant impacts from direct service activities, to create a 
strong sense of national identity with AmeriCorps, and to be cost-
effective; it was never intended to be discriminatory or overly 
prescriptive. Accordingly, the language has been clarified as follows: 
``The Corporation is seeking applications that focus activities within 
a limited number of priorities and have a more narrow geographic focus 
or placement strategy. * * * This preference is not intended to 
discourage comprehensive approaches to community problem-solving or to 
discourage programs in rural areas. * * * In addition, programs can 
bring AmeriCorps Members together for training and service and can 
define program size to be consistent with the community.'' In other 
words, the Corporation has left it up to the applicant to define 
``community.'' For example, if the community is a rural one, then 
``concentration of Members'' can be defined in proportion to the rural 
area. In addition, while the Corporation does not object to individual 
placement per se, it funded a disproportionate [[Page 7758]] number of 
individual placement models in 1994 and, for this grant cycle, 
discourages programs that place AmeriCorps Members individually across 
many organizations without providing opportunities for them to meet, 
share experiences and reflection, and learn from one another to better 
understand the collective impact they have on their community.

6. Localities for Concentration

    A number of comments recommended that the Corporation retain the 
policy of providing special consideration for projects in areas that 
are environmentally distressed or adversely affected by Federal actions 
related to the management of Federal lands resulting in significant 
regional job losses and economic dislocation. Accordingly, the 
Corporation has adopted language to this end. ``If empowerment zones 
and enterprise communities have been officially designated by HUD by 
February 28, 1995, the Corporation will give preference to applicants 
who propose to sponsor AmeriCorps service activities in those areas. 
The Corporation will also give preference to areas impacted by military 
downsizing.'' HUD has officially designated empowerment zones and 
enterprise communities. Programs proposing to operate in these areas 
will receive a preference.

7. Special Consideration for Past Corporation-Funded Programs

    Several comments requested a change in Corporation policy regarding 
special consideration for past Corporation funded programs. The 
comments suggested that the Corporation allow the programs to apply as 
renewals and not new applicants, and that the Corporation waive the 15% 
local match. The Corporation has declined to make these changes. 
Accordingly, the policy reads as follows:
    The following programs were funded previously, but are no longer 
eligible to apply directly to the Corporation. If these programs apply 
through the state process and if they are determined to be high 
quality, they will receive preference over other high quality programs 
during the Corporation selection process. Because their current funding 
is based upon 1994 priorities, they may apply under either 1994 or 1995 
priorities, but are encouraged to address those for 1995. They must 
apply to the state using the application instructions for new programs.
     Defense Conversion Assistance Programs.
     Summer of Safety Continuation Programs.
     Subtitle D programs originally funded for two-year grants 
under the National and Community Service Act of 1990. These programs 
did not compete under the 1994 funding cycle.
     Subtitle H Programs of the National and Community Service 
Act of 1993 renewed from Subtitle E programs under the National and 
Community Service Act of 1990.
    By way of further explanation, the requirement that Subtitle D 
programs funded with two-year grants apply as new applicants refers to 
those subtitle D programs that were funded by the former Commission on 
National and Community Service for the 1993 and 1994 funding cycles.

8. Other

    A number of other comments concerned the following issues: Health 
Care Eligibility--Request to allow Members to include dependents on the 
AmeriCorps health plan at the cost of the Member. Child Care 
Eligibility--Request for a more inclusive policy that is not based on 
income levels, or pro-rating awards based on income. Education Awards 
Only Requirements--Request that the Corporation cover health care and 
child care costs for programs receiving Education Awards Only. These 
comments concern statutory provisions which cannot be changed by 
regulations. They can only be changed through amendments to the 
legislation. The Corporation is currently considering possible 
amendments to our legislation, and the above comments will be 
considered.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.

    Dated: February 6, 1995.
Terry Russell,
General Counsel, Corporation for National Service.
[FR Doc. 95-3301 Filed 2-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6050-28-P