[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13312-13315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5922]
[[Page 13311]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of Labor
Employment and Training Administration
Department of Education
Office of Vocational and Adult Education
_______________________________________________________________________
School-to-Work Opportunities Act, State Implementation Grants; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 47 / Friday, March 10, 1995 /
Notices
[[Page 13312]]
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Vocational and Adult Education
School-to-Work Opportunities Act; State Implementation Grants
AGENCIES: Department of Labor and Department of Education.
ACTION: Notice of proposed selection criteria and a proposed definition
of administrative costs for School-to-Work Opportunities State
Implementation Grants to be made in fiscal year 1995 and succeeding
years.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Departments of Labor and Education jointly propose
selection criteria to be used in evaluating applications submitted
under the School-to-Work Opportunities State Implementation Grant
(State Implementation Grants) competition in fiscal year (FY) 1995 and
succeeding years, authorized under section 212 of the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act of 1994 (the Act). State Implementation Grants will
enable States to implement their plans for offering 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. The
Departments also propose a definition for administrative costs that
would apply to State Implementation Grants funded under the Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 10, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Janet Moore, National
School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue, S.W., Suite 210,
Washington, D.C. 20024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janet Moore, National School-to-Work Office (202) 401-3822 (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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Departments of Labor and Education intend to reserve funds
appropriated for FY 1995 under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of
1994 (the Act) (Pub. L. 103-239) for a competition for State
Implementation Grants authorized under section 212 of the Act. The
Departments propose a definition of administrative costs and selection
criteria that will be used in evaluating applications submitted in
response to the FY 1995 State Implementation Grant competition. States
are advised that applications for State Implementation Grants must meet
all of the requirements in the Act. In addition to applying the
proposed selection criteria during the review of applications, the
Departments will evaluate applications utilizing the considerations and
approval criteria in section 214 of the Act. The Departments intend to
apply the Department of Labor regulations pertaining to enforcement and
administrative requirements for grants in 29 CFR parts 33, 93, 95, 96,
97, 98 to this State Implementation Grant competition.
Proposed Definition and Selection Criteria
The Departments propose to apply the definition of administrative
costs and the selection criteria in this notice to the FY 1995
competition for State Implementation Grants. Unless modified, the
definition and selection criteria will be used for future State
Implementation Grants in succeeding fiscal years. The Departments
solicit comments on the proposed definition and selection criteria, and
will announce the final definition and selection criteria in a notice
in the Federal Register after taking into account the responses to this
notice and other considerations of the Departments.
Note: This notice of proposed selection criteria does not
solicit applications. A notice inviting applications for School-to-
Work Opportunities State Implementation Grants will be published in
the Federal Register concurrent with or immediately following
publication of the notice of final selection criteria.
Definition
All definitions in the Act apply to School-to-Work Opportunities
systems funded under this and future State Implementation Grant
competitions. The Act does not contain a definition of ``administrative
costs'' as used in section 217 of the Act. The Departments propose that
the following definition be applied to this and future 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 program's allowable
activities listed in section 214(b) (4) and (5) and section 215(c) of
the Act. Administrative costs may be both personnel and non-personnel,
and direct and 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:
Overall system management, system coordination, and
general administrative functions;
Preparing program plans, budgets, and schedules, as well
as applicable amendments to them;
Monitoring of local initiatives, pilot projects,
subrecipients, and related systems and processes;
Procurement activities, including the award of specific
subgrants, contracts, and purchase orders;
Providing State or local officials and the general public
with information about the initiative (public relations);
Developing systems and procedures, including management
information systems, for assuring compliance with the requirements
under the Act;
Preparing reports and other documents related to the Act;
Coordinating the resolution of audit findings;
Evaluating system results against stated objectives;
Performing administrative services;
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.
Selection Criteria
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----
Includes effective strategies for integrating school-based
and work-based learning, integrating academic and vocational education,
and establishing linkages between secondary and postsecondary
education;
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
[[Page 13313]] areas, within a reasonable period of time.
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;
Ensures all students will have a range of options,
including options for higher education, additional training and
employment in high-skill, high-wage jobs; and
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----
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-based
enterprises, and paid work experiences;
The school-based learning component that will provide
students 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;
A connecting activities component to provide a functional
link between students' school and work activities and employers and
educators; and
A plan for an effective process for assessing students'
skills and 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 extent to which the State has obtained the active
involvement of employers and other interested parties critical to the
success of the School-to-Work Opportunities system, such as the parties
listed in section 213(d)(5) of the Act, as well as State legislators.
Whether the State plan demonstrates an effective and
convincing strategy for continuing the commitment 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.
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.
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, and paid
work experiences.
Criterion 3: Participation of All Students
Points: 15.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will
consider:
The extent to which the State will implement effective
strategies and systems to ensure that all students have meaningful
opportunities to participate in School-to-Work Opportunities programs.
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.
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.
The feasibility and effectiveness of the State's strategy
for serving students from rural communities with low population
densities.
The State's methods for ensuring safe and healthy work
environments for students.
Note: Experience with the FY 1994 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 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 Criteria 4: Stimulating and Supporting Local School-to-Work
Opportunities Systems
Points: 15.
Considerations: In applying this criterion, reviewers will
consider:
The extent to which the State assists local entities to
form and sustain effective local partnerships serving communities in
all parts of the State.
Whether the plan includes an effective strategy for
addressing the specific labor market needs of localities that will be
implementing School-to-Work systems.
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 School-to-
Work Opportunities Act.
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, expanding and improving career and academic counseling
services, and assistance in the use of technology-based instructional
techniques.
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: [[Page 13314]]
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.
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.
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) 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 adequacy of the management structure that the State
purposes for the School-to-Work Opportunities system.
The extent to which the State's management plan
anticipates barriers to implementation and proposes effective methods
for addressing barriers as they arise.
Whether the plan includes feasible measurable goals for
the School-to-Work-Opportunities system, based on performance outcomes
established under section 402 of the Act, and an effective method for
collecting information relevant to the State's progress in meeting its
goals.
Whether the plan includes a regulatory scheduled process
for improving or redesigning the School-to-Work Opportunities
implementation system based on performance outcomes as established
under section 402 of the Act.
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 of the Act, the Departments will give
priority to applications that show 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:
1. 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) 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.
2. Paid, High-Quality Work-Based Learning--10 Points
Up to 10 points will be awarded to applications that demonstrate
that the State--
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 as is feasible; and
Has established methods for ensuring consistently high
quality work-based learning experiences across the State.
Invitation to Comment: Interested persons are invited to submit
comments on the proposed selection criteria and the proposed definition
of administrative costs contained in this notice. Interested persons
are also invited to comment on the Departments' proposal that States be
required to submit their applications for new State Implementation
Grant awards within 30 days of the publication of a notice of final
selection criteria. The Departments recognize that for the FY 1994
State Implementation Grant competition they provided applicants with 60
days in which to submit their applications following the publication of
the notice of final selection criteria and priorities.
However, the selection criteria proposed for the FY 1995 State
Implementation Grant competition are very similar to those that applied
to the FY 1994 competition and the States have been actively engaged in
the planning of their School-to-work Opportunities systems with State
Development Grant funds since initial development grants were awarded
in early 1994. Accordingly, and in the interest of designing an
application submission and review process that enables the Departments
to make FY 1995 awards in as timely a fashion as possible, the
Departments propose to provide States with 30 days in which to submit
their applications for new FY 1995 State Implementation Grants.
Finally, under section 213(a)(2) of the Act, where a Governor has
been unable, in accordance with section 213(d)(4) of the Act, to obtain
support for the State plan from all of the individuals and entities
listed in 213(b)(4) (A) through (J), the Governor must provide those
non-concurring individuals and entities with a copy of the State's
final application and provide those individuals and entities with 30
days in which to submit their comments on that application. Under
section 213(a)(2)(C) of the Act, the governor must include any such
comments in the State's application. In order to adhere to these
statutory requirements while providing the same application submission
deadlines and ensuring timely application reviews for all States, the
Departments propose that a State submit its final application
simultaneously to the Departments and to any of the individuals and
entities listed in section 213(b)(4) (A) through (J) who must be given
an opportunity to comment under section 213(a)(2). Any comments
received as a result of this opportunity will be provided to the
Departments immediately upon receipt of those comments by the State,
but no later than 30 days after the request for comments is made by the
Governor under section 213(a)(2)(B). Once all such comments have been
received, applications will be considered to be complete.
All comments submitted in response to this notice will be available
for public inspection, during and after the comment period, in the
National School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia Avenue SW., Suit 210,
Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday of each week, except Federal holidays.
Intergovernmental Review
This program is subject to the requirements of Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 29 CFR Part 17. The objective of the
Executive Order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism by relying on processes developed by State and
local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal
financial assistance.
In accordance with the order, this document is intended to provide
early notification of the Departments' specific plans and actions for
this program.
Applicable Regulations: 29 CFR parts 33, 93, 95, 96, 97, 98.
[[Page 13315]] Dated: March 7, 1995.
Doug Ross,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training, Department of Labor.
Augusta Kappner,
Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education, Department of
Education.
[FR Doc. 95-5922 Filed 3-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M