[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 10, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11927-11935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-5954]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families


Refugee Resettlement Program; Proposed Availability of Formula 
Allocation Funding for FY 1999 Targeted Assistance Grants for Services 
to Refugees in Local Areas of High Need

AGENCY: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), ACF, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed availability of formula allocation funding 
for FY 1999 targeted assistance grants to States for services to 
refugees \1\ in local areas of high need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In addition to persons who meet all requirements of 45 CFR 
400.43, ``Requirements for documentation of refugee status,'' 
eligibility for targeted assistance includes Cuban and Haitian 
entrants, certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are admitted to the 
U.S. as immigrants, and certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are U.S. 
citizens. (See section II of this notice on ``Authorization.'') The 
term ``refugee'', used in this notice for convenience, is intended 
to encompass such additional persons who are eligible to participate 
in refugee program services, including the targeted assistance 
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the proposed availability of funds and 
award procedures for FY 1999 targeted assistance grants for services to 
refugees under the Refugee Resettlement Program (RRP). These grants are 
for service provision in localities with large refugee populations, 
high refugee concentrations, and high use of public assistance, and 
where specific needs exist for supplementation of currently available 
resources.
    This notice proposes that the qualification of counties be based on 
refugee and entrant arrivals during the 5-year period from FY 1994 
through FY 1998, and on the concentration of refugees and entrants as a 
percentage of the general population. Under this proposal, 10 new 
counties would qualify for targeted assistance and 7 counties which 
previously received targeted assistance grants would no longer qualify 
for targeted assistance funding.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by April 9, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Address written comments, in duplicate, to: Toyo A. Biddle, 
Office of Refugee Resettlement, Administration for Children and 
Families, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Washington, DC 20447.

APPLICATION DEADLINE: The deadline for applications will be established 
by the final notice; applications should not be sent in response to 
this notice of proposed allocations.


[[Page 11928]]


CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA) NUMBER: 93.584.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toyo Biddle, Director, Division of 
Refugee Self-Sufficiency, (202) 402-9250.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose and Scope

    This notice announces the proposed availability of funds for grants 
for targeted assistance for services to refugees in counties where, 
because of factors such as unusually large refugee populations, high 
refugee concentrations, and high use of public assistance, there exists 
and can be demonstrated a specific need for supplementation of 
resources for services to this population.
    The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) has available $49,477,000 
in FY 1999 funds for the targeted assistance program (TAP) as part of 
the FY 1999 appropriation for the Department of Health and Human 
Services (Pub. L. 105-277).
    The Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) proposes 
to use the $49,477,000 in targeted assistance funds as follows:
     $44,529,300 will be allocated to States under the 5-year 
population formula, as set forth in this notice.
     $4,947,700 (10% of the total) will be used to award 
discretionary grants to States under separate grant announcements.
    The purpose of targeted assistance grants is to provide, through a 
process of local planning and implementation, direct services intended 
to result in the economic self-sufficiency and reduced welfare 
dependency of refugees through job placements.
    The targeted assistance program reflects the requirements of 
section 412(c)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 
which provides that targeted assistance grants shall be made available 
``(i) primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment and 
achievement of self-sufficiency, (ii) in a manner that does not 
supplant other refugee program funds and that assures that not less 
than 95 percent of the amount of the grant award is made available to 
the county or other local entity.''

II. Authorization

    Targeted assistance projects are funded under the authority of 
section 412(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as 
amended by the Refugee Assistance Extension Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-
605), 8 U.S.C. 1522(c); section 501(a) of the Refugee Education 
Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-422), 8 U.S.C. 1522 note, insofar as 
it incorporates by reference with respect to Cuban and Haitian entrants 
the authorities pertaining to assistance for refugees established by 
section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited above; section 584(c) of the 
Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Act, 1988, as included in the FY 1988 Continuing 
Resolution (Pub. L. 100-202), insofar as it incorporates by reference 
with respect to certain Amerasians from Vietnam the authorities 
pertaining to assistance for refugees established by section 412(c)(2) 
of the INA, as cited above, including certain Amerasians from Vietnam 
who are U.S. citizens, as provided under title II of the Foreign 
Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Acts, 
1989 (Pub. L. 100-461), 1990 (Pub. L. 101-167), and 1991 (Pub. L. 101-
513).

III. Client and Service Priorities

    Targeted assistance funding must be used to assist refugee families 
to achieve economic independence. To this end, States and counties are 
required to ensure that a coherent family self-sufficiency plan is 
developed for each eligible family that addresses the family's needs 
from time of arrival until attainment of economic independence. (See 45 
CFR 400.79 and 400.156(g).) Each family self-sufficiency plan should 
address a family's needs for both employment-related services and other 
needed social services. The family self-sufficiency plan must include: 
(1) A determination of the income level a family would have to earn to 
exceed its cash grant and move into self-support without suffering a 
monetary penalty; (2) a strategy and timetable for obtaining that level 
of family income through the placement in employment of sufficient 
numbers of employable family members at sufficient wage levels; (3) 
employability plans for every employable member of the family; and (4) 
a plan to address the family's social services needs that may be 
barriers to self-sufficiency. In local jurisdictions that have both 
targeted assistance and refugee social services programs, one family 
self-sufficiency plan may be developed for a family that incorporates 
both targeted assistance and refugee social services.
    Services funded through the targeted assistance program are 
required to focus primarily on those refugees who, either because of 
their protracted use of public assistance or difficulty in securing 
employment, continue to need services beyond the initial years of 
resettlement. States may not provide services funded under this notice, 
except for referral and interpreter services, to refugees who have been 
in the United States for more than 60 months (5 years).
    In accordance with 45 CFR 400.314, States are required to provide 
targeted assistance services to refugees in the following order of 
priority, except in certain individual extreme circumstances: (a) 
Refugees who are cash assistance recipients, particularly long-term 
recipients; (b) unemployed refugees who are not receiving cash 
assistance; and (c) employed refugees in need of services to retain 
employment or to attain economic independence.
    In addition to the statutory requirement that TAP funds be used 
``primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment'' 
(section 412(c)(2)(B)(i)), funds awarded under this program are 
intended to help fulfill the Congressional intent that ``employable 
refugees should be placed on jobs as soon as possible after their 
arrival in the United States'' (section 412(a)(1)(B)(i) of the INA). 
Therefore, in accordance with 45 CFR 400.313, targeted assistance funds 
must be used primarily for employability services designed to enable 
refugees to obtain jobs with less than one year's participation in the 
targeted assistance program in order to achieve economic self-
sufficiency as soon as possible. Targeted assistance services may 
continue to be provided after a refugee has entered a job to help the 
refugee retain employment or move to a better job. Targeted assistance 
funds may not be used for long-term training programs such as 
vocational training that last for more than a year or educational 
programs that are not intended to lead to employment within a year.
    In accordance with Sec. 400.317, if targeted assistance funds are 
used for the provision of English language training, such training must 
be provided in a concurrent, rather than sequential, time period with 
employment or with other employment-related activities.
    A portion of a local area's allocation may be used for services 
which are not directed toward the achievement of a specific employment 
objective in less than one year but which are essential to the 
adjustment of refugees in the community, provided such needs are 
clearly demonstrated and such use is approved by the State. Allowable 
services include those listed under Sec. 400.316.
    Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of the INA, States must 
``insure that women have the same opportunities as men to participate 
in training and instruction.'' In addition, in accordance with 
Sec. 400.317, services must be

[[Page 11929]]

provided to the maximum extent feasible in a manner that includes the 
use of bilingual/bicultural women on service agency staffs to ensure 
adequate service access by refugee women. The Director also strongly 
encourages the inclusion of refugee women in management and board 
positions in agencies that serve refugees. In order to facilitate 
refugee self-support, the Director also expects States to implement 
strategies which address simultaneously the employment potential of 
both male and female wage earners in a family unit. States and counties 
are expected to make every effort to obtain day care services, 
preferably subsized day care, for children in order to allow women with 
children the opportunity to participate in employment services or to 
accept or retain employment. To accomplish this, day care may be 
treated as a priority employment-related service under the targeted 
assistance program. Refugees who are participating in TAP-funded or 
social services-funded employment services or have accepted employment 
are eligible for day care services for children. For an employed 
refugee, TAP-funded day care should be limited to one year after the 
refugee becomes employed. States and counties, however, are expected to 
use day care funding from other publicly funded mainstream programs as 
a prior resource and are encouraged to work with service providers to 
assure maximum access to other publicly funded resources for day care.
    In accordance with Sec. 400.317, targeted assistance services must 
be provided in a manner that is culturally and linguistically 
compatible with a refugee's language and cultural background, to the 
maximum extent feasible. In light of the increasingly diverse 
population of refugees who are resettling in this country, refugee 
service agencies will need to develop practical ways of providing 
culturally and linguistically appropriate services to a changing ethnic 
population. Services funded under this notice must be refugee-specific 
services which are designed specifically to meet refugee needs and are 
in keeping with the rules and objectives of the refugee program. 
Vocational or job-skills training, on-the-job training, or English 
language training, however, need not be refugee-specific.
    When planning targeted assistance services, States must take into 
account the reception and placement (R & P) services provided by local 
resettlement agencies in order to utilize these resources in the 
overall program design and to ensure the provision of seamless, 
coordinated services to refugees that are not duplicative. See 
Sec. 400.156(b) as referenced in Sec. 400.317.
    ORR strongly encourages States and counties when contracting for 
targeted assistance services, including employment services, to give 
consideration to the special strengths of mutual assistance 
associations (MAAs), whenever contract bidders are otherwise equally 
qualified, provided that the MAA has the capability to deliver services 
in a manner that is culturally and linguistically compatible with the 
background of the target population to be served. ORR also strongly 
encourages MAAs to ensure that their management and board composition 
reflect the major target populations to be served.
    ORR defines MAAs as organizations with the following 
qualifications:
    a. The organization is legally incorporated as a nonprofit 
organization; and
    b. Not less than 51% of the composition of the Board of Directors 
or governing board of the mutual assistance association is comprised of 
refugees or former refugees, including both refugee men and women.
    Finally, in order to provide culturally and linguistically 
compatible services in as cost-efficient a manner as possible in a time 
of limited resources, ORR strongly encourages States and counties to 
promote and give special consideration to the provision of services 
through coalitions of refugee service organizations, such as coalitions 
of MAAs, voluntary resettlement agencies, or a variety of service 
providers. ORR believes it is essential for refugee-serving 
organizations to form close partnerships in the provision of services 
to refugees in order to be able to respond adequately to a changing 
refugee picture. Coalition-building and consolidation of providers is 
particularly important in communities with multiple service providers 
in order to ensure better coordination of services and maximum use of 
funding for services by minimizing the funds used for multiple 
administrative overhead costs.
    The award of funds to States under this notice will be contingent 
upon the completeness of a State's application as described in section 
IX, below.

IV. Reserved for Discussion of Comments in the Final Notice

V. Eligible Grantees

    Eligible grantees are those agencies of State governments that are 
responsible for the refugee program under 45 CFR 400.5 in States 
containing counties which qualify for FY 1999 targeted assistance 
awards.
    The Director of ORR proposes to determine the eligibility of 
counties for inclusion in the FY 1999 targeted assistance program on 
the basis of the method described in section VI of this notice.
    The use of targeted assistance funds for services to Cuban and 
Haitian entrants is limited to States which have an approved State plan 
under the Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program (CHEP).
    The State agency will submit a single application on behalf of all 
county governments of the qualified counties in that State. Subsequent 
to the approval of the State's application by ORR, local targeted 
assistance plans will be developed by the county government or other 
designated entity and submitted to the State.
    A State with more than one qualified county is permitted, but not 
required, to determine the allocation amount for each qualified county 
within the State. However, if a State chooses to determine county 
allocations differently from those set forth in the final notice, in 
accordance with Sec. 400.319, the FY 1999 allocations proposed by the 
State must be based on the State's population of refugees who arrived 
in the U.S. during the most recent 5-year period. A State may use 
welfare data as an additional factor in the allocation of its targeted 
assistance funds if it so chooses; however, a State may not assign a 
greater weight to welfare data than it has assigned to population data 
in its allocation formula. In addition, if a State chooses to allocate 
its FY 1999 targeted assistance funds in a manner different from the 
formula set forth in the final notice, the FY 1999 allocations and 
methodology proposed by the State must be included in the State's 
application for ORR review and approval.
    Applications submitted in response to the final notice are not 
subject to review by State and areawide clearinghouses under Executive 
Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.''

VI. Qualification and Allocation

    For FY 1999, ORR proposes to continue to use the formula that 
limits the use of targeted assistance funds to serving refugees who 
have been in the U.S. 5 years or less. The Director of ORR proposes to 
determine the qualification of counties for targeted assistance once 
every three years, as stated in the FY 1996 notice of proposed 
availability of targeted assistance allocations to States which was 
published in the Federal Register on May 6, 1996 (61 FR 20260). Since 
the FY 1996-FY 1998 three-year period has expired, for FY 1999, ORR

[[Page 11930]]

has reviewed data on all counties that could potentially qualify for 
TAP funds on the basis of the most current 5-year refugee/entrant 
arrival data.

A. Qualifying Counties

    In order to qualify for application for FY 1999 targeted assistance 
funds, a county (or group of adjacent counties with the same Standard 
Metropolitan Statistical Area, or SMSA) or independent city, would be 
required to rank above a selected cut-off point of jurisdictions for 
which data were reviewed, based on two criteria: (1) The number of 
refugee/entrant arrivals placed in the county during the most recent 5-
year period (FY 1994--FY 1998); and (2) the 5-year refugee/entrant 
arrival population as a percent of the county overall population.
    Each county would be ranked on the basis of its 5-year arrival 
population and its concentration of refugees, with a relative weighting 
of 2 to 1 respectively, because we believe that large numbers of 
refugee/entrant arrivals into a county create a significant impact, 
regardless of the ratio of refugees to the county general population.
    Each county would then be ranked in terms of the sum of a county's 
rank on refugee arrivals and its rank on concentration. To qualify for 
targeted assistance, a county would have to rank within the top 50 
counties. ORR has decided to limit the number of qualified counties to 
the top 50 counties in order to target a sufficient level of funding to 
the most impacted counties.
    ORR has screened data on all counties that have received awards for 
targeted assistance since FY 1983 and on all other counties that could 
potentially qualify for TAP funds based on the criteria proposed in 
this notice. Analysis of these data indicates that: (1) 40 counties 
which have previously received targeted assistance would continue to 
qualify; (2) 7 counties which have previously received targeted 
assistance would no longer qualify; and (3) 10 new counties would be 
qualified.
    Table 1 provides a list of the counties that would remain qualified 
and the new counties that would qualify, the number of refugee/entrant 
arrivals in those counties within the past 5 years, the percent that 
the 5-year arrival population represents of the overall county 
population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula 
described above.
    Table 2 lists the counties that have previously received targeted 
assistance which would no longer qualify, the number of refugee/entrant 
arrivals in those counties within the past 5 years, the percent that 
the 5-year arrival population represents of the overall county 
population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula.
    The proposed counties listed in this notice as qualified to apply 
for FY 1999 TAP funding would remain qualified for TAP funding through 
FY 2001. ORR does not plan to consider the eligibility of additional 
counties for TAP funding until FY 2002, when ORR will again review data 
on all counties that could potentially qualify for TAP funds based on 
the criteria contained in this proposed notice. We believe that a more 
frequent redetermination of county qualification for targeted 
assistance would not provide qualifying counties a sufficient period of 
time within a stable funding climate to adequately address the refugee 
impact in their counties, while a less frequent redetermination of 
county qualification would pose the risk of not considering new 
population impacts in a timely manner.

B. Allocation Formula

    Of the funds available for FY 1999 for targeted assistance, 
$44,529,300 would be allocated by formula to States for qualified 
counties based on the initial placements of refugees, Amerasians, 
entrants, and Kurdish asylees in these counties during the 5-year 
period from FY 1994 through FY 1998 (October 1, 1993-September 30, 
1998).
    With regard to Havana parolees, in the absence of reliable data on 
the State-by-State resettlement of this population, we are crediting 
13,442 Havana parolees who arrived in the U.S. in FY 1998 according to 
the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), using the following 
methodology. For FY 1995, FY 1996, and FY 1997, Florida's Havana 
parolees for each qualifying county are based on actual arrival data 
submitted by the State of Florida, while Havana parolees credited to 
qualifying counties in other States were prorated based on the 
counties' proportion of the 5-year entrant population in the U.S.
    If a qualifying county does not agree with ORR's population 
estimate and believes that its 5-year population for FY 1994-FY 1998 
was undercounted and wishes ORR to reconsider its population estimate, 
the county must provide the following evidence: The county must submit 
to ORR a letter from each local voluntary agency that resettled 
refugees in the county that attests to the fact that the refugees/
entrants listed in an attachment to the letter were resettled as 
initial placements during the 5-year period from FY 1994-FY 1998 in the 
county making the claim.
    Documentation must include the name, alien number, date of birth 
and date of arrival in the U.S. for each refugee/entrant claimed. 
Listings of refugees who are not identified by their alien numbers will 
not be considered. Counties should submit such evidence separately from 
comments on the proposed formula no later than 30 days from the date of 
publication of this notice and should be addressed to: Loren Bussert, 
Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency, Office of Refugee Resettlement, 
370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Washington, DC 20447, telephone: (202) 401-
4732. Failure to submit the required documentation within the required 
time period will result in forfeiture of consideration.

VII. Allocations

    Table 3 lists the proposed qualifying counties, the number of 
refugee and entrant arrivals in those counties during the 5-year period 
from October 1, 1993-September 30, 1998, the prorated number of Havana 
parolees credited to each county based on the county's proportion of 
the 5-year entrant population in the U.S., the sum of the third, 
fourth, and fifth columns, and the proposed amount of each county's 
allocation based on its 5-year arrival population.
    Table 4 provides State totals for proposed targeted assistance 
allocations.
    Table 5 indicates the areas that each proposed qualifying county 
represents.

                           Table 1.--Top 50 Counties Eligible for Targeted Assistance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  5-Year arrival   Concentration
                        County and state                            population        percent      Sum of ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Targeted Assistance Counties Eligible for Continuation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dade County, FL.................................................          67,475          3.4833               3
Sacramento County, CA...........................................          11,795          1.1328              30
New York, NY....................................................          55,434           .7570              30

[[Page 11931]]

 
City of St. Louis, MO...........................................           7,672          1.9340              32
Multnomah, OR...................................................          12,261           .8681              36
King/Snohomish, WA..............................................          14,510           .7354              38
DeKalb County, GA...............................................           6,582          1.2059              41
San Francisco, CA...............................................           8,110           .5057              49
Oneida County, NY...............................................           4,125          1.6444              50
Fulton County, GA...............................................           5,690           .8768              55
Orange County, CA...............................................          12,856           .5333              58
Jefferson County, KY............................................           5,161           .7761              65
Suffolk County, MA..............................................           4,755           .7163              72
Dallas/Tarrant, TX..............................................          12,684           .4196              77
Santa Clara County, CA..........................................          10,902           .7280              78
Polk County, IA.................................................           3,435          1.0499              79
District of Columbia, DC........................................           3,890           .6409              86
Hennepin County, MN.............................................           5,323           .5156              86
Cook/Kane, IL...................................................          17,379           .3205              90
Maricopa County, AZ.............................................           8,723           .4111              91
Duval County, FL................................................           3,847           .5717              94
Monroe County, NY...............................................           3,888           .5446              94
San Diego County, CA............................................           9,355           .3745              97
Bernalillo County, NM...........................................           3,286           .6837             101
Harris County, TX...............................................           9,387           .3331             103
Denver County, CO...............................................           3,246           .6942             104
Philadelphia County, PA.........................................           5,797           .3656             108
Davidson County, TN.............................................           3,252           .6367             109
Ingham County, MI...............................................           2,535           .8991             112
City of Richmond, VA............................................           2,340          1.1526             113
Lancaster County, NE............................................           2,337          1.0938             118
Hudson County, NJ...............................................           2,982           .5391             123
Los Angeles County, CA..........................................          17,321           .1954             129
Ramsey County, MN...............................................           2,700           .5558             129
Fairfax County, VA..............................................           3,609           .3763             129
Fresno County, CA...............................................           3,014           .4516             134
Cass County, ND.................................................           1,669          1.6225             139
Pierce County, WA...............................................           2,658           .4534             147
Cuyahoga County, OH.............................................           3,815           .2702             151
Broward County, FL..............................................           3,440           .2740             155
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            New Counties That Qualify
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spokane County, WA..............................................           3,009           .8327              98
Clark County, NV................................................           3,517           .4743             114
Davis/Salt Lake, UT.............................................           4,605           .3911             114
Minnehaha County, SD............................................           1,430          1.1550             154
Kent County, MI.................................................           2,374           .4742             155
Guilford County, NC.............................................           2,093           .6024             155
Erie County, PA.................................................           1,873           .6797             156
Yolo County, CA.................................................           1,434          1.0160             158
Hillsborough County, FL.........................................           2,946           .3532             158
Hampden County, MA..............................................           2,239           .4907             158
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          Table 2.--Targeted Assistance Counties That No Longer Qualify
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  5-year arrival   Concentration
                        County and state                            population        percent      Sum of ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alameda County, CA..............................................           3,330           .2604             165
Oakland County, MI..............................................           2,827           .2609             180
Palm Beach County, FL...........................................           2,410           .2791             186
City of Baltimore, MD...........................................           2,104           .2859             197
Broome County, NY...............................................           1,098           .5200             221
San Joaquin County, CA..........................................           1,221           .2540             258
Merced County, CA...............................................             690           .3868             296
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 11932]]


                                          Table 3.--Targeted Assistance Proposed Allocations by County: FY 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                            $44,429,300
                    County                                     State                    Refugees     Entrants      Havana       Total      total FY 1999
                                                                                          \1\                     parolees     arrivals     allocation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\2\---------------------------------
Maricopa County..............................  Arizona..............................        7,394          780          549        8,723        $983,963
Fresno County................................  California...........................        3,011            2            1        3,014         339,982
Los Angeles County...........................  California...........................       16,581          434          306       17,321       1,953,825
Orange County................................  California...........................       12,817           23           16       12,856       1,450,169
Sacramento County............................  California...........................       11,788            4            3       11,795       1,330,487
San Diego County.............................  California...........................        8,476          516          363        9,355       1,055,253
San Francisco................................  California...........................        8,028           48           34        8,110         914,816
Santa Clara County...........................  California...........................       10,815           51           36       10,902       1,229,756
Yolo County..................................  California...........................        1,425            5            4        1,434         161,757
Denver County................................  Colorado.............................        3,241            3            2        3,246         366,152
District of Columbia.........................  District of Col......................        3,866           14           10        3,890         438,796
Broward County...............................  Florida..............................          977        1,548          915        3,440         388,035
Dade County..................................  Florida..............................        8,427       33,143       25,905       67,475       7,611,244
Duval County.................................  Florida..............................        3,788           28           31        3,847         433,945
Hillsborough County..........................  Florida..............................        1,525          767          654        2,946         332,312
DeKalb County................................  Georgia..............................        6,562           12            8        6,582         742,456
Fulton County................................  Georgia..............................        5,334          209          147        5,690         641,837
Cook/Kane....................................  Illinois.............................       16,699          399          281       17,379       1,960,368
Polk County..................................  Iowa.................................        3,433            1            1        3,435         387,471
Jefferson County \3\.........................  Kentucky.............................        3,605          913          643        5,161         582,166
Hampden County...............................  Massachusetts........................        2,224            9            6        2,239         252,561
Suffolk County...............................  Massachusetts........................        4,648           63           44        4,755         536,368
Ingham County................................  Michigan.............................        1,785          440          310        2,535         285,950
Kent County..................................  Michigan.............................        2,304           41           29        2,374         267,789
Hennepin County..............................  Minnesota............................        5,318            3            2        5,323         600,439
Ramsey County................................  Minnesota............................        2,683           10            7        2,700         304,563
City of St. Louis............................  Missouri.............................        7,670            1            1        7,672         865,409
Lancaster County.............................  Nebraska.............................        2,272           38           27        2,337         263,616
Clark County \4\.............................  Nevada...............................        1,363        1,264          890        3,517         396,721
Hudson County................................  New Jersey...........................        1,605          808          569        2,982         336,372
Bernalillo County............................  New Mexico...........................        1,137        1,261          888        3,286         370,664
Monroe County................................  New York.............................        2,723          684          481        3,888         438,570
New York.....................................  New York.............................       54,272          682          480       55,434       6,253,007
Oneida County................................  New York.............................        4,123            1            1        4,125         465,304
Guliford County..............................  North Carolina.......................        2,081            7            5        2,093         236,092
Cass County..................................  North Dakota.........................        1,664            3            2        1,669         188,265
Cuyahoga County..............................  Ohio.................................        3,805            6            4        3,815         430,336
Multnomah....................................  Oregon...............................       11,216          613          432       12,261       1,383,052
Erie County..................................  Pennsylvania.........................        1,873            0            0        1,873         211,276
Philadelphia County..........................  Pennsylvania.........................        5,708           52           37        5,797         653,907
Minnehaha County.............................  South Dakota.........................        1,430            0            0        1,430         161,305
Davidson County..............................  Tennessee............................        3,160           54           38        3,252         366,829
Dallas/Tarrant...............................  Texas................................       11,479          707          498       12,684       1,430,767
Harris County................................  Texas................................        9,065          189          133        9,387       1,058,862
Davis/Salt Lake..............................  Utah.................................        4,603            1            1        4,605         519,448
Fairfax......................................  Virginia.............................        3,595            8            6        3,609         407,099
City of Richmond.............................  Virginia.............................        2,153          110           77        2,340         263,954
King/Snohomish...............................  Washington...........................       14,423           51           36       14,510       1,636,742
Pierce County................................  Washington...........................        2,641           10            7        2,658         299,825
Spokane County...............................  Washington...........................        3,009            0            0        3,009         339,418
                                                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          313,824       46,016       34,920      394,760      44,529,300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refugees includes refugees, Kurdish asylees, and Amerasian immigrants from Vietnam.
\2\ For FY 1995, 1996 and 1997, Havana parolee arrivals to the qualifying Florida counties (18,538) are based on actual data while parolees in the non-
  Florida counties (4,948) are prorated based on the counties' proportion of the five-year (FY 1994-1998) entrant population. For FY 1998, 11,434 Havana
  parolees are prorated to all the qualifying counties based on their proportion of the five-year entrant population.
\3\ The allocation for Jefferson County, Kentucky will be awarded to the Kentucky Wilson/Fish project.
\4\ The allocation for Clark County, Nevada will be awarded to the Nevada Wilson/Fish project.


   Table 4--Targeted Assistance Proposed Allocations by State: FY 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            $44,529,300
                          State                            total FY 1999
                                                            allocation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona.................................................        $983,963
California..............................................       8,436,044
Colorado................................................         366,152
District of Columbia....................................         438,796
Florida.................................................       8,765,536
Georgia.................................................       1,384,293

[[Page 11933]]

 
Illinois................................................       1,960,368
Iowa....................................................         387,471
Kentucky................................................         582,166
Massachusetts...........................................         788,930
Michigan................................................         553,740
Minnesota...............................................         905,002
Missouri................................................         865,409
Nebraska................................................         263,616
Nevada..................................................         396,721
New Jersey..............................................         336,372
New Mexico..............................................         370,664
New York................................................       7,156,881
North Carolina..........................................         236,092
North Dakota............................................         188,265
Ohio....................................................         430,336
Oregon..................................................       1,383,052
Pennsylvania............................................         865,183
South Dakota............................................         161,305
Tennessee...............................................         366,829
Texas...................................................       2,489,630
Utah....................................................         519,448
Virginia................................................         671,053
Washington..............................................       2,275,985
                                                         ---------------
        Total...........................................      44,529,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                       Table 5--Targeted Assistance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               State                   Targeted assistance area                     Definition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona............................  Maricopa County              ..............................................
California.........................  Fresno County                ..............................................
                                     Los Angeles County           ..............................................
                                     Orange County                ..............................................
                                     Sacramento County            ..............................................
                                     San Diego                    ..............................................
                                     San Francisco..............  Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties.
                                     Santa Clara County           ..............................................
                                     Yolo County                  ..............................................
Colorado...........................  Denver                       ..............................................
District of Columbia                                              ..............................................
Florida............................  Broward County               ..............................................
                                     Dade County                  ..............................................
                                     Duval County                 ..............................................
                                     Hillsborough County          ..............................................
Georgia............................  De Kalb County               ..............................................
                                     Fulton County                ..............................................
Illinois...........................  Cook and Kane Counties       ..............................................
Iowa...............................  Polk County                  ..............................................
Kentucky...........................  Jefferson County             ..............................................
Massachusetts......................  Hampden County               ..............................................
                                     Suffolk County               ..............................................
Michigan...........................  Ingham County                ..............................................
                                     Kent County                  ..............................................
Minnesota..........................  Hennepin County              ..............................................
                                     Ramsey County                ..............................................
Missouri...........................  City of St. Louis            ..............................................
Nebraska...........................  Lancaster County             ..............................................
Nevada.............................  Clark County                 ..............................................
New Jersey.........................  Hudson County                ..............................................
New Mexico.........................  Bernalillo County            ..............................................
New York...........................  Monroe County                ..............................................
                                     New York...................  Bronx, Kings, Queens, New York, and Richmond
                                                                   Counties.
                                     Oneida County                ..............................................
North Carolina.....................  Guilford County              ..............................................
North Dakota.......................  Cass County                  ..............................................
Ohio...............................  Cuyahoga County              ..............................................
Oregon.............................  Multnomah..................  Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties,
                                                                   Oregon, and Clark County, Washington.
Pennsylvania.......................  Erie                         ..............................................
                                     Philadelphia                 ..............................................
South Dakota.......................  Minnehaha County             ..............................................
Tennessee..........................  Davidson County              ..............................................
Texas..............................  Dallas/Tarrant               ..............................................
                                     Harris County                ..............................................
Utah...............................  Davis/Salt lake............  Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah Counties.
Virginia...........................  Fairfax....................  Fairfax County and the cities of Falls Church,
                                                                   Fairfax, and Alexandria.
                                     City of Richmond             ..............................................
Washington.........................  King/Snohomish               ..............................................
                                     Pierce County                ..............................................
                                     Spokane County               ..............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 11934]]

VIII. Application and Implementation Process

    Under the FY 1999 targeted assistance program, States may apply for 
and receive grant awards on behalf of qualified counties in the State. 
A single allocation will be made to each State by ORR on the basis of 
an approved State application. The State agency will, in turn, receive, 
review, and determine the acceptability of individual county targeted 
assistance plans.
    Pursuant to Sec. 400.210(b), FY 1999 targeted assistance funds must 
be obligated by the State agency no later than one year after the end 
of the Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. 
Funds must be liquidated within two years after the end of the Federal 
fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. A State's final 
financial report on targeted assistance expenditures must be received 
no later than two years after the end of the Federal fiscal year in 
which the Department awarded the grant. If final reports are not 
received on time, the Department will deobligate any unexpended funds, 
including any unliquidated obligations, on the basis of the State's 
last filed report.
    The requirements regarding the discretionary portion of the 
targeted assistance program will be addressed separately in a grant 
announcement for those funds. Applications for these funds are 
therefore not subject to provisions contained in this notice but to 
other requirements which will be conveyed separately.

IX. Application Requirements

    In applying for targeted assistance funds, a State agency is 
required to provide the following:
    A. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in 
accordance with the requirements in 45 CFR part 400.
    B. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used primarily 
for the provision of services which are designed to enable refugees to 
obtain jobs with less than one year's participation in the targeted 
assistance program. States must indicate what percentage of FY 1999 
targeted assistance formula allocation funds that are used for services 
will be allocated for employment services.
    C. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will not be used to 
offset funding otherwise available to counties or local jurisdictions 
from the State agency in its administration of other programs, e.g. 
social services, cash and medical assistance, etc.
    D. Identification of the local administering agency.
    E. The amount of funds to be awarded to the targeted county or 
counties. If a State with more than one qualifying targeted assistance 
county chooses to allocate its targeted assistance funds differently 
from the formula allocation for counties presented in the ORR targeted 
assistance notice in a fiscal year, its allocations must be based on 
the State's population of refugees who arrived in the U.S. during the 
most recent 5-year period. A State may use welfare data as an 
additional factor in the allocation of targeted assistance funds if it 
so chooses; however, a State may not assign a greater weight to welfare 
data than it has assigned to population data in its allocation formula. 
The application must provide a description of, and supporting data for, 
the State's proposed allocation plan, the data to be used, and the 
proposed allocation for each county.
    In instances where a State receives targeted assistance funding for 
impacted counties contained in a standard metropolitan statistical area 
(SMSA) which includes a county or counties located in a neighboring 
State, the State receiving those funds must provide a description of 
coordination and planning activities undertaken with the State Refugee 
Coordinator of the neighboring State in which the impacted county or 
counties are located. These planning and coordination activities should 
result in a proposed allocation plan for the equitable distribution of 
targeted assistance funds by county based on the distribution of the 
eligible population by county within the SMSA. The proposed allocation 
plan must be included in the State's application to ORR.
    F. A description of the State's guidelines for the required content 
of county targeted assistance plans and a description of the State's 
review/approval process for such county plans. Acceptable county plans 
must minimally include the following:
    1. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in 
accordance with the requirements contained in ORR regulations in 45 CFR 
400.156 as incorporated by Sec. 400.317.
    2. Procedures for carrying out a local planning process for 
determining targeted assistance priorities and service strategies. All 
local targeted assistance plans will be developed through a planning 
process that involves, in addition to the State Refugee Coordinator, 
representatives of the private sector (for example, private employers, 
private industry council, Chamber of Commerce, etc.), leaders of 
refugee/entrant community-based organizations, voluntary resettlement 
agencies, refugees from the impacted communities, and other public 
officials associated with social services and employment agencies that 
serve refugees. Counties are encouraged to foster coalition-building 
among these participating organizations.
    3. Identification of refugee/entrant populations to be served by 
targeted assistance projects, including approximate numbers of clients 
to be served, and a description of characteristics and needs of 
targeted populations. (As per 45 CFR 400.314)
    4. Description of specific strategies and services to meet the 
needs of targeted populations. These should be justified where possible 
through analysis of strategies and outcomes from projects previously 
implemented under the targeted assistance programs, the regular social 
service programs, and any other services available to the refugee 
population.
    5. The relationship of targeted assistance services to other 
services available to refugees/entrants in the county including State-
allocated ORR social services.
    6. Analysis of available employment opportunities in the local 
community. Examples of acceptable analyses of employment opportunities 
might include surveys of employers or potential employers of refugee 
clients, surveys of presently effective employment service providers, 
review of studies on employment opportunities/forecasts which would be 
appropriate to the refugee populations.
    7. Description of the monitoring and oversight responsibilities to 
be carried out by the county or qualifying local jurisdiction.
    8. Assurance that the local administrative budget will not exceed 
15% of the local allocation. Targeted assistance grants are cost-based 
awards. Neither a State nor a county is entitled to a certain amount 
for administrative costs. Rather, administrative cost requests should 
be based on projections of actual needs. All TAP counties will be 
allowed to spend up to 15% of their allocation on TAP administrative 
costs, as need requires. However, States and counties are strongly 
encouraged to limit administrative costs to the extent possible to 
maximize available funding for services to clients.
    9. For any State that administers the program directly or otherwise 
provides direct service to the refugee/entrant population (with the 
concurrence of the county), the State must provide ORR with the same 
information required above for review and prior approval.
    G. Identification of the contracting cycle dates for targeted 
assistance

[[Page 11935]]

service contracts in each county. States with more than one qualified 
county are encouraged to ensure that all counties participating in TAP 
in the State use the same contracting cycle dates.
    H. A description of the State's plan for conducting fiscal and 
programmatic monitoring and evaluations of the targeted assistance 
program, including frequency of on-site monitoring.
    I. Assurance that the State will make available to the county or 
designated local entity not less than 95% of the amount of its formula 
allocation for purposes of implementing the activities proposed in its 
plan, except in the case of a State that administers the program 
locally as described in item F9 above.
    J. Assurance that the State will follow or mandate that its sub-
recipients will follow appropriate State procurement and contract 
requirements in the acquisition, administration, and management of 
targeted assistance service contracts.

Results or Benefits Expected

    All applicants must establish proposed targeted assistance 
performance goals for each of the 6 ORR performance outcome measures 
for each impacted county's proposed service contract(s) or sub-grants 
for the next contracting cycle. Proposed performance goals must be 
included in the application for each performance measure. The 6 ORR 
performance measures are: entered employments, cash assistance 
reductions due to employment, cash assistance terminations due to 
employment, 90-day employment retentions, average wage at placement, 
and job placements with available health benefits. Targeted assistance 
program activity and progress achieved toward meeting performance 
outcome goals are to be reported quarterly on the ORR-6, the 
``Quarterly Performance Report.''
    States which are currently grantees for targeted assistance funds 
should base projected annual outcome goals on past performance. Current 
grantees should have adequate baseline data for all of the 6 ORR 
performance outcome measures based on a history of targeted assistance 
program experience.
    States identified as new eligible targeted assistance grantees are 
also required to set proposed outcome goals for each of the 6 ORR 
performance outcome measures. New grantees may use baseline data, as 
available, and current data as reported on the ORR-6 for social 
services program activity to assist them in the goal-setting process.
    New qualifying counties within States that are current grantees are 
also required to set proposed outcome goals for each of the 6 ORR 
performance outcome measures. New counties may use baseline data, as 
available, and current data as reported on the ORR-6 for social 
services program activity to assist them in the goal-setting process.
    Proposed targeted assistance outcome goals should reflect 
improvement over past performance and strive for continuous improvement 
during the project period from one year to another.

Budget and Budget Justification

    Provide line item detail and detailed calculations for each budget 
object class identified on the Budget Information form (424A). Detailed 
calculations must include estimation methods, quantities, unit costs, 
and other similar quantitative detail sufficient for the calculation to 
be duplicated. The detailed budget must also include a breakout by the 
funding sources identified in Block 15 of the SF-424.
    Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the 
categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, 
and allocability of the proposed costs. The Office of Refugee 
Resettlement is particularly interested in the following:

    A line item budget and justification for State administrative 
costs limited to a maximum of 5% of the total award to the State. 
Each total budget period funding amount requested must be necessary, 
reasonable, and allocable to the project. States that administer the 
program locally in lieu of the county, through a mutual agreement 
with the qualifying county, may request administrative costs that 
add up to, but may not exceed, 10% of the county's TAP allocation to 
the State's administrative budget.

States Administering the Program Directly

    States that propose to administer the program locally or provide 
direct service to the refugee population (with the concurrence of the 
county) must submit a program summary to ORR for prior review and 
approval. The summary must include a description of the proposed 
services; a justification for the projected allocation for each 
component including relationship of funds allocated to numbers of 
clients served, characteristics of clients, duration of training and 
services, and cost per placement. In addition, the program component 
summary must describe any ancillary services or subcomponents such as 
day care, transportation, or language training.

X. Reporting Requirements

    States are required to submit quarterly reports on the outcomes of 
the targeted assistance program, using Schedule A and Schedule C of the 
new ORR-6 Quarterly Performance Report form which was sent to States in 
ORR State Letter 95-35 on November 6, 1995.

XI. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13)

    Based on historical experience, ORR anticipates fewer than ten 
responses to this notice. An OMB control number is therefore not 
required.

    Dated: March 5, 1999.
Lavinia Limon,
Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement.
[FR Doc. 99-5954 Filed 3-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P