[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 161 (Friday, August 19, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55526-55559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16049]



[[Page 55525]]

Vol. 81

Friday,

No. 161

August 19, 2016

Part II





Department of Education





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





34 CFR Parts 461, 462, 463 et al.





Programs and Activities Authorized by the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act (Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity 
Act); Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2016 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 55526]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

34 CFR Parts 461, 462, 463, 472, 477, 489, and 490

RIN 1830-AA22
[Docket No. 2015-ED-OCTAE-0003]


Programs and Activities Authorized by the Adult Education and 
Family Literacy Act (Title II of the Workforce Innovation and 
Opportunity Act)

AGENCY: Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, Department of 
Education.

ACTION: Final regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Secretary establishes regulations to implement changes to 
the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) resulting from the 
enactment of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014 (WIOA 
or the Act). These final regulations clarify new provisions in AEFLA. 
The Secretary also updates the regulations that establish procedures 
for determining the suitability of tests used for measuring State 
performance on accountability measures that assess the effectiveness of 
AEFLA programs and activities. The Secretary also removes specific 
parts of title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that are no 
longer in effect.

DATES: These final regulations are effective September 19, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lekesha Campbell, U.S. Department of 
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 11008, Potomac Center Plaza 
(PCP), Washington, DC 20202-2800.
    If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 
telephone (TTY), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS), 
toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 22, 2014, President Obama signed into law WIOA (Pub. L. 
113-128), which replaces the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA). As 
under WIA, AEFLA is title II of WIOA (title II). WIOA supports 
innovative strategies to keep pace with changing economic conditions 
and seeks to improve coordination across the primary Federal programs 
that support employment services, workforce development, adult 
education, and vocational rehabilitation activities. These final 
regulations further the Department of Education's (Department or ED) 
implementation of new provisions in AEFLA. Through these regulations, 
we explain the programs and activities authorized under AEFLA and 
assist State and local grantees in their implementation efforts.
    We have limited the regulations to only those that we believe are 
absolutely necessary to clarify and reiterate key statutory provisions 
of WIOA, as well as to respond to public comments. In the regulations, 
we incorporate the relevant requirements from AEFLA to provide context 
and for reader convenience.
    Summary of the Major Provisions of This Regulatory Action:
    Through these final regulations the Secretary:
    1. Removes specific parts of title 34 that are no longer in effect.
    2. Updates and revises existing AEFLA regulations regarding the 
suitability of tests for use in the National Reporting System for Adult 
Education (NRS) to reflect new provisions of WIOA. The regulations also 
include procedures that States and local eligible providers must follow 
when using suitable tests for NRS reporting. The changes conform to 
statutory language in WIOA and clarify existing requirements.
    3. Restates the purpose of AEFLA and the programs authorized by the 
Act, as well as clarifies the related Education Department General 
Administration Regulations (EDGAR) and definitions that apply to the 
program.
    4. Describes the process and requirements for States to award 
grants or contracts to eligible providers and the activities that may 
be charged to local administrative costs. These regulations implement 
new requirements established by WIOA, including the requirement that 
local workforce development boards (Local WDBs) review applications for 
funds prepared by applicants for AEFLA funding, the requirement that 
entities have ``demonstrated effectiveness'' to be eligible providers, 
and the requirement that local administrative funds be used to promote 
the alignment of an eligible provider's activities with the local 
workforce development plan established under title I of WIOA.
    5. Reiterates what constitutes an adult education and literacy 
activity or program and clarifies how funds may be used for activities 
that are newly authorized by WIOA.
    6. Describes how AEFLA funds may be used to support programs for 
corrections education and the education of other institutionalized 
individuals, including new activities authorized by WIOA.
    7. Clarifies the use of funds for new and expanded activities under 
the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program.

Public Comment

    On April 16, 2015, the Secretary published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM or proposed regulations) for these programs in the 
Federal Register (80 FR 20968), available at https://federalregister.gov/a/2015-05540. In response to our invitation in the 
NPRM, nearly 300 parties submitted comments on the proposed 
regulations. In these final regulations we discuss amendments and new 
regulations in the order in which their parts appear in the CFR. We 
then set out our analysis by subpart and section. For each part, we 
provide a summary of the changes we proposed, a summary of the 
differences between the proposed regulations and these final 
regulations, and a detailed discussion of the public comments we 
received on the proposed regulations. We then discuss the regulations 
that we are removing. Generally, we do not address technical and other 
minor changes.
    We received a number of comments expressing general support for the 
proposed regulations. We thank the commenters for their support. We do 
not discuss comments that were beyond the scope of the changes we 
proposed in the NPRM.

34 CFR Part 462--Measuring Educational Gain in the National Reporting 
System for Adult Education

Summary of Changes

    In the preamble of the NPRM, we discussed on pages 20969 through 
20971 the major changes proposed to part 462. These regulations are 
authorized under section 212 of WIOA, which makes adult education and 
literacy programs and activities subject to the performance 
accountability requirements of section 116 of WIOA. Through the 
proposed regulations, we sought to further formalize the process for 
determining the suitability of tests for use in the NRS. By creating a 
uniform review and approval process, the regulations would facilitate 
the submission process for test publishers and strengthen the integrity 
of the NRS as a critical tool for measuring State performance on 
accountability measures related to adult education and literacy 
activities under AEFLA, as required under section 116 of WIOA. The 
proposed process would also provide a means by which the Secretary 
would assess the continued validity of tests that have previously been 
determined suitable for use in the NRS.
    There are three differences between the NPRM and these final 
regulations. In the final regulations:

[[Page 55527]]

     We use the term ``English as a Second Language (ESL)'' 
when referring to educational functioning levels of English language 
learners to maintain consistency with NRS information collection and 
guidelines.
     We update Sec.  462.13(c) regarding the criteria that the 
Secretary uses to determine the suitability of tests for use in the 
NRS.
     We remove Sec.  462.43 regarding how States may report 
educational functioning level gains for students. Educational 
functioning level gain is included in the WIOA joint final rule at 20 
CFR 677.155(a)(1)(v) (and will be included in part 463, Subpart I) as 
one of five measures of documented progress that specify how to show a 
measurable skill gain for performance accountability under section 116 
of WIOA, and it applies across all of the WIOA core programs. As such, 
the Department of Education and the Department of Labor agree that any 
further explanation regarding educational functioning level gains is 
best provided in the joint information collection request (ICR) for the 
WIOA Common Performance Reporting (WIOA Joint Performance ICR) and 
joint guidance. The Departments reiterate that States will be required 
to report on the measurable skill gains performance indicator, which 
may include educational functioning level gain, as set forth in Sec.  
677.155(a)(1)(v), consistent with the WIOA Joint Performance ICR and as 
explained in guidance.
    Public Comment:

Subpart A--General

Sec.  462.3 What definitions apply?

    In the NPRM we proposed to revise Sec.  462.3 to align several 
terms with the language in WIOA. For example, to conform to section 203 
of AEFLA, we proposed replacing the term ``English as a second language 
(ESL)'' with the term ``English language acquisition (ELA).'' We also 
proposed to remove the reference to a physical copy of the NRS 
Guidelines to provide an easier and immediate public access online.
    Comments: Numerous commenters supported changing the term from ESL 
to ELA, with some stating that it more accurately describes the intent 
of the programming and pathways. One commenter recommended substituting 
English Language Acquisition Program (ELAP) for the term ELA. Numerous 
commenters expressed concern about States using the term English 
Language Acquisition (ELA) to refer to English Language Learners or 
students in ESL because ``ELA'' is commonly understood to refer to 
English Language Arts in a number of educational contexts, including in 
college and career readiness standards. They indicated that it would 
cause unnecessary confusion. Numerous commenters recommended using the 
already-branded terms ESL or English for Speakers of Other Languages 
(ESOL).
    Discussion: We appreciate the support from some commenters for the 
change in terminology that we originally proposed. We also acknowledge 
the concerns raised by other commenters regarding confusion that might 
arise from the proposed change in terminology. We note that in revising 
the NRS information collection request, Implementation Guidelines: 
Measures and Methods for the National Reporting System for Adult 
Education (OMB Control Number: 1830-0027), we retained the term English 
as a Second Language (ESL) when specifically referring to the six 
educational functioning levels for English language learners. Since the 
changes we originally proposed in this rule related specifically to 
these six educational functioning levels used for NRS reporting and not 
to the actual services available to English language learners under the 
Act, we believe using the term English as a Second Language (ESL) 
results in greater clarity and consistency between this rule and the 
corresponding NRS information collection request.
    Change: We have replaced the term English language acquisition 
(ELA) with the term English as a Second Language (ESL) when referring 
to the educational functioning levels for English language learners, 
and we have made the appropriate conforming changes throughout part 
462.

Subpart B--What process does the Secretary use to review the 
suitability of tests for use in the NRS?

Sec.  462.10 How does the Secretary review tests?

    In proposed Sec.  462.10, the Department established two additional 
submission dates for the submission of tests in program years 2016 and 
2017. Currently, tests must be submitted by October 1 of each year. The 
two additional dates of April 1, 2017 and April 1, 2018 would provide 
more opportunities for the Secretary to review and approve assessments 
and will increase the availability of new assessments to eligible 
providers in the first two years of implementing the performance 
accountability requirements under section 116 of WIOA.
    Comments: Several commenters expressed support for the addition of 
two submission dates for test review, stating that this will allow test 
publishers time to develop quality assessments, and to submit new or 
revised assessments that align with the College and Career Readiness 
Standards for Adult Education and the final released versions of the 
educational functioning level descriptors. One commenter suggested two 
submission dates each year, beginning with April 1, 2017, and 
continuing until there are multiple tests approved. One commenter 
recommended that the Department offer more than two submission dates. 
They suggested that in 2016 and 2017, the Department consider allowing 
the publishers to submit applications when they are ready, rather than 
only on October 1 or April 1.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' support for our proposed two 
submission dates each year, as well as their suggestion to offer 
continuous or rolling submissions throughout the year based upon 
publishers' readiness to submit. Our past experience indicates that 
rolling assessment review opportunities do not yield an increase in the 
quantity or quality of tests suitable for use in the NRS. Based on our 
experiences to date, we believe that the two additional dates of April 
1, 2017 and April 1, 2018, in addition to October 1, 2016 and October 
1, 2017, offer increased flexibility as well as additional 
opportunities to submit new tests for review in the first two years of 
implementing the performance accountability requirements under section 
116 of WIOA. Beginning in program year 2018, we will return to one 
annual submission date on October 1.
    Change: None.

Sec.  462.13 What criteria and requirements does the Secretary use for 
determining the suitability of tests?

    We noted in the preamble of the NPRM that we proposed to update the 
reference to the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing to 
reflect the most current edition of these standards.
    Comments: One commenter requested that the regulations be updated 
to refer to the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing as 
being developed by American Educational Research Association (AERA), 
American Psychological Association (APA), and the National Council of 
Measurement in Education (NCME), as reflected in the 2014 edition.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestion that the 
regulations be updated to refer to the

[[Page 55528]]

2014 edition of the Standards for Educational and Psychological 
Testing, which was inadvertently omitted in the proposed rule text.
    Change: We have revised final Sec.  462.13 to reflect the new 
edition of the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing.

Subpart D--What requirements must States and eligible providers follow 
when measuring educational gain?

Sec.  462.40 Must a State have an assessment policy?

    In Sec.  462.40, we proposed adding one additional element to the 
information a State must include in its State assessment policy by 
requiring that the State specify a target for the percentage of all 
pre-tested students who both meet that threshold of instruction and 
take a matched post-test. The post-test score is used to determine 
whether the student has made educational functioning level gain. Under 
WIA, States were directed to specify this target by the information 
collection request, Implementation Guidelines: Measures and Methods for 
the National Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB Control Number: 
1830-0027), but in the NPRM, we proposed to make this a regulatory 
requirement.
    Comments: Two commenters expressed concern that the requirement to 
set a post-testing target will negatively influence the integrity of 
the testing process, leading States to skirt the most effective 
administration of the tests or to manipulate reporting. One of these 
commenters recommended that uniform review and approval processes be 
used to ensure integrity of test and reporting results. The other 
commenter stated that post-testing targets place too much emphasis on 
the role post-testing plays in determining educational functioning 
level gains, to the exclusion of screening, support services, and 
instruction, and can lead to improper test administration to meet 
reporting demands.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenters that the integrity of the 
testing process and the quality of instructional services must not be 
negatively impacted by the regulatory requirement. We note that the 
proposed requirement for a State to specify in its assessment policy a 
target for the percentage of all pre-tested students who meet that 
threshold of instruction and take a matched post-test is a standard 
States are currently directed to specify by the information collection, 
Implementation Guidelines: Measures and Methods for the National 
Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB Control Number: 1830-0027). 
We are making this practice a regulatory requirement for consistency 
purposes. As stated in our proposed regulations, the purpose of 
requiring States to establish this standard is to promote the 
implementation of policies and practices by eligible providers that 
maximize the percentage of students who have a matched post-test 
completed in order to document educational functioning level gain and 
to encourage continuous improvement over time.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter recommended States be given a trial period 
to evaluate and determine reasonable performance and therefore 
acclimate to the process of setting post-test targets so they can 
negotiate more effectively with the Department on reasonable target 
levels.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's interest in determining 
how to most meaningfully implement the proposed requirement. We note 
that a post-test standard is a current element in the information 
collection, Implementation Guidelines: Measures and Methods for the 
National Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB Control Number: 
1830-0027). We are including this element in this section as a 
regulatory requirement, thus aligning it with the other elements 
required in the State assessment policy and establishing consistency 
between these final regulations and the information collection request. 
We further note that the post-testing standard required in this 
regulation is determined solely by the State and articulated in the 
State's assessment policy. It is not negotiated with the Department. 
The State, at its sole discretion, may evaluate the standard it has set 
and make any necessary revisions.
    Change: None.

Sec.  462.42 How are tests used to place students at an NRS educational 
functioning level?

    Proposed Sec.  462.42 revised the authority citation to conform to 
WIOA.
    Comments: One commenter expressed concerns that the testing methods 
to determine educational functioning level will disadvantage 
participants because they may not be experienced with traditional 
testing, and because standardized testing has been recognized to skew 
toward particular ethnicities and higher socioeconomic groups.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concern that the testing 
methods to determine educational functioning levels may disadvantage 
participants who may not be experienced with standardized testing. We 
agree that poorly constructed tests can skew results for particular 
groups. We note that in Sec.  462.13, we have specified the criteria 
and requirements that the Secretary uses for determining the 
suitability of tests. These criteria require a regular evaluation of 
test items for fairness and bias, which includes the design, 
development, and delivery of tests for variability among intended test 
takers. We conclude that these criteria are sufficient to address the 
commenter's concerns.
    Change: None.

Sec.  462.43 How is educational gain measured for the purpose of the 
performance indicator in section 116(b)(2)(A)(i)(V) of the Act 
concerning the achievement of measurable skill gains?

    Proposed Sec.  462.43(a) confirmed that educational functioning 
level gain is measured by testing students in reading and mathematics. 
We also proposed adding Sec.  462.43(c) to allow States that offer 
adult high school programs, authorized by State law or regulations, to 
measure and report educational functioning level gain through the 
awarding of credits or Carnegie units. Additionally, as noted in Sec.  
462.41, we revised the title of this section to clarify that the 
measurement of educational gain as described in these regulations is 
for the purpose of applying the measurable skill gains performance 
indicator in section 116 of WIOA to programs and activities under 
AEFLA.
    Comments: Many commenters endorsed continued use of educational 
functioning levels (EFLs) through pre-/post-testing and also encouraged 
eventual refinement of EFLs or the development of other potential 
measures that can document participants' progress toward educational 
goals. Some commenters suggested that the final regulations support 
measures that demonstrate progression along a career pathway. Various 
commenters suggested that the final regulations provide specificity on 
how a number of alternative measures, such as transition to 
postsecondary education and training, attainment of a secondary 
credential, advancement in competency-based educational programs, and 
passing portions of high school equivalency exams or citizenship exams 
might count as educational functioning level gains for students. 
Commenters also inquired about how pre-/post-testing could be used to 
support students' progression along a career pathway. Some commenters 
supported our proposed inclusion of

[[Page 55529]]

Carnegie units or credits in States with adult high school programs 
while others questioned how the regulation might safeguard against 
States reporting educational functioning level gains for students based 
upon seat time rather than actual skills attainment.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concern for implementing 
the measurable skill gains performance indicator in a manner that 
supports students' progression along a career pathway and that does not 
only rely on testing. We agree that States need additional flexibility 
to support students' progression along career pathways responsive to 
industry needs and standards within local or regional economies and 
believe that flexibility is provided in Sec.  677.155(a)(1)(v) of the 
WIOA joint final rule. We note that educational functioning level gain 
for students is included in Sec.  677.155(a)(1)(v) as one of five 
measures of documented progress that specify how to show a measurable 
skill gain under section 116 of WIOA and that apply across all WIOA 
core programs. We also note that attainment of a secondary school 
diploma is another measure of documented progress in Sec.  
677.155(a)(1)(v) that States may use to demonstrate and report a 
measurable skill gain under section 116 of WIOA. Because these measures 
apply across core programs, the Departments have agreed that any 
further explanation regarding these measures, including educational 
functioning level gain, is best provided in the WIOA Joint Performance 
ICR and joint guidance. However, in response to commenters' 
suggestions, the Departments intend to include transition to 
postsecondary education and training in the WIOA Joint Performance ICR 
as an additional way for States to report an educational functioning 
level gain. The Departments reiterate that States will be required to 
report on the measurable skill gains indicator, which may include 
educational functioning level gain, as set forth in Sec.  
677.155(a)(1)(v), consistent with the WIOA Joint Performance ICR and as 
explained in guidance.
    Change: We remove and reserve Sec.  462.43.

34 CFR Part 463--Adult Education and Family Literacy Act

Summary of Changes

    In the preamble of the NPRM, we discussed on pages 20971 through 
20975 proposed new regulations to support State and local 
implementation of WIOA-related changes to the AEFLA program. We 
proposed regulations to reiterate the purpose of AEFLA and the programs 
authorized by the Act, as well as clarify the relationship of those 
programs and definitions to EDGAR. We also sought to describe the 
process and requirements for States to award grants or contracts to 
eligible providers and the activities that may be charged to local 
administrative costs. The proposed regulations included new 
requirements established by WIOA, such as: The requirement that Local 
WDBs review applications for funds prepared by applicants for AEFLA 
funding, the requirement that entities have ``demonstrated 
effectiveness'' to be eligible providers, and the requirement that 
local administrative funds be used to promote the alignment of an 
eligible provider's activities with the local workforce development 
plan established under title I of WIOA. The proposed regulations also 
sought to define what constitutes an adult education and literacy 
activity or program and clarify how funds may be used for activities 
that are newly authorized by WIOA. We also proposed to describe how 
AEFLA funds may be used to support programs for corrections education 
and the education of other institutionalized individuals, including new 
activities authorized by WIOA. Finally, we proposed regulations to 
clarify the use of funds for new and expanded activities under the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program.
    There are several important differences between the NPRM and these 
final regulations:
    We clarified in these final regulations that attainment of a 
secondary school equivalency credential is inherently a part of the 
purpose of AEFLA.
    We removed the limitation of the definition of ``concurrent 
enrollment'' to subpart F so that the definition now applies to all 
subparts in this Part 463. In the definition of ``reentry initiatives 
and post release services'' in Sec.  463.3, we changed the phrase 
``release from prison'' to ``release from a correctional institution.''
    We have revised Sec.  463.21 to give States more flexibility for 
organizing and overseeing a process for Local WDBs to review eligible 
providers' applications for alignment with the local workforce 
development plan and to make recommendations to the eligible agency to 
promote alignment with the local plan.
    We have revised Sec.  463.24 to clarify that an eligible provider 
that has not been previously funded under title II of WIOA may 
demonstrate effectiveness by providing performance data related to its 
record of improving the skills of eligible individuals, particularly 
eligible individuals who have low levels of literacy, in the content 
domains of reading, writing, mathematics, English language acquisition, 
and other subject areas relevant to the services contained in the 
State's application to award contracts or grants to eligible providers.
    We have revised Sec.  463.25 to clarify that the eligible agency 
may increase the amount that can be spent on local administration in 
cases where the cost limits are too restrictive to allow for specified 
activities.
    We have revised Sec.  463.32(a) to clarify that a State or eligible 
provider may use curriculum, lesson plans, or instructional materials 
to demonstrate that an English language acquisition program is 
implementing the State's content standards for adult education.
    We have revised Sec.  463.32(b) to more clearly state our intent 
for how eligible providers can demonstrate that an English language 
acquisition program is meeting the requirement of Sec.  463.31(b) by 
offering educational and career counseling services that enable English 
language learners to transition to further education or employment.
    We have revised Sec.  463.37(a)(1) to more clearly state how, 
within the overall scope of the program, each of the three required 
components of an integrated education and training program must be of 
sufficient intensity and quality, and based on the most rigorous 
research available.
    We have revised Sec.  463.73 to more clearly reflect the statutory 
requirement to use funds provided under section 243 in combination with 
integrated education and training activities as defined in subpart D as 
well as to better clarify options for meeting the requirement.
    Public Comment:
    Comments: One commenter expressed general support for the Act's 
potential for helping youth and adults prepare for meaningful 
employment in State, regional, and local economies. This commenter 
encouraged adult educators to consult with employers in the design of 
services.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter's suggestion. We have 
historically provided a range of technical assistance resources to 
encourage and support adult educators' engagement with employers to 
ensure that education services are relevant and responsive to local 
economic circumstances. We believe that the Act's support for career 
pathways development and new adult education and literacy activities 
such as workforce preparation activities and integrated education and 
training offer adult educators new opportunities to enhance and expand 
engagement efforts with

[[Page 55530]]

employers so that adult education services meet the needs of job 
seekers and employers.
    Change: None.

Subpart A--Adult Education General Provisions

463.1 What is the purpose of the Adult Education and Family Literacy 
Act?

    WIOA retains and expands the purposes of AEFLA. Under WIA, AEFLA 
aimed to help adults improve their educational and employment outcomes, 
become self-sufficient, and support the educational development of 
their children. Under WIOA, AEFLA's purposes have been expanded to 
include assisting adults to transition to postsecondary education and 
training, including through career pathway programs. Further, WIOA 
formalizes the role of adult education in assisting English language 
learners to acquire the skills needed to succeed in the 21st-century 
economy.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed support for the expanded 
purposes of AEFLA. Two commenters stated that in addition to the focus 
on workforce development, priority service should continue for 
individuals who are not in the workforce and need adult education and 
literacy services. Another commenter expressed concern over the 
statutory reference in the purpose section of AEFLA to ``transition to 
postsecondary education and training, including through career 
pathways,'' stating that the focus of adult education should remain on 
secondary credential attainment.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support for the expanded 
purposes of AEFLA. We agree with those commenters who stated that in 
addition to a focus on workforce development, services should continue 
to be made available for individuals who are not in the workforce and 
need adult education and literacy services. We believe that the Act, as 
well as these final regulations, provide States the flexibility to 
continue to provide adult education services to eligible individuals 
both in and out of the labor force. We do not agree, however, that the 
focus of adult education should remain solely on secondary school 
equivalency or secondary credential attainment. We believe that within 
the overall purposes set forth in the Act to strengthen the United 
States workforce development system through innovation in, and 
alignment and improvement of, employment, training, and education 
programs to promote individual and national economic growth, WIOA 
appropriately emphasizes transition to postsecondary education and 
training and career pathways. Moreover, the multiple and expanded 
purposes of adult education set forth in WIOA do not give us authority 
to limit the focus to secondary credential attainment.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Several commenters expressed concerns that while both the 
name and the purpose of the authorizing statute reference family 
literacy, the proposed regulations did not adequately convey the 
importance of eligible providers continuing to provide family literacy 
services. One commenter suggested that the Department add language to 
the proposed regulations to clarify the importance of family literacy 
services as an express purpose under AEFLA. Another commenter expressed 
concern that simply restating the statutory language in the proposed 
regulations might result in individuals not in the workforce being 
denied services and suggested that the Department revise the language 
of the proposed regulations.
    Several of these commenters suggested that the Department consider 
including family literacy-relevant performance measures in the 
performance accountability system. One commenter suggested that the 
Department allow State plans to include additional performance 
indicators relevant to improving family literacy. Another commenter 
suggested that the Department convene an expert group to assist with 
the development of such measures.
    Discussion: Proposed Sec.  463.1 restated section 202 from the Act. 
Section 202 states that the purpose of AEFLA is to create a partnership 
between the Federal government, States, and localities to assist 
eligible individuals in achieving four enumerated goals, the second of 
which is to assist adults who are parents or family members to obtain 
education skills that--
    (A) Are necessary to becoming full partners in the educational 
development of their children; and
    (B) Lead to sustainable improvements in the economic opportunities 
for their family.
    We believe this statutory language clearly and sufficiently 
establishes the continued importance of family literacy within the Act. 
Moreover, we do not believe we have the authority to emphasize any one 
of the four statutory purposes over others. We are aware of the concern 
over the continued ability to serve individuals not in the labor force. 
Again, as we noted above, we believe that the Act, as well as these 
final regulations, provide States the flexibility to continue to 
provide adult education services to eligible individuals both in and 
out of the labor force.
    In terms of commenters' requests that we add family literacy 
measures to the performance accountability system for WIOA, the Act 
specifies six primary indicators of performance and does not give the 
Department the authority to create additional indicators of 
performance. However, section 116(b)(2)(B) provides States with the 
flexibility to identify in the State plan additional performance 
accountability indicators. Additionally, based upon these comments we 
have decided to retain the optional family literacy reporting table 
within the NRS, thereby supporting States' flexibility to report these 
measures should they opt to use them. We note that this optional 
reporting table was created with input from adult education 
administrators and practitioners and is maintained through a process 
that includes consultation with a technical work group comprised of 
State directors of adult education.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that, in addition to the 
statutory reference to secondary diploma attainment, we should revise 
proposed Sec.  463.1(c) to expressly include attainment of high school 
equivalency.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestion and agree that 
acknowledging attainment of secondary school equivalency, in addition 
to secondary school diploma attainment, clarifies proposed Sec.  
463.1(c).
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.1(c) to include the attainment of 
the recognized equivalent of a secondary school diploma.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that proposed Sec.  463.1(d) 
might be strengthened by adding language from proposed Sec.  463.31 
concerning the definition of an English language acquisition program.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestions and agree 
that, in instances where immigrants need English language acquisition 
services, this suggestion might strengthen the regulations. However, we 
note that not all immigrants need English language acquisition services 
and that making this change could limit immigrants' access to other 
adult education and literacy activities. Additionally, we note that in 
proposing Sec.  463.1, we stated that our intent was to clarify the 
expanded purposes of AEFLA under WIOA. Our intent was not to expand on 
those purposes. We believe that Sec.  463.1(d) as proposed achieves the 
clarity that we sought and also maintains maximum State flexibility to 
address diverse

[[Page 55531]]

immigrants' needs for adult education and literacy activities.
    Change: None.

463.3 What definitions apply to the Adult Education and Family Literacy 
Act programs?

    Proposed Sec.  463.3 identified 31 terms used in WIOA that pertain 
to AEFLA. In some instances, the terms, as defined in titles I and II, 
apply across all six of the programs authorized or amended under WIOA, 
including the Adult, Dislocated Worker, and Youth programs (title I of 
WIOA); AEFLA (title II of WIOA); the Employment Service program under 
the Wagner-Peyser Act of 1933 (title III of WIOA); and the Vocational 
Rehabilitation program authorized under title I of the Rehabilitation 
Act of 1973 (title IV of WIOA) (together, ``core programs''). In other 
instances, the terms are specific to AEFLA, title II of WIOA. Proposed 
Sec.  463.3 is intended to assist AEFLA grantees by centralizing 
relevant definitions into one section. Proposed Sec.  463.3 also 
identifies terms found in EDGAR that apply to State grant programs and 
that are relevant to AEFLA. Seven additional terms used in WIOA are not 
explicitly defined elsewhere. We have listed and defined these terms 
under ``other definitions'' to clarify their meaning for purposes of 
the AEFLA program.

Concurrent Enrollment

    Comments: One commenter concurred with our proposed definition but 
noted that other sections of the proposed regulations referred to six, 
rather than four, core programs. This commenter asked that the proposed 
definition be revised to be consistent with other related regulations. 
Two commenters stated that co-enrollment should not be limited to the 
core programs and should include postsecondary education and training. 
Additionally, in a comment under Sec.  463.22 (see below) a commenter 
suggested that we remove the limitation of the definition to this 
subpart F only.
    Discussion: We appreciate the suggestion supporting consistency 
throughout the proposed regulations and agree that in the proposed 
definition of concurrent enrollment we should have referred to six, 
rather than four, core programs. We also note that when we originally 
proposed this definition we stated that it was for purposes of 
administration of the AEFLA program and that we acknowledged that in 
practice the term often had a wider meaning. We also originally 
proposed the definition specifically for purposes of this subpart F in 
which proposed Sec.  463.60(b) listed allowable educational programs 
for criminal offenders in correctional institutions and other 
institutionalized individuals.
    Through the definition of concurrent enrollment, we clarify that 
postsecondary education is not an allowable use of AEFLA funds under 
Sec.  463.60(b)(6). Finally, we agree with the commenter who suggested 
that we not limit the definition of concurrent enrollment only to this 
subpart F.
    Change: We have revised the definition of ``concurrent enrollment'' 
in Sec.  463.3 to correct the reference to core programs to six rather 
than four. We have also removed the limitation on this definition 
applying to only subpart F.

Reentry Initiatives and Post Release Services

    Comments: Regarding the definition of ``reentry initiatives and 
post release services,'' one commenter objected to the proposed 
definition's reference to release from prison. This commenter suggested 
that replacing prison with the term correctional institution as defined 
in WIOA would not unnecessarily limit reentry services.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's desire to maintain 
maximum flexibility in providing reentry services and agree that the 
final rule should not unnecessarily limit these services.
    Change: We have revised the definition of ``re-entry and post-
release services'' in Sec.  463.3 to apply to release from a 
correctional institution.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that the statutory definition of 
``basic skills deficient'' be expanded in final regulations to provide 
additional time for both adults who have not taken standardized tests 
and adults with undiagnosed learning disabilities.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concern for being able to 
provide optimal supports for adults who may be unfamiliar with 
standardized testing and adults with learning disabilities. We have 
reviewed the definitions of both ``individual with a barrier to 
employment'' in section 3(24) of the Act and ``individual with a 
disability'' in section 3(25) of the Act and conclude that they are 
adequate to include adults with learning disabilities and adults who 
may be unfamiliar with standardized testing. We also note that section 
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires that eligible providers 
provide appropriate test accommodations as needed.
    Change: None.

Subpart C--How does a state make an award to eligible providers?

Sec.  463.20 What is the process that the eligible agency must follow 
in awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers?

    Proposed Sec.  463.20 describes the process that an eligible agency 
must follow when awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers. 
WIOA retains the WIA requirement that an eligible agency award 
multiyear grants or contracts on a competitive basis to eligible 
providers for the purpose of developing, implementing, and improving 
adult education within the State or outlying area. WIOA also retains 
the WIA requirement that an eligible agency ensure that all eligible 
providers have direct and equitable access to apply and compete for 
grants and contracts under AEFLA. Title II of WIOA further requires an 
eligible agency to use the same grant or contract announcement and 
application processes for all eligible providers in the State or 
outlying area. Under WIA, when awarding grants under AEFLA, State 
eligible agencies were required to consider 12 factors. WIOA revises 
these 12 factors and adds one additional factor relating to the 
alignment between proposed activities and services and the strategy and 
goals of the local plan, and the activities and services of the one-
stop partners. Eligible agencies must also consider under WIOA the 
coordination of the local education program with available education, 
training, and other support services in the community.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.20, but noted that that the description of individuals in the 
community who are identified as most in need of adult education no 
longer contains a stipulation for determining an individual's need 
based on income. The commenter recommended that, since WIOA requires 
the alignment between proposed activities and services and the strategy 
and goals of the local plan, States be allowed flexibility to implement 
additional factors such as income when determining most in need.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concerns for meeting the 
education and employment needs of low-income individuals. While WIA 
explicitly required that, in awarding grants or contracts under title 
II, the eligible agency must consider the commitment of the eligible 
provider to serve individuals in the community who are most in need of 
literacy services, including individuals who are low income or have 
minimal literacy skills, WIOA does not explicitly contain

[[Page 55532]]

such a requirement for consideration. However, Sec.  463.20(d) does 
require that the eligible agency consider the degree to which the 
eligible provider would be responsive to serving individuals in the 
community who were identified in the local plan as most in need of 
adult education. The local plan must include an analysis of the 
education and skill levels of the workforce, including individuals with 
barriers to employment. Section 3 of the Act includes low-income 
individuals as one population in the definition of individuals with 
barriers to employment. We believe the requirement for an eligible 
agency to consider the extent to which an eligible provider is 
responsive to serving those individuals identified in the local plan as 
needing adult education, combined with local plan requirements to serve 
those with barriers to employment, will result in better access to 
education and training for all individuals with barriers to employment, 
including low-income individuals. Therefore, consistent with the needs 
identified in the approved Unified or Combined State Plan, we believe 
States have the flexibility to implement additional factors such as 
income when determining most in need. We remind States that choose to 
implement such additional factors of the requirement in section 223(c) 
of WIOA to identify to eligible providers that the rule or policy is 
being imposed by the State.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Another commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.20, which included a restatement of the 13 considerations that 
State eligible agencies must take into account in making awards to 
eligible providers. The commenter asked the Department to consider 
adding two additional considerations intended to support partnership 
development among core programs--one addressing co-enrollment and 
another addressing braided funding. Other commenters suggested that we 
add an additional consideration: Whether the eligible entity has a 
comprehensive plan to publicize the availability of adult education 
programming and the capacity to ensure ongoing communication, where 
appropriate, through partnerships or coordination with other entities, 
including public television stations. These same commenters suggested 
that we amend proposed Sec.  463.20(d)(10) to include public television 
stations.
    Discussion: We note that proposed Sec.  463.20 restated the 
statutory requirements regarding the process that the eligible agency 
must follow in awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers. 
While we appreciate the commenters' support for developing robust local 
partnerships to support successful WIOA implementation, we do not 
believe that we have the authority to add additional required 
considerations beyond the 13 specified in WIOA. We agree that the 
strategies suggested by commenters can support robust partnership 
development. We further note that Sec.  463.20 does not preclude 
eligible providers from engaging in these strategies. Co-enrollment and 
braided funding may be ways in which an eligible provider demonstrates 
that it meets the requirements of Sec.  463.20(d)(4) or Sec.  
463.20(d)(10). Similarly, engagement with public television stations 
may be one of the ways in which an eligible provider demonstrates to 
the eligible agency that it meets the requirements of Sec.  
463.20(d)(10).
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.21 What processes must be in place to determine the extent to 
which a local application for grants or contracts to provide adult 
education and literacy services is aligned with a local plan under 
section 108 of WIOA?

    WIOA promotes coordination between the Local WDBs and adult 
education providers by requiring in section 107(d)(11)(B)(i) that the 
local WDB review applications for AEFLA funds submitted to the eligible 
agency by eligible providers to determine whether the application is 
consistent with the local workforce plan, and to make recommendations 
to the eligible agency to promote alignment with the local workforce 
plan. Proposed Sec.  463.21 required an eligible agency to establish 
procedures for the Local Board review in its grant or contract 
application process and also established the type of documentation that 
must accompany the application. The proposed regulations also required 
the eligible agency to consider the results of the local WDB review in 
determining the extent to which the application addresses the 
requirements of the local plan developed in accordance with section 108 
of WIOA. The purpose of the proposed regulation is to establish uniform 
procedures within the State and outlying area for a local WDB to review 
an application and to ensure that the eligible agency considers the 
review in its award of grants and contracts for adult education and 
literacy activities.
    Comments: Multiple commenters stated that proposed Sec.  463.21 
supported improved alignment between local workforce development plans 
and adult education providers and expressed their support for this 
goal. Many of these commenters added that it was essential for the 
State to set consistent guidelines and uniform procedures. One of these 
commenters further suggested that the Department require States to (1) 
implement a standardized process for use statewide, (2) develop a 
standardized rubric for Local WDBs to use in implementing the process, 
and (3) develop the process in consultation with Local WDBs. Some of 
these commenters raised concerns about adequate time for the local WDB 
to conduct its review as outlined in proposed Sec.  463.21, and one 
commenter suggested that we expand the language in proposed Sec.  
463.21 to include a requirement for the Local WDBs to complete their 
reviews by a date specified by the eligible State agency.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' support for the goal of 
improved alignment between local workforce development plans and adult 
education service delivery. We agree that it is important that States 
set consistent guidelines and uniform procedures. We also acknowledge 
that there is diversity among States and local workforce development 
areas. As a result of this diversity, we believe there is a need to 
provide States with flexibility in meeting the statutory requirements 
for Local WDBs to review eligible providers' applications for 
consistency with the local workforce development plan and make 
recommendations to the eligible agency to promote alignment with the 
plan. We believe that adding the level of specificity suggested by 
commenters will limit States' flexibility in meeting the statutory 
requirements.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter stated that neither section 107 nor section 
232 of WIOA prescribed the time frame or the method for local WDB 
review or dictated the manner in which Local WDBs should make 
recommendations. The commenter maintained that, as proposed, Sec.  
463.21 would require an eligible provider to first submit its 
application to the local WDB. The commenter felt that this requirement 
was too restrictive and that States should be afforded the ability to 
develop operational processes to ensure alignment, consistent with 
sections 107 and 232 of WIOA.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter that, as proposed, Sec.  
463.21 presumed a more rigid sequence of steps for the submission of 
eligible providers' applications to Local WDBs that might not be 
optimal for all States.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.21(a) and (b) to allow States 
more flexibility

[[Page 55533]]

for organizing and overseeing a process for Local WDBs to review 
eligible providers' applications for alignment with the local workforce 
development plan and to make recommendations to the eligible agency to 
promote alignment with the local plan.
    Comments: Other commenters, while supportive of the goal of 
improved alignment, also expressed concern regarding whether the 
requirement for Local WDBs to review eligible providers' applications 
for alignment with the local workforce development plans might be 
realistically implemented in large urban areas with multiple eligible 
providers submitting applications to provide adult education and 
literacy activities. Some of these commenters proposed alternative 
means to achieve the desired alignment. For example, one commenter 
suggested alternative approaches such as, engaging all eligible 
providers within a local workforce development area in the creation of 
the local or regional workforce development plan, recruiting local WDB 
members to serve on adult education advisory councils, and specifying 
roles and responsibilities of required partners in local memoranda of 
understanding (MOUs). Another commenter suggested substituting the 
requirement for local WDB review of eligible providers' applications 
for documentation of the eligible provider's involvement in the 
development of the local workforce development plan.
    Discussion: We understand commenters' concern regarding 
implementing the new requirement for Local WDBs to review applications 
for title II funds submitted to eligible agencies by eligible 
providers. Final Sec.  463.20 provides an eligible agency with 
flexibility to implement this new requirement, consistent with section 
107(d)(11)(B)(i) of WIOA. The final regulations ensure all applications 
within a State are treated the same in the local WDB review process. 
The Act explicitly requires Local WDBs to review applications, and the 
Department is unable to include in the regulations any alternative 
review process that eliminates this requirement, such as those 
suggested by commenters.
    Change: None.
    Comments: A few commenters requested that we provide guidance on 
how to implement the requirements of proposed Sec.  463.21 in single 
State areas. Some commenters suggested that the Department would need 
to consider flexible options that respond to States where regional 
consortia or workforce advisory groups perform some of the duties of 
Local WDBs. Other commenters suggested that State workforce development 
boards should be required to review preliminary decisions by the 
eligible State agency before funds are awarded and that this could be 
accomplished by State workforce development board representation on 
grant review committees.
    We also received comments expressing concerns over the Local WDB's 
ability to avoid conflicts of interest and remain impartial in the 
conduct of the review of eligible providers' applications for alignment 
with local workforce development plans. To avoid such conflicts of 
interest at the local level, one commenter suggested that the final 
rule require that the State workforce board has a right to review 
eligible providers' applications prior to the State eligible agency 
issuing awards.
    Discussion: Final Sec.  463.21 recognizes the diversity among 
States, including single State areas, and provides flexibility in how a 
State establishes a process to determine the extent to which a local 
application for grants or contracts to provide adult education and 
literacy services is aligned with the local plan under section 108 of 
WIOA. WIOA does not, however, allow the Department to consider options 
that would have the effect of replacing local WDB review and 
recommendations with those from an alternate body or group. 
Additionally, AEFLA authorizes the eligible agency to award grants and 
contracts for adult education and literacy activities. In doing so, the 
eligible agency must consider a set of factors in the award of those 
grants or contracts, which include the degree to which the eligible 
provider would be responsive to the regional needs identified in the 
local plan. Section 463.21 describes how the eligible agency 
establishes a process for local WDB review in the grant or contract 
competition and considers the results of the review in its funding 
decisions. An additional requirement for the local WDB or State 
Workforce Development Board to review preliminary funding decisions by 
the eligible agency would diminish the authority of the eligible agency 
provided in statute. An eligible agency, however, has the flexibility 
to determine its application review process consistent with title II 
requirements, including determining how grant or contract applications 
are reviewed and providing safeguard measures to facilitate objective 
review and avoid conflicts of interest.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Two commenters expressed a concern that proposed Sec.  
463.21 would enable Local WDBs to determine which eligible providers 
would have the opportunity to submit applications to the State eligible 
agency or which applications the State eligible agency could fund.
    Some commenters expressed concerns regarding expertise of the local 
WDB in adult education, and questioned its ability to adequately review 
eligible providers' applications. One of these commenters suggested 
that independent adult education experts be invited to assist Local 
WDBs in conducting their reviews of eligible providers' applications. 
The commenter suggested that we expand the proposed rule text to 
explicitly encourage this practice.
    Discussion: We agree with commenters' concerns that local WDB 
reviews do not diminish the authority provided in AEFLA of the eligible 
agency to make funding determinations based on a variety of 
requirements contained in Sec.  463.20. The purpose of the local WDB 
review of an eligible provider application is to determine whether such 
plans are consistent with the local plan under section 108 of WIOA and 
to make recommendations to the eligible agency to promote alignment 
with such a plan. The eligible agency must consider the results of the 
review along with other statutory considerations in making funding 
decisions. The Department believes that only appointed local WDB 
members who do not have a conflict of interest as defined in section 
107(h) of WIOA are allowed to participate in the review of an eligible 
provider application. The rule does not preclude the local WDB from 
offering training to board members by adult education experts prior to 
participating in the review process and, therefore, a change to the 
regulations is not necessary.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.22 What must be included in the eligible provider's 
application for a grant or contract?

    Proposed Sec.  463.22 identifies what an eligible provider must 
include in its application for a grant or contract under AEFLA. An 
eligible provider must provide the information and assurances required 
by the eligible agency. The eligible provider must also describe how it 
will: Spend funds consistent with the requirements of AEFLA; provide 
services in alignment with the local plan required under section 108 of 
WIOA, including promotion of concurrent enrollment with title I 
services; fulfill one-stop partner responsibilities; meet adjusted 
levels of performance based on the newly-established primary indicators 
of

[[Page 55534]]

performance in section 116(b)(2)(A)(i) of WIOA and collect data to 
report on performance indicators; and provide services to meet the 
needs of eligible individuals. Eligible providers must also describe 
any cooperative arrangements that they have with other entities for the 
delivery of adult education and literacy activities and provide other 
information that addresses the 13 considerations outlined in Sec.  
463.20.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.22(a)(3), one commenter 
suggested that the description of providing services in alignment with 
local workforce plans, including promotion of concurrent enrollment 
with title I services should include specific reference to concurrent 
or co-enrollment, as we defined these terms in proposed Sec.  463.3, 
that is concurrent or co-enrollment as enrollment in two or more WIOA 
core programs.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter that the definition of 
concurrent enrollment contained in Sec.  463.3 should also be applied 
to sections other than subpart F.
    Change: We have revised the proposed definition to remove the 
limitation that it applies only to this subpart F.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.22(a)(4), several commenters 
expressed concern about eligible providers' ability to meet this 
requirement before data on the new WIOA performance indicators becomes 
available. One commenter suggested that the Department amend proposed 
Sec.  463.22(a)(4) to enable eligible providers to describe how they 
will meet additional performance indicators related to self-sufficiency 
and family literacy.
    Discussion: We understand the commenters' concerns about the 
availability of data for the primary indicators of performance. We 
recognize that data on all indicators will not be available until after 
eligible agencies are required to conduct competitions under subpart C. 
However, the requirement in Sec.  463.22(a)(4) is to provide a 
description of how the eligible provider will meet the State's adjusted 
levels of performance rather than to demonstrate that it has met the 
State's adjusted levels of performance. Additionally, the Department 
issued Program Memorandum OCTAE 16-02, Establishing Expected Levels of 
Performance and Negotiating Adjusted Levels of Performance for Program 
Year (PY) 2016-17 and 2017-18. In this guidance we note that the 
Department is using transition authority under section 503(a) of WIOA 
to establish a phased-in approach of negotiating and setting levels of 
performance for the first two program years of the initial four-year 
Unified or Combined State Plan. For PYs 2016-17 and 2017-18, the 
Department will negotiate adjusted levels of performance with States 
for one indicator for the AEFLA program--the measurable skill gain 
indicator. The Department will collect baseline data for the other five 
primary performance indicators during this period.
    We are unable to add language to Sec.  463.22(a)(4) that would 
establish additional indicators of performance because the primary 
indicators of performance are specified in section 116 of WIOA. A State 
may identify additional indicators of performance in the State plan, 
but these additional indicators are not subject to negotiation with the 
Department. In cases where a State has identified additional indicators 
of performance in its State plan, section 232 of the Act provides the 
State with the flexibility to include in its application for funds a 
requirement for eligible providers to describe how they will meet such 
additional performance indicators.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.22(a)(5)(i), one commenter 
questioned what we meant by providing access through the one-stop 
delivery system to adult education and literacy activities. This 
commenter stated that in areas where adult education providers and one-
stop operators had minimal interactions under WIA, such providers will 
need time to establish the kind of working relationships now explicitly 
required under WIOA. The commenter expressed the hope that the 
Department would acknowledge that such a transformation would require a 
period of transition.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concerns about the time 
needed to transform relationships among partner programs in the one-
stop delivery system and recognize the need for technical assistance 
and guidance as the workforce system implements expanded partnership 
requirements. The Department is committed to providing on-going 
assistance to States in achieving a vision of increased access to high-
quality services through the one-stop delivery system.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.22(a)(5)(ii), one commenter 
suggested that the regulations provide best practice strategies for 
title II eligible providers to use a portion of funds under WIOA to 
maintain the one-stop delivery system. This commenter suggested that 
examples of these best practices might include co-location, co-
enrollment, and delivery of digital literacy and distance learning 
programming for one-stop customers.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter's suggestion that best 
practice strategies would be helpful to States as they implement one-
stop provisions. However, we disagree that these regulations are the 
appropriate place for providing such best practices. The Department 
will assist in making best practices and examples available through 
technical assistance.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Three commenters suggested that we redesignate Sec.  
463.22(a)(10) to Sec.  463.22(a)(11) and insert the following for Sec.  
463.22(a)(10): how the eligible agency, either directly or in 
partnership or coordination with other agencies, institutions, or 
organizations, will provide for the delivery of adult education and 
literacy services across multiple platforms, such as television, 
internet based, and place based.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's suggestions to emphasize 
partnerships that provide adult education and literacy services across 
multiple platforms. We agree that such partnerships have the potential 
of enhancing access to these services and remain committed to improving 
access to services. However, based on the requirements of section 232 
of WIOA, Sec.  463.22 contains items that are statutorily required to 
be in an eligible provider's application for a grant or contract, 
including information that the eligible agency may require. The 
Department cannot require additional items.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.23 Who is eligible to apply for a grant or contract for adult 
education and literacy activities?

    Proposed Sec.  463.23 lists the organizations that are eligible to 
apply for a grant or contract to provide adult education and literacy 
activities, as well as the 10 organization types that may be eligible 
providers, two of which are a consortium or coalition of organization 
types and a partnership between an employer and eligible entities. 
Proposed Sec.  463.24 further permits other organization types, even if 
not specifically listed, to apply as eligible providers if they meet 
the demonstrated effectiveness requirement.
    Comments: A few commenters suggested that we expand the list of 
potential eligible providers in proposed Sec.  463.23. Some of these 
commenters stated that public television stations have demonstrated a 
commitment and ability to provide necessary and relevant

[[Page 55535]]

adult education services and suggested that we expand the list in 
proposed Sec.  463.23 to include public television stations as 
potential eligible providers of adult education and literacy services. 
One commenter suggested that we might better assist States' efforts to 
develop employer-driven workforce development systems by expanding the 
list in proposed Sec.  463.23 to include employers. Another commenter 
suggested that we add non-profit labor unions to the list as well.
    Discussion: We appreciate the suggestions to add to the list of 
potential eligible providers. We believe the statutory language is 
flexible enough to cover other non-profit organizations and entities, 
such as those identified by commenters, and that it is therefore 
unnecessary to identify additional, specific organizations or entities.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.24 How must an eligible provider establish that it has 
demonstrated effectiveness?

    To ensure that programs are of high quality, proposed Sec.  463.24 
would further clarify how an organization previously funded under title 
II of WIOA, as well as an organization not previously funded under 
title II of WIOA, could demonstrate effectiveness by providing 
performance data in its application. This clarification would help 
States conduct fair and equitable grant competitions for all eligible 
providers.
    Comments: Multiple commenters expressed support for the requirement 
to use past performance data to establish demonstrated effectiveness. 
Several of these commenters also suggested that we add a requirement to 
specify past performance data with particular subpopulations, for 
example learning disabled adults or English language learners. One of 
these commenters suggested that the final regulations allow for special 
consideration of eligible providers that have worked with adults having 
the lowest levels of educational attainment. A few commenters suggested 
that the Department issue non-regulatory guidance to assist States and 
potential eligible providers in better understanding what specific 
types of data may be used to meet the requirements in proposed Sec.  
463.24.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support for using past 
performance data to establish demonstrated effectiveness. We note that 
in the NPRM, we specified data on past performance in improving the 
skills of eligible individuals, as defined in section 203(4) of WIOA, 
which includes individuals who are basic skills deficient, individuals 
who do not have a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent, and English language learners. We also included the 
requirement to pay particular attention to past effectiveness in 
serving eligible individuals who have low levels of literacy. We also 
note that the final rule does not preclude a State from also 
considering other subpopulations that may have been identified in the 
State's unified or combined plan. We believe that any further 
delimitation of the types of individuals served in the past might limit 
States' flexibility to respond to emerging needs within a State, 
regional or local economy. Additionally, creating special consideration 
for certain eligible providers would violate the requirement in the Act 
that eligible providers have direct and equitable access to apply for 
funds. As in the past, the Department expects to provide training and 
technical assistance to eligible agencies.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Many commenters supportive of proposed Sec.  463.24 were 
also concerned about the lack of past performance data on WIOA 
performance accountability indicators during the initial years of WIOA 
implementation. These commenters suggested that we revise Sec.  463.24 
to enable eligible providers to establish that they have demonstrated 
effectiveness using applicable performance measures from the most 
recent reporting period.
    Discussion: We recognize concerns about the availability of 
performance data under WIOA in the initial years of WIOA implementation 
and acknowledge that full performance data on WIOA primary indicators 
of performance may not be available when eligible providers are making 
initial applications for funding. However, we believe that Sec.  463.24 
provides an alternative for applicants that may not have WIOA primary 
indicators of performance data available. The regulations allow any 
eligible provider that has never been funded under title II of WIOA, 
which would include all eligible providers during the initial years of 
WIOA, to provide performance data to demonstrate its effectiveness in 
serving basic skills deficient eligible individuals, including data 
demonstrating a record of success on outcomes related to improving the 
skills of eligible individuals, particularly eligible individuals who 
have low levels of literacy, in the content domains of reading, 
writing, mathematics, English language acquisition, and other subject 
areas relevant to the services contained in the State's application for 
funds.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.24 to clarify that an eligible 
provider that has not been previously funded under title II of WIOA may 
demonstrate effectiveness by providing performance data related to its 
record of improving the skills of eligible individuals, particularly 
eligible individuals who have low levels of literacy, in the content 
domains of reading, writing, mathematics, English language acquisition, 
and other subject areas relevant to the services contained in the 
State's application for funds.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that we revise proposed Sec.  
463.24 to require three years of past performance data and that we 
include past data on student persistence as well. The commenter 
suggested that we consider using an eligible provider's post-test rate 
as an indicator of student persistence. Another commenter supportive of 
eligible providers using past performance data to establish that they 
have demonstrated effectiveness suggested that we also include a 
requirement to provide data on co-enrollment in other core programs as 
well as postsecondary career and technical education.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' recommendations to 
include additional requirements in Sec.  463.24 to be used in 
determining demonstrated effectiveness. However, we believe the 
proposed regulation provides reliable data on participant outcomes that 
are reflective of program effectiveness. The requirement to provide 
three years of data and inclusion of additional factors would limit 
flexibility for States and eligible providers.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that we expand proposed Sec.  
463.24 to include Sec.  463.24(d), which would state that the title II 
eligible State agency is responsible for defining how both current and 
new applicants are evaluated in the grant competitions when determining 
demonstrated effectiveness.
    Discussion: We agree with comments that recognize that the eligible 
agency for title II is responsible for determining if an applicant is 
of demonstrated effectiveness. Section 463.20 makes clear that the 
eligible agency is responsible for awarding grants and contracts to 
eligible providers within the State or outlying area to provide adult 
education and literacy activities and the processes it must follow in 
doing so. We believe the rule is clear and that no further 
clarification is necessary.
    Change: None.

[[Page 55536]]

    Comments: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the 
requirement in proposed Sec.  463.24 for eligible providers to 
establish that they have demonstrated effectiveness based upon past 
performance data. These commenters felt that this requirement limited 
potential eligible providers to organizations with past experience 
providing adult education and literacy services. These commenters felt 
that proposed Sec.  463.24 did not provide eligible providers the 
opportunity to demonstrate capacity for effectiveness.
    One of these commenters stated that proposed Sec.  463.24 limited a 
State's ability to cultivate or develop new eligible providers of adult 
education and literacy services. According to this commenter, the 
requirement in proposed Sec.  463.24 that an eligible provider 
establish that it has demonstrated effectiveness based upon its past 
performance data did not allow for States to consider new providers 
with qualified staff but no past performance data. The commenter 
suggested that there may be circumstances in which States may want the 
flexibility to consider the past performance data of individual members 
of an eligible provider's proposed staff rather than the organization 
as a whole.
    Another commenter stated employers, in particular, as potential 
eligible providers might have a difficult time meeting the past 
performance data requirements set forth in proposed Sec.  463.24 and 
suggested we consider the postsecondary education practice of 
establishing demonstrated capacity to provide effective education and 
occupational training services.
    One commenter suggested that we revise proposed Sec.  463.24 to 
allow flexibility for equivalent past performance data with similar 
subpopulations and institute a provisional year for funding eligible 
providers able to present adequate equivalent past performance data 
until more relevant past performance data on actual adult education and 
literacy services with particular subpopulations becomes available.
    Discussion: We agree with commenters who expressed concern that the 
requirement to demonstrate past effectiveness should not limit 
qualified eligible providers from competing for grants and contracts to 
provide adult education and literacy services. The regulation 
establishes uniformity for how past effectiveness is determined so that 
all eligible providers are treated fairly in the grant competition. 
Section 463.24 provides an opportunity for an eligible provider who 
does not have performance data as defined in the Act to demonstrate 
past effectiveness by providing data that demonstrates it has been 
previously effective in serving basic skills deficient eligible 
individuals. This data may demonstrate past effectiveness in improving 
reading, writing, mathematics, English language acquisition and other 
subject areas relevant to services contained in the State's application 
for funds. We believe this provides flexibility for how an applicant 
may meet the statutory requirement for having demonstrated 
effectiveness. In regard to recommendations made to require 
demonstrated effectiveness related to specific subpopulations, we 
believe the provision in Sec.  463.24 for an application to demonstrate 
effectiveness in subject areas relevant to the State's application 
allows the State the flexibility to garner such information, as 
appropriate. We are not able to substitute ``establishing demonstrated 
capacity to provide effective educational and occupational training 
services'' or to substitute past effectiveness of staff since such a 
change would not meet the Act's requirement for demonstrated 
effectiveness. Additionally, we do not believe that instituting a 
provisional year for eligible providers to gather data meets the Act's 
requirement for demonstrated effectiveness based upon past performance.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter questioned the clarity of proposed Sec.  
463.24 and suggested that we make clear that proposed Sec.  463.24(b) 
and (c) are intended to specify means by which eligible providers might 
meet the requirements in Sec.  463.24(a), and are not additional data 
submission requirements.
    Discussion: We agree that Sec.  463.24(b) and (c) are not intended 
to result in additional data submission requirements, but rather that 
the eligible agency must make a means available in the application 
process for eligible providers to present such data in the application 
for a grant or contract.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.24 to more clearly indicate that 
proposed Sec.  463.24(b) and (c) are two ways in which eligible 
providers might meet the requirements in Sec.  463.24(a).

Sec.  463.25 What are the requirements related to local administrative 
cost limits?

    Comments: None.
    Discussion: As part of the formal clearance process, we identified 
a need to clarify Sec.  463.25 to better align with the final joint 
regulations.
    Change: We revised Sec.  463.25 to clarify that the eligible agency 
may increase the amount that can be spent on local administration in 
cases where the cost limits are too restrictive to allow for specified 
activities.

Sec.  463.26 What activities are considered local administrative costs?

    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.26. The remainder of the comments that we received regarding 
proposed Sec.  463.26 focused specifically on Sec.  463.26(e). While 
commenters supported the use of administrative rather than program 
funds, these commenters also expressed concern regarding the adequacy 
of the available local administrative funds to cover AEFLA program 
administration costs and the provisions of proposed Sec.  463.26(e)--
i.e., carrying out the one-stop partner responsibilities described in 
the proposed joint regulations about one-stop partner responsibilities 
including contributing to the infrastructure costs of the one-stop 
delivery system. Some commenters suggested limiting the amount of local 
administrative funds that could be used for carrying out the partner 
responsibilities described in Sec.  678.420 including contributing to 
the infrastructure costs of the one-stop delivery system to not more 
than 1.5 percent of an eligible provider's total AEFLA funding. One 
commenter suggested that the cap on administrative funds be raised in 
order to meet the requirements of proposed Sec.  463.26(e). Another 
commenter suggested that additional guidance on contributions to the 
infrastructure costs of the one-stop delivery system was needed.
    Discussion: We acknowledge the concern expressed by some commenters 
regarding the adequacy of funds available to cover local administrative 
costs, particularly as it relates to carrying out one-stop partner 
responsibilities. The proposed joint regulation describing the local 
funding mechanism for one-stop infrastructure costs reiterates that the 
amount of local administrative funds that may be used for one-stop 
infrastructure costs must be based on proportionate use of the one-stop 
delivery system and relative benefit received. Additionally, as stated 
in Sec.  463.25, in cases where the eligible provider believes the 5 
percent limitation on administrative costs is too restrictive to allow 
for administrative activities, including the partner responsibilities 
to support the one-stop delivery system, the eligible provider may 
negotiate with the eligible agency to determine an adequate level of 
funds

[[Page 55537]]

to support non-instructional activities. We conclude, therefore, that 
Sec.  463.25 gives eligible providers adequate flexibility to address 
the commenters' concerns.
    We appreciate the commenter's request for guidance on contributions 
to the infrastructure costs of the one-stop delivery system. We are 
working with our partners at the U.S. Department of Labor to develop 
joint guidance and technical assistance to states on the implementation 
of the infrastructure cost provisions.
    Change: None.

Subpart D--What are adult education and literacy activities?

Sec.  463.31 What is an English language acquisition program?

    Proposed Sec.  463.31 restates the statutory requirement in section 
203(6) of WIOA that an English language acquisition program under the 
Act be designed to help English language learners achieve competence in 
reading, writing, speaking, and comprehension of the English language. 
It also clarifies a new requirement under WIOA that the program must 
lead to the attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent, and transition to postsecondary education or training, or 
lead to employment.
    Comments: Multiple commenters expressed support for the statutory 
requirement (restated in proposed Sec.  463.31(b)) that an English 
language acquisition program must lead to attainment of a secondary 
school diploma or its recognized equivalent and transition to 
postsecondary education and training, or employment. These commenters 
stated that this requirement would support successful implementation of 
career pathways programs. Other commenters stated that this new 
requirement seemed to contradict the retention of family literacy 
activities as an express purpose under the Act. These commenters stated 
that eligible providers funded under the Act provide English language 
acquisition services to English language learners whose primary reason 
for participating is to support the educational development of their 
children, and who may not have immediate goals related to employment or 
postsecondary education. Commenters suggested that we revise proposed 
Sec.  463.31(b) such that the program of instruction must lead to 
documented improvement in literacy levels for the purposes of family 
literacy, or the attainment of a secondary school diploma or its 
recognized equivalent and transition to postsecondary education or 
training, or lead to employment.
    Discussion: We appreciate the support of commenters who stated that 
the new statutory requirement for an English language acquisition 
program to lead to attainment of a secondary school diploma or its 
recognized equivalent and transition to postsecondary education and 
training, or employment, supports the successful implementation of 
career pathways programs. We do not agree that this new requirement 
contradicts the retention of family literacy as an adult education and 
literacy activity under the Act. We acknowledge that students 
participate in adult education and literacy activities--including 
family literacy and English language acquisition--for a variety of 
reasons, not all of which are related to credential attainment, a 
transition to postsecondary education, or employment. However, we do 
not believe that the statutory requirement that the English language 
acquisition program must lead to attainment of a secondary school 
diploma or its recognized equivalent, transition to postsecondary 
education and training, or employment, precludes serving eligible 
individuals whose primary motivation for participating in the program 
is to support the educational development of their children. Moreover, 
Sec.  463.1(b) clarifies the appropriateness of serving such eligible 
individuals. We believe that it is clear that English language 
acquisition programs should not discourage or exclude eligible 
individuals from participation, regardless of whether they are seeking 
a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent, or transition 
to postsecondary education or training or employment. We do not believe 
that we have the authority to expand the statutory requirement by 
adding a family literacy-specific requirement for English language 
acquisition programs to the final regulations. We also note that 
through the measurable skill gains performance indicator, documented 
improvements in literacy levels are already inherently a part of all 
adult education and literacy activities reported in the NRS.
    Change: None.
    Comments: A few commenters interpreted proposed Sec.  463.31(b) to 
mean that adult English language learners are expected to attain a 
secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent and transition to 
postsecondary education or training, or obtain employment within a 
program year. These commenters expressed concerns regarding the 
feasibility of such an expectation and noted that it was inconsistent 
with the Act's intent to serve eligible individuals who are basic 
skills deficient. One of these commenters expressed a concern that the 
perception that participants were meant to achieve the outcomes in 
proposed Sec.  463.31(b) within a program year might result in lower-
skilled individuals not being served. This commenter suggested that the 
Department provide guidance on how eligible providers can provide 
English language acquisition services to lower-skilled learners in 
accordance with the requirements of proposed Sec.  463.31.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns for continuing 
to serve all levels of English language learners, including lower-
skilled individuals and individuals who are basic skills deficient. We 
agree that continuing to serve these English language learners is 
consistent with the intent of the Act. We believe that this is 
reinforced in Sec.  463.20(d)(1) and (d)(2) through the considerations 
that eligible agencies must take into account in awarding grants and 
contracts to eligible providers. We also believe the flexibility that 
we provide English language acquisition programs in Sec.  463.32 to 
meet the requirement in Sec.  463.31(b) further supports eligible 
providers' ability to serve English language learners at all levels, 
including lower-skilled individuals and individuals who are basic 
skills deficient.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed concerns that some English 
language learners already have secondary (and, sometimes postsecondary) 
credentials from their native countries, while others are already 
employed upon enrollment in English language acquisition activities. 
Thus, such individuals may not be seeking English language acquisition 
services for reasons related to the attainment of a secondary school 
diploma (or its recognized equivalent), transition to postsecondary 
education and training, or employment, and, therefore, would not be 
eligible to participate in English language acquisition activities. 
These commenters suggested that we delete the phrase ``that leads to'' 
in Sec.  463.31(b) and substitute in its place the phrase ``that 
provides opportunities that include but are not limited to.'' Several 
of these commenters also requested that we provide additional guidance 
on how English language learners with secondary or postsecondary 
credentials from their own country might be served in an English 
language acquisition program under WIOA.

[[Page 55538]]

    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns for continuing 
to serve all levels of English language learners including 
professionals with degrees and credentials from their native countries. 
As stated earlier, we do not believe that the statutory requirement 
that the English language acquisition program must lead to attainment 
of a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent and 
transition to postsecondary education and training or employment 
precludes serving eligible individuals whose primary motivation for 
participating in the program is other than credential attainment or 
employment-related. Section 463.31(a) states clearly that an English 
language acquisition program is a program of instruction designed to 
help English language learners achieve competence in reading, writing, 
speaking, and comprehension of the English language. We do not believe 
that the program design requirements set forth in Sec.  463.31(b) are 
intended to limit services to particular types of students with 
particular goals or reasons for participating. We believe that any 
eligible individual who is an English language learner, as defined in 
section 203(7) of WIOA, can be served by an English language 
acquisition program and should not be dissuaded from participation in 
such programs. Additionally, eligible agencies and eligible providers 
may want to consider which adult education and literacy activities--
e.g., English language acquisition or integrated English literacy and 
civics education--best meet the needs of particular English language 
learners and, to the extent possible, match services available to 
students' needs.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for what the commenter 
described as the renaming of ESL (English as a Second Language) to ELA 
(English Language Acquisition). Multiple commenters expressed a concern 
over potential confusion that might arise in adopting the acronym ELA 
to represent English language acquisition. According to these 
commenters, the acronym ELA is already widely used in education to 
represent English language arts. Other commenters requested that we 
allow States to choose to continue using extant nomenclature for 
English language acquisition activities. According to this commenter, 
States should continue to be able to refer to these services as English 
as a Second Language (ESL) or English for Speakers of Other Languages 
(ESOL) consistent with past practice within a particular State.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concern for clarity and 
for proactively avoiding any possible confusion. We note that in 
proposed Sec.  463.31 we restated terminology that is in the Act. We 
did not propose using any particular acronym to describe services for 
English language learners. We agree that States should continue to be 
able to refer to services in a manner that is most appropriate to the 
particular circumstances within a State as long as the program or 
services meet the Act's definition of English language acquisition. We 
also note that we will continue to use language that is consistent with 
that used in the Act.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.32 How does a program that is intended to be an English 
language acquisition program meet the requirement that the program lead 
to attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent and transition to postsecondary education and training, or 
employment?

    Proposed Sec.  463.32 seeks to establish how an English language 
acquisition program must meet the new requirement that it lead to 
secondary school completion (attainment of a diploma or its recognized 
equivalent) and transition to postsecondary education and training or 
employment. Section 463.32 proposes that a program may satisfy the 
requirement by using rigorous and challenging adult education standards 
that meet the requirements in the Unified or Combined State Plan, 
providing supportive services that assist an individual to transition 
to postsecondary education or training, or designing the program to be 
a part of a career pathway. These programs or services have been 
identified as having a positive impact on the successful transition of 
adults to postsecondary education and training and employment. We 
invited public input on these proposals and requested suggestions 
regarding other methods that may be used to meet the requirement.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.32, stating that it allows title II providers the necessary 
flexibility to enable English language acquisition programs to be part 
of career pathways.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support and agree that 
Sec.  463.32 allows eligible providers flexibility to enable English 
language acquisition programs to be part of career pathways.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Several commenters stated that proposed Sec.  463.32(a) 
requires States to have an English Language Acquisition curriculum 
aligned with State adult education content standards. These commenters 
expressed concerns that States do not have such a curriculum, and that 
it might take considerable time and additional resources to develop 
such a curriculum. One of these commenters noted that some States are 
precluded by State law from creating such a curriculum. These 
commenters therefore recommended that this requirement be removed or 
modified. If we modified the requirement, many of these commenters 
suggested that we replace the word ``curriculum'' with the phrase 
``instruction and instructional materials.'' One commenter requested 
that we provide a timeline and expected degree of alignment (as a 
percentage) required between a curriculum and State adult education 
standards.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns regarding the 
creation of State curricula for English language acquisition programs. 
In proposing Sec.  463.32(a) we did not intend to require States to 
have an English language acquisition curriculum aligned to the State's 
content standards for adult education. It was our intention to propose 
that implementation of the State's content standards for adult 
education would be one option for meeting the requirement in Sec.  
463.31(b) and that one way to demonstrate implementation of the State's 
content standards for adult education was through use of an aligned 
curriculum. The proposed regulation does not require that such a 
curriculum be a State curriculum. Rather, it requires that a curriculum 
be aligned with the State adult education content standards. This would 
allow flexibility for a curriculum to be a local curriculum as long as 
it is aligned with the State content standards.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.32(a) to clarify that a State or 
local curriculum, lesson plans, or instructional materials, if aligned 
with State adult education content standards, may demonstrate that an 
English language acquisition program is implementing the State's 
content standards for adult education.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.32(b), numerous commenters 
expressed concerns regarding our use of the term ``supportive 
services.'' Commenters noted that supportive services are defined in 
section 3(59) of the Act. Commenters stated that few adult education 
programs had sufficient

[[Page 55539]]

funds to provide such services using title II funds. Commenters 
suggested that we revise proposed Sec.  463.32(b) to read as follows: 
Offer case management or educational and career counseling services 
that enable an eligible individual to access support in order to attain 
a secondary school diploma or its equivalent and transition to 
postsecondary education or employment. One commenter supported our use 
of the term supportive services as defined in WIOA stating that such 
services are often necessary to support students' attainment of a 
secondary credential and transition to postsecondary education and 
training.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' concerns regarding the use of 
limited title II funds to provide supportive services. In proposing 
Sec.  463.32(b), we did not intend that eligible providers use title II 
funds to provide supportive services as defined in section 3(59) of the 
Act for the purpose of demonstrating that an English language 
acquisition program leads to attainment of a secondary school diploma 
or its recognized equivalent and transition to postsecondary education 
and training or leads to employment. It was our intention that an 
English language acquisition program could meet the requirement of 
Sec.  463.31(b) by offering educational and career counseling services 
that enabled English language learners to transition to further 
education or employment. While we agree with the commenter who stated 
that supportive services are often necessary to support students' 
attainment of a secondary credential and transition to postsecondary 
education and training, we do not believe that supportive services, as 
that term is defined in section 3(59) of the Act, is an appropriate 
method to meet the intent of Sec.  463.32 or an appropriate use of 
AEFLA funds. We encourage eligible providers to collaborate with other 
required partners in the local workforce development area to provide 
participants access to appropriate supportive services.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.32(b) to more clearly state our 
intent for how eligible providers might demonstrate that an English 
language acquisition program is meeting the requirement of Sec.  
463.31(b) by offering educational and career counseling services that 
enable English language learners to transition to further education or 
employment.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.32(c), several commenters 
suggested that we provide non-regulatory guidance on how English 
language acquisition services for lower level students can be part of a 
career pathway. Multiple commenters suggested that we elaborate on the 
language in proposed Sec.  463.32(c) to read as follows: Be part of a 
career pathway that includes at lower levels career-infused provisions 
including infusing contextualizing instructions around high demand job 
clusters in the area, integrating work readiness skills and integrating 
career awareness and planning. One commenter suggested that we add a 
definition of career pathways that includes an emphasis on pathways to 
jobs with family-sustaining wages to the regulations. Other commenters 
requested that we clarify whether the term career pathways as applied 
under proposed Sec.  463.32(c) requires coordination with career 
pathways being implemented by Local WDBs pursuant to section 107(d)(5) 
of WIOA.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' desire to understand how 
English language acquisition programs serving lower-skilled English 
language learners can be part of a career pathway. We have historically 
provided substantive and on-going technical assistance on how adult 
education programs serving lower-skilled learners can be designed to 
provide on-ramps and bridges to career pathways. We urge commenters to 
consult these resources available through the Literacy Information and 
Communication System (LINCS) at http://lincs.ed.gov/. While we agree 
that rephrasing Sec.  463.32(c), as proposed by some commenters, is one 
way to describe how an English language acquisition program might be 
part of a career pathway, we do not agree that it is, or should be, the 
only way. We believe that the statutory definition of career pathways 
is adequate for English language acquisition programs that opt for 
Sec.  463.32(c) as a means to meet the requirement that the program 
lead to secondary school completion (attainment of a secondary school 
diploma or recognized equivalent) and transition to postsecondary 
education and training or lead to employment. We encourage English 
language acquisition programs using this option to coordinate, as 
appropriate, with career pathways being implemented by Local WDBs 
pursuant to Section 107(d)(5) of WIOA.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter stated that proposed Sec.  463.32(a), (b), 
and (c) are all necessary to support low-skilled adults' advancement 
along career pathways and suggested that we revise the regulation to 
make them all required. Several other commenters suggested that the 
regulation should be revised such that all programs are required to 
demonstrate that they meet proposed Sec.  463.32(a) as well as either 
proposed Sec.  463.32(b) or (c). Other commenters encouraged the 
Department to maintain maximum flexibility in how English language 
acquisition programs might meet the statutory requirement that the 
program leads to attainment of a secondary school diploma or equivalent 
and transition to postsecondary education and training or leads to 
employment.
    Discussion: We agree with commenters that proposed Sec.  463.32(a), 
(b), and (c) are all important to support low-skilled adults' 
advancement along career pathways. We also note that States' English 
language acquisition programs are diverse and have varying levels of 
programmatic capacity. While larger, better-resourced programs might be 
able to meet all three requirements proposed in Sec.  463.32, other 
programs that also contribute to adults' advancement along a career 
pathway might not be able to meet all three requirements. We therefore 
agree with those commenters that urged us to maintain maximum 
flexibility in how English language acquisition programs might meet 
AEFLA's requirement that the program leads to attainment of a secondary 
school diploma or its recognized equivalent and transition to 
postsecondary education and training or leads to employment.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that we add an additional 
provision to allow programs to meet the requirement by offering health, 
financial, and general literacy to promote self-sufficiency.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's response to our request 
for alternatives to the three options we proposed. We also agree with 
the commenter that the topics of health, financial, and general 
literacy to promote self-sufficiency are important for adult English 
language learners to master. However, we do not believe that mastery of 
these topics alone necessarily leads to attainment of a secondary 
school diploma or its recognized equivalent and transition to 
postsecondary education and training or leads to employment, as AEFLA 
requires.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Another commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.32 and suggested that we add the additional provision for how an 
English language acquisition program might meet the requirement that 
the program lead to the attainment of a secondary school diploma or its 
recognized

[[Page 55540]]

equivalent and transition to postsecondary education and training or 
lead to employment. This commenter suggested that all English language 
acquisition programs offered by postsecondary institutions that 
articulate to other postsecondary programs offered at the respective 
institutions be considered as meeting the requirement.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's response to our request 
for alternatives to the three options we proposed. We also note that 
intra-institutional articulation of courses is an important step in the 
development of career pathways. However, we further note that intra-
institutional articulation among courses does not necessarily always 
result in career pathways as defined in section 3(7) of the Act. 
Providing this option, then, could result in a particular subset of 
adult English language acquisition eligible providers being able to 
meet the requirement of Sec.  463.31(b) by using a lower standard than 
other types of eligible providers. We believe that English language 
acquisition programs offered by postsecondary institutions may meet the 
requirement in Sec.  463.31(b) using one or more of the three options 
we originally proposed.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.33 What are integrated English literacy and civics education 
services?

    WIOA includes among the authorized adult education and literacy 
activities a set of services that were previously authorized through 
annual appropriations acts, rather than through title II of WIA. These 
services are integrated English literacy and civics education services, 
which WIOA defines in section 203(12) as educational services that 
include both literacy and English language instruction integrated with 
civics education. Under WIOA, these services may be provided to adults 
who are English language learners, including those who are 
professionals with degrees or credentials in their native countries, 
and may include workforce training. Proposed Sec.  463.33 restates 
AEFLA's statutory language pertaining to integrated English literacy 
and civics education services.
    Comments: Several commenters expressed support for the definition 
of English literacy and civics education services. Many of these same 
commenters expressed confusion over the distinction between integrated 
English literacy and civics education as an adult education and 
literacy activity in Sec.  463.30 and the Integrated English Literacy 
and Civics Education program in subpart G of these regulations.
    Discussion: We thank commenters for sharing their concerns and 
appreciate the opportunity to clarify two distinct uses of the term 
integrated English literacy and civics education within our 
regulations. Integrated English literacy and civics education is used 
in two distinct ways in the Act.
    First, integrated English literacy and civics education may be 
provided by an eligible provider as a ``required local activity'' under 
section 231(b), in accordance with its grant or contract with the State 
to provide adult education and literacy activities. An eligible 
provider that provides integrated English literacy and civics education 
as a local activity under section 231(b) is not required to provide the 
services in combination with integrated education and training.
    Second, integrated English literacy and civics education must also 
be implemented as a program under section 243 of the Act with funds 
allocated as described in section 243. The integrated English literacy 
and civics education program under section 243 (see subpart G) carries 
additional requirements beyond those that an eligible provider must 
meet in implementing integrated English literacy and civics education 
as a local activity under section 231(b).
    Services provided through section 243 (see subpart G) must include 
education services that enable adult English language learners to 
achieve competency in the English language and to acquire the basic and 
more advanced skills needed to function effectively as parents, 
workers, and citizens in the United States. It must include instruction 
in literacy and English language acquisition and instruction on the 
rights and responsibilities of citizenship and civic participation, and 
may include workforce training. Additionally, the section 243 
integrated English literacy and civics education program must be 
provided in combination with integrated education and training 
activities.
    As part of the integrated English literacy and civics education 
program requirements, each program that receives funding under section 
243 must be designed to (1) prepare adults who are English language 
learners for, and place such adults in, unsubsidized employment in in-
demand industries and occupations that lead to economic self-
sufficiency; and (2) integrate with the local workforce development 
system and its functions to carry out the activities of the program.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.34 What are workforce preparation activities?

    Proposed Sec.  463.34 restated statutory language in WIOA that 
establishes workforce preparation activities as activities, programs, 
or services that are designed to help an individual acquire a 
combination of basic academic skills, critical thinking, digital 
literacy, and self-management skills. While adult education and 
literacy instruction has traditionally supported the development of 
basic academic and critical thinking skills, the addition of workforce 
preparation activities under WIOA will now also enable eligible 
providers to support the development of self-management skills and 
digital literacy. WIOA further states that workforce preparation 
includes developing competencies in using resources and information, 
working with others, understanding systems, and obtaining skills 
necessary to successfully transition to and complete postsecondary 
education, training, and employment. These competencies are commonly 
incorporated into definitions of employability skills. Proposed Sec.  
463.34 added employability skills to the list of competencies described 
in WIOA to further clarify the definition of workforce preparation.
    Comments: One commenter questioned the need to use the term 
workforce preparation activities, stating that such activities were 
already a de facto part of existing adult basic and adult secondary 
education. Multiple commenters expressed support for inclusion of 
workforce preparation activities in the Act and stated that such 
instructional activities can help promote self-sufficiency and reduce 
generational poverty.
    One commenter expressed support for inclusion of workforce 
preparation activities among adult education and literacy activities 
but expressed concern regarding the adequacy of the accountability 
framework to assess workforce preparation activities. Another commenter 
suggested that Local WDBs and adult educators work together to achieve 
a common ground for measuring the workforce preparation skills of 
individuals exiting core programs.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' overall support for the Act's 
specific attention to workforce preparation activities as an explicit 
part of adult education and literacy activities. We acknowledge that 
the six primary indicators of performance set forth in section 116 of 
the Act may not appear to explicitly assess workforce preparation 
activities. However, the

[[Page 55541]]

Secretaries of Labor and Education have defined the measurable skill 
gains indicator to include attainment of an educational functioning 
level gain. Within the NRS for adult education, educational functioning 
level descriptors were recently revised to align with rigorous college 
and career readiness standards, which include much of the knowledge and 
skills listed under workforce preparation activities. We maintain, 
therefore, that workforce preparation activities are assessed broadly 
through the assessment of educational functioning levels. We further 
note that, given the highly contextualized nature of these activities 
relative to particular industry sectors and jobs as well as the 
diversity in State, regional, and local economic conditions, we 
appreciate one commenter's suggestion that Local WDBs and adult 
educators work together to achieve a common ground for measuring the 
workforce preparation skills of individuals exiting core programs. 
Finally, we note that States have the flexibility to identify 
additional performance indicators to address this concern.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed support for the inclusion 
of digital literacy skills as part of workforce preparation activities 
defined in proposed Sec.  463.34 and requested that the regulation 
require the use of digital literacy standards in providing these 
services. These commenters suggested the Northstar Digital Literacy 
Standards as an example.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support for inclusion of 
digital literacy skills as part of workforce preparation activities. We 
also appreciate commenters' desire to base instruction of these skills 
on standards. However, we have authority under section 102(b)(2)(D)(ii) 
of WIOA only to require eligible agencies to align content standards 
for adult education with State-adopted challenging academic content 
standards, as adopted under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 
as amended. Beyond this, we do not have authority to require the 
adoption of, or instruction based on, any specific kind of standards.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.35 What is integrated education and training?

    Proposed Sec.  463.35 restated the statutory definition of 
integrated education and training from section 203(11) of WIOA.
    Comments: Some commenters asked for clarification as to whether all 
eligible providers of adult education and literacy activities are 
required to provide integrated education and training. One commenter 
stated that such a requirement might not be efficient depending upon a 
particular adult education program's size, type, and location. The 
commenter speculated that it might not be sufficient that adult 
education programs provide adult education and literacy activities 
along with workforce preparation activities and refer students, as 
appropriate, to occupational training programs within the community. 
Another commenter questioned the appropriateness of integrated 
education and training for learners at the lowest levels. The commenter 
stated that integrated education and training should focus on students 
with an educational functioning level at or above sixth grade 
equivalency. The commenter further recommended that integrated 
education and training be focused on students with employment-related 
goals rather than all students.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters sharing their questions and 
concerns regarding whether or not all eligible providers of adult 
education and literacy activities are required to provide integrated 
education and training. We note that proposed Sec.  463.35 merely 
restated AEFLA's definition of integrated education and training, which 
does not require all eligible providers to provide integrated education 
and training. Section 203(2) of the Act lists the programs, activities, 
and services that are allowable adult education and literacy 
activities. Integrated education and training is only one activity of 
several listed. We point out, however, that eligible agencies receiving 
funds provided under section 243 of the Act through the integrated 
English literacy and civics education program are required to provide 
integrated English literacy and civics education in combination with 
integrated education and training activities (see Sec.  463.70(c)). 
Consistent with the purpose as stated in section 202 of the Act, these 
regulations provide eligible agencies and eligible providers the 
flexibility to respond to diverse adult education needs particular to 
State, regional, and local circumstances.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter inquired if young adults with disabilities 
who are no longer eligible for special education might qualify for 
integrated education and training services as described in proposed 
Sec.  463.35.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's question. Section 203(4) 
of the Act defines eligible individuals. Individuals who meet the 
stipulations set forth in section 203(4) of the Act, regardless of 
disability status, qualify for adult education and literacy services, 
including integrated education and training services as described in 
Sec.  463.35.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.36 What are the required components of an integrated 
education and training program funded under title II?

    Proposed Sec.  463.36 described the three components that would be 
required in an integrated education and training program. These 
components are adult education and literacy activities, workforce 
preparation activities, and workforce training. Two of the components, 
adult education and literacy activities and workforce preparation 
activities, are explained in Sec.  463.30 and Sec.  463.34, 
respectively. Proposed Sec.  463.36 further clarified the third 
remaining component, the workforce training component, by referencing 
section 134(c)(3)(D) of the Act, which identifies the activities that 
constitute training within the employment and training services 
authorized by title I-B of WIOA.
    Comments: One commenter agreed that the three required components 
in proposed Sec.  463.36 were essential and recommended that we add two 
additional requirements--supportive services and integration with job 
placement services and other functions of the local workforce 
development system. According to this commenter, supportive services 
and integration with job placement services and other functions of the 
local workforce development system are also essential to supporting 
students' successful completion of integrated education and training 
and subsequent employment.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's support for the proposed 
three required components of integrated education and training. We also 
acknowledge the importance of supportive services (see our discussion 
regarding Sec.  463.32(b) above) and job placement services in 
supporting eligible individuals' educational and career advancement. 
However, we do not believe that WIOA provides us with the authority to 
add additional requirements for integrated education and training 
programs. We note that in Sec.  463.38 (see below) we establish that an 
integrated education and training program meets the requirement that it 
is for educational and career advancement in part by being part of a 
career pathway. We believe the requirement that integrated education 
and training programs funded under title II be part of

[[Page 55542]]

a career pathway will help ensure that integrated training and 
education program participants can access appropriate supportive and 
job placement services.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that for lower level learners we 
revise the three required components in proposed Sec.  463.36 by 
substituting Sec.  463.36(c), workforce training for a specific 
occupation or occupational cluster which can be any one of the training 
services defined in section 134(c)(3)(D) of the Act, for career 
awareness. Another commenter suggested that for lower level students we 
require only Sec.  463.36(a), adult education and literacy activities, 
and Sec.  463.36(b), workforce preparation activities.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns for adequately 
addressing the education and employment needs of lower-skilled adults. 
We also agree that it is important to provide learners at all levels 
with career awareness services. We note that section 203(12) of the Act 
requires that integrated education and training include ``workforce 
training for a specific occupation or occupational cluster.'' We do not 
believe that general career awareness activities alone constitute 
workforce training as described in section 203(12).
    Additionally, as we noted in our discussion in Sec.  463.35, above, 
we do not anticipate that all eligible individuals served by an 
eligible provider will immediately be ready for or need integrated 
education and training. Some eligible individuals--depending upon local 
economic conditions or individual characteristics--may be best served 
first through other adult education and literacy activities prior to, 
and in preparation for, subsequent enrollment in an integrated 
education and training program. Again, we believe that eligible 
agencies and eligible providers need maximum flexibility to determine 
how to best address the needs and goals for job seekers and employers 
identified in the State and local workforce development plans.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for the flexibility to 
use title II funds for workforce training for a specific occupation or 
occupational cluster for the purpose of educational and career 
advancement. Another commenter suggested that title II providers should 
partner with title I providers whenever possible to ensure efficiency 
and avoid duplication of services. Numerous other commenters suggested 
that the occupational training component of integrated education and 
training be funded with title I funds and that those funds should be 
exhausted before title II funds were used for that purpose. These 
commenters suggested that a provision be added to the regulations 
similar to the limitations of use of AEFLA funds for family literacy 
services found in section 231(d) of the Act. Additional commenters 
offered alternative suggestions, including ability to benefit and 
employer funds that could be used for occupational training costs 
before title II funds were used. Commenters sharing this view further 
suggested that if title II funds were to be used to pay for 
occupational training, the regulations should provide a limit on how 
much of the funds could be expended on occupational training. One 
commenter stated that title II funds should not be used for costs 
associated with occupational training.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' concerns for optimal 
efficiency in devoting resources to the development and provision of 
integrated education and training programs. We agree that whenever 
possible, appropriate WIOA core programs or other appropriate resources 
should be leveraged to maximize overall efficiency and impact of the 
publicly funded workforce development system. We acknowledge that 
reserving title II funds for the provision of adult education and 
literacy activities, including workforce preparation activities, and 
utilizing other sources of funding, as appropriate, to provide the 
workforce training component can extend the availability of much-needed 
adult education and literacy services. We also agree with commenters 
who suggested strong partnerships with title I programs and strongly 
encourage effective co-enrollment strategies between title II and title 
I training services in order to maximize resources when delivering 
integrated education and training. We note, however, that the Act does 
not provide us with the authority to restrict the source of funding for 
the workforce training component of integrated education and training, 
nor does it provide us with the authority to limit the amount of funds 
that can be used for occupational training.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.37 How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that the three required 
components be ``integrated''?

    Proposed Sec.  463.37 sought to establish how the three components 
of integrated education and training must be integrated. The proposed 
regulation required that an integrated education and training program 
balance the proportion of instruction across the three components, 
deliver the components simultaneously, and use occupationally relevant 
instructional materials. Proposed Sec.  463.37 would also require a 
program to have a single set of learning objectives that identifies 
specific adult education content, workforce preparation activities, and 
workforce training competencies. These proposed requirements were 
intended to facilitate the design of high-quality integrated education 
and training programs that focus on improving the academic skills of 
low-skilled adults while advancing their occupational competencies. We 
sought public input on the proposed requirements and other suggested 
requirements that may support the provision of integrated education and 
training services to eligible adults at all skill levels.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.37. One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  463.37 and 
noted additionally that adult educators would likely require new and 
ongoing professional development in order to be able to effectively 
meet the requirement that the three required components be integrated. 
Other commenters expressed specific concern over local programs' 
ability to meet the proposed requirement in rural areas with few 
occupational training providers. Other commenters expressed support for 
proposed Sec.  463.37 and encouraged the Department to consider whether 
it may be appropriate to provide additional guidance to States and 
eligible providers on appropriate tools for measuring workforce 
preparation activities and workforce training competencies. These 
commenters stated that workforce preparation activities and workforce 
training competencies may be newer curriculum elements for some adult 
education providers, and it might be valuable to offer resources on how 
they can best be measured. Another commenter stated that additional 
guidance and flexibility would be required in order for title II 
providers to be able to meet the requirements of proposed Sec.  463.37.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' overall support for proposed 
Sec.  463.37 and agree that for many eligible providers the 
development, delivery, and assessment of integrated education and 
training will present both new opportunities and challenges. We 
appreciate the commenters' suggestions regarding specific types of 
guidance and

[[Page 55543]]

professional development that may be needed to support expansion of 
high quality integrated education and training. We continue to support 
an online collection of technical assistance resources, a virtual 
community of practice, and a number of online courses and Webcasts 
available through the Literacy Information and Communication System 
(LINCS) at: http://lincs.ed.gov/ as well as the Department's online 
resource for teaching and assessing employability skills available at: 
http://cte.ed.gov/employabilityskills/. As we plan for future guidance 
and technical assistance efforts, we will consider the commenters' 
suggestions.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.37(a)(1) that within the 
overall scope of an integrated education and training program the three 
required components be instructionally balanced proportionately across 
the three components, particularly with respect to improving reading, 
writing, mathematics, and English proficiency of eligible individuals, 
one commenter questioned the clarity of the phrase ``instructionally 
balanced proportionately'' and stated that requiring the three 
components to be instructionally balanced proportionately would limit 
States' flexibility to design integrated education and training 
programs that are responsive to the needs of students, employers, and 
local economies.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concern for maintaining 
adequate flexibility to design integrated education and training 
programs that are responsive to the needs of students, employers and, 
local economies. We note that in proposing Sec.  463.37(a) we stated 
that Sec.  463.37(a)(1), Sec.  463.37(a)(2), and Sec.  463.37(a)(3) 
were meant to be considered within the overall scope of an integrated 
education and training program. We do not, therefore, agree that this 
limits States' flexibility to design integrated education and training 
programs that are responsive to the needs of students, employers, and 
local economies. However, we also recognize that the proposed phrasing 
of Sec.  463.37(a)(1) may not have adequately stated our intent that 
all three required components be of sufficient quality and intensity. 
We note that one of the considerations that an eligible agency must 
take into account when reviewing eligible providers' applications for 
grants or contracts to provide adult education and literacy services is 
sufficient quality and intensity of the services proposed (see Sec.  
463.20(d)(5)(i)). In proposing Sec.  463.37(a)(1), it was our intention 
to ensure that each of the required components of an integrated 
education and training program be of sufficient quality and intensity.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.37(a)(1) to more clearly state 
our intent that within the overall scope of an integrated education and 
training program, all three required components must be of sufficient 
quality and intensity and must be based on the most rigorous research 
available.
    Comments: Regarding proposed Sec.  463.37(a)(2) that the three 
required components occur simultaneously, two commenters asked whether 
providing adult education and literacy activities, workforce 
preparation activities, and occupational training as distinct, yet 
linked, activities sufficiently met the requirement for the components 
to be integrated. Another commenter expressed overall support for 
proposed Sec.  463.37 and suggested that we emphasize in the final rule 
that integrated education and training is a career pathways strategy 
that supports acceleration in accordance with the definition of career 
pathways in section 3(7)(E) of the Act. The commenter suggested, 
therefore, that we emphasize that the adult education and literacy 
activities, workforce preparation activities, and occupational training 
should occur simultaneously and not sequentially. One commenter stated 
that the requirement that the three activities occur simultaneously 
would limit States' flexibility in designing integrated education and 
training programs that are responsive to the needs of students and 
employers.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' desire for flexibility in 
the design of integrated education and training programs that are 
responsive to the needs of both job seekers and employers. We note that 
section 203(11) of the Act requires that the three components be 
delivered ``concurrently and contextually.'' We further note that in 
proposing Sec.  463.37(a) we stated that Sec.  463.37(a)(1), (a)(2), 
and (a)(3) were meant to be considered within the overall scope of an 
integrated education and training program. We do not, therefore, agree 
that this limits States' flexibility to design integrated education and 
training programs that are responsive to the needs of students, 
employers, and local economies. We agree with the commenter who noted 
that integrated education and training is part of a career pathways 
strategy that supports acceleration in accordance with the definition 
of career pathways in section 3(7)(E) of the Act and, accordingly, that 
the adult education and literacy activities, workforce preparation 
activities, and occupational training should occur simultaneously and 
not sequentially. We anticipate that as WIOA implementation unfolds, we 
will be collaborating with eligible agencies and providers to provide 
additional guidance on particular questions regarding diverse models of 
integrated education and training.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed concerns for programs 
serving lower level students and students in multi-level classes and 
the ability of these programs to meet the requirement in proposed Sec.  
463.37(a)(3) that the instruction in the three required components use 
occupationally relevant materials. These commenters suggested that we 
revise proposed Sec.  463.37(a)(3) to change the words ``use 
occupationally relevant instructional materials'' to ``use 
employability relevant instructional materials.'' The commenters stated 
that this change would better encompass all students served by adult 
education programs.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns for adequately 
addressing the education and employment needs of lower-skilled adults. 
We also agree that it is important to provide learners at all levels 
with opportunities to master employability skills and encourage 
eligible providers to incorporate workforce preparation activities into 
all adult education and literacy activities, as appropriate. As we 
noted in our discussion in Sec.  463.35 above, we do not anticipate 
that all eligible individuals served by an eligible provider will 
immediately be ready for or need integrated education and training. It 
may be that some eligible individuals--depending upon local economic 
conditions or individual characteristics--are best served by first 
providing other adult education and literacy activities prior to, and 
in preparation for, subsequent enrollment in an integrated education 
and training program. For those eligible individuals who need, and are 
ready for, integrated education and training services, we believe it 
necessary to use occupationally relevant instructional materials, as 
appropriate, across the three required components of the integrated 
education and training program. We note that section 203(12) of the Act 
requires that integrated education and training include ``workforce 
training for a specific occupation or occupational cluster.'' We do not 
believe that substituting general employability instructional materials 
for occupationally relevant instructional materials would be consistent 
with the statutory requirement.

[[Page 55544]]

    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that we add an additional 
requirement that adult education programs providing integrated 
education and training must have components that are integrated by 
coordinating with one or more industry partnerships that will be 
established by the local WDB. The commenter stated that working with 
industry partnerships would support the development of relevant 
curricula, contextualization of programming, and the creation of work-
based learning opportunities that support the integration of the three 
required components. The commenter asserted that such partnerships are 
critical to the building of a strong career pathway for program 
participants.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter that the quality and 
relevance of integrated education and training programs can be enhanced 
by coordinating with one or more industry partnerships to be 
established by Local WDBs. We agree that working with industry 
partnerships can support the development of relevant curricula, 
contextualization of programming, and the creation of work-based 
learning opportunities. We also believe that such coordination can be a 
strategy for ensuring high quality occupationally relevant 
instructional materials. And we agree that such partnerships are 
critical to the building of a strong career pathway for program 
participants and we encourage all eligible providers to coordinate, as 
appropriate, with industry partnerships. However, we do not agree that 
such partnerships necessarily result in the integration of the three 
required components of an integrated education and training program.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.38 How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that an integrated 
education and training program be ``for the purpose of educational and 
career advancement''?

    Under proposed Sec.  463.38, we required the educational component 
of a program to be aligned with the State's content standards for adult 
education as described in the State's Unified or Combined State Plan 
and that the program be part of a career pathway as defined in section 
3(7) of WIOA, in order to meet the WIOA requirement that the integrated 
education and training program be for the purpose of educational and 
career advancement. The use of rigorous and challenging academic 
standards and career pathways that contextualize learning are 
recognized strategies to promote readiness for postsecondary education 
and work.
    Comments: Numerous commenters expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.38, particularly the requirement in proposed Sec.  463.38(a) that 
the adult education component of the program be aligned with the 
State's content standards for adult education as described in the 
State's Unified or Combined State Plan.
    A few commenters expressed some reservation regarding the 
requirement in proposed Sec.  463.38(b) that the integrated education 
and training program be part of a career pathway. According to these 
commenters, some jobs in some regional economies (e.g., van driver, 
casino dealer, night janitor) were not part of a career pathway. They 
suggested that we modify proposed Sec.  463.38(b) to require that, if 
possible, the integrated education and training program be part of a 
career pathway. Another commenter recommended that career awareness 
activities be interpreted to satisfy the requirement that the program 
is part of a career pathway, especially for beginning level, lower-
skilled learners.
    One commenter stated that integrated education and training should 
address the long-term needs of the workforce as well as the immediate 
needs of employers. According to the commenter, integrated education 
and training should be defined as both education for transferrable 
skills, and knowledge and job related training for immediate job 
placement. The commenter suggested that the Department strengthen 
proposed Sec.  463.38 to reinforce these two goals.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' support for the 
requirement in Sec.  463.38(a) that the adult education component of 
the program be aligned with the State's content standards for adult 
education as described in the State's Unified or Combined State Plan. 
We agree with the commenter who stated that integrated education and 
training should address the long-term needs of the workforce as well as 
the immediate needs of employers. In large part, our intent in 
establishing the requirement that the adult education component of the 
program be aligned with the State's content standards for adult 
education is to support the inclusion of transferrable skills and 
knowledge in the design of integrated education and training programs. 
We appreciate commenters who shared concerns about integrated education 
and training programs designed for particular jobs in local economies 
meeting the requirement that the program be part of a career pathway. 
However, based on the examples provided by these commenters, we 
disagree that such jobs cannot be part of a career pathway. In fact, in 
our own research on occupational or career clusters at O*Net OnLine 
(see http://www.onetonline.org/), which is sponsored by the Department 
of Labor, we found that each of the examples offered could easily be 
associated with one or more career pathways. Thus, requiring an 
integrated education and training program to be aligned with the 
State's content standards for adult education and to be part of a 
career pathway, allows such a program to address both the short- and 
long-term needs of the workforce as well as the immediate needs of 
employers. We do not believe that providing only career awareness meets 
the definition of career pathways in section 3(7) of the Act.
    Change: None.

Subpart F--Programs for Corrections Education and the Education of 
Other Institutionalized Individuals

Sec.  463.60 What are programs for corrections education and the 
education of other institutionalized individuals?

    Proposed Sec.  463.60 described programs for corrections education 
and the education of other institutionalized individuals.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.60. Several commenters stated that not all corrections facilities 
provide all of the educational programs listed in proposed Sec.  
463.60(b). The commenters concluded that the list of academic programs 
should be suggestive rather than mandatory and asked that we revise the 
language in proposed Sec.  463.60(b) accordingly.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns for clarity 
regarding proposed Sec.  463.60. We note that proposed Sec.  463.60 
restated the list in section 225(b) of WIOA of the permissible 
educational programs for criminal offenders in correctional 
institutions and other institutionalized individuals. We believe both 
WIOA and Sec.  463.60 are sufficiently clear that the list is 
permissive and that implementing every program on the list is not 
required.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter suggested that completion of high school 
equivalency begun while incarcerated should be a condition of parole. 
The commenter further suggested that postsecondary education should be 
available to individuals under the age of 21.

[[Page 55545]]

    Discussion: We appreciate the commenter's concern for maximizing 
incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals' access to 
educational opportunities. We note, however, that both suggestions are 
beyond our statutory authority.
    Change: None.
    Comments: We received several comments requesting additional 
guidance on corrections education. Numerous commenters requested that 
we provide guidance on whether incarcerated individuals were considered 
in the workforce and whether prison jobs counted as employment for 
purposes of the performance accountability system in section 116 of 
WIOA. One of these commenters suggested that consideration of the 
difficulties in serving incarcerated individuals be factored into the 
negotiation of State adjusted levels of performance for purposes of the 
performance accountability system. This commenter also requested that 
we clarify what career pathways services should be provided to eligible 
individuals served in corrections education programs. Another commenter 
requested that we clarify if AEFLA funds for corrections education and 
education of other institutionalized individuals could be used to 
provide special education services to young adults incarcerated in the 
juvenile justice system or students eligible for a 504 plan.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' requests for guidance and 
clarification regarding programs for corrections education and other 
institutionalized individuals. Questions regarding whether incarcerated 
individuals are considered in the workforce and whether prison jobs 
count toward the employment indicators have been addressed in the joint 
final regulations on the performance accountability system. The 
Department of Labor and the Department of Education (the Departments) 
have added language in 20 CFR 677.155(a)(2)(i) (for purposes of AEFLA, 
found in Part 463 subpart I) to establish that for the purpose of 
determining program performance levels, section 225 participants will 
not be included in performance calculations for the following 
indicators: Employment under 20 CFR 677.155(a)(1)(i) and (ii); earnings 
under 20 CFR 677.155(a)(1)(iii); credential attainment under 20 CFR 
677.155(a)(1)(iv); and the effectiveness in serving employers under 20 
CFR 677.155(a)(1)(vi). The Departments made this decision based on the 
fact that section 225 participants do not have the opportunity to be 
employed or to participate in education or training programs in the 
same manner as other participants who are in the general population. 
The process of negotiating and reaching agreement on adjusted levels of 
performance has been addressed in the final WIOA Unified and Combined 
State Plan Requirements Information Collection Request (State Plan 
ICR), as well as through Program Memorandum OCTAE 16-02, Establishing 
Expected Levels of Performance and Negotiating Adjusted Levels of 
Performance for Program Year (PY) 2016-17 and 2017-18. As noted in the 
State Plan ICR and guidance, for the first State plan submission, the 
Departments will work with States during the negotiation process to 
establish the adjusted levels of performance for each of the primary 
indicators for the core programs. If necessary, some may be adjusted 
after the release of the final regulation and joint performance ICR. 
Additionally, the Departments will disseminate joint and program-
specific guidance to provide further clarification.
    In terms of clarifying what career pathway services should be 
provided to eligible individuals served in corrections programs, we 
believe that eligible providers should provide career pathway services 
that support achievement of the vision and goals articulated in State 
and local workforce development plans. We seek to maintain State and 
local flexibility to achieve their respective visions and goals and 
therefore decline to limit the services that may be provided through 
regulation. Finally, we note that AEFLA funds for corrections education 
and education of other institutionalized individuals may be used to 
provide special education services to eligible individuals regardless 
of disability status.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter described challenges in providing 
concurrent enrollment services to inmates in rural areas where 
occupational training providers and resources were scarce and training 
program offerings limited and sporadic. The commenter requested that 
the Department provide non-regulatory guidance to address these issues.
    Discussion: We acknowledge that the challenges in providing adult 
education and literacy activities, including programs for corrections 
education and the education of other institutionalized individuals, may 
differ in rural and urban areas. In the past we have provided technical 
assistance to support high-quality corrections education across the 
nation (see, for example, the corrections education resource collection 
and community of practice through the available through the Literacy 
Information and Communication System (LINCS) at: http://lincs.ed.gov/). 
As we move forward with WIOA implementation, we will continue to look 
for opportunities to address emerging challenges.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.61 How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers under programs for corrections education and the education of 
other institutionalized individuals?

    WIOA emphasizes the importance of educational and career 
advancement for incarcerated individuals by increasing the cap on funds 
that States may use for programs for corrections education and the 
education of other institutionalized individuals from 10 percent (under 
WIA) to 20 percent. Proposed Sec.  463.61 restated this new statutory 
provision and clarified that any awards made by the eligible agency for 
programs for corrections education and education programs for other 
institutionalized individuals must be made in accordance with the 
applicable regulation in subpart C.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.61. Other commenters requested clarification on how State 
departments of corrections might participate in the process specified 
in subpart C.
    Discussion: We appreciate the opportunity to provide clarification 
that State departments of corrections, like all other eligible 
providers, would submit an application for a grant or contract to 
provide adult education and literacy activities following the process 
specified in subpart C.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.63 How may funds under programs for corrections education and 
the education of other institutionalized individuals be used to support 
transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release services with 
the goal of reducing recidivism?

    Proposed Sec.  463.63 sought to establish how funds may support 
transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release services. 
This regulation was intended to clarify that re-entry and other post-
release services must support the educational needs of the individual.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.63, noting that the provision of such post-release services was 
consistent with the design of career pathways. Another commenter 
questioned how recidivism might be

[[Page 55546]]

defined in order to meet any associated reporting requirements under 
the Act.
    Discussion: We appreciate the support for the proposed regulation 
and agree that such post-release services are consistent with the 
design of career pathways. In our definition of re-entry and post-
release services we noted that examples of such services might include 
education and employment services that can help formerly incarcerated 
individuals in progressing along a career pathway. We appreciate the 
question regarding a definition of recidivism and have addressed that 
issue in amendments to our information collection package, 
Implementation Guidelines: Measures and Methods for the National 
Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB Control Number: 1830-0027).
    Change: None.

Subpart G--What is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?

    In addition to the new integrated English literacy and civics 
education services described in Sec.  463.33--one of several authorized 
``adult education and literacy activities'' in AEFLA--WIOA authorized a 
new, specific Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program 
that replaces the English literacy and civics education (EL/Civics) 
program previously authorized through annual appropriations. The 
authorization of the program in WIOA eliminates the need for it to be 
authorized and separately funded annually through the appropriations 
process. The new program retains the focus on English language 
proficiency and civics education instruction, but there are new 
requirements to support stronger ties to employment and the workforce 
system.

Sec.  463.70 What is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education program?

    Proposed Sec.  463.70 described the program's statutory 
requirements related to participants for whom this program is intended 
and the types of services that are required in the program. It also 
sought to clarify that the educational services provided under the 
program must meet the requirements established in Sec.  463.33 
pertaining to integrated English literacy and civics education 
services.
    Comments: Two commenters expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.70. A third commenter expressed similar support but also suggested 
implementing a flexible approach to incorporating workforce preparation 
into education. According to this commenter, curricula not necessarily 
contextualized for workforce development or employment is still 
relevant to workforce development and employment. Other commenters 
expressed support for proposed Sec.  463.70 and also encouraged 
flexibility in implementation. According to these commenters, co-
enrollment in workforce development programs should be optional and 
reflect a student-centered approach that takes students' needs and 
abilities into account. The commenters encouraged the Department to 
provide examples in guidance of how the program might support the 
economic, linguistic, and civic integration goals of diverse immigrant 
subpopulations.
    Other commenters expressed concern that the definition of the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program in proposed 
Sec.  463.70 was more restrictive than the definition of ``integrated 
English literacy and civics education'' in section 203(12) of the Act 
and restated in proposed Sec.  463.33. These commenters suggested that 
we replace the word ``must'' in proposed Sec.  463.70(c) with ``may'' 
so that Sec.  463.70(c) would read as follows: ``Such educational 
service may be delivered in combination with integrated education and 
training services as described in Sec.  463.36.''
    Two commenters sharing this concern expressed the additional 
concern that the definition of the Integrated English Literacy and 
Civics Education program in proposed Sec.  463.70 would limit States' 
ability to provide services that can address all the needs of English 
language learners seeking English language proficiency and civics 
education services. These commenters further stated that not all 
English language learners seeking English language proficiency and 
civics education services seek or require workforce training. Some, for 
example, are already gainfully self-employed and interested primarily 
in improving their language skills and obtaining citizenship. For those 
learners for whom workforce training might be appropriate, the 
commenter encouraged workforce development providers to partner with 
adult education providers to leverage their respective expertise and 
resources in support of efficiently helping such learners to be placed 
in unsubsidized employment.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters sharing their support for the 
proposed regulation and suggesting that we adopt a flexible approach 
for incorporating workforce preparation into educational services. We 
agree that curricula not necessarily contextualized for workforce 
development or employment can still be relevant to workforce 
development and employment. We also agree that eligible individuals' 
co-enrollment in workforce development programs should be optional and 
based upon individuals' needs and abilities. Proposed Sec.  463.70(c) 
restates statutory language. Substituting ``must'' for ``may,'' as some 
commenters suggested, would change language explicitly restated from 
the Act. We do not believe we have the authority to change language 
restated from the Act. We agree that not all English language learners 
seeking English language proficiency and civics education services also 
seek, or require, workforce training. As we have stated above in our 
discussion of Sec.  463.35, we do not anticipate that all eligible 
individuals seeking English language proficiency and civics education 
services would require integrated education and training. English 
language learners seeking English language proficiency and civics 
education, but not seeking workforce training, should not be excluded 
or discouraged from participation in the Integrated English Literacy 
and Civics Education program. However, we do note that the Act requires 
that eligible providers receiving funds under section 243 are required 
to provide these services in combination with integrated education and 
training (see Sec.  463.73). We believe that a program design that 
provides the option for interested eligible individuals to access 
integrated education and training services meets the statutory 
requirement that the program funds be used in combination with such 
services. For those eligible providers serving eligible individuals 
under section 243 who do require integrated education and training, we 
proposed two options for meeting the requirement in Sec.  463.74. 
Additionally, as we noted in our discussion of Sec.  463.33, States 
have the flexibility to provide integrated English literacy and civics 
education as a required activity under section 231(b) without the 
additional workforce and employment-related requirements of section 
243. Therefore, we do not agree that the regulation, as proposed, would 
limit States' flexibility to provide integrated English literacy and 
civics education services that are responsive to students' diverse 
needs.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Other commenters expressed concern regarding the absence 
of specific measures for civics education in the proposed regulations 
and suggested that the Department consider adding such measures to the 
performance accountability system for WIOA. These commenters stated 
that an

[[Page 55547]]

absence of such measures could result in creating unintended 
disincentives for providing much needed civics instruction.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concerns over creating 
unintended disincentives for providing civics instruction. We note that 
the definition of integrated English literacy and civics education 
provided in Sec.  463.33 requires that it include instruction in 
literacy and English language acquisition and instruction on the rights 
and responsibilities of citizenship and civic participation. While we 
lack authority to add additional primary indicators of performance, we 
continue to include optional civics education outcomes for States to 
use in our information collection request for title II (see 
Implementation Guidelines: Measures and Methods for the National 
Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB Control Number: 1830-0027)).
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.72 How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers for the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?

    Proposed Sec.  463.72 described the statutory requirements to be 
used by eligible agencies in awarding funds, including a requirement 
that States must follow the provisions governing the award of funds 
established in subpart C.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.72. Other commenters expressed concerns over the requirement that 
EL/Civics education providers funded under WIA may not be able to meet 
the requirements of demonstrated effectiveness in proposed Sec.  463.24 
and suggested that the Department revise the proposed regulations in 
order to provide special consideration for providers of EL/Civics under 
WIA as they compete for Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education funds.
    Discussion: Section 231(c) of the Act requires that eligible 
agencies ensure that all eligible providers have direct and equitable 
access to apply and compete for grants or contracts. We do not have 
authority to give States the flexibility to provide special 
consideration for EL/Civics providers under WIA. We have, however, 
revised Sec.  463.24 to clarify options for how eligible providers can 
establish demonstrated effectiveness.
    Change: We revised Sec.  463.24(b)(2) to provide an option for 
eligible providers who do not have performance data based upon the 
primary indicators of performance listed in section 116 of the Act.

Sec.  463.73 What are the requirements for eligible providers that 
receive funding through the Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education program?

    Proposed Sec.  463.73 reiterated statutory language regarding 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program services and 
design, including requirements for the program to facilitate job 
placement, economic self-sufficiency, and integration with the 
workforce development system.
    Comments: Two commenters expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.73. Multiple commenters expressed disagreement with proposed Sec.  
463.73(b) and (c) by suggesting that these should not be requirements. 
These commenters suggested that the Department rephrase proposed Sec.  
463.73 to make Sec.  463.73(b) and (c) optional.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' support for proposed Sec.  
463.73. Section 463.73 restates the Act's statutory language. It is 
inconsistent with the Act to make these statutory requirements 
optional.
    Change: None.
    Comments: A few commenters suggested that we revise proposed Sec.  
463.73(a) and add language to encourage providers of integrated English 
literacy and civics education to partner with public television 
stations. These commenters stated that such a revision could support 
the use of high-quality instructional materials.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concern for the use of 
high-quality instructional materials and agree that public television 
stations may serve as one potential source of such materials. We note 
that we set out requirements in these final regulations and use 
technical assistance to share promising practices. We also note that 
the Department does not have the authority to endorse particular 
curricula or sets of materials.
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter stated that meeting the requirement of 
proposed Sec.  463.73(b) might pose particular challenges for rural 
areas where sufficient integrated education and training providers may 
not exist.
    Discussion: We acknowledge that the challenges in providing adult 
education and literacy activities, including integrated education and 
training, may differ in rural and urban areas. In the past we have 
provided technical assistance to support high-quality career pathways 
development, including the development of models of integrated 
education and training, across the nation (see, for example, the career 
pathways resource collection and community of practice available 
through the Literacy Information and Communication System (LINCS) at: 
http://lincs.ed.gov/. We have also encouraged and supported States in 
exploring non-traditional service delivery options, including distance 
and hybrid models of education. As we move forward with WIOA 
implementation, we will continue to look for opportunities to address 
challenges through innovation and technology.
    Change: None.
    Comments: Other commenters suggested that we specify a particular 
type of integrated education and training that will meet the 
requirement proposed in Sec.  463.73(b). One commenter suggested that 
we revise Sec.  463.73(b) to state that the integrated education and 
training activities provided to participants served under section 243 
include entrepreneurship education and small business planning and 
development so that those participants are able to start their own 
business as a career pathway that leads to sustainable improvements in 
the economic opportunities for their families.
    Discussion: We appreciate the commenters' concern for ensuring that 
the integrated education and training provided in combination with 
integrated English literacy and civics education is relevant to the 
needs of English language learners. We agree that for some eligible 
individuals, entrepreneurship education can contribute to advancement 
along a career pathway that leads to sustainable improvements in the 
economic opportunities for families. We also note that in Sec.  463.36, 
we clarify the workforce training component of integrated education and 
training by referencing the training services listed in section 
134(c)(3)(D) of the Act, including ``entrepreneurial training.''
    Change: None.
    Comments: One commenter expressed concern for adult education 
providers' ability to meet the requirements in proposed Sec.  
463.73(c)(1) and (c)(2). This commenter suggested that these 
requirements might be more easily achieved through collaboration with 
other core programs.
    Discussion: We agree with the commenter. We believe that Sec.  
463.74(a) provides this option to eligible providers through the option 
of co-enrolling participants in integrated education and training, as 
described in subpart D, that is provided within the local or regional 
workforce development

[[Page 55548]]

area from sources other than section 243. For example, an eligible 
provider might collaborate with the local title I Youth, Adult, or 
Dislocated Worker provider to fund the training component of the 
integrated education and training activities.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.74 How does an eligible provider that receives funds through 
the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program meet the 
requirement to provide services in combination with integrated 
education and training?

    Proposed Sec.  463.74 was intended to clarify an important 
distinction between integrated English literacy and civics education 
services that may be provided under section 231 of the Act, and 
integrated English literacy and civics education programs funded under 
section 243 of the Act. The Act requires that funds made available for 
integrated English literacy and civics education be used in combination 
with integrated education and training activities. The proposed 
regulation provided two options that an eligible provider funded under 
section 243 of the Act may use to provide integrated English literacy 
and civics education in combination with integrated education and 
training activities.
    Comments: Several commenters stated that the Department needs to 
provide further clarification regarding proposed Sec.  463.74. These 
commenters suggested that not all students would need to be co-enrolled 
in occupational training. Additionally, these commenters suggested that 
for some students (for example, lower skilled students) on-ramp or 
bridge programs that can improve students' basic skill levels, as well 
as provide career awareness and workforce preparation activities, 
rather than co-enrollment in occupational training, may be a better 
approach. These commenters asked the Department to allow flexibility so 
lower skilled students could participate in integrated English literacy 
and civics education services, make a career pathway plan while they 
are participating, and then transition to appropriate workforce 
training when they reach a level of English that would ensure that they 
could benefit from occupational training. Commenters asked the 
Department to supplement the final regulations with further guidance on 
such flexibility.
    Discussion: We agree with commenters' observations that not all 
students seeking services under section 243 of the Act will require 
employment related services and, therefore, may have no need to be co-
enrolled in occupational training. Similarly, we further agree that 
some students who have employment-related educational needs may not be 
adequately prepared for integrated education and training and may 
benefit most from more basic educational services in preparation for 
integrated education and training. We believe the Act does not require 
all participants enrolled in integrated English literacy and civics 
education programs under section 243 to be receiving integrated 
education and training services. We do believe the Act requires that 
eligible providers receiving funds under section 243 use those funds 
for integrated English literacy and civics education in combination 
with integrated education and training activities. Thus, participants 
for whom integrated education and training services are appropriate 
will have access to those services. For these reasons, we proposed in 
the NPRM two options for how programs could meet the statutory 
requirement that funds for integrated English literacy and civics 
education programs provided under section 243 be used in combination 
with integrated education and training activities. First, eligible 
providers serving eligible individuals for whom integrated English 
literacy and civics education and integrated education and training are 
appropriate have the flexibility to co-enroll such eligible individuals 
in other integrated education and training programs within the local or 
regional workforce development area funded through sources other than 
section 243. Second, such eligible providers may use section 243 funds 
to support integrated education and training activities as defined in 
subpart D.
    Change: We have revised Sec.  463.74 to more clearly reflect the 
statutory requirement to use funds provided under section 243 in 
combination with integrated education and training activities as 
defined in subpart D as well as to better clarify the options for 
meeting the requirement.
    Comments: One commenter expressed concern that the requirement to 
provide integrated English literacy and civics education services in 
combination with integrated education and training would disadvantage 
many providers of EL/Civics education under WIA in competing for funds 
under section 243 of the Act. According to this commenter, many of the 
EL/Civics providers funded under WIA did not provide workforce 
preparation or workforce training, and therefore do not have the 
capacity to offer such programming. The commenter asked the Department 
to modify the proposed rule to give special consideration to 
organizations that offer EL/Civics programming but not integrated 
education and training services. The commenter suggested that the rule 
be modified to expressly state that integrated education and training 
services could be offered by an entity other than the organization 
providing EL/Civics programming but working in coordination with that 
entity. In support of this point the commenter further stated that 
proposed Sec.  463.23(i) specifically provided for applications from 
consortia and coalitions of different organizations that provide 
services. The commenter also suggested that the rule could also be 
modified to give consideration to an applicant organization's prior 
receipt of EL/Civics funding and provision of EL/Civics programming 
when applying for grants under AEFLA.
    Discussion: We appreciate concerns expressed related to current 
providers of English literacy and civics education under WIA not having 
the capacity to provide services under the new requirements of section 
243 of WIOA. Section 463.72 of these final regulations requires the 
eligible agency to award funds to eligible providers under subpart C. 
We believe the requirement to award section 243 funds using the same 
requirements as other awards under title II is consistent with WIOA. We 
cannot create special considerations for one type of eligible provider 
over another in the rule. We do, however, agree that the types of 
cooperation described by the commenter may result in a competitive 
application for section 243 funds and we encourage eligible providers 
to seek out partnerships that leverage workforce services for 
participants in integrated English literacy and civics education.
    Change: None.

Sec.  463.75 Who is eligible to receive education services through the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program?

    Proposed Sec.  463.75 described those eligible under the Act to 
receive services under the integrated English literacy and civics 
education program.
    Comments: One commenter expressed support for proposed Sec.  
463.75. Another commenter expressed appreciation for the inclusion of 
professionals with degrees and credentials in their native countries. 
One commenter inquired whether civics education was applicable only to 
English language learners or to all students enrolled in integrated 
education and training.
    Discussion: We appreciate commenters' overall support for

[[Page 55549]]

proposed Sec.  463.75 and share in their appreciation for the inclusion 
of professionals with degrees and credentials in their native 
countries. While we support the integration of civics education, as 
appropriate, into all adult education and literacy activities for all 
students, we also note that integrated English literacy and civics 
education is specifically for English language learners.
    Change: None.

Regulations To Be Removed

    In the preamble of the NPRM, we discussed on page 20969 those 
regulations that we proposed to remove. The Department proposed to 
remove 34 CFR parts 460 and 461 because these regulations are no longer 
applicable to the Federal AEFLA program. These regulations were 
promulgated under the National Literacy Act (P.L. 102-73) in 1992, 
which has since been superseded. We also proposed to remove regulations 
for six discretionary grant programs that are no longer authorized by 
statute: the State Literacy Resource Centers Program (part 464), the 
National Workplace Literacy Program (part 472), the State Program 
Analysis Assistance and Policy Studies Program (part 477), the 
Functional Literacy for State and Local Prisoners Program (part 489), 
the Life Skills for State and Local Prisoners Program (part 490), and 
the Adult Education for the Homeless Program (part 491).
    Public Comment: In response to our invitation in the NPRM, no 
parties submitted comments on the removal of any of these regulations.
    Changes: None.

Regulatory Impact Analysis

Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether 
this regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to 
the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 
12866 defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action likely 
to result in a rule that may--
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to 
as an ``economically significant'' rule);
    (2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the 
Executive order.
    This regulatory action is a significant regulatory action subject 
to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
    We have also reviewed these regulations under Executive Order 
13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, 
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in 
Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 
13563 requires that an agency--
    (1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination 
that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits 
and costs are difficult to quantify);
    (2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, 
consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into 
account--among other things and to the extent practicable--the costs of 
cumulative regulations;
    (3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select 
those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential 
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other 
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);
    (4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather 
than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must 
adopt; and
    (5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct 
regulation, including economic incentives--such as user fees or 
marketable permits--to encourage the desired behavior, or provide 
information that enables the public to make choices.
    Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency ``to use the best 
available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible.'' The Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these 
techniques may include ``identifying changing future compliance costs 
that might result from technological innovation or anticipated 
behavioral changes.''
    We have also determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    We are issuing these final regulations only on a reasoned 
determination that their benefits justify their costs. In choosing 
among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches 
that maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the 
Department believes that these final regulations are consistent with 
the principles in Executive Order 13563.
    We also have determined that this regulatory action would not 
unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the 
exercise of their governmental functions.
    In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has 
assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and 
qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs associated 
with this regulatory action are those resulting from statutory 
requirements and those we have determined as necessary for 
administering the Department's programs and activities.

Potential Costs and Benefits

    Under Executive Order 12866, we have assessed the potential costs 
and benefits of this regulatory action and have determined that these 
regulations do not impose additional costs to State eligible agencies 
under title II, local eligible providers of adult education, or the 
Federal government. We make this determination based upon analysis of 
the particular requirements in parts 462 and 463.
    The regulations in part 462 primarily represent conforming changes 
and updates to current regulations so as to make an orderly transition 
from WIA to WIOA. For example, we revised the title of Sec.  462.41 to 
conform to the joint WIOA rule to implement the measurable skill gains 
performance indicator by requiring the documentation of achievement of 
academic, technical, occupational, or other forms of progress.
    A second example of changes in part 462 is one in which States are 
provided more flexibility in reporting outcomes for adult learners. 
Section 462.43(c) recognizes the fact that several States offer adult 
high school programs, sanctioned by State law or regulation, which lead 
to a secondary school diploma or its equivalent. The rule now allows 
these States to measure and report educational gain through the 
awarding of credits or Carnegie Units, but does not require States to 
implement changes at an additional cost. Thus, from a cost perspective, 
the regulations in part 462 do not impose substantively new 
requirements on State eligible agencies or local eligible providers of 
adult education. Additionally, the benefits of clarifying the 
conforming changes from WIA to WIOA and

[[Page 55550]]

providing States additional flexibility justify the promulgation of the 
regulations in part 462.
    The regulations in part 462 also update and revise existing AEFLA 
regulations established under WIA that determine the suitability of 
tests for use in the NRS to reflect new WIOA provisions. We expect that 
these final regulations will result in a more uniform test review and 
approval process. For example, Sec.  462.10 establishes new dates by 
which tests must be submitted for review each year. The revised 
submission dates provide more opportunities for publishers to submit 
assessments to the Secretary for review and may increase the 
availability of new assessments to providers. Section 462.11(a)(4) 
increases the number of application copies that a publisher must submit 
to the Secretary from three to four. The additional cost to test 
publishers of providing another copy of an application is negligible. 
Accordingly, we conclude that the regulations in part 462 provide test 
publishers with greater flexibility in the overall submission process, 
and as such, anticipate that the benefits of this additional 
flexibility outweigh any potential minimal costs for test publishers. 
Moreover, we believe that the benefits of this change outweigh the 
potential costs as it strengthens the integrity of the NRS as a 
critical tool for measuring State performance on accountability 
measures while reducing costs to the Federal government.
    The regulations in part 463 largely clarify administrative and 
programmatic changes made by WIOA to the provisions regarding general 
adult education (e.g., applicable definitions, relevant programs, 
applicable regulations), how States make awards to local eligible 
providers, new adult education and literacy activities, new 
requirements for programs for corrections education and the education 
of other institutionalized individuals, and a new English literacy and 
civics education program. While WIOA enacts substantive programmatic 
changes in these areas, WIOA also provides States and outlying areas 
funding and flexibility to address these challenges.
    The regulations in subpart C of part 463 describe the process and 
requirements for States and outlying areas to award grants or contracts 
to eligible providers as well as the activities allowed for local 
administrative costs. New application requirements include those aimed 
at alignment with local workforce plans and promotion of concurrent 
enrollment with title I services, fulfillment of one-stop partner 
responsibilities, performance against the newly established primary 
indicators of performance, improving services to meet the needs of 
eligible individuals, and other information that addresses the 13 
considerations outlined in Sec.  463.20. The changes and new 
requirements in subpart C pose no costs to eligible State agencies, 
eligible providers, or the Federal government that are additional to 
the costs imposed by statutory requirements.
    Section 463.21 requires an eligible agency to establish procedures 
for local WDB review in its grant or contract application process. The 
regulation further establishes that the local WDB must have an 
opportunity to make recommendations to the eligible agency to promote 
alignment with the local plan and that the eligible agency must 
consider the results of the review by the local WDB in determining the 
extent to which the application addresses the required considerations 
in Sec.  463.20. While this is a new requirement under WIOA, we 
conclude that it does not impose significant additional costs to 
eligible State agencies, eligible providers, or the Federal government 
as it minimally extends requirements already in place to compete for 
AEFLA funds.
    The regulations in subparts D, F, and G generally restate statutory 
definitions of adult education and literacy activities and clarify new 
allowable uses of funds. As such, we conclude that these new 
regulations add no additional costs and provide the added benefit of 
clarifying the flexibility that eligible State agencies and eligible 
providers have in using funds provided under the Act for adult 
education and literacy activities as set forth in WIOA. Thus, we have 
determined that the regulations in part 463 do not impose additional 
costs to State eligible agencies under title II of WIOA, eligible 
providers of adult education, or the Federal government.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 does not require you to respond 
to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control 
number. We display the valid OMB control numbers assigned to the 
collections of information in these final regulations at the end of the 
affected sections of the regulations.

Intergovernmental Review

    This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the 
regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive 
order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened 
federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State 
and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal 
financial assistance.
    This document provides early notification of our specific plans and 
actions for this program.

Assessment of Educational Impact

    In the NPRM, we requested comments on whether the proposed 
regulations would require transmission of information that any other 
agency or authority of the United States gathers or makes available. We 
received no comments, and we do not believe that these regulations 
would require transmission of this sort of information.

Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 requires us to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local elected officials in the development of 
regulatory policies that have federalism implications. ``Federalism 
implications'' means substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. In the NPRM we stated that the regulations covered in that 
document may have federalism implications and encouraged State and 
local elected officials to review and provide comments on the proposed 
regulations. In the Public Comment section of this preamble, we discuss 
any comments we received on this subject.
    Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this 
document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, 
audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this 
document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free 
Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the 
Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System 
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well 
as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal 
Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you 
must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.
    You may also access documents of the Department published in the 
Federal Register by using the article search feature at: 
www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search 
feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published 
by the Department.


[[Page 55551]]


(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number: 84.002.
    Adult Education--Basic Grants to States)

List of Subjects

34 CFR Part 460

    Adult education, Grant programs--education.

34 CFR Part 461

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education.

34 CFR Part 462

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

34 CFR Part 463

    Adult education, Grant programs--education.

34 CFR Part 464

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education.

34 CFR Part 472

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

34 CFR Part 477

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education.

34 CFR Part 489

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

34 CFR Part 491

    Administrative practice and procedure, Adult education, Grant 
programs--education.

    Dated: June 30, 2016.
John B. King, Jr,
Secretary of Education.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, under the authority of 
29 U.S.C. 3271 et seq. and 3343(f), the Secretary amends title 34 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 462--MEASURING EDUCATIONAL GAIN IN THE NATIONAL REPORTING 
SYSTEM FOR ADULT EDUCATION

0
1. The authority citation for part 462 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority:  29 U.S.C. 3292, et seq., unless otherwise noted.


0
2. The authority citation at the end of Sec.  462.1 is revised to read 
as follows:


Sec.  462.1  What is the scope of this part?

* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
3. Section 462.2 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  462.2  What regulations apply?

    The following regulations apply to this part:
    (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations 
(EDGAR) as follows:
    (1) 34 CFR part 76 (State-Administered Programs).
    (2) 34 CFR part 77 (Definitions that Apply to Department 
Regulations).
    (3) 34 CFR part 79 (Intergovernmental Review of Department of 
Education Programs and Activities).
    (4) 34 CFR part 81 (General Education Provisions Act--Enforcement).
    (5) 34 CFR part 82 (New Restrictions on Lobbying).
    (6) 34 CFR part 84 (Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free 
Workplace (Financial Assistance)).
    (7) 34 CFR part 86 (Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention).
    (8) 34 CFR part 97 (Protection of Human Subjects).
    (9) 34 CFR part 98 (Student Rights in Research, Experimental 
Programs, and Testing).
    (10) 34 CFR part 99 (Family Educational Rights and Privacy).
    (b) The regulations in this part 462.
    (c)(1) 2 CFR part 180 (OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide 
Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement)), as adopted at 2 CFR part 
3485; and
    (2) 2 CFR part 200 (Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost 
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards), as adopted at 2 
CFR part 3474.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)

0
4. Section 462.3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text.
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Adult basic education (ABE)'' in 
paragraph (b).
0
c. Revising paragraphs (1), (3)(i), and (3)(iii) of the definition of 
``Adult education population'' in paragraph (b).
0
d. Revising the definitions of ``Adult secondary education (ASE)'', 
``Content domains, content specifications, or NRS skill areas'', 
``Educational functioning levels'', ``English as a second language 
(ESL)'', and ``Guidelines'' in paragraph (b).
0
e. Revising the authority citation.
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  462.3  What definitions apply?

    (a) Definitions in the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act 
(Act). The following terms used in these regulations are defined in 
section 203 of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, 20 U.S.C. 
3292 (Act):
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Adult basic education (ABE) means instruction designed for an adult 
whose educational functioning level is equivalent to a particular ABE 
literacy level listed in the NRS educational functioning level table in 
the Guidelines.
    Adult education population * * *
    (1) Who have attained 16 years of age;
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Are basic skills deficient;
* * * * *
    (iii) Are English language learners.
    Adult secondary education (ASE) means instruction designed for an 
adult whose educational functioning level is equivalent to a particular 
ASE literacy level listed in the NRS educational functioning level 
table in the Guidelines.
    Content domains, content specifications, or NRS skill areas mean, 
for the purpose of the NRS, reading, writing, and speaking the English 
language, mathematics, problem solving, English language acquisition, 
and other literacy skills as defined by the Secretary.
    Educational functioning levels mean the ABE, ASE, and ESL literacy 
levels, as provided in the Guidelines, that describe a set of skills 
and competencies that students demonstrate in the NRS skill areas.
    English as a Second Language (ESL) means instruction designed for 
an adult whose educational functioning level is equivalent to a 
particular ESL English language proficiency level listed in the NRS 
educational functioning level table in the Guidelines.
    Guidelines means the Implementation Guidelines: Measures and 
Methods for the National Reporting System for Adult Education (OMB 
Control Number: 1830-0027) (also known as NRS Implementation 
Guidelines) posted on the Internet at: www.nrsweb.org.
* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292, et seq., unless otherwise noted)


0
5. Section 462.4 is revised to read as follows:

[[Page 55552]]

Sec.  462.4  What are the transition rules for using tests to measure 
educational gain for the National Reporting System for Adult Education 
(NRS)?

    A State or an eligible provider may continue to measure educational 
gain for the NRS using tests that the Secretary has identified in the 
most recent notice published in the Federal Register until the 
Secretary announces through a notice published in the Federal Register 
a date by which such tests may no longer be used.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
6. In Sec.  462.10, paragraph (b) and the authority citation for the 
section are revised to read as follows:


Sec.  462.10  How does the Secretary review tests?

* * * * *
    (b) A test publisher that wishes to have the suitability of its 
test determined by the Secretary under this part must submit an 
application to the Secretary, in the manner the Secretary may 
prescribe, by October 1, 2016, April 1, 2017, October 1, 2017, April 1, 
2018, October 1, 2018, and by October 1 of each year thereafter.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
7. Section 462.11 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4), (b), (e) 
introductory text, (f) introductory text, and (j)(4) and the authority 
citation to read as follows:


Sec.  462.11  What must an application contain?

    (a) * * *
    (4) Submit to the Secretary four copies of its application.
    (b) General information. (1) A statement, in the technical manual 
for the test, of the intended purpose of the test and how the test will 
allow examinees to demonstrate the skills that are associated with the 
NRS educational functioning levels in the Guidelines.
* * * * *
    (e) Match of content to the NRS educational functioning levels 
(content validity). Documentation of the extent to which the items or 
tasks on the test cover the skills in the NRS educational functioning 
levels in the Guidelines, including--
* * * * *
    (f) Match of scores to NRS educational functioning levels. 
Documentation of the adequacy of the procedure used to translate the 
performance of an examinee on a particular test to an estimate of the 
examinee's standing with respect to the NRS educational functioning 
levels in the Guidelines, including--
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (4) If a test has been substantially revised--for example by 
changing its mode of administration, administration procedures, 
structure, number of items, content specifications, item types, forms, 
sub-tests, or number of hours between pre- and post-testing from the 
most recent edition reviewed by the Secretary under this part--the test 
publisher must provide an analysis of the revisions, including the 
reasons for the revisions, the implications of the revisions for the 
comparability of scores on the current test to scores on the previous 
test, and results from validity, reliability, and equating or standard-
setting studies undertaken subsequent to the revisions.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
8. Section 462.12 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iv), (c)(2), 
(d)(2), (e)(1)(ii), and (e)(5), and the authority citation to read as 
follows:


Sec.  462.12  What procedures does the Secretary use to review the 
suitability of tests?

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (iv) Includes a test that samples one or more of the major content 
domains of the NRS educational functioning levels of ABE, ASE or ESL 
with sufficient numbers of questions to represent adequately the domain 
or domains; and
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Annually publishes in the Federal Register and posts on the 
Internet at www.nrsweb.org a list of the names of tests and test forms 
and the educational functioning levels the tests are suitable to 
measure in the NRS. A copy of the list is also available from the U.S. 
Department of Education, Office of Career, Technical, and Adult 
Education, Division of Adult Education and Literacy, 400 Maryland 
Avenue SW., Room 11152, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-
7240.
    (d) * * *
    (2) The test publisher may resubmit an application to have the 
suitability of its test determined by the Secretary under this part on 
October 1 in the year immediately following the year in which the 
Secretary notifies the publisher.
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) A test has been substantially revised--for example, by 
changing its mode of administration, administration procedures, 
structure, number of items, content specifications, item types, forms 
or sub-tests, or number of hours between pre- and post-testing.
* * * * *
    (5) If the Secretary revokes the determination regarding the 
suitability of a test, the Secretary publishes in the Federal Register 
and posts on the Internet at www.nrsweb.org a notice of that revocation 
along with the date by which States and eligible providers must stop 
using the revoked test. A copy of the notice of revocation is also 
available from the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Career, 
Technical, and Adult Education, Division of Adult Education and 
Literacy, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 11152, Potomac Center Plaza, 
Washington, DC 20202-7240.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
9. Section 462.13 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and the 
authority citation to read as follows:


Sec.  462.13  What criteria and requirements does the Secretary use for 
determining the suitability of tests?

* * * * *
    (b) The test must sample one or more of the major content domains 
of the NRS educational functioning levels of ABE, ASE or ESL with 
sufficient numbers of questions to adequately represent the domain or 
domains.
* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
10. Section 462.14 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and the 
authority citation to read as follows:


Sec.  462.14  How often and under what circumstances must a test be 
reviewed by the Secretary?

* * * * *
    (b) If a test that the Secretary has determined is suitable for use 
in the NRS is substantially revised--for example, by changing its mode 
of administration, administration procedures, structure, number of 
items, content specifications, item types, forms, sub-tests, or number 
of hours between pre- and post-testing--and the test publisher wants 
the test to continue to be used in the NRS, the test publisher must 
submit, as provided in Sec.  462.11(j)(4), the substantially revised 
test or version of the test to the Secretary for review so that the 
Secretary can determine whether the test continues to be suitable for 
use in the NRS.
* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
11. Section 462.40 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) and 
the authority citation to read as follows:

[[Page 55553]]

Sec.  462.40  Must a State have an assessment policy?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Identify the pre- and post-tests that the State requires 
eligible providers to use to measure the educational functioning level 
gain of ABE, ASE, and ESL students;
    (3)(i) Indicate when, in calendar days or instructional hours, 
eligible providers must administer pre- and post-tests to students;
    (ii) Ensure that the time for administering the post-test is long 
enough after the pre-test to allow the test to measure educational 
functioning level gains according to the test publisher's guidelines; 
and
    (iii) Specify a standard for the percentage of students to be pre- 
and post-tested.
* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
12. Section 462.41 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (3), 
(c)(2), and the authority citation to read as follows:


Sec.  462.41  How must tests be administered in order to accurately 
measure educational gain?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Administer the pre-test to students at a uniform time, 
according to the State's assessment policy; and
    (3) Administer pre-tests to students in the skill areas identified 
in the State's assessment policy.
    (c) * * *
    (2) Administer the post-test to students at a uniform time, 
according to the State's assessment policy;
* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)


0
13. The authority citation at the end of Sec.  462.42 is revised to 
read as follows:


Sec.  462.42  How are tests used to place students at an NRS 
educational functioning level?

* * * * *

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3292)

Sec.  462.43  [Removed and Reserved]

0
14. Remove and reserve Sec.  462.43.


Sec.  462.44  [Removed and Reserved]

0
15. Remove and reserve Sec.  462.44.
0
16. Part 463 is added to read as follows:

PART 463--ADULT EDUCATION AND FAMILY LITERACY ACT

Sec.
Subpart A--Adult Education General Provisions
463.1 What is the purpose of the Adult Education and Family Literacy 
Act?
463.2 What regulations apply to the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act programs?
463.3 What definitions apply to the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act programs?
Subpart B--[Reserved]
Subpart C--How Does a State Make an Award to Eligible Providers?
463.20 What is the process that the eligible agency must follow in 
awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers?
463.21 What processes must be in place to determine the extent to 
which a local application for grants or contracts to provide adult 
education and literacy services is aligned with a local plan under 
section 108 of WIOA?
463.22 What must be included in the eligible provider's application 
for a grant or contract?
463.23 Who is eligible to apply for a grant or contract for adult 
education and literacy activities?
463.24 How can an eligible provider establish that it has 
demonstrated effectiveness?
463.25 What are the requirements related to local administrative 
cost limits?
463.26 What activities are considered local administrative costs?
Subpart D--What Are Adult Education and Literacy Activities?
463.30 What are adult education and literacy programs, activities, 
and services?
463.31 What is an English language acquisition program?
463.32 How does a program that is intended to be an English language 
acquisition program meet the requirement that the program lead to 
attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent and transition to postsecondary education and training or 
leads to employment?
463.33 What are integrated English literacy and civics education 
services?
463.34 What are workforce preparation activities?
463.35 What is integrated education and training?
463.36 What are the required components of an integrated education 
and training program funded under title II?
463.37 How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that the three required 
components be ``integrated''?
463.38 How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that an integrated 
education and training program be ``for the purpose of educational 
and career advancement''?
Subpart E--[Reserved]
Subpart F--Programs for Corrections Education and the Education of 
Other Institutionalized Individuals?
463.60 What are programs for Corrections Education and the Education 
of other Institutionalized Individuals?
463.61 How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers under the program for Corrections Education and Education 
of other Institutionalized Individuals?
463.62 What is the priority for programs that receive funding 
through programs for Corrections Education and Education of other 
Institutionalized Individuals?
463.63 How may funds under programs for Corrections Education and 
Education of other Institutionalized Individuals be used to support 
transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release services 
with the goal of reducing recidivism?
Subpart G--What Is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
Program?
463.70 What is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?
463.71 How does the Secretary make an award under the Integrated 
English Literacy and Civics Education program?
463.72 How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers for the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?
463.73 What are the requirements for eligible providers that receive 
funding through the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?
463.74 How does an eligible provider that receives funds through the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program meet the 
requirement to use funds for Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education in combination with integrated education and training 
activities?
463.75 Who is eligible to receive education services through the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program?
Subpart H-K--[Reserved]

    Authority: 29 U.S.C. 102 and 103, unless otherwise noted.

Subpart A--Adult Education General Provisions


Sec.  463.1  What is the purpose of the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act?

    The purpose of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) 
is to create a partnership among the Federal Government, States, and 
localities to provide, on a voluntary basis, adult education and 
literacy activities, in order to--
    (a) Assist adults to become literate and obtain the knowledge and 
skills necessary for employment and economic self-sufficiency;
    (b) Assist adults who are parents or family members to obtain the 
education and skills that--

[[Page 55554]]

    (1) Are necessary to becoming full partners in the educational 
development of their children; and
    (2) Lead to sustainable improvements in the economic opportunities 
for their family;
    (c) Assist adults in attaining a secondary school diploma or its 
recognized equivalent and in the transition to postsecondary education 
and training, through career pathways; and
    (d) Assist immigrants and other individuals who are English 
language learners in--
    (1) Improving their--
    (i) Reading, writing, speaking, and comprehension skills in 
English; and
    (ii) Mathematics skills; and
    (2) Acquiring an understanding of the American system of 
Government, individual freedom, and the responsibilities of 
citizenship.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3271)

Sec.  463.2  What regulations apply to the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act programs?

    The following regulations apply to the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act programs:
    (a) The following Education Department General Administrative 
Regulations (EDGAR):
    (1) 34 CFR part 75 (Direct Grant Programs), except that 34 CFR 
75.720(b), regarding the frequency of certain reports, does not apply.
    (2) 34 CFR part 76 (State-Administered Programs), except that 34 
CFR 76.101 (The general State application) does not apply.
    (3) 34 CFR part 77 (Definitions that Apply to Department 
Regulations).
    (4) 34 CFR part 79 (Intergovernmental Review of Department of 
Education Programs and Activities).
    (5) 34 CFR part 81 (General Education Provisions Act--Enforcement).
    (6) 34 CFR part 82 (New Restrictions on Lobbying).
    (7) 34 CFR part 86 (Drug and Alcohol Prevention).
    (8) 2 CFR part 200 (Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost 
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards), as adopted at 2 
CFR part 3474.
    (b) The regulations in 34 CFR part 462.
    (c) The regulations in 34 CFR part 463.


Sec.  463.3  What definitions apply to the Adult Education and Family 
Literacy Act programs?

    Definitions in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. The 
following terms are defined in Sections 3, 134, 203, and 225 of the 
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3102, 3174, 3272, 
and 3305):

Adult Education
Adult Education and Literacy Activities
Basic Skills Deficient
Career Pathway
Core Program
Core Program Provision
Correctional Institution
Criminal Offender
Customized Training
Eligible Agency
Eligible Individual
Eligible Provider
English Language Acquisition Program
English Language Learner
Essential Components of Reading
Family Literacy Activities
Governor
Individual with a Barrier to Employment
Individual with a Disability
Institution of Higher Education
Integrated Education and Training
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education
Literacy
Local Educational Agency
On-the-Job Training
Outlying Area
Postsecondary Educational Institution
State
Training Services
Workplace Adult Education and Literacy Activities
Workforce Preparation Activities

    Definitions in EDGAR. The following terms are defined in 34 CFR 
77.1:

Applicant
Application
Award
Budget
Budget Period
Contract
Department
ED
EDGAR
Fiscal Year
Grant
Grantee
Nonprofit
Private
Project
Project Period
Public
Secretary
Subgrant
Subgrantee

    Other Definitions. The following definitions also apply:
    Act means the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, Public Law 
113-128.
    Concurrent enrollment or co-enrollment refers to enrollment by an 
eligible individual in two or more of the six core programs 
administered under the Act.
    Digital literacy means the skills associated with using technology 
to enable users to find, evaluate, organize, create, and communicate 
information.
    Peer tutoring means an instructional model that utilizes one 
institutionalized individual to assist in providing or enhancing 
learning opportunities for other institutionalized individuals. A peer 
tutoring program must be structured and overseen by educators who 
assist with training and supervising tutors, setting educational goals, 
establishing an individualized plan of instruction, and monitoring 
progress.
    Re-entry and post-release services means services provided to a 
formerly incarcerated individual upon or shortly after release from a 
correctional institution that are designed to promote successful 
adjustment to the community and prevent recidivism. Examples include 
education, employment services, substance abuse treatment, housing 
support, mental and physical health care, and family reunification 
services.
    Title means title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity 
Act, the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act, Public Law 113-128.

Subpart B--[Reserved]

Subpart C--How Does a State Make an Award to Eligible Providers?


Sec.  463.20  What is the process that the eligible agency must follow 
in awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers?

    (a) From grant funds made available under section 222(a)(1) of the 
Act, each eligible agency must award competitive multiyear grants or 
contracts to eligible providers within the State or outlying area to 
enable the eligible providers to develop, implement, and improve adult 
education and literacy activities within the State or outlying area.
    (b) The eligible agency must require that each eligible provider 
receiving a grant or contract use the funding to establish or operate 
programs that provide adult education and literacy activities, 
including programs that provide such activities concurrently.
    (c) In conducting the competitive grant process, the eligible 
agency must ensure that--
    (1) All eligible providers have direct and equitable access to 
apply and compete for grants or contracts;
    (2) The same grant or contract announcement and application 
processes are used for all eligible providers in the State or outlying 
area; and
    (3) In awarding grants or contracts to eligible providers for adult 
education

[[Page 55555]]

and literacy activities, funds shall not be used for the purpose of 
supporting or providing programs, services, or activities for 
individuals who are not eligible individuals as defined in the Act, 
except that such agency may use such funds for such purpose if such 
programs, services, or activities are related to family literacy 
activities. Prior to providing family literacy activities for 
individuals who are not eligible individuals, an eligible provider 
shall attempt to coordinate with programs and services that do not 
receive funding under this title.
    (d) In awarding grants or contracts for adult education and 
literacy activities to eligible providers, the eligible agency must 
consider the following:
    (1) The degree to which the eligible provider would be responsive 
to--
    (i) Regional needs as identified in the local workforce development 
plan; and
    (ii) Serving individuals in the community who were identified in 
such plan as most in need of adult education and literacy activities, 
including individuals who--
    (A) Have low levels of literacy skills; or
    (B) Are English language learners;
    (2) The ability of the eligible provider to serve eligible 
individuals with disabilities, including eligible individuals with 
learning disabilities;
    (3) The past effectiveness of the eligible provider in improving 
the literacy of eligible individuals, especially those individuals who 
have low levels of literacy, and the degree to which those improvements 
contribute to the eligible agency meeting its State-adjusted levels of 
performance for the primary indicators of performance described in 
Sec.  677.155;
    (4) The extent to which the eligible provider demonstrates 
alignment between proposed activities and services and the strategy and 
goals of the local plan under section 108 of the Act, as well as the 
activities and services of the one-stop partners;
    (5) Whether the eligible provider's program--
    (i) Is of sufficient intensity and quality, and based on the most 
rigorous research available so that participants achieve substantial 
learning gains; and
    (ii) Uses instructional practices that include the essential 
components of reading instruction;
    (6) Whether the eligible provider's activities, including whether 
reading, writing, speaking, mathematics, and English language 
acquisition instruction delivered by the eligible provider, are based 
on the best practices derived from the most rigorous research 
available, including scientifically valid research and effective 
educational practice;
    (7) Whether the eligible provider's activities effectively use 
technology, services and delivery systems, including distance 
education, in a manner sufficient to increase the amount and quality of 
learning, and how such technology, services, and systems lead to 
improved performance;
    (8) Whether the eligible provider's activities provide learning in 
context, including through integrated education and training, so that 
an individual acquires the skills needed to transition to and complete 
postsecondary education and training programs, obtain and advance in 
employment leading to economic self-sufficiency, and to exercise the 
rights and responsibilities of citizenship;
    (9) Whether the eligible provider's activities are delivered by 
instructors, counselors, and administrators who meet any minimum 
qualifications established by the State, where applicable, and who have 
access to high-quality professional development, including through 
electronic means;
    (10) Whether the eligible provider coordinates with other available 
education, training, and social service resources in the community, 
such as by establishing strong links with elementary schools and 
secondary schools, postsecondary educational institutions, institutions 
of higher education, Local WDBs, one-stop centers, job training 
programs, and social service agencies, business, industry, labor 
organizations, community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, 
and intermediaries, in the development of career pathways;
    (11) Whether the eligible provider's activities offer the flexible 
schedules and coordination with Federal, State, and local support 
services (such as child care, transportation, mental health services, 
and career planning) that are necessary to enable individuals, 
including individuals with disabilities or other special needs, to 
attend and complete programs;
    (12) Whether the eligible provider maintains a high-quality 
information management system that has the capacity to report 
measurable participant outcomes (consistent with section Sec.  666.100) 
and to monitor program performance; and
    (13) Whether the local area in which the eligible provider is 
located has a demonstrated need for additional English language 
acquisition programs and civics education programs.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3321)

Sec.  463.21  What processes must be in place to determine the extent 
to which a local application for grants or contracts to provide adult 
education and literacy services is aligned with a local plan under 
section 108 of WIOA?

    (a) An eligible agency must establish, within its grant or contract 
competition, a process that provides for the submission of all 
applications for funds under AEFLA to the appropriate Local Boards.
    (b) The process must include--
    (1) Submission of the applications to the appropriate Local Board 
for its review for consistency with the local plan within the 
appropriate timeframe; and
    (2) An opportunity for the local board to make recommendations to 
the eligible agency to promote alignment with the local plan.
    (c) The eligible agency must consider the results of the review by 
the Local Board in determining the extent to which the application 
addresses the required considerations in Sec.  463.20.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3122(d)(11), 3321(e), 3322)

Sec.  463.22  What must be included in the eligible provider's 
application for a grant or contract?

    (a) Each eligible provider seeking a grant or contract must submit 
an application to the eligible agency containing the information and 
assurances listed below, as well as any additional information required 
by the eligible agency, including:
    (1) A description of how funds awarded under this title will be 
spent consistent with the requirements of title II of AEFLA;
    (2) A description of any cooperative arrangements the eligible 
provider has with other agencies, institutions, or organizations for 
the delivery of adult education and literacy activities;
    (3) A description of how the eligible provider will provide 
services in alignment with the local workforce development plan, 
including how such provider will promote concurrent enrollment in 
programs and activities under title I, as appropriate;
    (4) A description of how the eligible provider will meet the State-
adjusted levels of performance for the primary indicators of 
performance identified in the State's Unified or Combined State Plan, 
including how such provider will collect data to report on such 
performance indicators;
    (5) A description of how the eligible provider will fulfill, as 
appropriate, required one-stop partner responsibilities to--

[[Page 55556]]

    (i) Provide access through the one-stop delivery system to adult 
education and literacy activities;
    (ii) Use a portion of the funds made available under the Act to 
maintain the one-stop delivery system, including payment of the 
infrastructure costs for the one-stop centers, in accordance with the 
methods agreed upon by the Local Board and described in the memorandum 
of understanding or the determination of the Governor regarding State 
one-stop infrastructure funding;
    (iii) Enter into a local memorandum of understanding with the Local 
Board, relating to the operations of the one-stop system;
    (iv) Participate in the operation of the one-stop system consistent 
with the terms of the memorandum of understanding, and the requirements 
of the Act; and
    (v) Provide representation to the State board;
    (6) A description of how the eligible provider will provide 
services in a manner that meets the needs of eligible individuals;
    (7) Information that addresses the 13 considerations listed in 
Sec.  463.20; and
    (8) Documentation of the activities required by Sec.  463.21(b).
    (b) [Reserved]

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3322)

Sec.  463.23  Who is eligible to apply for a grant or contract for 
adult education and literacy activities?

    An organization that has demonstrated effectiveness in providing 
adult education and literacy activities is eligible to apply for a 
grant or contract. These organizations may include, but are not limited 
to:
    (a) A local educational agency;
    (b) A community-based organization or faith-based organization;
    (c) A volunteer literacy organization;
    (d) An institution of higher education;
    (e) A public or private nonprofit agency;
    (f) A library;
    (g) A public housing authority;
    (h) A nonprofit institution that is not described in any of 
paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section and has the ability to 
provide adult education and literacy activities to eligible 
individuals;
    (i) A consortium or coalition of the agencies, organizations, 
institutions, libraries, or authorities described in any of paragraphs 
(a) through (h) of this section; and
    (j) A partnership between an employer and an entity described in 
any of paragraphs (a) through (i) of this section.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(5))

Sec.  463.24  How must an eligible provider establish that it has 
demonstrated effectiveness?

    (a) For the purposes of this section, an eligible provider must 
demonstrate past effectiveness by providing performance data on its 
record of improving the skills of eligible individuals, particularly 
eligible individuals who have low levels of literacy, in the content 
domains of reading, writing, mathematics, English language acquisition, 
and other subject areas relevant to the services contained in the 
State's application for funds. An eligible provider must also provide 
information regarding its outcomes for participants related to 
employment, attainment of secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent, and transition to postsecondary education and training.
    (b) There are two ways in which an eligible provider may meet the 
requirements in paragraph (a) of this section:
    (1) An eligible provider that has been funded under title II of the 
Act must provide performance data required under section 116 to 
demonstrate past effectiveness.
    (2) An eligible provider that has not been previously funded under 
title II of the Act must provide performance data to demonstrate its 
past effectiveness in serving basic skills deficient eligible 
individuals, including evidence of its success in achieving outcomes 
listed in paragraph (a) of this section.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(5))

Sec.  463.25  What are the requirements related to local administrative 
cost limits?

    Not more than five percent of a local grant to an eligible provider 
can be expended to administer a grant or contract under title II. In 
cases where five percent is too restrictive to allow for administrative 
activities, the eligible agency may increase the amount that can be 
spent on local administration. In such cases, the eligible provider 
must negotiate with the eligible agency to determine an adequate level 
of funds to be used for non-instructional purposes.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3323)

Sec.  463.26  What activities are considered local administrative 
costs?

    An eligible provider receiving a grant or contract under this part 
may consider costs incurred in connection with the following activities 
to be administrative costs:
    (a) Planning;
    (b) Administration, including carrying out performance 
accountability requirements;
    (c) Professional development;
    (d) Providing adult education and literacy services in alignment 
with local workforce plans, including promoting co-enrollment in 
programs and activities under title I, as appropriate; and
    (e) Carrying out the one-stop partner responsibilities described in 
Sec.  678.420, including contributing to the infrastructure costs of 
the one-stop delivery system.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3323, 3322, 3151)

Subpart D--What Are Adult Education and Literacy Activities?


Sec.  463.30  What are adult education and literacy programs, 
activities, and services?

    The term ``adult education and literacy activities'' means 
programs, activities, and services that include:
    (a) Adult education,
    (b) Literacy,
    (c) Workplace adult education and literacy activities,
    (d) Family literacy activities,
    (e) English language acquisition activities,
    (f) Integrated English literacy and civics education,
    (g) Workforce preparation activities, or
    (h) Integrated education and training.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(2))

Sec.  463.31  What is an English language acquisition program?

    The term ``English language acquisition program'' means a program 
of instruction--
    (a) That is designed to help eligible individuals who are English 
language learners achieve competence in reading, writing, speaking, and 
comprehension of the English language; and
    (b) That leads to--
    (1) Attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent; and
    (2) Transition to postsecondary education and training; or
    (3) Employment.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(6))

Sec.  463.32  How does a program that is intended to be an English 
language acquisition program meet the requirement that the program 
leads to attainment of a secondary school diploma or its recognized 
equivalent and transition to postsecondary education and training or 
leads to employment?

    To meet the requirement in Sec.  463.31(b) a program of instruction 
must:
    (a) Have implemented State adult education content standards that 
are aligned with State-adopted challenging academic content standards, 
as adopted under the Elementary and Secondary

[[Page 55557]]

Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) as described in the State's 
Unified or Combined State Plan and as evidenced by the use of a State 
or local curriculum, lesson plans, or instructional materials that are 
aligned with the State adult education content standards; or
    (b) Offer educational and career counseling services that assist an 
eligible individual to transition to postsecondary education or 
employment; or
    (c) Be part of a career pathway.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3112(b)(2)(D)(ii), 3272)

Sec.  463.33  What are integrated English literacy and civics education 
services?

    (a) Integrated English literacy and civics education services are 
education services provided to English language learners who are 
adults, including professionals with degrees or credentials in their 
native countries, that enable such adults to achieve competency in the 
English language and acquire the basic and more advanced skills needed 
to function effectively as parents, workers, and citizens in the United 
States.
    (b) Integrated English literacy and civics education services must 
include instruction in literacy and English language acquisition and 
instruction on the rights and responsibilities of citizenship and civic 
participation and may include workforce training.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(12))

Sec.  463.34  What are workforce preparation activities?

    Workforce preparation activities include activities, programs, or 
services designed to help an individual acquire a combination of basic 
academic skills, critical thinking skills, digital literacy skills, and 
self-management skills, including competencies in:
    (a) Utilizing resources;
    (b) Using information;
    (c) Working with others;
    (d) Understanding systems;
    (e) Skills necessary for successful transition into and completion 
of postsecondary education or training, or employment; and
    (f) Other employability skills that increase an individual's 
preparation for the workforce.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(17); P.L. 111-340)

Sec.  463.35  What is integrated education and training?

    The term ``integrated education and training'' refers to a service 
approach that provides adult education and literacy activities 
concurrently and contextually with workforce preparation activities and 
workforce training for a specific occupation or occupational cluster 
for the purpose of educational and career advancement.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272(11))

Sec.  463.36  What are the required components of an integrated 
education and training program funded under title II?

    An integrated education and training program must include three 
components:
    (a) Adult education and literacy activities as described in Sec.  
463.30.
    (b) Workforce preparation activities as described in Sec.  463.34.
    (c) Workforce training for a specific occupation or occupational 
cluster which can be any one of the training services defined in 
section 134(c)(3)(D) of the Act.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272, 3174)

Sec.  463.37  How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that the three required 
components be ``integrated''?

    In order to meet the requirement that the adult education and 
literacy activities, workforce preparation activities, and workforce 
training be integrated, services must be provided concurrently and 
contextually such that--
    (a) Within the overall scope of a particular integrated education 
and training program, the adult education and literacy activities, 
workforce preparation activities, and workforce training:
    (1) Are each of sufficient intensity and quality, and based on the 
most rigorous research available, particularly with respect to 
improving reading, writing, mathematics, and English proficiency of 
eligible individuals;
    (2) Occur simultaneously; and
    (3) Use occupationally relevant instructional materials.
    (b) The integrated education and training program has a single set 
of learning objectives that identifies specific adult education 
content, workforce preparation activities, and workforce training 
competencies, and the program activities are organized to function 
cooperatively.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272)

Sec.  463.38  How does a program providing integrated education and 
training under title II meet the requirement that the integrated 
education and training program be ``for the purpose of educational and 
career advancement''?

    A provider meets the requirement that the integrated education and 
training program provided is for the purpose of educational and career 
advancement if:
    (a) The adult education component of the program is aligned with 
the State's content standards for adult education as described in the 
State's Unified or Combined State Plan; and
    (b) The integrated education and training program is part of a 
career pathway.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272, 3112)

Subpart E--[Reserved]

Subpart F--What are Programs for Corrections Education and the 
Education of Other Institutionalized Individuals?


Sec.  463.60  What are programs for Corrections Education and the 
Education of other Institutionalized Individuals?

    (a) Authorized under section 225 of the Act, programs for 
corrections education and the education of other institutionalized 
individuals require each eligible agency to carry out corrections 
education and education for other institutionalized individuals using 
funds provided under section 222 of the Act.
    (b) The funds described in paragraph (a) of this section must be 
used for the cost of educational programs for criminal offenders in 
correctional institutions and other institutionalized individuals, 
including academic programs for--
    (1) Adult education and literacy activities;
    (2) Special education, as determined by the eligible agency;
    (3) Secondary school credit;
    (4) Integrated education and training;
    (5) Career pathways;
    (6) Concurrent enrollment;
    (7) Peer tutoring; and
    (8) Transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release-
services with the goal of reducing recidivism.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3302, 3305)

Sec.  463.61  How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers under the program for Corrections Education and Education of 
other Institutionalized Individuals?

    (a) States may award up to 20 percent of the 82.5 percent of the 
funds made available by the Secretary for local grants and contracts 
under section 231 of the Act for programs for corrections education and 
the education of other institutionalized individuals.
    (b) The State must make awards to eligible providers in accordance 
with subpart C.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3302, 3321)


[[Page 55558]]




Sec.  463.62  What is the priority for programs that receive funding 
through programs for Corrections Education and Education of other 
Institutionalized Individuals?

    Each eligible agency using funds provided under Programs for 
Corrections Education and Education of Other Institutionalized 
Individuals to carry out a program for criminal offenders within a 
correctional institution must give priority to programs serving 
individuals who are likely to leave the correctional institution within 
five years of participation in the program.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3305)

Sec.  463.63  How may funds under programs for Corrections Education 
and Education of other Institutionalized Individuals be used to support 
transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release services with 
the goal of reducing recidivism?

    Funds under Programs for Corrections Education and the Education of 
Other Institutionalized Individuals may be used to support educational 
programs for transition to re-entry initiatives and other post-release 
services with the goal of reducing recidivism. Such use of funds may 
include educational counseling or case work to support incarcerated 
individuals' transition to re-entry and other post-release services. 
Examples include assisting incarcerated individuals to develop plans 
for post-release education program participation, assisting students in 
identifying and applying for participation in post-release programs, 
and performing direct outreach to community-based program providers on 
behalf of re-entering students. Such funds may not be used for costs 
for participation in post-release programs or services.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3305)

Subpart G--What Is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education Program?


Sec.  463.70  What is the Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education program?

    (a) The Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program 
refers to the use of funds provided under section 243 of the Act for 
education services for English language learners who are adults, 
including professionals with degrees and credentials in their native 
countries.
    (b) The Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program 
delivers educational services as described in Sec.  463.33.
    (c) Such educational services must be delivered in combination with 
integrated education and training activities as described in Sec.  
463.36.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272, 3333)

Sec.  463.71  How does the Secretary make an award under the Integrated 
English Literacy and Civics Education program?

    (a) The Secretary awards grants under the Integrated English 
Literacy and Civics Education program to States that have an approved 
Unified State Plan in accordance with Sec.  463.90 through Sec.  
463.145, or an approved Combined State Plan in accordance with Sec.  
463.90 through Sec.  463.145.
    (b) The Secretary allocates funds to States following the formula 
described in section 243(b) of the Act.
    (1) Sixty-five percent is allocated on the basis of a State's need 
for integrated English literacy and civics education, as determined by 
calculating each State's share of a 10-year average of the data of the 
Office of Immigration Statistics of the Department of Homeland Security 
for immigrants admitted for legal permanent residence for the 10 most 
recent years; and
    (2) Thirty-five percent is allocated on the basis of whether the 
State experienced growth, as measured by the average of the three most 
recent years for which the data of the Office of Immigration Statistics 
of the Department of Homeland Security for immigrants admitted for 
legal permanent residence are available.
    (3) No State receives an allotment less than $60,000.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3333)

Sec.  463.72  How does the eligible agency award funds to eligible 
providers for the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education 
program?

    States must award funds for the Integrated English Literacy and 
Civics Education program to eligible providers in accordance with 
subpart C.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3321)

Sec.  463.73  What are the requirements for eligible providers that 
receive funding through the Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education program?

    Eligible providers receiving funds through the Integrated English 
Literacy and Civics Education program must provide services that--
    (a) Include instruction in literacy and English language 
acquisition and instruction on the rights and responsibilities of 
citizenship and civic participation; and
    (b) Are designed to:
    (1) Prepare adults who are English language learners for, and place 
such adults in, unsubsidized employment in in-demand industries and 
occupations that lead to economic self-sufficiency; and
    (2) Integrate with the local workforce development system and its 
functions to carry out the activities of the program.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272, 3333)

Sec.  463.74  How does an eligible provider that receives funds through 
the Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program meet the 
requirement to use funds for Integrated English Literacy and Civics 
Education in combination with integrated education and training 
activities?

    An eligible provider that receives funds through the Integrated 
English Literacy and Civics Education program may meet the requirement 
to use funds for integrated English literacy and civics education in 
combination with integrated education and training activities by:
    (a) Co-enrolling participants in integrated education and training 
as described in subpart D of this part that is provided within the 
local or regional workforce development area from sources other than 
section 243 of the Act; or
    (b) Using funds provided under section 243 of the Act to support 
integrated education and training activities as described in subpart D 
of this part.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3333, 3121, 3122, 3123)

Sec.  463.75  Who is eligible to receive education services through the 
Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education program?

    Individuals who otherwise meet the definition of ``eligible 
individual'' and are English language learners, including professionals 
with degrees and credentials obtained in their native countries, may 
receive Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education services.

(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3272)

Subpart H-K--[Reserved]

PART 464 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
17. Remove and reserve part 464.

PART 472 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
18. Remove and reserve part 472.

PART 477 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
19. Remove and reserve part 477.

PART 489 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
20. Remove and reserve part 489.

[[Page 55559]]

PART 490 [REMOVED AND RESERVED]

0
21. Remove and reserve part 490.

[FR Doc. 2016-16049 Filed 8-8-16; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P