## Other Youth Topics

## Breadcrumb

            -  Youth Topics 
            -  Opportunity Youth 
            -  Performance Partnership Pilots for Disconnected Youth (P3) 
            -           Round 4 Program List      

# Round 4 Program List

# Examples of Programs Potentially Eligible for Inclusion in Pilots

Programs that may be included in pilots are limited to those that target disconnected youth, or are designed to prevent youth from disconnecting from school or work, that provide education, training, employment, and other related social services. Programs that serve youth as well as other populations may still be eligible for inclusion. In general, the Agencies will consider whether the inclusion of a program in a pilot is consistent with, or conflicts with, other significant legal or policy considerations.

The Agencies recognize that for Performance Partnership Pilots to be successful they must protect vulnerable populations and individuals served by programs included in each pilot at the same time that funds are blended and pilots are given new flexibilities. One of the flexibilities available to pilots is the opportunity to blend program funds. For a program to be blended as part of a pilot, the Federal agency must determine that doing so will: (1) not deny or restrict an individual’s eligibility to services; and (2) not adversely affect vulnerable populations that receive services from that program. More information on these determinations is provided in the FAQs posted at http://youth.gov/p3.

Some programs may introduce a greater likelihood of adversely affecting vulnerable populations, if blended in a pilot, and therefore warrant greater levels of review during the application process to ensure appropriate safeguards. Certain programs may be particularly well suited for blending if they have broad authority or a purpose well aligned with that of a Performance Partnership Pilot and therefore have very low risk of violating the P3 statutory protections. On the other hand, other programs may not be appropriate for a pilot at all if the Agencies determine that their inclusion would infringe on the statutory protections, or that inclusion would undermine important Federal policies or objectives. Where Federal programs are not eligible or suitable for blending under P3, pilots may consider how to braid funding streams, or align them in ways that promote more effective and efficient outcomes even though each stream of funds maintains a separate identity and remains subject to the requirements of the program for which the funds were appropriated.

To assist applicants in determining whether to propose various Federal programs for blending in a pilot using funds from FY 2018 and later years, the Agencies have identified three categories of risk as well as specific examples of the types of programs in each category. This resource identifies programs that should likely not be blended in a pilot and those for which agencies believe that applicants would have either a notably high or low burden of proof to show that the statutory protections will not be violated. This is not a comprehensive list of all programs that may be involved or blended in a pilot, and applicants should consider the context of their localities in determining which programs to blend.

In addition, the inclusion of competitive grants that have already been awarded will merit special consideration on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the scope, objectives, and target population(s) of the existing competitive grant award(s) appropriately and sufficiently align with, the scope, objectives, and target population(s) of the proposed pilot.

## Category 1: Programs with Low Likelihood of Adversely Affecting Vulnerable Populations if Funds Are Blended

The Agencies have identified these programs as presenting a low likelihood of adversely affecting vulnerable populations if their funds are blended in a pilot. The Agencies would require assurances, but not plans, for ensuring the protection of individuals and vulnerable populations in receiving services.

These programs may align with the purpose or requirements of Performance Partnership Pilots, or they may have sufficiently broad authority that blending those funds would be unlikely to violate the statutory protections.

## Category 2: Programs Requiring Significant Review to Ensure that Vulnerable Populations Are Not Adversely Affected if Funds Are Blended

The Agencies have identified these programs as potentially eligible for blending, but only with significant, robust safeguards in place to ensure that vulnerable populations are not adversely affected. While applicants should propose safeguards as needed, these safeguards would ultimately be negotiated and finalized through the performance agreement.

These programs typically serve highly vulnerable populations, such as homeless youth, foster youth, justice-involved youth, and students with disabilities. To blend funds from such programs, applicants must convincingly demonstrate that the outcomes of the population served by the original program will not diminish during the pilot.

Evidence may include plans for data collection on the vulnerable population, alternative service options, and alternative sources of funds. A pilot’s Performance Agreement may include outcome measurements and accountability mechanisms related to these vulnerable populations.

## Category 3: Programs Likely Inappropriate for Blending Funds Due to High Likelihood of Restricting Eligibility for Services or Adversely Affecting Vulnerable Populations

While case-by-case determinations will be made, the Agencies have determined that there is a strong likelihood that blending funds from these programs would: (1) deny or restrict an individual’s eligibility for services funded by these programs; or (2) adversely affect vulnerable populations that receive such services. These programs may entitle all eligible individuals to a service, or provide individuals with direct benefits such as vouchers, credits, and scholarships. Applicants can try to justify that the blending of these programs’ funds would not violate the P3 statutory protections. Such justifications must be compelling.

## Re-Connect Menu

-  Overview 
-  Evaluation 
-  Round 5 (FY 2021) 
-  Round 4 (FY 2018 and FY 2019)    -  P3 Round 4 Presentations 
  -  Round 4 Program List 
-  Round 3 (FY 2016) 
-  Round 2 (FY 2015) 
-  Round 1 (FY 2014) 
-  Background