27812 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

RIN 1830–ZA02

School-to-Work Opportunities Act;

Local Partnership Grants

AGENCIES: Department of Labor and

Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of proposed selection

criteria, administrative cost cap, and

definition.

SUMMARY: The Departments of Labor and

Education jointly propose selection

criteria to be used in evaluating

applications submitted under the

School-to-Work Opportunities Local

Partnership (Local Partnership Grants)

competition in fiscal year (FY) 1995 and

succeeding years, authorized under

Title III of the School-to-Work

Opportunities Act of 1994 (the Act).

Local Partnership Grants will enable

local partnerships, that have built a

sound planning and development base,

to begin implementation of School-toWork Opportunities initiatives that will

become a part of a statewide School-toWork Opportunities system. These

initiatives will offer young Americans

access to programs designed to prepare

them for first jobs in high-skill, highwage careers, and to increase their

opportunities for further education and

training. The Departments also propose

a definition for the term ‘‘administrative

costs’’ as well as a 10 percent cap on

administrative costs incurred by local

partnerships receiving grants under

Title III.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Maria Kniesler, National

School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia

Avenue, SW., Suite 210, Washington,

DC 20024. Comments may also be faxed

to the National School-to-Work Office,

Attention: Maria Kniesler at (202) 401–

6211.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maria Kniesler, National School-toWork Office (202) 401–6218 (this is not

a toll-free number). Individuals who use

a telecommunications device for the

deaf (TDD) may call the Federal

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–

800–877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 8

p.m., Eastern time, Monday through

Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Departments of Labor and

Education intend to reserve funds

appropriated for FY 1995 under the Act

(P.L. 103–239) for a competition for

Local Partnership Grants authorized

under Title III of the Act. The

Departments propose an administrative

cost cap, a definition of the term

‘‘administrative costs,’’ and selection

criteria that would be used in evaluating

applications submitted in response to

the FY 1995 Local Partnership Grant

competition. Local partnerships are

advised that applications for Local

Partnership Grants must meet all of the

requirements of the Act that apply to

programs funded under Title III.

In accordance with section 5 of the

Act, and as part of their ongoing efforts

to improve their joint administration of

all School-to-Work Opportunities

programs authorized under the Act,

including the School-to-Work

Opportunities Local Partnership

program, the Departments are currently

in the process of considering

appropriate administrative procedures.

It is the intent of the Departments that

whatever procedures are used will

result in the most effective and efficient

joint administration of all School-toWork Opportunities programs. In

response to this notice, commenters are

encouraged to submit comments and

suggestions on how the Departments

can best achieve the efficient and

effective joint administration of the

School-to-Work Opportunities Local

Partnership program, including

comments and suggestions relating to

the joint grants administration process

and to the applicability of

administrative regulations.

Proposed Administrative Cost Cap,

Definition, and Selection Criteria

The Departments propose to apply the

10 percent cap on administrative costs

contained in section 215(b)(6) of the Act

to local partnerships receiving grants

directly under this competition. The

Departments have concluded that

applying the 10 percent cap to Title III

grants awarded to local partnerships by

the Departments would be consistent

with the Act’s broader limitations on

administrative costs, with the 10

percent cap imposed on partnerships

receiving School-to-Work Opportunities

subgrants from States, and with section

305 of Title III, which requires

conformity between School-to-Work

Opportunities plans of local

partnerships and State School-to-Work

Opportunities plans. The Departments

also propose a definition of the term

‘‘administrative costs,’’ which is a term

that appears in the Act but which the

Act does not define, and the

Departments propose to apply the

selection criteria in this notice to the FY

1995 competition for Local Partnership

Grants. Unless modified in the final

notice for this competition, the 10

percent administrative cap, the

definition of administrative costs, and

selection criteria proposed herein, will

be used for future Local Partnership

Grants in the years succeeding FY 1995.

The Departments solicit comments on

the proposed 10 percent cap, the

proposed definition, and the proposed

selection criteria. A final notice of

selection criteria will be published in

the Federal Register after the

Departments have taken into account

the responses to this notice and have

applied other relevant considerations.

Note: This notice of proposed selection

criteria does not solicit applications. A notice

inviting applications for School-to-Work

Opportunities Local Partnership Grants will

be published in the Federal Register

concurrent with or immediately following

publication of the notice of final selection

criteria.

Definition

All definitions in the Act apply to

School-to-Work Opportunities systems

funded under this and future Local

Partnership Grant competitions.

However, the Act does not contain a

definition of the term ‘‘administrative

costs.’’ The Departments, therefore,

propose to apply the following

definition to the administration of

grants under this competition:

The term ‘‘administrative costs’’

means the activities of a local

partnership that are necessary for the

proper and efficient performance of its

duties under the Local Partnership

Grant pursuant to the School-to-Work

Opportunities Act and that are not

directly related to the provision of

services to participants or otherwise

allocable to the program’s allowable

activities under the grant listed in

section 215(b)(4) and section 215(c) of

the Act. Administrative costs may be

either personnel and non-personnel

costs, and may be either direct and

indirect. Costs of administration include

those costs that are related to this grant

in such categories as—

A. Costs of salaries, wages, and

related costs of the grantee’s staff

engaged in—

• Overall system management, system

coordination, and general

administrative functions;

• Preparing program plans, budgets,

and schedules, as well as applicable

amendments;
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Notices 27813

• Monitoring of local initiatives, pilot

projects, subrecipients, and related

systems and processes;

• Procurement activities, including

the award of specific subgrants,

contracts, and purchase orders;

• Developing systems and

procedures, including management

information systems, for ensuring

compliance with the requirements

under the Act;

• Preparing reports and other

documents related to the Act;

• Coordinating the resolution of audit

findings;

B. Costs for goods and services

required for administration of the

School-to-Work Opportunities system;

C. Costs of system-wide management

functions; and

D. Travel costs incurred for official

business in carrying out grants

management or administrative

activities.

Selection Criteria

Selection Criterion 1: Comprehensive

Local School-to-Work Opportunities

System (40 Points)

Considerations: In applying this

criterion, reviewers will consider—

A. 20 Points. The extent to which the

partnership has designed a

comprehensive local School-to-Work

Opportunities plan that—

• Includes effective strategies for

integrating school-based and workbased learning, integrating academic

and vocational education, and

establishing linkages between secondary

and postsecondary education;

• Is likely to produce systemic change

that will have substantial impact on the

preparation of all students for a first job

in a high-skill, high-wage career and in

increasing their opportunities for further

learning;

• Ensures all students will have a

range of options, including options for

higher education, additional training

and employment in high-skill, highwage jobs;

• Ensures coordination and

integration with existing school-to-work

programs, including programs financed

from State and private sources, with

funds available from Federal education

and training programs (such as the Job

Training Partnership Act and the Carl D.

Perkins Vocational and Applied

Technology Education Act); and where

applicable, communities designated as

Empowerment Zones or Enhanced

Enterprise Communities (EZ/EEC);

• Serves a geographical area that

reflects the needs of the local labor

market, and is able to adjust to regional

structures that the State School-to-Work

Opportunities plan may identify; and

• Targets occupational clusters that

represent growing industries in the

partnership’s geographic area; and,

where applicable, demonstrates that the

clusters are included among the

occupational clusters being targeted by

the State School-to-Work Opportunities

system.

B. 20 Points. The extent to which the

partnership’s plan demonstrates its

capability to achieve the statutory

requirements and to effectively put in

place the system components in Title I

of the School-to-Work Opportunities

Act, including—

• A work-based learning component

that includes the statutory ‘‘mandatory

activities’’ and that contributes to the

transformation of workplaces into active

learning components of the education

system through an array of learning

experiences such as mentoring, jobshadowing, unpaid work experiences,

school-sponsored enterprises, and paid

work experiences;

• A school-based learning component

that provides students with high-level

academic and technical skills consistent

with academic standards that the State

establishes for all students, including,

where applicable, standards established

under the Goals 2000: Educate America

Act;

• A connecting activities component

to provide a functional link between

students’ school and work activities,

and between employers and educators;

• Effective processes for assessing

skills and knowledge required in career

majors, and issuing portable skill

certificates that are benchmarked to

high-quality standards such as those

States will establish under the Goals

2000: Educate America Act, and for

periodically assessing and collecting

information on student outcomes, as

well as a realistic strategy and timetable

for implementing the process in concert

with the State.

• A flexible School-to-Work

Opportunities system that allows

students participating in the local

system to develop new career goals over

time, and to change career majors; and

• Effective strategies for: providing

staff development for teachers, worksite

mentors and other key personnel;

developing model curricula and

innovative instructional methodologies;

expanding career and academic

counseling in elementary and secondary

schools; and utilizing innovative

technology-based instructional

techniques.

Selection Criterion 2: Quality and

Effectiveness of the Local Partnership

(20 Points)

Considerations: In applying this

criterion, reviewers will refer to section

4(11) of the Act and consider—

• Whether the partnership’s plan

demonstrates an effective and

convincing strategy for continuing the

commitment of employers and other

interested parties in the local School-toWork Opportunities system;

• The effectiveness of the

partnership’s plan to include private

sector representatives as joint partners

with educators in both the design and

the implementation of the local Schoolto-Work Opportunities system;

• The extent to which the local

partnership has developed strategies to

provide a range of opportunities for

employers to participate in the design

and implementation of the local Schoolto-Work Opportunities system,

including membership on councils and

partnerships; assistance in setting

standards, designing curricula, and

determining outcomes; providing

worksite experiences for teachers;

helping to recruit other employers; and

providing worksite learning activities

for students such as mentoring, job

shadowing, unpaid work experiences,

and paid work experiences;

• The extent to which the roles and

responsibilities of the key partners,

including employers, educators,

representatives of labor organizations or

nonmanagerial employee

representatives, community-based

organizations, and other key parties are

clearly defined and are likely to produce

the desired changes in the way students

are prepared for the future;

• The extent to which the partnership

demonstrates the capacity to build a

quality local School-to-Work

Opportunities system;

• Whether the partnership has

included methods for sustaining and

expanding the partnership, as the

program expands in scope and size.

Selection Criterion 3: Participation of

All Students (15 Points)

Considerations: In applying this

criterion, reviewers will consider—

• The extent to which the partnership

has developed realistic strategies for

ensuring that all students have effective

and meaningful opportunities to

participate in the local School-to-Work

Opportunities system;

• Whether the partnership has

identified potential barriers to the

participation of any students, and the

degree to which it proposes effective

ways of overcoming these barriers;
27814 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 101 / Thursday, May 25, 1995 / Notices

• The degree to which the

partnership has developed realistic

goals and methods for assisting young

women to participate in School-to-Work

Opportunities programs leading to

employment in high-performance, highpaying jobs, including non-traditional

jobs;

• The partnership’s methods for

ensuring safe and healthy work

environments for students; and

• The extent to which the

partnership’s plan provides for the

participation of a significant number or

percentage of students in School-toWork Opportunities activities listed

under Title I of the Act.

Selection Criterion 4: Collaboration

With State (15 Points)

Considerations: In applying this

criterion, reviewers will consider—

• The extent to which the local

partnership has effectively consulted

with its State School-to-Work

Opportunities partnership, and has

established realistic methods for

ensuring consistency of its local

strategies with the statewide School-toWork Opportunities system being

developed by that State partnership;

• Whether the local partnership has

developed a sound strategy for

integrating its plan, as necessary, with

the State plan for a statewide School-toWork Opportunities system;

• The extent to which the local

partnership has developed effective

processes through which it is able to

assist and collaborate with the State in

establishing the statewide School-toWork system, and is able to provide

feedback to the state on their systembuilding process.

• Whether the plan includes a

feasible workplan that describes the

steps that will be taken in order to make

the local system part of the State

School-to-Work Opportunities system,

including a timeline that includes major

planned objectives during the grant

period.

Selection Criterion 5: Management Plan

(10 Points)

Considerations: In applying this

criterion, reviewers will consider—

• The feasibility and effectiveness of

the partnership’s strategy for using other

resources, including private sector

resources, to maintain the system when

Federal resources under the School-toWork Opportunities Act are no longer

available.

• The extent to which the

partnership’s management plan

anticipates barriers to implementation

and proposes effective methods for

addressing barriers as they arise.

• Whether the plan includes feasible

measurable goals for the School-to-Work

Opportunities system, based on

performance outcomes established

under section 402 of the Act, and an

effective method for collecting

information relevant to the local

partnership’s progress in meeting its

goals.

• Whether the plan includes a

regularly scheduled process for

improving or redesigning the School-toWork Opportunities system based on

performance outcomes established

under section 402 of the Act.

• The extent to which the resources

requested will be used to develop

information, products and ideas that

will assist other States and local

partnerships as they design and

implement local systems.

• The extent to which the partnership

will limit equipment and other

purchases in order to maximize the

amounts spent on delivery of services to

students.

Intergovernmental Review

This program is subject to the

requirements of Executive Order 12372

and the regulations in 29 CFR Part 17.

The objectives of the Executive order is

to foster an intergovernmental

partnership and a strengthened

federalism by relying on processes

developed by State and local

governments for coordination and

review of proposed Federal financial

assistance.

In accordance with the order, this

document is intended to provide early

notification of the Departments’ specific

plans and actions for this program.

Executive Order 12866

This notice of proposed priority has

been reviewed in accordance with

Executive Order 12866. Under the terms

of the order the Secretary has assessed

the potential costs and benefits of this

regulatory action.

The potential costs associated with

the notice of proposed priority are those

resulting from statutory requirements

and those determined by the Secretary

to be necessary for administering this

program effectively and efficiently.

In assessing the potential costs and

benefits—both quantitative and

qualitative—of this notice of proposed

priority, the Secretary has determined

that the benefits of the proposed priority

justify the costs.

The Secretary has also determined

that this regulatory action does not

unduly interfere with State, local, and

tribal governments in the exercise of

their governmental functions.

To assist the Department in

complying with the specific

requirements of Executive Order 12866,

the Secretary invites comment on

whether there may be further

opportunities to reduce any potential

costs or increase potential benefits

resulting from this proposed priority

without impeding the effective and

efficient administration of the program.

Invitation to Comment

Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on the proposed

application of the 10 percent cap on

administrative costs, the proposed

selection criteria, and the proposed

definition of the term ‘‘administrative

costs’’ contained in this notice. All

comments submitted in response to this

notice will be available for public

inspection, during and after the

comment period, in the National

School-to-Work Office, 400 Virginia

Avenue, S.W., Suite 210, Washington,

D.C., between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and

4 p.m., Monday through Friday of each

week, except Federal holidays.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Number has not been assigned.)

Dated: May 16, 1995.

Doug Ross,

Assistant Secretary for Employment and

Training, Department of Labor.

Augusta Kappner,

Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult

Education, Department of Education.

[FR Doc. 95–12786 Filed 5–24–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P