Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2001 / Notices 21229

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act

This notice does not create any

reporting or recordkeeping requirements

requiring OMB clearance.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

93.566 Refugee Assistance—State

Administered Programs)

Dated: April 20, 2001.

Carmel Clay-Thompson,

Acting Director, Office of Refugee

Resettlement.

[FR Doc. 01–10443 Filed 4–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4184–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and

Families

Refugee Resettlement Program;

Proposed Availability of Formula

Allocation Funding for FY 2001

Targeted Assistance Grants for

Services to Refugees in Local Areas of

High Need

AGENCY: Office of Refugee Resettlement

(ORR), ACF, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed availability

of formula allocation funding for FY

2001 targeted assistance grants to States

for services to refugees in local areas of

high need.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

proposed availability of funds and

award procedures for FY 2001 targeted

assistance grants for services to refugees

under the Refugee Resettlement Program

(RRP). These grants are for service

provision in localities with large refugee

populations, high refugee

concentrations, and high use of public

assistance, and where specific needs

exist for supplementation of currently

available resources.

This notice continues the eligibility of

those 50 counties located in 29 States

that previously qualified for and

received targeted assistance program

(TAP) grants beginning in FY 1999 as a

result of the three-year qualification

process. The FY 2001 TAP formula

allocations are based on the same

formula as in FY 1999, updated to

reflect arrivals during the five-year

period from FY 1996 through FY 2000.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be

received by May 29, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Address written comments,

in duplicate, to: Gayle A. Smith, Office

of Refugee Resettlement, Administration

for Children and Families, 370 L’Enfant

Promenade, SW., Washington, D.C.

20447.

Application Deadline: The deadline

for applications will be established by

the final notice. Applications should not

be sent in response to this notice of

proposed allocations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gayle Smith, Director, Division of

Refugee Self-Sufficiency, (202) 205–

3590, e-mail: gsmith@acf.dhhs.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose and Scope

This notice announces the proposed

availability of funds for grants for

targeted assistance for services to

refugees in counties where, because of

factors such as unusually large refugee

populations, high refugee

concentrations, and high use of public

assistance, there exists and can be

demonstrated a specific need for

supplementation of resources for

services to this population.

The Office of Refugee Resettlement

(ORR) has available $49,477,000 in FY

2001 funds for the targeted assistance

program (TAP) as part of the FY 2001

appropriation for the Department of

Health and Human Services

(Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001,

as enacted into law by section 1(a)(1) of

Pub. L. No. 106–554).

The Director of the Office of Refugee

Resettlement (ORR) proposes to use the

$49,477,000 in targeted assistance funds

as follows:

• $44,529,300 will be allocated to

States under the five-year population

formula, as set forth in this notice.

• $4,947,700 (10 percent of the total)

will be used to award discretionary

grants to States under separate

continuation grant awards.

The purpose of targeted assistance

grants is to provide, through a process

of local planning and implementation,

direct services intended to result in the

economic self-sufficiency and reduced

welfare dependency of refugees through

job placements.

The targeted assistance program

reflects the requirements of section

412(c)(2)(B) of the Immigration and

Nationality Act (INA), which provides

that targeted assistance grants shall be

made available ‘‘(i) primarily for the

purpose of facilitating refugee

employment and achievement of selfsufficiency, (ii) in a manner that does

not supplant other refugee program

funds and that assures that not less than

95 percent of the amount of the grant

award is made available to the county

or other local entity.’’

II. Authorization

Targeted assistance projects are

funded under the authority of section

412(c)(2) of the Immigration and

Nationality Act (INA), as amended by

the Refugee Assistance Extension Act of

1986 (Pub. L. No. 99–605), 8 U.S.C.

1522(c); section 501(a) of the Refugee

Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub.

L. No. 96–422), 8 U.S.C. 1522 note,

insofar as it incorporates by reference

with respect to Cuban and Haitian

entrants the authorities pertaining to

assistance for refugees established by

section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited

above; section 584(c) of the Foreign

Operations, Export Financing, and

Related Programs Appropriations Act,

1988, as included in the FY 1988

Continuing Resolution (Pub. L. No. 100–

202), insofar as it incorporates by

reference with respect to certain

Amerasians from Vietnam the

authorities pertaining to assistance for

refugees established by section 412(c)(2)

of the INA, as cited above, including

certain Amerasians from Vietnam who

are U.S. citizens, as provided under title

II of the Foreign Operations, Export

Financing, and Related Programs

Appropriations Acts, 1989 (Pub. L. No.

100–461), 1990 (Pub. L. No. 101–167),

and 1991 (Pub. L. No. 101–513).

III. Use of Funds

Targeted assistance funding must be

used to assist refugee families to achieve

economic independence in accordance

with regulations at 45 CFR part 400. The

term ‘‘refugee’’ includes persons who

meet all requirements of 45 CFR 400.43

(as amended by 65 FR 15409 (March 22,

2000)). In addition to the statutory

requirement that TAP funds be used

‘‘primarily for the purpose of facilitating

refugee employment’’ (section

412(c)(2)(B)(i)), funds awarded under

this program are intended to help fulfill

the Congressional intent that

‘‘employable refugees should be placed

on jobs as soon as possible after their

arrival in the United States’’ (section

412(a)(1)(B)(i) of the INA). Therefore, in

accordance with 45 CFR 400.313,

targeted assistance funds must be used

primarily for employability services

designed to enable refugees to obtain

jobs with less than one year’s

participation in the targeted assistance

program in order to achieve economic

self-sufficiency as soon as possible.

Under 45 CFR 400.316, a State may

provide the same scope of services

under targeted assistance as may be

provided to refugees under 45 CFR

400.154 and 45 CFR 400.155, with the

exception of 45 CFR 400.155(h).

Targeted assistance services may

continue to be provided after a refugee

has entered a job to help the refugee

retain employment or move to a better

job. Targeted assistance funds may not

be used for long-term training programs

such as vocational training that last for

21230 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2001 / Notices

more than a year or educational

programs that are not intended to lead

to employment within a year.

States may not provide services

funded under this notice, except for

referral and interpreter services, to

refugees who have been in the United

States for more than 60 months (five

years). Citizenship and naturalization

preparation services to refugees who

have been in the United States for more

than 60 months may not be provided

with targeted assistance funding.

In accordance with 45 CFR 400.314,

States are required to provide targeted

assistance services to refugees in the

following order of priority, except in

certain individual extreme

circumstances: (a) Refugees who are

cash assistance recipients, particularly

long-term recipients; (b) unemployed

refugees who are not receiving cash

assistance; and (c) employed refugees in

need of services to retain employment

or to attain economic independence.

In accordance with 45 CFR 400.317, if

targeted assistance funds are used for

the provision of English language

training, such training must be provided

in a concurrent, rather than sequential,

time period with employment or with

other employment-related activities.

Refugees who are participating in

TAP-funded or social services-funded

employment services or have accepted

employment are eligible for day care

services for children. For an employed

refugee, TAP-funded day care should be

limited to one year after the refugee

becomes employed. States and counties,

however, are expected to use day care

funding from other publicly funded

mainstream programs as a prior resource

and are encouraged to work with service

providers to assure maximum access to

other publicly funded resources for day

care for which the child is eligible.

Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of

the INA, States must ‘‘ensure that

women have the same opportunities as

men to participate in training and

instruction.’’ In addition, in accordance

with 45 CFR 400.317, targeted

assistance services must be provided, to

the maximum extent feasible, in a

manner that includes the use of

bilingual/bicultural women on service

agency staffs to ensure adequate service

access by refugee women.

In accordance with 45 CFR 400.317,

targeted assistance services must be

provided in a manner that is culturally

and linguistically compatible with a

refugee’s language and cultural

background, to the maximum extent

feasible. In light of the increasingly

diverse population of refugees who are

resettling in this country, refugee

service agencies will need to develop

practical ways of providing culturally

and linguistically appropriate services

to a changing ethnic population.

Services funded under this notice must

be refugee-specific services that are

designed specifically to meet refugee

needs and are in keeping with the rules

and objectives of the refugee program.

Vocational or job-skills training, on-thejob training, or English language

training, however, need not be refugeespecific.

Finally, in order to provide culturally

and linguistically compatible services in

as cost-efficient a manner as possible in

a time of limited resources, ORR

strongly encourages States and counties

to promote and give special

consideration to the provision of

services through coalitions of refugee

service organizations, such as coalitions

of Mutual Assistance Associations

(MAAs), voluntary resettlement

agencies, or a variety of service

providers. ORR believes it is essential

for refugee-serving organizations to form

close partnerships in the provision of

services to refugees in order to be able

to respond adequately to a changing

refugee picture. Coalition-building and

consolidation of providers is

particularly important in communities

with multiple service providers in order

to ensure better coordination of services

and maximum use of funding for

services by minimizing the funds used

for multiple administrative overhead

costs.

The award of funds to States under

this notice will be contingent upon the

completeness of a State’s application as

described in section VIII below.

IV. (Reserved for Discussion of

Comments in the Final Notice)

V. Eligible Grantees

Eligible grantees are (a) those agencies

of State governments that are

responsible for the refugee program

under 45 CFR 400.5 in States containing

counties that qualify for FY 2001

targeted assistance awards; (b) a

replacement designee appointed by the

Director pursuant to 45 CFR 400.301(c)

if the State authorized the replacement

designee to act as its agent in applying

for and receiving targeted assistance

funds; or (c) an agency which has Statewide responsibility for an alternative to

the State-administered program in lieu

of the State under a Wilson/Fish grant

authorized by section 412 (e)(7) of the

INA.

The Director of ORR proposes to

determine the eligibility of counties for

inclusion in the FY 2001 targeted

assistance program on the basis of the

method described in section VI of this

notice.

The use of targeted assistance funds

for services to Cuban and Haitian

entrants is limited to States that have an

approved State plan under the Cuban/

Haitian Entrant Program (CHEP).

The State agency will submit a single

application on behalf of all county

governments that are qualified counties

in that State. Subsequent to the approval

of the State’s application by ORR, local

targeted assistance plans will be

developed by the county government or

other designated entity and submitted to

the State.

A State with more than one qualified

county is permitted, but not required, to

determine the allocation amount for

each qualified county within the State.

However, if a State chooses to determine

county allocations differently from

those set forth in the final notice, in

accordance with 45 CFR 400.319, the FY

2001 allocations proposed by the State

must be based on the State’s population

of refugees who arrived in the U.S.

during the most recent five-year period.

A State may use welfare data as an

additional factor in the allocation of its

targeted assistance funds if it so

chooses; however, a State may not

assign a greater weight to welfare data

than it has assigned to population data

in its allocation formula. In addition, if

a State chooses to allocate its FY 2001

targeted assistance funds in a manner

different from the formula set forth in

the final notice, the FY 2001 allocations

and methodology proposed by the State

must be included in the State’s

application for ORR review and

approval.

Applications submitted in response to

the final notice are not subject to review

by State and area-wide clearinghouses

under Executive Order 12372,

‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal

Programs.’’

VI. Qualification and Allocation

A. Qualification

The Director of ORR will determine

the qualification of counties for targeted

assistance once every three years, as

stated in the FY 1999 notice of proposed

availability of targeted assistance

allocations to States which was

published in the Federal Register on

March 10, 1999 (64 FR 11927). Since

ORR determined the qualification of

counties for targeted assistance in FY

1999, those qualifying counties

determined eligible in FY 1999 and

listed in this notice as qualified to apply

for FY 2001 TAP funding would remain

qualified for TAP funding through FY

2001 on the basis of the most current

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2001 / Notices 21231

five-year refugee/entrant arrival data.

ORR does not plan to consider the

eligibility of additional counties for TAP

funding until FY 2002, when ORR will

again review data on all counties that

could potentially qualify for TAP funds.

B. Allocation Formula

Of the funds available for FY 2001 for

targeted assistance, $44,529,300 would

be allocated by formula to States for

qualified counties based on the initial

placements of refugees, Amerasians,

entrants (including Havana parolees),

and Kurdish asylees in these counties

during the five-year period from FY

1996 through FY 2000 (October 1, 1995–

September 30, 2000). This is data that is

available in the ORR Refugee Data

System.

The arrival data used as the basis for

targeted assistance formula allocations

do not take asylees or secondary

migrants who have received services

into account. We are unable to include

secondary migrants in the 5-year

population because secondary migration

is not currently tracked at the county

level. We are unable to include asylees,

except for Kurdish asylees who were

processed on Guam, because

information from the Immigration and

Naturalization Service (INS) and

Executive Office of Immigration Review

(EOIR) on grants of asylum are available

by zip code of the asylee. Unfortunately,

zip code assignments do not correspond

to county designations. Many zip codes

cross county lines and in some cases,

State lines. Therefore, based on

available data, ORR is currently unable

to credit numbers of asylees to counties.

ORR plans to remedy this by revising

the ORR–11 and seeking OMB approval

to capture numbers of asylees and

secondary migrants accessing services at

the county level. This revision to the

ORR–11 will allow States to report on

numbers of asylees and secondary

migrants receiving services at the

county level. ORR will adjust the

targeted assistance 5-year population

based on these data.

States are advised that ORR expects

that these revisions to the ORR–11, once

implemented, will require States to

track asylees and secondary migrants

who receive services by name, social

security number, alien registration

number, county of initial residence/

resettlement, and county of current

residence in order to transmit this

information to ORR in the future.

With regard to Havana parolees, in the

absence of reliable data on the State-byState resettlement of this population, we

are crediting 49,504 Havana parolees

who arrived in the U.S. during the past

five years according to the Immigration

and Naturalization Service (INS), using

the following methodology. For FY 1999

and FY 2000, we credited the qualifying

counties with Havana parolees

according to arrival numbers supplied

to us by the Parolee Orientation Program

funded by the International Affairs

Office of the INS. For FY 1996 through

FY 1998, the Havana parolees for each

qualifying county in Florida are based

on actual arrival data submitted by the

State of Florida; Havana parolees

credited to qualifying counties in other

States were prorated based on the

counties’ proportion of the three-year

(FY 1996 through FY 1998) entrant

population in the U.S.

If a qualifying county does not agree

with ORR’s population estimate and

believes that its five-year population for

FY 1996–FY 2000 was undercounted

and wishes ORR to reconsider its

population estimate, the county must

provide the following evidence: The

county must submit to ORR a letter from

each local voluntary agency that

resettled refugees in the county that

attests to the fact that the refugees/

entrants listed in an attachment to the

letter were resettled as initial

placements during the five-year period

from FY 1996–FY 2000 in the county

making the claim. Documentation must

include the name, alien number, date of

birth and date of arrival in the U.S. for

each refugee/entrant claimed. Listings of

refugees who are not identified by their

alien numbers will not be considered.

Counties should submit such evidence

separately from comments on the

proposed formula no later than 30 days

from the date of publication of this

notice and addressed to: Loren Bussert,

Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency,

Office of Refugee Resettlement, 370

L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington,

DC 20447; telephone, (202) 401–4732; Email: lbussert@acf.dhhs.gov. Failure to

submit the required documentation

within the required time period will

result in forfeiture of consideration. 

VII. Allocations

Table 1 lists the qualifying counties;

the number of refugee (column 3) and

entrant (column 4) arrivals in those

counties during the five-year period

from October 1, 1995–September 30,

2000; the number of Havana parolees

(column 5) credited to each county

during this period, the total number of

arrivals; and the proposed amount of

each county’s allocation based on its

five-year arrival population.

TABLE 1.—PROPOSED TARGETED ASSISTANCE ALLOCATIONS BY COUNTY: FY 2001

County State Refugees 1 Entrants Havanna

parolees 2

Total arrivals

FY 1996–2000

Total FY 2001

proposed

allocation

1 Maricopa County ................. Arizona ...................................... 9,674 685 401 10,760 $1,407,207

2 Fresno County ..................... California ................................... 968 2 1 971 126,988

3 Los Angeles County ............ California ................................... 13,149 124 380 13,653 1,785,506

4 Orange County .................... California ................................... 4,713 12 23 4,748 620,904

5 Sacramento County ............. California ................................... 10,652 2 6 10,660 1,394,099

6 San Diego County ............... California ................................... 5,826 141 280 6,247 816,924

7 San Francisco ..................... California ................................... 5,028 13 33 5,074 663,511

8 Santa Clara County ............. California ................................... 6,317 43 31 6,391 835,815

9 Yolo County ......................... California ................................... 1,224 0 3 1,227 160,407

10 Denver County ..................... Colorado ................................... 2,795 0 5 2,800 366,117

11 District of Columbia ............. District of Columbia .................. 2,941 5 14 2,960 387,124

12 Broward County ................... Florida ....................................... 617 1,279 1,274 3,170 414,566

13 Dade County ....................... Florida ....................................... 7,012 14,453 40,330 61,795 8,081,420

14 Duval County ....................... Florida ....................................... 4,641 18 59 4,718 617,010

15 Hillsborough County ............ Florida ....................................... 1,605 329 1,312 3,246 424,505

16 DeKalb County .................... Georgia ..................................... 8,685 10 8 8,703 1,138,115

17 Fulton County ...................... Georgia ..................................... 4,644 84 134 4,862 635,840

18 Cook/Kane ........................... Illinois ........................................ 14,730 182 272 15,184 1,985,732

19 Polk County ......................... Iowa .......................................... 3,571 1 2 3,574 467,400

20 Jefferson County 3 ............... Kentucky ................................... 3,765 1,576 487 5,828 762,188

21232 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2001 / Notices

TABLE 1.—PROPOSED TARGETED ASSISTANCE ALLOCATIONS BY COUNTY: FY 2001—Continued

County State Refugees 1 Entrants Havanna

parolees 2

Total arrivals

FY 1996–2000

Total FY 2001

proposed

allocation

21 Hampden County ................ Massachusetts .......................... 2,296 9 5 2,310 302,046

22 Suffolk County ..................... Massachusetts .......................... 4,154 57 49 4,260 557,146

23 Ingham County .................... Michigan ................................... 1,911 718 227 2,856 373,532

24 Kent County ......................... Michigan ................................... 3,125 190 29 3,344 437,320

25 Hennepin County ................. Minnesota ................................. 7,891 5 4 7,900 1,033,085

26 Ramsey County ................... Minnesota ................................. 1,680 2 5 1,687 220,638

27 City of St. Louis ................... Missouri .................................... 9,429 1 1 9,431 1,233,302

28 Lancaster County ................ Nebraska .................................. 2,302 34 20 2,356 308,113

29 Clark County 4 ...................... Nevada ..................................... 1,761 1,162 698 3,621 473,547

30 Hudson County .................... New Jersey ............................... 787 257 868 1,912 250,047

31 Bernalillo County ................. New Mexico .............................. 880 695 647 2,222 290,588

32 Monroe County .................... New York .................................. 2,526 643 358 3,527 461,254

33 New York ............................. New York .................................. 32,361 355 481 33,197 4,341,434

34 Oneida County .................... New York .................................. 4,781 0 0 4,781 625,249

35 Guilford County .................... North Carolina .......................... 2,508 5 15 2,528 330,607

36 Cass County ........................ North Dakota ............................ 2,043 0 2 2,045 267,441

37 Cuyahoga County ................ Ohio .......................................... 3,335 6 7 3,348 437,854

38 Multnomah ........................... Oregon ...................................... 11,076 734 317 12,127 1,585,917

39 Erie County .......................... Pennsylvania ............................ 1,989 0 0 1,989 260,117

40 Philadelphia County ............ Pennsylvania ............................ 4,200 26 39 4,265 557,718

41 Minnehaha County 5 ............ South Dakota ............................ 1,729 0 0 1,729 226,115

42 Davidson County ................. Tennessee ................................ 3,180 54 45 3,279 428,774

43 Dallas/Tarrant ...................... Texas ........................................ 10,636 333 406 11,375 1,487,587

44 Harris County ....................... Texas ........................................ 8,039 508 118 8,665 1,133,158

45 Davis/Salt Lake .................... Utah .......................................... 5,569 1 3 5,573 728,761

46 Fairfax County ..................... Virginia ...................................... 3,285 4 9 3,298 431,318

47 City of Richmond ................. Virginia ...................................... 2,403 39 59 2,501 327,116

48 King/Snohomish .................. Washington ............................... 12,529 41 34 12,604 1,648,339

49 Pierce County ...................... Washington ............................... 1,982 3 5 1,990 260,264

50 Spokane County .................. Washington ............................... 3,207 0 1 3,208 419,535

Total ................................... ................................................... 266,151 24,841 49,504 340,496 44,529,300

1 Includes refugees, Amerasian immigrants from Vietnam, and Kurdish asylees from Iraq. Does not inlcude other asylees or secondary migrants. 2For FY 1999 and FY 2000, the Havana parolees for all counties are based on actual data. For previous years, the Havana parolees of Florida counties are based on actual data, while parolees from other counties are prorated based on each county’s proportion of the three-year (FY

1996–1998) entrant population. 3The allocation for Jefferson County, Kentucky will be awarded to the Kentucky Wilson/Fish project.

4The allocation for Clark County, Nevada will be awarded to the Nevada Wilson/Fish project.

5The allocation for Minnehaha County, South Dakota will be awarded to the South Dakota Wilson/Fish project.

TABLE 2.—TARGETED ASSISTANCE

PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS BY STATE:

FY 2001

State Total FY 2001

allocation

Arizona .................................. $1,407,207

California ............................... 6,404,154

Colorado ............................... 366,117

District of Columbia .............. 387,124

Florida ................................... 9,537,501

Georgia ................................. 1,773,955

Illinois .................................... 1,985,732

Iowa ...................................... 467,400

Kentucky ............................... 762,188

Massachusetts ...................... 859,192

Michigan ............................... 810,852

Minnesota ............................. 1,253,723

Missouri ................................ 1,233,302

Nebraska .............................. 308,113

Nevada ................................. 473,547

New Jersey ........................... 250,047

New Mexico .......................... 290,588

New York .............................. 5,427,937

North Carolina ...................... 330,607

North Dakota ........................ 267,441

Ohio ...................................... 437,854

Oregon .................................. 1,585,917

TABLE 2.—TARGETED ASSISTANCE

PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS BY STATE:

FY 2001—Continued

State Total FY 2001

allocation

Pennsylvania ........................ 817,835

South Dakota ........................ 226,115

Tennesee .............................. 428,774

Texas .................................... 2,620,745

Utah ...................................... 728,761

Virginia .................................. 758,434

Washington ........................... 2,328,138

Total ............................... 44,529,300

VIII. Application and Implementation

Process

States that are currently operating

under approved management plans for

their FY 1999 targeted assistance

program and wish to continue to do so

for their FY 2001 grants may provide the

following in lieu of resubmitting the full

currently approved plan:

The State’s application for FY 2001

funding shall provide:

• Assurance that the State’s current

management plan for the administration

of the targeted assistance program, as

approved by ORR in FY 1999, will

continue to be in full force and effect for

the FY 2001 targeted assistance

program, subject to any additional

assurances or revisions required by this

notice which are not reflected in the

current plan. Any proposed

modifications to the approved plan will

be identified in the application and are

subject to ORR review and approval,

e.g., if the State assumes local

administration of the program or if the

State chooses to determine county

allocations differently. Any proposed

changes must address and reference all

appropriate portions of the FY 1999

application content requirements to

ensure complete incorporation in the

State’s management plan.

• A line item budget and justification

for State administrative costs limited to

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 82 / Friday, April 27, 2001 / Notices 21233

a maximum of five percent of the total

award to the State. Each total budget

period funding amount requested must

be necessary, reasonable, and allocable

to the project.

• All applicants must submit targeted

assistance performance goals as

described under Section IX.

IX. Results or Benefits Expected

All applicants must establish targeted

assistance proposed performance goals

for each of the six ORR performance

outcome measures for each targeted

assistance county’s proposed service

contract(s) or sub-grants for the next

contracting cycle. Proposed

performance goals must be included in

the application for each performance

measure. The six ORR performance

measures are: entered employments,

cash assistance reductions due to

employment, cash assistance

terminations due to employment, 90-

day employment retentions, average

wage at placement, and job placements

with available health benefits. Targeted

assistance program activity and progress

achieved toward meeting performance

outcome goals are to be reported

quarterly on the ORR–6, the ‘‘Quarterly

Performance Report.’’

X. Reporting Requirements

States will be required to submit

quarterly reports on the outcomes of the

targeted assistance program, using the

same form which States use for

reporting on refugee social services

formula grants. This is Schedule A and

Schedule C, pages 1 and 2 of the ORR–

6 Quarterly Performance Report form

(OMB #0970–0036).

XI. The Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (Pub. L. 104–13)

This notice does not create any

reporting or recordkeeping requirements

requiring OMB clearance.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

(CFDA) Number: 93.584

Dated: April 20, 2001.

Carmel Clay-Thompson,

Acting Director, Office of Refugee

Resettlement.

[FR Doc. 01–10444 Filed 4–26–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4184–01–P