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

This program announcement consists of four parts:

Part I. General Information Background--program purpose and scope, legislative authority. Discussion of Comments Received, Funding Availability, Use of Funds, Assurances/Information, Local Program Administration. Project and Applicant Eligibility--Qualification and Allocation, Funding Priorities, Eligible Applicants, project and budget periods, multiple applications. Part II: The Project Description Part III: The Review Process--intergovernmental review, initial ACF screening, evaluation criteria and application review. Part IV: The Application--application materials, development and submission.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13): Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average four hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information. The following information collections are included in the program announcement: OMB Approval No. 0970-0139, ACF UNIFORM PROJECT DESCRIPTION (UPD), which expires 10/31/2000, and OMB Approval No. 0970-0036, ORR-6, Quarterly Performance Report (QPR), which expires 7/31/2002. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Part I. General Information/Background

Purpose and Scope

This notice announces the availability of funds for grants to States 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 by refugees, there exists and can be demonstrated a specific need for supplementation of resources for services to this population. 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.

Legislative Authority

Targeted assistance projects are funded under the authority of section 412(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. 1522(c)); section 501(a) of the Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-422), 8 U.S.C. 1522 note, insofar as it incorporates by reference with respect to Cuban and Haitian entrants the authorities pertaining to assistance for refugees established by section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited above; section 584(c) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1988, as included in the FY 1988 Continuing Resolution (Pub. L. 100-202), insofar as it incorporates by reference with respect to certain Amerasians from Vietnam the authorities pertaining to assistance for refugees established by section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited above, including certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are U.S. citizens, as provided under title II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Acts, 1989 (Pub. L. 100-461), 1990 (Pub. L. 101-167), and 1991 (Pub. L. 101- 513). The targeted assistance program reflects the requirements of section 412(c)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which provides that targeted assistance grants shall be made available ``(i) primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment and achievement of self-sufficiency, (ii) in a manner that does not supplant other refugee program funds and that assures that not less than 95 percent of the amount of the grant award is made available to the county or other local entity.''

Discussion of Comments Received

Ten letters of comment were received in response to the notice of proposed availability of FY 1999 funds for targeted assistance. The comments are summarized below and are followed in each case by the Department's response. Comment: Eight commenters requested that ORR consider the impact that loss of targeted assistance funding will have on large counties with large number of refugee arrivals. These same commenters indicated that several arbitrary decisions by ORR, such as use of concentration rate as an index of impact, the weighting of concentration rate in the calculations, and the failure of ORR to use some assessments of impact such as welfare dependency and median household income in the formula make it possible for large counties to be disqualified. One commenter requested a modification of the proposed targeted assistance allocation methodology based on an increase in arrivals during FY 1998 and heavy utilization of public assistance by refugees in a county. Resonse: ORR understands that discontinuance of targeted assistance program (TAP) funds in the counties that no longer qualify will have an impact on the services in those counties. Counties losing targeted assistance formula funds may wish to apply for ORR targeted assistance discretionary funds through their States. Regarding the suggestion that ORR use welfare dependency or median household income as qualifying criteria, ORR must take into account all eligibility factors which are outlined in the statute for which data are available. In section 412(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the three factors listed for targeted assistance are high population, high refugee concentration, and high use of public assistance. While we do not have welfare dependency data, data are available on refugee population and refugee concentration. Therefore, ORR is required to use both factors in determining county qualification. As stated in the notice of proposed allocations, ORR assigns a double weight to population because we believe that large numbers of refugee/entrant arrivals to a county create a significant impact, regardless of the ratio of refugees to the county general population. Regarding the suggestion that ORR use median household income as a qualifying criterion for targeted assistance funds, this criterion is not one of the factors outlined in the statute governing the targeted assistance allocation formula. Comment: Two commenters questioned the number of Havana parolees credited to each county in the proposed notice. Response: At the time of the proposed notice, ORR had received no data on FY 1998 Havana parolees other than the gross number reported (13,442) for the fiscal year by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Rather than delay publication of the Proposed Notice, ORR credited each county in the U.S. with a portion of the FY 1998 arrivals according to its share of the five-year population of entrant arrivals. During the comment period, ORR obtained additional records from the Florida Department of Health on parolees arriving in Florida counties. The Final Notice reflects these data. As was done in the FY 1998 Final Notice, each Florida country is credited with the number of arrivals identified by the Florida Department of Health; each non- Florida county is credited with a proportional share of the remaining Havana Parolees according to its share of the five-year entrant population.

Funding Availability

The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) has available $49,477,000 in FY 1999 funds for the targeted assistance program (TAP) as part of the FY 1999 appropriation for the Department of Health and Human Services (Pub. L. 105-277). The Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) will 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% of the total) will be used to award discretionary grants to States under separate grant announcements.

Use of Funds

Targeted assistance funding must be used to assist refugee families to achieve economic independence. Services funded through the targeted assistance program are required to focus primarily on those refugees who, either because of their protracted use of public assistance or difficulty in securing employment, continue to need services beyond the initial years of resettlement. States may not provide services funded under this notice, except for referral and interpreter services, to refugees who have been in the United States for more than 60 months (5 years). In accordance with 45 CFR 400.314, States are required to provide targeted assistance services to refugees in the following order of priority, except in

certain individual extreme circumstances: (a) Refugees who are cash assistance recipients, particularly long-term recipients; (b) unemployed refugees who are not receiving cash assistance; and (c) employed refugees in need of services to retain employment or to attain economic independence. In addition to the statutory requirement that TAP funds be used ``primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment'' (section 412(c)(2)(B)(i)), funds awarded under this program are intended to help fulfill the Congressional intent that ``employable refugees should be placed on jobs as soon as possible after their arrival in the United States'' (section 412(a)(1)(B)(i) of the INA). Therefore, in accordance with 45 CFR 400.313, targeted assistance funds must be used primarily for employability services designed to enable refugees to obtain jobs with less than one year's participation in the targeted assistance program in order to achieve economic self- sufficiency as soon as possible. Targeted assistance services may continue to be provided after a refugee has entered a job to help the refugee retain employment or move to a better job. Targeted assistance funds may not be used for long-term training programs such as vocational training that last for more than a year or educational programs that are not intended to lead to employment within a year. In accordance with 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. A portion of a local area's allocation may be used for services which are not directed toward the achievement of a specific employment objective in less than one year but which are essential to the adjustment of refugees in the community, provided such needs are clearly demonstrated and such use is approved by the State. Allowable services include those listed under 45 CFR 400.316. Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of the INA, States must ``insure that women have the same opportunities as men to participate in training and instruction.'' In addition, in accordance with 45 CFR 400.317, 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. The Director also strongly encourages the inclusion of refugee women in management and board positions in agencies that serve refugees. In order to facilitate refugee self-support, the Director also expects States to implement strategies which address simultaneously the employment potential of both male and female wage earners in a family unit. States and counties are expected to make every effort to assure availability of day care services for children in order to allow women with children the opportunity to participate in employment services or to accept or retain employment. To accomplish this, day care may be treated as a priority employment-related service under the targeted assistance program. Refugees who are participating in TAP-funded or social services-funded employment services or have accepted employment are eligible for day care services for children. For an employed refugee, TAP-funded day care should be limited to one year after the refugees becomes employed. States and counties, however, are expected to use day care funding from other publicly funded mainstream programs as a prior resource and are encouraged to work with service providers to assure maximum access to other publicly funded resources for day care. In accordance with 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 which are designed specifically to meet refugee needs and are in keeping with the rules and objectives of the refugee program. Vocational or job-skills training, on-the-job training, or English language training, however, need not be refugee-specific. When planning targeted assistance services, States must take into account the reception and placement (R&P) services provided by local resettlement agencies in order to utilize these resources in the overall program design and to ensure the provision of seamless, coordinated services to refugees that are not duplicative. See 45 CFR 400.156(b). ORR strongly encourages States and counties when contracting for targeted assistance services, including employment services, to give consideration to the special strengths of mutual assistance associations (MAAs), whenever contract bidders are otherwise equally qualified, provided that the MAA has the capability to deliver services in a manner that is culturally and linguistically compatible with the background of the target population to be served. ORR also strongly encourages MAAs to ensure that their management and board composition reflect the major target populations to be served.

Assurances/Information

The State's application for FY 1999 funding shall provide: 1. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in accordance with the requirements in 45 CFR Part 400. 2. Assurance that the targeted assistance funds will be used primarily for the provision of services which are designed to enable refugees to obtain jobs with less than one year's participation in the targeted assistance program. Of the FY 1999 targeted assistance formula allocation used for services, States must indicate the percentage that will be used for employment services. 3. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will not be used to offset funding otherwise available to counties or local jurisdictions from the State agency in its administration of other programs, e.g., social services, cash and medical assistance, etc. 4. Assurance that local administrative budgets will not exceed 15% of the local allocation. Targeted assistance grants are cost-based awards. Neither a State nor a county is entitled to a certain amount for administrative costs. Rather, administrative cost requests should be based on projections of actual needs. States and counties are strongly encouraged to limit administrative costs to the extent possible to maximize available funding for services to clients. 5. Assurance that the State will make available to the county or designated local entity not less than 95% of the amount of its formula allocation for purposes of implementing the activities proposed in the plan, except in the case of a State that administers the program locally as described below. 6. Assurance that the State and its contractors or sub-recipients will follow appropriate State procurement and contracting requirements in the acquisition, administration and management of targeted assistance service contracts and sub-grants. 7. Identification of the contracting cycle for targeted assistance service contracts in each county. States with more than one qualified county are encouraged to ensure that all counties participating in TAP in the State use the same contracting cycle dates.

8. A description of the State's plan for conducting fiscal and program monitoring of the targeted assistance program, including frequency of on-site monitoring. 9. Identification of the local administering agency.

States Administering the Program Locally

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

Qualification and Allocation

Qualifying New Counties In order to qualify for application for FY 1999 targeted assistance funds, a county (or group of counties with the same Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, or SMSA) or independent city is required to rank above a selected cut-off point of jurisdictions for which data were reviewed, based on two criteria: (1) The number of refugee/entrant arrivals placed in the county during the most recent 5-year period (FY 1994-1998); and (2) the 5-year refugee/entrant population as a percentage of the county's overall population. County arrival numbers have been adjusted based on updated refugee and entrant arrival data. Welfare dependency will no longer be used as a qualifying criterion since welfare dependency data for refugee AFDC and now TANF recipients have not been available at the national level since FY 1989. Each county was ranked on the basis of its 5-year arrival population and its concentration of refugees, with a relative weighting of 2 to 1 respectively, because we believe that large numbers of refugee/entrant arrivals into a county create a significant impact, regardless of the ratio of refugees to the general population. Each county was then ranked in terms of the sum of a county's rank on refugee/entrant arrivals and its rank on concentration. In order to target a sufficient level of funding to the most impacted counties, a county had to rank within the top 50 counties in order to qualify. It is ORR's intent that the 50 counties listed as qualified for TAP funding in the FY 1999 final TAP notice will remain qualified for TAP funding through FY 2001. ORR has screened data on all counties that have received awards for targeted assistance since FY 1983 and on all other counties that could potentially qualify for TAP funds based on the criteria in this notice. Analysis of these data indicates that: (1) 40 counties which have previously received targeted assistance continue to qualify; (2) 7 counties which have previously received targeted assistance no longer qualify; and (3) 10 new counties qualify. Table 1 provides a list of the counties that remain qualified and the new counties that qualify, the number of refugee/entrant arrivals in those counties within the past 5 years, the percent that the 5-year arrival population represents of the overall county population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula described above. Table 2 lists the counties that have previously received targeted assistance funding which no longer qualify, the number of refugee/ entrant arrivals in those counties within the past 5 years, the percent that the 5-year arrival population represents of the overall county population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula. Allocation Formula Of the funds available for FY 1999 for targeted assistance, $44,529,300 is allocated by formula to States for qualified counties based on the initial placements of refugees, Amerasians, entrants, and Kurdish asylees in these counties during the 5-year period from FY 1994 through FY 1998 (October 1, 1993-September 30, 1998). With regard to Havana parolees, we are crediting 13,442 Havana parolees who arrived in FY 1998 to qualified counties in Florida based on data the State submitted to ORR during the public comment period. We have credited FY 1998 Havana parolee arrivals to the remaining qualified targeted assistance counties based on the counties' proportion of the 5-year entrant arrival population. For FY 1995 and FY 1996, Florida's Havana parolees for each qualified county are based on actual data submitted by the State of Florida, while Havana parolees credited to counties in other States were prorated based on the counties' proportion of the 5-year entrant population in the U.S. The allocations in this notice reflect these additional parolee numbers.

Allocations

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

Table 1.--Top 50 Counties Eligible for Targeted Assistance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5-year County State arrival Concentration Sum of total (in percent) ranks ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Targeted Assistance Counties Eligible for Continuation ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dade County.................................. FL............................. 67,889 3.5047 3 Sacramento County............................ CA............................. 11,795 1.1328 30 New York..................................... NY............................. 55,411 0.7567 30 City of St. Louis............................ MO............................. 7,672 1.9340 32 Multnomah.................................... OR............................. 12,231 0.8660 36 King/Snohomish............................... WA............................. 14,507 0.7353 38 DeKalb County................................ GA............................. 6,584 1.2062 41 Santa Clara County........................... CA............................. 10,899 0.7278 49 Oneida County................................ NY............................. 4,125 1.6445 50

Fulton County................................ GA............................. 5,681 0.8754 55 Orange County................................ CA............................. 12,858 0.5334 58 Jefferson County............................. KY............................. 5,155 0.7753 65 Suffolk County............................... MA............................. 4,757 0.7165 72 Dallas/Tarrant............................... TX............................. 12,652 0.4185 77 San Francisco................................ CA............................. 8,108 0.5056 78 Polk County.................................. IA............................. 3,435 1.0500 79 Hennepin County.............................. MN............................. 5,323 0.5156 86 District of Columbia......................... DC............................. 3,889 0.6408 86 Cook/Kane.................................... IL............................. 17,362 0.3202 90 Maricopa County.............................. AZ............................. 8,686 0.4093 91 Duval County................................. FL............................. 3,851 0.5722 94 Monroe County................................ NY............................. 3,863 0.5411 94 San Diego County............................. CA............................. 9,332 0.3736 97 Denver County................................ CO............................. 3,246 0.6942 102 Harris County................................ TX............................. 9,382 0.3329 103 Bernalillo County............................ NM............................. 3,226 0.6713 106 Davidson County.............................. TN............................. 3,249 0.6361 107 Philadelphia County.......................... PA............................. 5,794 0.3654 109 Ingham County................................ MI............................. 2,514 0.8918 113 City of Richmond............................. VA............................. 2,335 1.1499 115 Lancaster County............................. NE............................. 2,335 1.0930 116 Hudson County................................ NJ............................. 2,991 0.5408 125 Ramsey County................................ MN............................. 2,700 0.5558 129 Fairfax County............................... VA............................. 3,610 0.3764 129 Los Angeles County........................... CA............................. 17,313 0.1953 129 Fresno County................................ CA............................. 3,014 0.4515 136 Cass County.................................. ND............................. 1,669 1.6224 139 Pierce County................................ WA............................. 2,658 0.4534 147 Cuyahoga County.............................. OH............................. 3,817 0.2703 152 Broward County............................... FL............................. 3,449 0.2747 156 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Counties That Qualify ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Spokane County............................... WA............................. 3,009 0.8327 99 Davis/Salt Lake.............................. UT............................. 4,605 0.3911 113 Clark County................................. NV............................. 3,462 0.4669 118 Hillsborough County.......................... FL............................. 3,084 0.3698 148 Guilford County.............................. NC............................. 2,093 0.6024 153 Minnehaha County............................. SD............................. 1,430 1.1550 154 Kent County.................................. MI............................. 2,372 0.4738 154 Erie County.................................. PA............................. 1,873 0.6797 155 Hampden County............................... MA............................. 2,239 0.4907 157 Yolo County.................................. CA............................. 1,433 1.0156 158 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2.--Counties That No Longer Qualify ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5-year County State arrival Concentration Sum of total (in percent) ranks ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alameda County............................... CA............................. 3,329 0.2602 165 Oakland County............................... MI............................. 2,826 0.2608 180 Palm Beach County............................ FL............................. 2,398 0.2777 190 Baltimore City............................... MD............................. 2,105 0.2860 198 Broome County................................ NY............................. 1,098 0.5175 222 San Joaquin County........................... CA............................. 1,221 0.2540 259 Merced County................................ CA............................. 690 0.3868 296 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3.--Targeted Assistance Allocations by County [FY 1999] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Total FY 1999 County State Refugees Entrants Havana arrival FY final \1\ parolees 94-98 allocation -----------------------------------------------------------------------------\2\-------------------------------- 1 Maricopa County...... Arizona......... 7,394 780 512 8,686 $979,275

2 Fresno County........ California...... 3,011 2 1 3,014 339,804 3 Los Angeles County... California...... 16,581 434 298 17,313 1,951,899 4 Orange County........ California...... 12,817 23 18 12,858 1,449,634 5 Sacramento County.... California...... 11,788 4 3 11,795 1,329,790 6 San Diego County..... California...... 8,476 517 339 9,332 1,052,107 7 San Francisco........ California...... 8,028 48 32 8,108 914,111 8 Santa Clara County... California...... 10,815 51 33 10,899 1,228,773 9 Yolo County.......... California...... 1,425 5 3 1,433 161,559 10 Denver County........ Colorado........ 3,241 3 2 3,246 365,960 11 District of Columbia. District of 3,866 14 9 3,889 438,453 Columia. 12 Broward County....... Florida......... 978 1,578 893 3,449 388,847 13 Dade County.......... Florida......... 8,426 33,125 26,338 67,889 7,653,928 14 Duval County......... Florida......... 3,788 28 35 3,851 434,169 15 Hillsborough County.. Florida......... 1,525 767 792 3,084 347,696 16 DeKalb County........ Georgia......... 6,562 13 9 6,584 742,292 17 Fulton County........ Georgia......... 5,334 209 138 5,681 640,486 18 Cook/Kane............ Illinois........ 16,699 399 264 17,362 1,957,424 19 Polk County.......... Iowa............ 3,433 1 1 3,435 387,268 20 Jefferson County \3\. Kentucky........ 3,605 934 616 5,155 581,184 21 Hampden County....... Massachusetts... 2,224 9 6 2,239 252,429 22 Suffolk County....... Massachusetts... 4,648 63 46 4,757 536,313 23 Ingham County........ Michigan........ 1,785 440 289 2,514 283,433 24 Kent County.......... Michigan........ 2,304 41 27 2,372 267,424 25 Hennepin County...... Minnesota....... 5,318 3 2 5,323 600,125 26 Ramsey County........ Minnesota....... 2,683 10 7 2,700 304,403 27 City of St. Louis.... Missouri........ 7,670 1 1 7,672 864,955 28 Lancaster County..... Nebraska........ 2,272 38 25 2,335 263,252 29 Clark County \4\..... Nevada.......... 1,363 1,264 835 3,462 390,312 30 Hudson County........ New Jersey...... 1,605 809 577 2,991 337,211 31 Bernalillo County.... New Mexico...... 1,137 1,261 828 3,226 363,705 32 Monroe County........ New York........ 2,723 688 452 3,863 435,522 33 New York............. New York........ 54,272 682 457 55,411 6,247,137 34 Oneida County........ New York........ 4,123 1 1 4,125 465,060 35 Guilford County...... North Carolina.. 2,081 7 5 2,093 235,969 36 Cass County.......... North Dakota.... 1,664 3 2 1,669 188,166 37 Cuyahoga County...... Ohio............ 3,805 6 6 3,817 430,336 38 Multnomah............ Oregon.......... 11,216 613 402 12,231 1,378,945 39 Erie County.......... Pennsylvania.... 1,873 0 0 1,873 211,165 40 Philadelphia County.. Pennsylvania.... 5,708 52 34 5,794 653,226 41 Minnehaha County \5\. South Dakota.... 1,430 0 0 1,430 161,221 42 Davidson County...... Tennessee....... 3,160 54 35 3,249 366,298 43 Dallas/Tarrant....... Texas........... 11,479 707 466 12,652 1,426,410 44 Harris County........ Texas........... 9,065 189 128 9,382 1,057,744 45 Davis/Salt Lake...... Utah............ 4,603 1 1 4,605 519,176 46 Fairfax County....... Virginia........ 3,595 8 7 3,610 406,998 47 City of Richmond..... Virginia........ 2,153 110 72 2,335 263,252 48 King/Snohomish....... Washington...... 14,423 51 33 14,507 1,635,546 49 Pierce County........ Washington...... 2,641 10 7 2,658 299,668 50 Spokane County....... Washington...... 3,009 0 0 3,009 339,240 ----------------------------------------------------------------- T ..................... ................ 313,824 46,056 35,087 394,967 44,529,300 o. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Refugees includes refugees, Kurdish asylees, and Amerasian immigrants from Vietnam. \2\ For all years, Havana parolee arrivals to the qualifying Florida counties (28,058) are based on actual data, while parolees in the non-Florida counties (7,029) are prorated based on the counties' proportion of the five- year (FY 1994-1998) entrant population. \3\ The allocation for Jefferson County, Kentucky will be awarded to the Kentucky Wilson/Fish project. \4\ The allocation for Clark County, Nevada will be awarded to the Nevada Wilson/Fish project. \5\ The allocation for Minnehaha County, South Dakota will be awarded to the South Dakota Wilson/Fish project.

Table 4.--Targeted Assistance Final Allocations by State [FY 1999] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total FY 1999 State allocation ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Arizona................................................. $979,275 California.............................................. 8,427,677 Colorado................................................ 365,960 District of Columbia.................................... 438,453

Florida................................................. 8,824,640 Georgia................................................. 1,382,778 Illinois................................................ 1,957,424 Iowa.................................................... 387,268 Kentucky................................................ 581,184 Massachusetts........................................... 788,742 Michigan................................................ 550,857 Minnesota............................................... 904,528 Missouri................................................ 864,955 Nebraska................................................ 263,252 Nevada.................................................. 390,312 New Jersey.............................................. 337,211 New Mexico.............................................. 363,705 New York................................................ 7,147,719 North Carolina.......................................... 235,969 North Dakota............................................ 188,166 Ohio.................................................... 430,336 Oregon.................................................. 1,378,945 Pennsylvania............................................ 864,391 South Dakota............................................ 161,221 Tennesee................................................ 366,298 Texas................................................... 2,484,154 Utah.................................................... 519,176 Virginia................................................ 670,250 Washington.............................................. 2,274,454 --------------- Total............................................... 44,529,300 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Spokane County...... ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eligible Applicants

ORR invites eligible entities to submit grant applications for Targeted Assistance Grants for Services to Refugees in Local Areas of High Need. Eligible grantees are those agencies of State governments that are responsible for the refugee program under 45 CFR 400.5 in States containing counties which qualify for FY 1999 targeted assistance awards. Under the FY 1999 targeted assistance program, States may apply for and receive grant awards on behalf of qualified counties in the State. A single allocation will be made to each State by ORR on the basis of an approved State application. The State agency will, in turn, receive, review, and determine the acceptability of individual county targeted assistance plans. The State agency will submit a single application on behalf of all county governments of the qualified counties in that State. Subsequent to the approval of the State's application by ORR, local targeted assistance plans will be developed by the county government or other designated entity and submitted to the State. The use of targeted assistance funds for services to Cuban and Haitian entrants is limited to States which have an approved State plan under the Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program (CHEP). 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 this notice, in accordance with 45 CFR 400.319, the FY 1999 allocations proposed by the State must be based on the State's population of refugees who arrived in the U.S. during the most recent 5-year period. A State may use welfare data as an additional factor in the allocation of its targeted assistance funds if it so chooses; however, a State may not assign a greater weight to welfare data than it has assigned to population data in its allocation formula. In addition, if a State chooses to allocate its FY 1999 targeted assistance funds in a manner different from the formula set forth in this notice, the FY 1999 allocations and methodology proposed by the State must be included in the State's application for ORR review and approval. This announcement is inviting applications for project periods up to 3 years. Awards will be for a one-year budget period, although project periods may be for 3 years. Applications for continuation grants funded under these awards beyond the one-year budget period but within the 3 year project period will be entertained in subsequent years on a noncompetitive basis, subject to availability of funds, satisfactory progress of the grantee and a determination that continued funding would be in the best interest of the Government.

Part II: The Project Description

Purpose

The project description provides a major means by which an application is evaluated and ranked to compete with other applications for available assistance. The project description should be concise and complete and should address the activity for which Federal funds are being requested. Supporting documents should be included where they can present information clearly and succinctly. Applicants are encouraged to provide information on their organizational structure, staff, related experience, and other information considered to be relevant. Awarding offices use this and other information to determine whether the applicant has the capability and resources necessary to carry out the proposed project. It is important, therefore, to carry out the proposed project, and it is important that this information be included in the application. However, in the narrative the applicant must distinguish between resources directly related to the proposed project from those that will not be used in support of the specific project for which funds are requested.

General Instructions

Cross-referencing should be used rather than repetition. ACF is particularly interested in specific factual information and statements of measurable goals in quantitative terms. Project descriptions are evaluated on the basis of substance, not length. Extensive exhibits are not required. (Supporting information concerning activities that will not be directly funded by the grant or information that does not directly pertain to an intergral part of the grant funded activity should be placed in an appendix.) Pages should be numbered and a table of contents should be included for easy reference. General Instructions for Preparing a Full Project Description

Introduction

Applicants required to submit a full project description shall prepare the project description statement in accordance with the following instructions.

Project Summary/Abstract

Provide a summary of the project description (a page or less) with reference to the funding request.

Objectives and Need for Assistance

Clearly identify the physical, economic, social, financial, institutional, and/or other problem(s) requiring a solution. The need for assistance must be demonstrated and the principal and subordinate objectives of the project must be clearly stated; supporting documentation, such as letters of support and testimonials from concerned interests other than the applicant, may be included. Any relevant data based on planning studies should be included or referred to in the endnotes/footnotes. Incorporate demographic data and participation/beneficiary information, as needed. In developing the project description, the applicant may volunteer or be requested to provide information on the total range of projects currently being conducted and supported (or to be initiated), some of which may be outside the scope of the program announcement.

Results or Benefits Expected

Identify the results and benefits to be derived. For example, when applying for a grant to establish a neighborhood child care center, describe who will occupy the facility, who will use the facility, how the facility will be used, and how the facility will benefit the community which it will serve.

Approach

Outline a plan of action which describes the scope and detail of how the proposed work will be accomplished. Account for all functions

or activities identified in the applications. Cite factors which might accelerate or decelerate the work and state your reason for taking the proposed approach rather than others. Describe any unusual features of the project such as design or technological innovations, reductions in cost or time, or extraordinary social and community involvement. Provide quantitative monthly or quarterly projections of the accomplishments to be achieved for each function or activity in such terms as the number of people to be served and the number of microloans made. When accomplishments cannot be quantified by activity or function, list them in chronological order to show the schedule of accomplishments and their target dates. Identify the kinds of data to be collected, maintained, and/or disseminated. Note that clearance from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget might be needed prior to a ``collection of information'' that is ``conducted or sponsored'' by ACF. List organizations, cooperating entities, consultants, or other key individuals who will work on the project along with a short description of the nature of their effort or contribution.

Budget and Budget Justification

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

General

The following guidelines are for preparing the budget and budget justification. Both Federal and non-Federal resources shall be detailed and justified in the budget and narrative justification. For purposes of preparing the budget and budget justification, ``Federal resources'' refers only to the ACF grant for which you are applying. Non-Federal resources are all other Federal and non-Federal resources. It is suggested that budget amounts and computations be presented in a columnar format: first column, object class categories; second column, Federal budget; next column(s), non-Federal budget(s), and last column, total budget. The budget justification should be a narrative.

Part III: The Review Process

A. Intergovernmental Review

This program is not covered under Executive Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,'' and 45 CFR Part 100, ``Intergovernmental Review of Department of Health and Human Services Programs and Activities.''

B. Initial ACF Screening

Each application submitted under this program announcement will undergo a pre-review to determine that (1) the application was received by the closing date and submitted in accordance with the instruction in this announcement and (2) the applicant is eligible for funding.

C. Application Review and Review Criteria

Applications which pass the initial ACF screening will be evaluated and rated based on the completeness of the application as described below.

Criteria 1: Objectives and Need

States and counties are required to ensure that a coherent family self-sufficiency plan is developed for each eligible family that addresses the family's needs from time of arrival until attainment of economic independence. (See 45 CFR 400.79 and 400.156(g)). Each family self-sufficiency plan should address a family's needs for both employment-related services and other needed social services. The family self-sufficiency plan must include: (1) a determination of the income level a family would have to earn to exceed its cash grant and move into self-support without suffering a monetary penalty; (2) a strategy and timetable for obtaining that level of family income through the placement in employment of sufficient numbers of employable family members at sufficient wage levels; and (3) employability plans for every employable member of the family. In local jurisdictions that have both targeted assistance and refugee social services programs, one family self-sufficiency plan that incorporates both targeted assistance and refugee social services may be developed for a family. In instances where a State received targeted assistance funding for impacted counties contained in a standard metropolitan statistical area (SMSA) which includes a county or counties located in a neighboring State, the State receiving those funds must provide a description of the coordination and planning activities undertaken with the State Refugee Coordinator of the neighboring State in which the impacted county or counties are located. These planning and coordination activities should result in a proposed allocation plan for the equitable distribution of targeted assistance funds by county based on the distribution of the eligible population by county within the SMSA. The proposed allocation plan must be included in the State's application to ORR.

Criteria 2: Approach

A description of the State's guidelines for the targeted assistance plans for the required content of county targeted assistance plans or requests for proposals (RFPs), in the case of States that administer the program directly on behalf of an impacted county, and a description of the State's review/approval process for such county plans or RFPs. Acceptable county plans must minimally include the following: a. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in accordance with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 400. b. Procedures for carrying out a local planning process for determining targeted assistance priorities and service strategies. All local targeted assistance plans will be developed through a planning process that involves, in addition to the State Refugee Coordinator, representatives of the private sector (for example, private employers, the private industry council, Chamber of Commerce, etc.), leaders of refugee/entrant community-based organizations, voluntary resettlement agencies, refugees from the impacted communities, and other public officials associated with the social services and employee agencies that serve refugees. Counties are encouraged to foster coalition- building among those participating organizations. c. Identification of the refugee/entrant populations to be served by targeted assistance projects, including approximate numbers of clients to be served, and a description of characteristics and needs of targeted populations. (As per 45 CFR 400.314). d. Description of specific strategies and services to meet the needs of targeted populations. These should be justified where possible through analysis of strategies and outcomes from projects previously implemented under targeted assistance programs, and any other services available to the refugee populations. e. The relationship of targeted assistance services to other services available to refugees in the county

including State-allocated ORR social services. f. Analysis of available employment opportunities in the local community. Examples of acceptable analysis of employment opportunities might include surveys of employers or potential employers of refugee clients and reviews of studies on employment opportunities/forecasts which would be appropriate to the refugee populations. Description of the monitoring and oversight responsibilities to be carried out by the county or qualifying jurisdiction.

Criteria 3: Budget and Budget Justification

Provide line item detail and detailed calculations for each budget object class identified on the Budget Information form (SF-424A). Detailed calculations must include estimation methods, quantities, unit costs, and other similar quantitive detail sufficient for the calculation to be duplicated. The detailed budget must also include a breakout by the funding sources identified in Block 15 of the SF-424. Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessary, reasonableness, and allocability for the proposed costs. Tnt Office of Refugee Resettlement is particularly interested in the following: A line item budget and budget, justification for State administrative costs limited to a maximum of 5% of the total award to the State. Each total budget period funding amount requested must be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the project. Sates that administer the program locally in lieu of the country, through a mutual agreement with the qualifying county, may request administrative costs that add up to, but may not exceed, 10% of the country's TAP allocation to the State's administrative budget. Each applicant should describe the amount of funds to be awarded to the targeted county or counties. If a State with more than one qualifying targeted assistance county chooses to allocate its targeted assistance funds differently from the formula allocation for counties presented in the ORR targeted assistance notice in a fiscal year, its allocations must be based on the State's population of refugees who arrived in the U.S. during the most recent 5-year period. A State may use welfare data as an additional factor in the allocation of targeted assistance funds if it so chooses; however, a State may not assign a greater weight to welfare data than it has assigned to population data in its allocation formula. The application must provide a description of, and supporting data for, the State's proposed allocation plan, and the proposed allocation for each county. In instances where a State receives targeted assistance funding for impacted counties contained in a standard metropolitan statistical area (SMSA) which includes a county or counties located in a neighboring State, the State receiving those funds must provide a description of the coordination and planning activities undertaken with the State Refugee Coordinator. A line item budget and justification for State Administrative costs limited to a maximum of 5% of the total award to the State. Each budget request must be necessary, reasonable and allocable to the project. States that administer the program locally in lieu of the county may use up to, but not exceed, 10% of the county's TAP allocation for the State's administrative budget.

Criteria 4: Results or Benefits Expected

All applicants must establish targeted assistance proposed performance goals for each of the 6 ORR performance outcome measures for each impacted county's proposed service contracts or sub-grants for the next contracting cycle. Proposed performance goals must be included in the application for each performance measure. The 6 ORR performance measures are: entered employments, cash assistance terminations due to employment, cash assistance reductions due to employment, 90-day employment retentions, average wage at placement, and entered employments 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 (OMB Approval No. 0970-0036, expires 7/31/2002). States that are currently grantees for targeted assistance funds should base projected annual outcome goals for each performance measure on past performance. States identified as new eligible targeted assistance grantees and States that are currently grantees that have new qualifying counties are also required to set proposed outcome goals for each of the 6 ORR performance outcome measures. New grantees may use baseline data, as available, and current data as reported on the ORR-6 for social services program activity to assist them in the goal-setting process. Proposed targeted assistance goals should reflect improvement over past performance and strive for continuous improvement during the project period from one year to another.

Part IV. The Application

A. Application Development

In order to be considered for a grant under this program announcement, an application must be submitted on the forms supplied and in the manager prescribed by ACF. Application materials including forms and instructions are available from the ORR State Analyst assigned to your State.

B. Application Submission

1. Mailed applications postmarked after the closing date will be classified as late. 2. Deadline: Mailed applications shall be considered as meeting an announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline date to DHHS, ACF, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Attention: Shirley B. Parker, ORR Grants Officer, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W., Sixth Floor, Washington, DC 20447. Applicants must ensure that a legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark or a legibly dated, machine produced postmark of a commercial mail service is affixed to the envelope/package containing the application(s). To be acceptable as proof of timely mailing, a postmark from a commercial mail service must include the logo/emblem of the commercial mail service company and must reflect the date the package was received by the commercial mail service company from the applicant. Private Metered postmarks shall not be acceptable as proof of timely mailing. (Applicants are cautioned that express/overnight mail services do not always deliver as agreed.) Applications hand-carried by applicants, applicant couriers, or by other representatives of the applicant shall be considered as meeting an announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline date, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., EDT, at the Department of Health and human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement, ACF Mailroom, 2nd Floor (near loading dock), Aerospace Center, 901 D Street, SW, Washington, DC 20024, between Monday and Friday (excluding Federal holidays). The address must appear on the envelope/package containing the application with the note: ``Attention: Shirley B. Parker, ORR Grants Officer.'' Applicants are cautioned that express/overnight mail services do not always deliver as agreed. ACF cannot accommodate transmission of applications by fax or through other electronic media.

Therefore, applications transmitted to ACF electronically will not be accepted regardless of date or time of submission and time of receipt. 3. Late applications. Applications which do not meet the criteria above are considered late applications. 4. Extension of deadlines. ACF may extend an application deadline when circumstances such as acts of God (floods, hurricanes, etc.) occur, or when there are widespread disruptions of the mail service, or in other rare cases. Determinations to extend or waive deadline requirements rest with ACF's Chief Grants Management Officer.

Reporting Requirements

States are required to submit quarterly reports on the outcomes of the targeted assistance program, using schedule A and Schedule C of the ORR-6 Quarterly Performance Report, OMB Approval No. 0970-0036, which expires 7/31/2002. Pursuant to 45 CFR 400.210(b), FY 1999 targeted assistance funds must be obligated by the State agency no later than one year after the end of the Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. Funds must be liquidated within two years after the end of the Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. A State's final financial report on targeted assistance expenditures must be received no later than two years after the end of the Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. If final reports are not received on time, the Department will deobligate any unexpended funds, including any unliquidated obligations, on the basis of the State's last filed report.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 93-584.

Dated: August 2, 1999. Lavinia Limon, Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement. [FR Doc. 99-20245 Filed 8-9-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-M