[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 110 (Monday, June 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31437-31445]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14899]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
Refugee Resettlement Program; Final Notice of Availability of
Formula Allocation Funding for FY 1997 Targeted Assistance Grants for
Services to Refugees in Local Areas of High Need
AGENCY: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), ACF, HHS.
ACTION: Final notice of availability of formula allocation funding for
FY 1997 targeted assistance grants to States for services to refugees
\1\ in local areas of high need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to persons who meet all requirements of 45 CFR
400.43, ``Requirements for documentation of refugee status,''
eligibility for targeted assistance includes Cuban and Haitian
entrants, certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are admitted to the
U.S. as immigrants, and certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are U.S.
citizens. (See section II of this notice on ``Authorization.'') The
term ``refugee'', used in this notice for convenience, is intended
to encompass such additional persons who are eligible to participate
in refugee program services, including the targeted assistance
program.
Refugees admitted to the U.S. under admissions numbers set aside
for private-sector-initiative admissions are not eligible to be
served under the targeted assistance program (or under other
programs supported by Federal refugee funds) during their period of
coverage under their sponsoring agency's agreement with the
Department of State--usually two years from their date of arrival,
or until they obtain permanent resident alien status, whichever
comes first.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of funds and award
procedures for FY 1997 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 final notice also announces the inclusion of 8 additional
qualified counties for targeted assistance formula allocation funding,
bringing the total of qualified targeted assistance counties from 39
counties to 47 counties for FY 1997.
The final notice reflects an adjustment in final allocations to
States as a result of additional arrival data.
A notice of proposed allocation of targeted assistance funds was
published for public comment in the Federal Register on April 1, 1997
(62 FR 15520).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toyo Biddle, Director, Division of
Refugee Self-Sufficiency, (202) 401-9250.
APPLICATION DEADLINE: The closing date for submission of applications
is July 24, 1997. Applications postmarked after the closing date will
be classified as late.
Mailed applications shall be considered as meeting an announced
deadline if they are either received on or before the deadline date or
sent on or before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of
Refugee Resettlement, Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency, 370
L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attention: Application
for Targeted Assistance Formula Program.
Applicants are cautioned to request a legibly dated U.S. Postal
Service postmark or to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial
carrier or the U.S. Postal Service. Private metered postmarks shall not
be acceptable as proof of timely mailing.
Applications handcarried by applicants, applicant couriers, or by
overnight/express mail couriers shall be considered as meeting an
announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline date,
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., at the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families,
Office of Refugee Resettlement, Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency,
ACF Mailroom, 2nd Floor Loading Dock, Aerospace Center, 901 D Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20024, between Monday and Friday (excluding Federal
holidays). (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.
To be considered complete, an application package must include a
signed original and two copies of Standard Form 424, 424A, and 424B,
dated April 1988. (We will provide copies of these materials to all
targeted assistance States.)
CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA) NUMBER: 93.584.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON APPLICATION PROCEDURES: States should
contact their State Analyst in ORR.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Purpose and Scope
This notice announces the 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 $49,857,000
in FY 1997 funds for the targeted assistance program (TAP) as part of
the FY 1997 appropriation for the Department of Health and Human
Services (Pub. L. No. 104-208).
The Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) will use
the $49,857,000 appropriated for FY 1997 targeted assistance as
follows:
$35,371,300 will be allocated under the 5-year population
formula to 47 qualified counties, as set forth in this notice.
$9,500,000 will be awarded under a discretionary grant
announcement to States to provide supportive services to elderly
refugees, particularly those who will soon lose SSI eligibility due to
the alien eligibility restrictions in the welfare reform law. A grant
[[Page 31438]]
announcement will be issued separately which sets forth application
requirements and evaluation criteria.
$4,985,700 (10% of the total) will be used to fund
continuation grants under a discretionary grant announcement that was
issued in FY 1996.
In addition, the Office of Refugee Resettlement will have available
an additional $5,000,000 in FY 1997 funds for the targeted assistance
discretionary program through the Foreign Operations, Export Financing,
and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1997 (Pub. L. No. 104-208).
These funds will augment the 10-percent of the targeted assistance
program which is set-aside for grants to localities most heavily
impacted by the influx of refugees such as Laotian Hmong, Cambodians
and Soviet Pentecostals, including secondary migrants who entered the
United States after October 1, 1979.
The Director originally designated $19 million in targeted
assistance funds for supportive services to elderly refugees out of
concern for the refugee elderly who are about to lose their SSI
eligibility due to the recent welfare reform law. In light of the
immigrant eligibility provisions regarding SSI and Medicaid proposed in
the recent FY 1998 budget agreement between the Administration and
Congress, the Director has decided to decrease the amount of
discretionary funding for services to elderly refugees at risk of
losing SSI from the $19,000,000 proposed for this purpose in the April
1 notice to $9,500,000. We believe the proposed changes in the budget
agreement will prevent the termination of SSI benefits to the majority
of refugee SSI recipients. The bipartisan budget agreement allows
immigrants who entered the U.S. prior to August 23, 1996, and who are
or become disabled to be eligible for SSI and Medicaid. While this
provision will not protect all refugees currently on SSI, it is
estimated that approximately 70%-80% of current refugee elderly SSI
recipients will be determined disabled and, as a consequence, will not
lose their SSI benefits. In addition, the Administration and Congress
have agreed to extend the SSI and Medicaid eligibility period for
refugees and asylees from 5 years after entry, (the limit in the
welfare reform law), to 7 years after entry. This budget resolution is
currently being considered by the House and Senate budget committees
and we expect legislation to follow shortly. The Director has decided
to allocate $9.5 million to a discretionary program to assist the
approximately 20%-30% of elderly SSI recipients who are not likely to
be determined disabled and thus lose their SSI benefits beginning in
August 1997 as a result.
The Director has decided to allocate the remaining $9.5 million to
the regular formula allocation program to enable additional impacted
counties to benefit from targeted assistance funding.
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 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.''
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. Client and Service Priorities
Targeted assistance funding must be used to assist refugee families
to achieve economic independence. To this end, 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 may be developed
for a family that incorporates both targeted assistance and refugee
social services.
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
[[Page 31439]]
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 Sec. 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 Sec. 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
Sec. 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 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.
In accordance with Sec. 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
Sec. 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.
ORR defines MAAs as organizations with the following
qualifications:
a. The organization is legally incorporated as a nonprofit
organization; and
b. Not less than 51% of the composition of the Board of Directors
or governing board of the mutual assistance association is comprised of
refugees or former refugees, including both refugee men and women.
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 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
IX, below.
IV. Discussion of Comments Received
Thirteen letters of comment were received in response to the notice
of proposed availability of FY 1997 funds for targeted assistance. The
comments are summarized below and are followed in each case by the
Department's response.
Comment: Ten commenters expressed support for the proposed use of
$19 million for services to the elderly, particularly those elderly who
are about to lose their SSI eligibility. One commenter was opposed to
the proposed $19 million discretionary program for elderly services and
questioned ORR's legal authority to use these funds in a discretionary
manner as opposed to including these funds in the formula allocation
program. The commenter recommended that ORR allocate all available TAP
funds by formula. One commenter, while supporting the use of the $19
million for the elderly, objected to the awarding of these funds
through a discretionary grant program and recommended a block grant
instead. Another commenter urged ORR to make the discretionary
application process as simple as possible and base awards on the number
of SSI refugees in the U.S. over 5 years. Six commenters recommended
that the funding be allocated only to States and counties with high
concentrations of refugees, not all States. Six commenters felt that
ORR should not allocate these funds on the basis of elderly refugee
arrivals and should base funding on current place of residence, not
initial place of resettlement. Eight commenters strongly recommended
that funding be based on the number of elderly refugees
[[Page 31440]]
in each area who received SSA notices in February and March 1997,
indicating they are likely to be ineligible for SSI. Five commenters
felt that local areas should be given the discretion to decide what
kinds of services to provide to elderly refugees. One commenter
recommended the inclusion of disabled as well as elderly refugees as
eligible recipients.
Response: To clarify the question of ORR's legal authority to award
$19 million in targeted assistance funds through a discretionary
program, there is no prohibition in the statute that precludes the use
of TAP funds for discretionary activities. Furthermore, nothing in ORR
regulations for the TAP formula program administratively establishes
any particular percentage of funds to be spent on the formula program.
The commenter will note, however, that the Director has added $9.5
million to the formula allocation amount.
Regarding inclusion of the disabled, in light of the budget
agreement between the Congress and the Administration to allow full
eligibility for SSI and Medicaid for disabled immigrants, including
refugees, who were residing in the U.S. prior to enactment of the
welfare reform law, ORR's elderly discretionary grant program will
focus only on the elderly. Under the elderly discretionary program, ORR
intends to fund only those States with counties that have large
concentrations of refugees age 65 and over, which is the population
most at-risk of losing SSI. Regarding the suggestion to base funding on
the number of refugee SSI recipients who received SSA notices in
February and March, 1997, to our knowledge, SSI recipient data that
separately identifies refugee recipients are not available from the
Social Security Administration. ORR intends to use a formula that
focuses on counties heavily impacted by older refugees. ORR utilized
data covering FY 1983 through FY 1996 for older refugees age 65 or
older or who will reach age 65 or older by October 1, 1999. From these
data, ORR developed a list of counties that had a minimum threshold of
500 or more refugees aged 65 or over. Additionally, other States and
counties may apply for these funds if they can demonstrate an older
refugee population that meets the minimum county threshold of 500 or
more older refugees.
Regarding the recommendation that services to the elderly should be
developed locally, the announcement to assist elderly refugees makes
clear that services should be developed and administered at local
levels. In addition, ORR encourages local service providers to work
closely with community-based Area Agencies on Aging to collaborate and
coordinate services to older refugees.
Finally, regarding the request to keep the application process as
simple as possible, ORR shares the commenter's interest and will make
every effort to keep the process simple.
Comment: Eight commenters from one State felt that States and
counties should have the flexibility to serve refugees in the U.S. over
5 years with targeted assistance formula funds. Several of these
commenters stated that there are large numbers of post-5-year refugees
in the State who are in need of services, have difficulty accessing
mainstream services, and will soon lose their eligibility for
assistance. One commenter recommended that ORR allow States to use TAP
funds to serve post-5-year refugees provided that existing priority
groups are fully served and sufficient TAP funds are available for this
purpose.
Response: We continue to believe that targeted assistance formula
funds should be used for refugees during their first 5 years in the
U.S. in order to concentrate adequate resources on helping refugees to
become self-sufficient as soon as possible without becoming long-term
welfare recipients. Of particular concern are the large numbers of
refugees in the U.S. less than 5 years, who reside in high welfare
States and have been on welfare since their arrival. These are the
refugees who require top priority from the refugee program. Also of top
priority is to make sure that future refugee arrivals never get to the
point of being on welfare for most of their first 5 years in the U.S.
For these reasons we do not agree with the commenters that the 5-year
limitation on targeted assistance formula funds should be changed; the
focus on services during the first 5 years is the right focus.
Regarding the comment that many of the post-5-year refugees will
soon lose their eligibility for public assistance, it is important to
note that most States have decided to allow refugees who were residing
in the U.S. prior to August 22, 1996, to continue to be eligible for
TANF assistance on the same basis as U.S. citizens.
Finally, we wish to remind States that ORR discretionary funds may
be used to serve post-5-year refugees. This year, a substantial amount,
approximately $42,685,000, will be available in discretionary funds to
serve refugees, including refugees who have been in the U.S. over 5
years.
Comment: Three commenters expressed concern regarding ORR's
requirement for family self-sufficiency plans. One commenter questioned
whether services should be provided to take refugees to self-
sufficiency thereby using resources that would otherwise be available
to help some refugees find employment. The commenter felt that the
requirement implied that services should be provided to a full-time
employed refugee until the family is off aid. Two commenters stated
that the family self-sufficiency plan is redundant with individual
employability plans. One commenter asked if one plan could be developed
in lieu of both plans. Another commenter recommended that ORR eliminate
the family self-sufficiency plan requirement and issue waivers to
States in the interim.
Response: As stated in several previous notices, the family self-
sufficiency plan is a tool that assists both the refugee family and the
employment counselor to focus more clearly on what steps need to be
taken to achieve self-sufficiency. In many cases, it requires more than
one wage-earner to go to work in order for a family to become self-
sufficient. The development of a family self-sufficiency plan puts the
proper focus on the family as the client unit. The employment plan, in
contrast, focuses on one person's employment without addressing what is
needed of other adults in the family to get the family unit self-
sufficient. We do not view self-sufficiency plans and individual
employment plans to be redundant; individual employment plans are part
of a family self-sufficiency plan, not a separate entity.
ORR does not insist that employment service providers work with all
refugee families until they are self-sufficient at the expense of other
clients, but we encourage States and providers to design programs that
efficiently use resources to help refugee families become self-
sufficient to the maximum extent feasible. By developing a family self-
sufficiency plan, at least a refugee family will be able to understand
what it takes to not only get a job, but to get off welfare. Experience
in a number of States shows that the use of family self-sufficiency
plans results ultimately in earlier family self-sufficiency through the
attainment of jobs for one or more wage earners at self-supporting
wages. We would be happy to connect any State and county that does not
understand how to use family self-sufficiency plans to good effect with
States and providers experienced in using family self-sufficiency plans
effectively.
Comment: One commenter questioned the meaningfulness of requiring
targeted
[[Page 31441]]
assistance grantees to propose TAP outcome goals aimed at continuous
improvement from one year to the next in light of factors such as
reduced TAP allocations, inability to serve refugees who have been in
the U.S. more than 60 months, and economic factors including recession
and high unemployment rates. Another commenter felt that since ORR
requires outcomes, less emphasis should be placed on how outcomes are
achieved and more local flexibility should be allowed in providing
services.
Response: We understand that funding levels and other variables
must be taken into account when setting and meeting outcome goals. For
this reason, we ask States and counties to set goals in terms of
percentages and real numbers. For example, a decrease in funding will
likely result in a smaller caseload to be served, but need not
necessarily result in a smaller percentage of the caseload entering
employment. States and counties also have the opportunity to attach a
narrative with the goal plan which explains local factors that affect
performance outcomes.
Regarding more local flexibility, we believe States and counties
already have a great deal of flexibility in designing services and
service delivery.
Comment: Two commenters raised concerns regarding the methodology
by which ORR allocates targeted assistance funds and qualifies counties
for targeted assistance funds. One commenter recommended that the
allocation formula be based on all refugee arrivals to the county with
no limitation regarding when the refugees first arrived in the county.
The same commenter also recommended that qualification for targeted
assistance funds should be based solely on refugee arrivals and not on
refugee concentration. One county requested that the TAP funding level
for the county remain equal to the county's FY 1996 allocation because
of the continued demand for TAP services in the county.
Response: In regard to the suggestion that the TAP allocation
formula be based on all refugee arrivals to the county regardless of
when the refugees arrived, the targeted assistance allocation formula
must be consistent with Sec. 400.315(b) of ORR's regulations which
limits the provision of targeted assistance formula services to
refugees who have been in the U.S. 5 years or less. In regard to using
population as the only qualifying criterion, ORR is required to use all
the factors that are outlined in the statute for which data are
available. Section 412(c)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
identifies large refugee populations, high refugee concentrations, and
high use of public assistance by refugees as three factors to take into
account for targeted assistance eligibility. While we do not have
available welfare dependency data, data are available on refugee
population and refugee concentration. Therefore ORR is required to use
both factors in determining county qualification.
In regard to a county's request for the same amount of funds as it
received in FY 1996, the amount of funds a qualified county receives
each year is based on the county's most recent five-year population. By
definition, allocations in a formula program must be determined on the
basis of a formula that is applied consistently across all grantees in
order to ensure equity. Special exceptions and deviations, therefore,
cannot be made in a formula allocation program.
V. Eligible Grantees
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 1997 targeted assistance
awards.
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).
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.
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 Sec. 400.319, the FY 1997 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 1997 targeted assistance funds in a manner different from the
formula set forth in this notice, the FY 1997 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 areawide clearinghouses under Executive
Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.''
VI. Qualification and Allocation
A. Qualified Counties
In the FY 1996 targeted assistance final notice (61 FR 36739 (July
12, 1996), the ORR Director indicated her intention to determine the
qualification of counties for targeted assistance funds once every
three years, beginning in FY 1996. Therefore, it is ORR's intent that
the 39 counties listed as qualified for TAP funding in FY 1996 will
remain qualified for TAP funding for FY 1997. We have decided, however,
to make 8 additional qualified counties eligible for FY 1997 targeted
assistance formula funding and have increased the total amount
available for formula allocation funding from $25,871,300 to
$35,371,300 to enable an increase in eligible counties. The increase in
the total amount available for formula allocations has also resulted in
higher allocations for the original 39 counties than appeared in the
April 1 notice.
The 8 additional counties deemed to be eligible for targeted
assistance funding were the next 8 counties, beyond the original 39
counties listed as qualified in FY 1996, that had the highest ranking
based on the sum of a county's rank on refugee arrivals during the 5-
year period from FY 1992--FY 1996 and its rank on concentration. Using
the same methodology as in FY 1996, each county was ranked on the basis
of its most recent 5-year arrival population and its concentration of
refugees, with a relative weighting of 2 to 1 respectively. Each county
was then ranked in terms of the sum of a county's rank on refugee
arrivals and its rank on concentration. The following 8 counties had
the highest rank and are listed in order of ranking:
Jefferson County, KY
Hudson County, NJ
Ingham County, MI
Cuyahoga County, OH
Cass County, ND
Broward County, FL
Pierce County, WA
Maricopa County, AZ
The addition of these 8 counties increases the list of qualified
targeted assistance counties from the 39 listed in the April 1 notice
to 47 counties and increases the number of States to receive targeted
assistance funding in FY 1997
[[Page 31442]]
from 21 States to 26 States. It is our intent that the 47 counties
listed in this notice as qualified to apply for FY 1997 TAP funding
will remain qualified for TAP funding through FY 1998. This, of course,
is subject to the availability of appropriations.
Since the Commonwealth of Kentucky no longer participates in the
refugee program, the Wilson/Fish grantee which has been operating the
refugee program since the State dropped out will be the eligible
grantee for the Jefferson County allocation.
B. Allocation Formula
Of the funds available for FY 1997 for targeted assistance,
$35,371,300 is allocated by formula to States for qualified counties
based on the initial placements of refugees, Amerasians, and entrants
in these counties during the 5-year period from FY 1992 through FY 1996
(October 1, 1991--September 30, 1996).
With regard to Havana parolees, we are crediting 6,910 Havana
parolees who arrived in FY 1996 to qualified counties in Florida based
on data the State submitted during the public comment period. We have
credited FY 1996 Havana parolees to the remaining qualified targeted
assistance counties based on the counties' proportion of the 5-year (FY
1992--FY 1996) entrant arrival population. For FY 1995, Florida's
Havana parolees for each qualified county are based on data submitted
by the State last year, while Havana parolees credited to counties in
other States were prorated based on the counties' proportion of the 5-
year (FY 1991--FY 1995) entrant population in the U.S. The allocations
in this notice reflect these additional parolee numbers.
VII. Allocations
Table 1 lists the qualified counties, the number of refugee/entrant
arrivals in those counties during the 5-year period from October 1,
1991--September 30, 1996, 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 three columns, and
the amount of each county's allocation based on its 5-year total
population.
Table 2 provides State totals for targeted assistance allocations.
Table 1.--Targeted Assistance Allocations By County: FY 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$35,371,300
Havana Total total FY
County State Refugees Entrants parolees arrivals FY 1997
\1\ 1992-1996 allocation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maricopa County......................... Arizona...................................... 5,262 600 169 6,031 $465,107
Alameda County.......................... California................................... 4,944 21 6 4,971 383,361
Fresno County........................... California................................... 5,841 2 0 5,843 450,609
Los Angeles County...................... California................................... 25,794 689 216 26,699 2,059,012
Merced County........................... California................................... 1,541 0 0 1,541 118,841
Orange County........................... California................................... 22,500 38 12 22,550 1,739,044
Sacramento County....................... California................................... 12,288 5 2 12,295 948,184
San Diego County........................ California................................... 12,457 516 147 13,120 1,011,807
SAN FRANCISCO AREA...................... California................................... 11.076 195 64 11,335 874,149
San Joaquin County...................... California................................... 2,434 7 2 2,443 188,403
Santa Clara County...................... California................................... 16,297 50 9 16,356 1,261,366
Denver County........................... Colorado..................................... 3,478 3 1 3,482 268,530
District of Columbia.................... District of Col.............................. 4,001 17 5 4,023 310,252
Broward County.......................... Florida...................................... 1,219 2,541 401 4,161 320,894
Dade County............................. Florida...................................... 10,618 40,023 14,038 64,679 4,988,009
Duval County............................ Florida...................................... 3,059 44 20 3,123 240,844
Palm Beach County....................... Florida...................................... 768 2,991 306 4,065 313,491
DeKalb County........................... Georgia...................................... 5,815 23 7 5,845 450,763
Fulton County........................... Georiga...................................... 6,298 238 66 6,602 509,143
CHICAGO AREA............................ Illinois..................................... 18,056 502 136 18,694 1,441,671
Polk County............................. Iowa......................................... 2,939 1 0 2,940 226,731
Jefferson County \2\.................... Kentucky..................................... 2,975 455 97 3,527 272,000
Baltimore County........................ Maryland..................................... 3,384 3 0 3,387 261,204
Suffolk County.......................... Massachusetts................................ 5,790 289 95 6,174 476,135
Ingham County........................... Michigan..................................... 1,788 266 66 2,120 163,493
Oakland County.......................... Michigan..................................... 3,995 8 3 4,006 308,941
Hennepin County......................... Minnesota.................................... 5,794 3 0 5,797 447,061
Ramsey County........................... Minnesota.................................... 4,538 10 3 4,551 350,971
St. Louis County........................ Missouri..................................... 5,891 2 0 5,893 454,465
Lancaster County........................ Nebraska..................................... 2,431 34 6 2,471 190,562
Hudson County........................... New Jersey................................... 2,032 892 271 3,195 246,397
Bernalillo County....................... New Mexico................................... 1,574 1,300 379 3,253 250,870
Broome County........................... New York..................................... 1,718 28 9 1,755 135,345
Monroe County........................... New York..................................... 3,025 516 152 3,693 284,802
NEW YORK CITY AREA...................... New York..................................... 84,374 1,218 373 85,965 6,629,573
Oneida County........................... New York..................................... 2,633 1 0 2,634 203,133
Cass County............................. North Dakota................................. 1,597 3 1 1,601 123,468
Cuyahoga County......................... Ohio......................................... 4,625 6 1 4,632 357,217
PORTLAND OREGON AREA.................... Oregon....................................... 11,034 581 148 11,763 907,156
Philadelphia County..................... Pennsylvania................................. 8,100 78 24 8,202 632,534
Davidson County......................... Tennessee.................................... 3,188 54 8 3,250 250,638
DALLAS AREA............................. Texas........................................ 12,114 612 175 12,901 994,918
Harris County........................... Texas........................................ 10,559 176 45 10,780 831,348
FAIRFAX AREA............................ Virginia..................................... 4,657 8 2 4,667 359,916
Richmond City........................... Virginia..................................... 1,913 109 31 2,053 158,326
Pierce County........................... Washington................................... 2,867 10 2 2,879 222,027
[[Page 31443]]
Seattle Area............................ Washington................................... 16,562 48 9 16,709 1,288,589
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................. ............................................. 385,933 55,216 17,507 458,656 35,317,300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes Havana Parolees (HP's) for FY 1995 and FY 1996. For FY 1995, HP arrivals to the qualifying Florida counties (7855) were based on actual
data while HP's in the non-Florida qualifying counties (1327) were prorated based on the counties' proportion of the five year (FY 1991-1995) entrant
population in the U.S. For FY 1996, HP arrivals to the qualifying Florida counties (6910) were based on actual data while HP's in the non-Florida
qualifying counties (1415) were prorated based on the counties' proportion of the five year (FY 1992-1996) entrant population in the U.S.
\2\ The allocation for Jefferson, KY will be awarded to the Kentucky Fish-Wilson project.
Table 2.--Targeted Assistance Allocations By State: FY 1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$35,371,300
State total FY 1997
allocation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona................................................. $465,107
California.............................................. 9,034,776
Colorado................................................ 268,530
District of Columbia.................................... 310,252
Florida................................................. 5,863,238
Georgia................................................. 959,906
Illinois................................................ 1,441,671
Iowa.................................................... 226,731
Kentucky................................................ 272,000
Maryland................................................ 261,204
Massachusetts........................................... 476,135
Michigan................................................ 472,434
Minnesota............................................... 798,032
Missouri................................................ 454,465
Nebraska................................................ 190,562
New Jersey.............................................. 246,397
New Mexico.............................................. 250,870
New York................................................ 7,252,853
North Dakota............................................ 123,468
Ohio.................................................... 357,217
Oregon.................................................. 907,156
Pennsylvania............................................ 632,534
Tennessee............................................... 250,638
Texas................................................... 1,826,266
Virginia................................................ 518,242
Washington.............................................. 1,510,616
---------------
Total............................................... 35,371,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Application and Implementation Process
Under the FY 1997 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.
Pursuant to Sec. 400.210(b), FY 1997 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 a State's last
filed report.
The requirements regarding the discretionary portions of the
targeted assistance program will be addressed separately in the grant
announcements for those funds. Applications for these funds are
therefore not subject to provisions contained in this notice but to
other requirements which will be conveyed separately.
Application for targeted assistance formula funds by the Wilson/
Fish grantee in Kentucky for services to refugees in Jefferson County
are not subject to the application requirements contained in this
notice but to Wilson/Fish requirements that will be conveyed
separately.
IX. Application Requirements
A. For States in Their Second Year of Targeted Assistance Funding
The State application requirements for grants for the FY 1997
targeted assistance formula allocation are as follows:
States that are currently operating under approved management plans
for their FY 1996 targeted assistance program and wish to continue to
do so for their FY 1997 grants may provide the following in lieu of
resubmitting the full currently approved plan:
The State's application for FY 1997 funding shall provide:
1. Assurance that the State's current management plan for the
administration of the targeted assistance program, as approved by ORR,
will continue to be in full force and effect for the FY 1997 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. Any
proposed changes must address and reference all appropriate portions of
the FY 1996 application content requirements to ensure complete
incorporation in the State's management plan.
2. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in
accordance with the requirements in 45 CFR Part 400.
3. Assurance that 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. States must indicate what percentage of FY 1997
targeted assistance formula allocation funds that are used for services
will be allocated for employment services.
4. 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.
5. 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,
[[Page 31444]]
the data to be used, and the proposed allocation for each county.
6. 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.
7. All applicants must establish targeted assistance proposed
performance goals for each of the 6 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 6
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.''
States which are currently grantees for targeted assistance funds
should base projected annual outcome goals on the past year's
performance. Proposed targeted assistance outcome goals should reflect
improvement over past performance and strive for continuous improvement
during the project period from one year to another.
8. A line item budget and 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. States that administer the
program locally in lieu of the county, through a mutual agreement with
the qualifying county, may add up to, but not exceed, 10% of the
county's TAP allocation to the State's administrative budget.
States administering the program locally: States that have
administered the program locally or 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
subcomponents such as day care, transportation, or language training.
B. For New States and States With New Counties
In applying for targeted assistance funds, a State agency is
required to provide the following:
1. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in
accordance with the requirements in 45 CFR Part 400.
2. Assurance that 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. States must indicate what percentage of FY 1997
targeted assistance formula allocation funds that are used for services
will be allocated 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. Identification of the local administering agency.
5. 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, the data to be used, 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
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.
6. A description of the State's guidelines for the required content
of county targeted assistance plans and a description of the State's
review/approval process for such county plans. Acceptable county plans
must minimally include the following:
a. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in
accordance with the requirements in 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,
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 social services and employment agencies that
serve refugees. Counties are encouraged to foster coalition-building
among these participating organizations.
c. Identification of 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 Sec. 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 the targeted assistance programs, the regular social
service programs, and any other services available to the refugee
population.
e. The relationship of targeted assistance services to other
services available to refugees/entrants in the county including State-
allocated ORR social services.
f. Analysis of available employment opportunities in the local
community. Examples of acceptable analyses of employment opportunities
might include surveys of employers or
[[Page 31445]]
potential employers of refugee clients, surveys of presently effective
employment service providers, review of studies on employment
opportunities/forecasts which would be appropriate to the refugee
populations.
g. Description of the monitoring and oversight responsibilities to
be carried out by the county or qualifying local jurisdiction.
h. Assurance that the local administrative budget 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.
i. For any State that administers the program directly or otherwise
provides direct service to the refugee/entrant population (with the
concurrence of the county), the State must provide ORR with the same
information required above for review and prior approval.
7. 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 contract(s) 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
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.''
States are 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 outcome goals should reflect
improvement over past performance and strive for continuous improvement
during the project period from one year to another.
8. An identification of the contracting cycle dates 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.
9. A description of the State's plan for conducting fiscal and
programmatic monitoring and evaluations of the targeted assistance
program, including frequency of on-site monitoring.
10. 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 its
plan, except in the case of a State that administers the program
locally as described in item 6i above.
11. A line item budget and 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. States that administer the
program locally in lieu of the county, through a mutual agreement with
the qualifying county, may add up to, but not exceed, 10% of the
county's TAP allocation to the State's administrative budget.
12. Assurance that the State will follow or mandate that its sub-
recipients will follow appropriate State procurement and contract
requirements in the acquisition, administration, and management of
targeted assistance service contracts.
X. 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
new ORR-6 Quarterly Performance Report form.
Dated: June 2, 1997.
Lavinia Limon,
Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement.
[FR Doc. 97-14899 Filed 6-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
