Download:
pdf |
pdfDEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Notice of Availability of Funds and Solicitation for Grant Applications under the
Young Parents Demonstration.
Announcement Type: Solicitation for Grant Applications (SGA)
Funding Opportunity Number: SGA/DFA PY-10-12
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 17.261
Key Dates: The closing date for receipt of applications under this announcement is
April 29, 2011. Applications must be received no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
Addresses: Mailed applications must be addressed to the U.S. Department of Labor,
Employment and Training Administration, Division of Federal Assistance, Attention:
Latifa Jeter, Grant Officer, Reference SGA/DFA PY 10-12, 200 Constitution Avenue,
NW, Room N4716, Washington, DC 20210. For complete application and submission
information, including online application instructions, please refer to Section IV –
Application and Submission Process.
Summary: The Employment and Training Administration (ETA), U.S. Department of
Labor (USDOL, or the Department) announces the availability of approximately $5.5
million authorized by the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 1 to support applicants
in providing intensive mentoring services to low-income young parents (both mothers
and fathers, and expectant parents ages 16 to 24) participating in workforce
development programs. Activities under this SGA are authorized under Section 171(b)
of the Workforce Investment Act, which allows for demonstration and pilot projects for
the purpose of developing and implementing techniques and approaches, and
demonstrating the effectiveness of specialized methods, in addressing employment and
training needs.
0F
Applicants must currently be operating a program for young parents that includes
educational and occupational skills training, case management and supportive services
that lead to family economic self-sufficiency. Funded projects will be encouraged to
serve young parents in high-risk categories, including those who are victims of child
abuse, children of incarcerated parents, court-involved youth, youth at-risk of court
involvement 2, homeless and runaway youth, Indian and Native American youth, migrant
youth, youth in or aging out of foster care 3, and youth with disabilities.
1F
2F
1
Pub. L. 111-117, Div. D, Title I, 123 Stat. 3227 (Dec. 16, 2009).
Youth and young adults ages 16 to 24 who have been under the supervision of the juvenile justice system, which
include: diversion programs, alternative sentencing programs, placed in juvenile correctional facilities or local
juvenile detention centers.
3
Youth in foster care receive “services” in a private home or in group homes that are usually provided by parents –
housing, food, clothing, medical care, transportation, and so on. Although foster care is intended to be temporary
and the goal is reunification of parents and children, when youth age out of foster care (typically when they reach
age 18), they lose all of their foster care services and they must provide them for themselves and transition to
independent adult living on their own.
2
Upon selection, all grantees must agree to participate in a random assignment
evaluation designed to test the impact of the mentoring services. Selected applicants
must enroll at least 400 participants over two years. (These individuals must be new
clients to the applicant’s existing program.) A lottery will determine which 200
participants will receive the mentoring services provided by the applicant (or its
designated partner) funded under this grant. This gives all 400 an equal chance at
getting into the program. The remaining 200 participants will participate in the
applicant’s existing program but will not receive the mentoring services. Applicants
must describe their program enrollment size during the past three years and show that
their existing program can enroll at least 400 individuals. If an applicant does not
propose enrolling at least 400 individuals under this grant, its application will not be
considered. Applicants that fail to provide the number of individuals they expect to
enroll on the abstract, see Section VI.B. Part III, will not be considered.
The majority of funds awarded under this demonstration must be used to provide the
mentoring services to participants who are randomly assigned to receive such service
(the treatment group). Participants who are not a part of the treatment group will be
assigned to the control group and will not receive the mentoring service. They must,
however, receive services funded by the applicant’s existing program. Therefore, grant
applicants may use up to 25 percent of grant funds for activities related to the
applicant’s existing program.
Section I. Funding Opportunity Description
0B
Despite a one-third decline in teen pregnancy since the early 1990’s, the United States
continues to have one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy and teen births among
industrialized nations. To address the issues of early pregnancy and childbearing, in
2009 the Young Parents Demonstration (YPD) provided approximately $10 million in
grant funds to 13 competitively-selected programs to provide innovative services to lowincome young parents. These 13 selected YPD grantees are using their awarded funds
to implement either a mentoring or a training model to increase participants’
employment-related outcomes.
In designing this SGA, ETA reviewed the literature (see excerpts below) on the
implementation of formal mentoring services and found that the research suggests that
formal mentoring services could improve educational and employment outcomes for
youth. As an example, the Ready-4-Work Initiative was an ETA pilot project where over
60 percent of participants received an organized mentoring program. Participants who
met with a mentor at least once showed stronger outcomes than those who did not
participate in a mentoring program. Information on this program can be found at
http://www.doleta.gov/RExO/PDF/Ready4Work_Information.pdf or
http://www.ppv.org/ppv/mentoring.asp . Therefore, this YPD funding opportunity will
focus on the provision of the mentoring services to low-income young parents to ensure
U
U
2
U
U
they succeed in the education and training activities in which they enroll and sustain and
advance the gains made in education and employment so that they may become
economically self-sufficient.
Prior Research on Mentoring – A growing body of research indicates that a supportive
relationship between youth and adults, such as a mentoring relationship, is an important
ingredient for positive outcomes in academics, social settings, career development,
health and safety (Eccles et. al, 2002). While evidence indicates that support and
guidance from adults is critical to enable youth to grow into responsible, self-sufficient
adults, there is a scarcity of support and guidance from adults in the lives of many
youth. This is especially the case with low-income youth. Single parent households,
reduced services in school districts, and less than ideal safety conditions in
neighborhoods have created environments where there are fewer and fewer supportive
adults in the lives of low-income youth (Tierney, et. al, 2000).
U
U
Mentoring is often defined as a sustained relationship between a young person and an
adult in which the adult provides the young person with support, guidance, and
assistance. Formal mentoring relationships are created through planned programs,
which can take the form of volunteer or staff mentor models. A range of studies have
found that mentoring relationships in organized programs can have positive effects on
youth such as increased personal and emotional development, socialization, selfesteem, academic achievement, and personal networks for employment. Several of
these studies are cited in Section VII.D.
While many studies on mentoring find that the approach is promising, not all mentoring
programs, whether they use volunteers or paid staff, are effective. A survey of the
literature finds that successful mentoring programs possess specific components:
screening, orientation and training, and support and supervision. In addition, Federal
Mentoring Council (FMC) research shows that the key elements of mentoring programs
that lead to greater impacts include:
•
Mentors have previous relevant experience in helping others,
•
Mentors commit to at least twelve months of participation,
• Mentors are carefully trained and supported and receive help structuring
activities with mentees,
•
The program is monitored for early problem detection,
•
Parents are involved as much as possible, and
•
Programs are evaluated and flexible to change as necessary.
According to the FMC, preliminary studies show that high quality mentoring has the
potential to be a successful intervention strategy to address risk among youth and to
3
promote positive behaviors and attitudes. Researchers have not yet sufficiently distilled
the specific impacts of mentoring alone from the impacts of the programs in which they
take place, but have suggested that close, consistent, and enduring mentoring
relationships are likely to have positive benefits. A strong connection characterized by
mutuality, trust, and empathy that spans a significant time period, and is focused on the
young person’s interests and preferences is likely to make an impact, while a distant,
brief, or inconsistent relationship is not (Rhodes, et. Al, 2008). Also, FMC studies
indicate that potential educational benefits consist of: better academic performance,
better school attendance and positive attitudes. While potential behavioral benefits
include: decreased likelihood of initiating illegal drug and alcohol use, and decreased
violent behavior.
A. Program Design – Necessary Existing Program Components
U
Each applicant must currently be operating a young parents program with the following
required components:
•
Education, Training, and Employment Strategies – This component must
focus on providing young parents with skills and credentials relevant to the
industries or occupations in demand in the local labor market;
•
Case Management – This component must include: the identification,
assessment, and enrollment of young parents; the development of a
personalized service strategy that may include personal, educational, or
employment-related supports; as well as the identification of appropriate
supportive services. Case managers must have a central role in ensuring
that project participants receive all of the necessary and appropriate services
to overcome any barriers to full project participation;
•
Supportive Services – This component should be aimed at reducing barriers
to stable participation in education and employment, and may include child
care assistance, transportation assistance, mental or physical health care,
substance abuse services, parenting education classes, work-based
stipends, or other efforts; and
Follow-Up and Post-Program Transition Services – This component should
include: follow-up and retention services intended to sustain and advance
the gains made in education and employment outcomes; individualized,
consistent follow-up after training and during the retention period for at least
one year; and/or intensive follow-up and retention services such as home
visits or employer visits in place of periodic phone calls.
•
B. Program Design - Intensive Mentoring Services
U
Each applicant may provide the mentoring services or partner with an organization that
provides these services. The mentoring service can engage either full-time paid
professional mentors or recruit volunteers (who may be paid appropriate compensation)
4
to work with the program’s young parents starting when they enroll in the program and
continuing for 18 months. The mentoring intervention must be designed to help youth in
three areas: education, career advancement and personal development. While
working with the young parent in a holistic manner, the mentor must strategically guide
and motivate the youth to complete the educational, employment and other services
that the case managers have deemed appropriate for them. They must also provide the
young parent with broader life guidance, such as how to juggle parenting with their other
commitments. Prior research suggest that mentors who offer active guidance to youths
and make concerted efforts to ensure their overall welfare are more effective (DuBois,
et. al, 2010). However, overly directive or task-focused mentors are less effective with
youth (Keller, 2005). Therefore, the mentoring services applicants propose to provide
under this SGA should strike a balance in their intensity to ensure a young parents’
overall success.
The mentoring program should provide the programmatic infrastructure needed to make
mentoring successful, namely:
5
•
Screening program mentors in order to select mentors whose personal and
work history supports their ability to work with their mentees in a cooperative
and non-threatening manner, will be able to keep their 18-month commitment,
and will develop a trusting relationship with the youths. Because the mentors
will be advising youths about their educational pathway, mentors should have
a minimum of some college and/or work experience in occupations that are
similar to those in which the youths are interested. If the mentors are paid
staff, they must also have at least one year of prior experience in providing
mentoring/counseling services to similar at-risk youths and be willing to work
a flexible schedule to be able to respond to the youths’ needs at various times
of the day including weekends.
•
Matching Mentors with Mentees to ensure success of the relationship. It is
important to establish a consistent matching system that can be used with the
proposed mentors and participants to help provide a consistent program.
Before matching a mentor with a mentee, program staff should go through all
the documentation collected as part of the screening process. Some tools
that can assist with a successful matching of mentors and mentees include:
1) a Mentor and Mentee Interest Survey form; 2) gatherings in which mentors
and mentees spend time participating in group activities; 3) brief one-to-one
chats that give both mentors and mentees an opportunity to identify a partner
they seem to identify with, among others; and 4) confidential feedback from
mentors and mentees after the gatherings or chats to determine the mentors’
and mentees’ level of ease with each other, after which program staff will
determine the match. Other matching elements to consider in the matching
process are: similar gender/ethnicity/culture, language, common interests
such as educational or occupational fields, possible needs of the mentee, life
experiences, and attitudes among others. Program staff are encouraged to
monitor the match very closely for the first three to six months, as both parties
U
U
U
U
are likely to need plenty of support as they build a trusting relationship.
During such times the Program Staff can play a crucial supportive and
facilitative role.
•
Orientation and Training of Mentors to provide them with a minimum of six
hours of in-depth training before they start meeting with youth. The training
must cover: 1) the issues that these young parents will be facing; 2) all
program services the young parents will be expected to use and how the
mentors should interact with program staff; 3) how best to build a trusting
relationship with the young parents; and 4) how best to use that relationship
to actively move the youths forward by providing advice in an appropriate
manner and advocating for the youths with others, including with program
staff. Additional ongoing training may also be provided on specific areas of
importance to young parents or to provide peer support opportunities for
mentors to discuss challenges and/or share best practices.
•
Support and Supervision of the mentors. The primary role of a mentor’s
supervisor (i.e. mentoring supervisor) is to ensure that each match is
proceeding well, that a solid relationship forms, that the relationship endures
and is able to overcome difficulties, and that the mentor is helping and
supporting the mentee to pursue their educational and career goals. Both
mentors and mentees should feel supported by the mentoring supervisor.
Therefore, during the first quarter, the mentors should participate in support
and/or supervision activities at least two or three times. Support and/or
supervision activities may include follow-up calls the supervisor makes to
discuss with the mentor how the relationship is developing or it might include
a supervisor observing the mentor/mentee interaction and providing
feedback, among other activities to be determined by the applicant. The
youths should be contacted by the mentoring supervisor at least quarterly.
Programs may choose to reduce the level of supervision/support after the first
quarter to once or twice a quarter if the relationship appears to be stable.
U
U
U
U
To ensure mentors and mentees have enough time to develop an enduring relationship,
the program must provide the following:
•
6
The mentors and young parents should meet at least 4 hours a month for 18
months. However, applicants that build in more meeting time at the beginning
of the relationship in order to get the relationship off on solid footing will be
preferred unless there is a good explanation for why the youths do not have
the time or the need to meet more often. The applicant must state the
maximum caseload each mentor would carry at one time. The number of
mentees assigned should enable the mentors: 1) to provide the required
level of interaction with the youths; 2) time to advocate for the youths with the
program staff and others; and 3) to work a flexible schedule to respond to
youths needs.
C. Program Design – Key Partners
U
Collaboration across organizations is critical to the success of any youth program. A
single organization does not typically have the resources to respond to the myriad of
issues that affect young parents most in need. Given that applicants must currently be
operating a program for young parents, such collaborations may already exist for the
provision of the Necessary Existing Program Components described in Section I.A.
Applicants who propose to partner with an organization that provides mentoring
services (such as community-based and faith-based organization, or private mentoring
services entity) rather than provide such services in-house, must demonstrate through a
letter of commitment their partnership with such entity that includes their experience
providing mentoring services to youth and collaborating or supporting youth programs,
and their relationship with the applicant including the expected duration of such
relationship. Applicants must also demonstrate through a letter of commitment their
partnership with the local workforce investment board to provide referrals to the young
parent program, access to assessments, employment and other career center
resources such as job development services to ensure the young parents’ success in
achieving employment goals. Section IV.B. Part III. – Attachments to the Technical
Proposal describes what these letters of commitment must contain.
Other partners, that are beneficial for comprehensive service provision of existing
program components, but are not required include: education and training providers
such as community colleges, career technical programs, and adult education programs;
health and human services agencies including children and family agencies and
substance abuse and mental health agencies; and other partners such as community
and faith-based organizations that provide supportive services such as financial literacy
training, housing assistance, transportation assistance, parenting skills training,
childcare assistance, and assistance with food and clothing.
U
U
D. Mandatory Participation in the Random Assignment Evaluation
U
Applicants selected to receive a grant award under this SGA must participate in the
rigorous random assignment impact evaluation of the Young Parents Demonstration
being conducted by the Capital Research Corporation and its subcontractors, The
Urban Institute and Abt Associates Inc. The evaluation will assess the effectiveness of
the mentoring services on numerous outcomes, including participants’ post-program
labor market outcomes.
In addition to the impact analysis, the evaluation also includes an implementation
analysis and cost-benefit analysis being conducted by The Urban Institute and its
subcontractor, Capital Research Corporation. The implementation analysis will provide
contextual information for better understanding the estimated impacts and also any
variation in service delivery for any sizeable subgroups served under the demonstration
project.
7
The evaluation is intended to generate evidence-based knowledge and information for
policymakers and decision-makers to determine whether services based on a mentoring
model are particularly effective or whether other policies and practices should be
chosen to assist young parents. Given the importance of assessing the potential
usefulness of a mentoring program model, ETA’s priority in designing the demonstration
is to ensure that the evaluation yields rigorous evidence about well-defined, tightlycontrolled models.
To ensure the integrity of the evaluation’s findings, grantees will be responsible for:
•
Adhering to the random assignment methodology and participating in all activities
related to conducting random assignment within their respective site(s).
•
Implementing the demonstration project while meeting the requirements of the
evaluation by:
o Having the operational and organizational capacity to enroll at least 400
participants over two years and randomly assigning participants to a
treatment group or a control group. All 400 participants will receive the
existing program services, but only the 200 assigned to the treatment group
will have access to the mentoring services provided under the grant. Those
in the control group will not receive mentoring services under this grant nor by
other sources that are provided by the grantee but will have access to the
existing program services.
8
•
Working with the evaluation team (and, if appropriate, the grantee’s partners) to
develop a process through which individuals are: 1) deemed eligible, 2) enrolled
in the study, and 3) entered into the selection lottery to determine who gets
mentoring services that minimizes the disruption of program operations and
meets the needs of the evaluation. (Applicants do not need to describe this
process in their application. It will be jointly developed by site staff and members
of the evaluation team.). This process will include: explaining the study to
potential participants, obtaining their written consent to participate in the study,
collecting baseline demographic information and contact information, conducting
random assignment using a simple Web-based application, informing study
participants of their research group assignment, and ensuring that participants
are treated in accordance with their assignment. Grantee staff will carry out the
process, with training and support from the evaluation team.
•
Identifying an Evaluation Coordinator, who will serve as primary liaison to the
evaluation team. This individual will coordinate site visits for the evaluation team
and be responsible for overseeing the study enrollment and random assignment
process.
•
Agreeing that qualitative and quantitative data collected on their site operations
and their program participants can be shared between ETA and the evaluators
for the purposes of the evaluation.
E. Mandatory Data Collection and Performance Management
U
U
All grantees will be required to collect program data necessary to analyze the required
outcomes and performance activity of interest to ETA, its Federal partners, and the
evaluation contractor. This will involve entering data into a Management Information
System (MIS) provided by the evaluation contractor that captures a significant amount
of participant-level demographic, service and outcome data. Typically, the data
required for an evaluation are similar to the data required for strong program
management.
F. Mandatory Grantee Orientation and Training Conference
U
U
Within 90 days after grant award, all grantees will be expected to participate in an
intensive orientation and training conference organized by the Technical Assistance
contractor in consultation with ETA and the evaluation contractor. Grantees should
budget travel costs for this purpose on their Budget Information Forms.
Section II. Award Information
A. Award Amount
Under this SGA, ETA intends to award approximately $5.5 million in grant funds. ETA
plans to fund approximately four to six grants. Individual grants will range in value from
$500,000 to $1.5 million. Applicants are encouraged to submit budgets for quality
projects at whatever funding level is appropriate for their project within the range
specified above. Any grant application that requests more than $1.5 million will be
deemed non-responsive and will not be considered. Please note this is a one-time
award and the grant will be for the entire 48-month duration of the program. No
additional funding will be available after the original award.
B. Period of Performance
The period of performance will be up to four (4) years from the date of execution of the
grant documents. This period of performance will allow for up to six months for initial
implementation, up to two years (24 months) of “live” enrollment of at least 400
individuals including 18 months of services for all program participants randomly
assigned to receive the intensive mentoring services. Applicants should plan to fully
expend grant funds during the period of performance while ensuring full transparency
and accountability for all expenditures.
9
C. Transparency
The Department is committed to conducting a transparent grant award process and
publicizing information about program outcomes. Applicants are advised that their
application and information related to its review and evaluation (whether or not the
application is successful) may be made publically available, either fully or partially. In
addition, information about grant progress and results may also be made publicly
available.
Section III. Eligibility Information
A. Eligible Applicants
In order to be eligible for consideration under this solicitation, applicants must: 1)
currently be operating a program for young parents that includes the Necessary Existing
Program Components as described in Section I.A., 2) provide mentoring services or
partner with an organization that provides these services as described in Section I.B.
and 3) propose to enroll at least 400 individuals under this grant as described in Section
I.D. Eligible applicants include:
•
A Local Workforce Investment Board;
•
A Federally-recognized Indian Tribe; or
•
A non-profit provider (such as a community or faith-based organization, industry
association, etc.) of workforce system services determined to be tax exempt
under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Applicants must provide a letter of commitment from the key partners – an organization
that provides mentoring services if the applicant chooses to partner with such entity and
a workforce investment board – as discussed in Section I.C.
B. Cost Sharing or Matching
Under this solicitation, matching or leveraged resources are not required. The applicant
may provide leveraged resources from key entities to strengthen the service program
offered to project participants.
C. Other Eligibility Criteria
Applicants must submit Letters of Commitment that show evidence of partnerships with
the key partners as described in Section IV.B.III. – Attachments to the Technical
Proposal.
Applicants must be willing to participate in the random assignment study described in
Section I.D. – Mandatory Participation in the Random Assignment Evaluation.
10
Grantees selected under this SGA must comply with the guidance provided by ETA, the
Technical Assistance provider and the evaluation contractor.
D. Eligible Participants
The target population for the YPD are low-income young parents (both mothers and
fathers and expectant parents ages 16 to 24), including those in high-risk categories
such as victims of child abuse, children of incarcerated parents, court-involved youth,
youth at risk of court involvement, homeless and runaway youth, Indian and Native
American youth, migrant youth, youth in or aging out of foster care, and youth with
disabilities. The extent of an applicant’s special outreach efforts to recruit high-risk
categories of participants will be considered in the evaluation criteria.
Veteran Priority for Participants
The Jobs for Veterans Act (Public Law 107-288) requires grantees to provide priority of
service for veterans and spouses of certain veterans for the receipt of employment,
training, and placement services in any job training program directly funded, in whole or
in part, by DOL. The regulations implementing this priority of service can be found at 20
CFR part 1010. In circumstances where a grant recipient must choose between two
qualified candidates for a service, one of whom is a veteran or eligible spouse, the
veterans priority of service provisions require that the grant recipient give the veteran or
eligible spouse priority of service by first providing him or her that service. To obtain
priority of service, a veteran or spouse must meet the program’s eligibility
requirements. Grantees must comply with DOL guidance on veterans’ priority. ETA’s
Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 10-09 (issued November 10,
2009) provides guidance on implementing priority of service for veterans and eligible
spouses in all qualified job training programs funded in whole or in part by DOL. TEGL
No. 10-09 is available at http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/corr_doc.cfm?DOCN=2816 .
U
U
Section IV. Application and Submission Process
1B
A. How to Obtain an Application Package
13B
This SGA contains all of the information and links to forms needed to apply for grant
funding.
B. Content and Form of Application Submission
Proposals submitted in response to this SGA must consist of three separate and distinct
parts: (I) a cost proposal; (II) a technical proposal; and (III) attachments to the technical
proposal. Applications that do not contain all of the three parts or that fail to adhere to
the instructions in this section will be deemed non-responsive and will not be
considered. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the funding amount
requested is consistent across all parts and sub-parts of the application.
11
Part I. The Cost Proposal. The Cost Proposal must include the following items:
SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance” (available at
http://www07.grants.gov/agencies/forms_repository_information.jsp) . The SF-424 must
clearly identify the applicant and must be signed by an individual with authority to enter
into a grant agreement. Upon confirmation of an award, the individual signing the SF424 on behalf of the applicant shall be considered the authorized representative of the
applicant. All applicants for Federal grant and funding opportunities are required to
have a Data Universal Numbering System (D-U-N-S®) number, and must supply their
D-U-N-S® Number on the SF-424. The D-U-N-S® Number is a nine-digit identification
number that uniquely identifies business entities. If you do not have a D-U-N-S®
Number, you can get one for free through the D&B website:
http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform/displayHomePage.do .
U
U
U
U
The SF-424A Budget Information Form (available at
http://www07.grants.gov/agencies/forms_repository_information.jsp) . In preparing the
Budget Information Form, the applicant must provide a concise narrative explanation to
support the budget request, explained in detail below.
U
U
Budget Narrative: The budget narrative must provide a description of costs associated
with each line item on the SF-424A. It should also include a description of leveraged
resources provided (as applicable) to support grant activities.
Note that the entire Federal grant amount requested (not just one year) must be
included on the SF-424 and SF-424A and budget narrative. No leveraged resources
should be shown on the SF-424 and SF-424A. The amount listed on the SF-424, SF424A and budget narrative must be the same. Please note, the funding amount
included on the SF-424 will be considered the official funding amount requested if any
inconsistencies are found. Applications that fail to provide an SF-424 including D-U-NS® Number, Budget Information Form SF-424A, and a budget narrative will be
considered non-responsive and not reviewed.
Regardless of the method of application submission, all applicants must register with
the Federal Central Contractor Registry (CCR) before submitting an application. Stepby-step instructions for registering with CCR can be found at
http://www.grants.gov/applicants/org_step2.jsp . An awardee must maintain an active
CCR registration with current information at all times during which it has an active
Federal award or an application under consideration. To remain registered in the CCR
database after the initial registration, the applicant is required to review and update on
an annual basis from the date of initial registration or subsequent updates its
information in the CCR database to ensure it is current, accurate and complete. For
purposes of this paragraph, the applicant is the entity that meets the eligibility criteria
and has the legal authority to apply and to receive the award. Failure to register with
the CCR before application submission will result in your application being found nonresponsive and not being reviewed.
U
12
U
Part II. The Technical Proposal. The Technical Proposal must demonstrate the
applicant’s capability to implement the grant project in accordance with the provisions of
this Solicitation. The guidelines for the content of the Technical Proposal are provided
in Section V of this SGA. The Technical Proposal is limited to 25 double-spaced singlesided 8.5 x 11 inch pages with 12 point Times New Roman font and 1 inch margins.
Any materials beyond the specified page limit will not be read . Applicants should
number the Technical Proposal beginning with page number 1. Applications that do not
include Part II, the Technical Proposal, will be considered non-responsive and not
reviewed.
24B
U
U
Part III. Attachments to the Technical Proposal. Attachments to the technical
proposal do not count against the limit of 25 pages for the Technical Proposal, but may
not exceed 18 pages in total. In addition to the Technical Proposal, the applicant must
submit the following attachments:
•
An abstract, not to exceed two (2) double-spaced single-sided pages 8.5 x 11
inch pages with 12 point Times New Roman font and 1 inch margins, which must
include the following: 1) summary of the proposed project, including applicant
name; 2) the number of individuals that will be recruited and enrolled; 3) project
title; 4) key partners; 5) projected outcomes; and 6) funding level requested;
•
If the applicant chooses to provide mentoring services through a partner
organization, they must attach a letter of commitment from such organization that
includes their: 1) previous experience providing mentoring services to youth; 2)
previous experience collaborating with or supporting existing youth programs;
and 3) relationship (existing or new) with the applicant’s program. The letter
must also specify the expected duration of the relationship with the applicant to
ensure participants receive the mentoring services described in Section I.B.
•
If the applicant is not a Local Workforce Investment Board, it must attach a letter
of commitment from the workforce investment board that includes a description
of the mechanisms for referring participants and providing access to
assessments, employment, and other resources such as job development
services.
Applications that do not include the required attachments will be deemed nonresponsive and will not be considered. Any additional materials beyond the 18-page
limit for attachments will not be reviewed. The required attachments must be affixed
and clearly identified as appendices to the application.
Applicants should not send documents separately to ETA, because documents received
separately will be tracked through a different system and will not be attached to the
application for review. ETA will not accept general letters of support submitted by
organizations or individuals that are not partners in the proposed project and that do not
directly identify the specific commitment or roles of the project partners. Support letters
of this nature will not be considered in the evaluation review process.
13
C. Submission Date, Times, Process and Addresses
14B
The closing date for receipt of applications under this announcement is April 29, 2011.
Applications may be submitted electronically on http://www.grants.gov or in hard copy
by mail or hand delivery (including overnight delivery). Hard copy applications must
be received at the address below no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Applications
submitted on grants.gov must also be successfully submitted (as described below) no
later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Applications sent by e-mail, telegram, or facsimile
(FAX) will not be accepted.
U
U
Applicants submitting proposals in hard copy must submit an original signed application
(including the SF-424) and one (1) ‘‘copy-ready’’ version free of bindings, staples or
protruding tabs to ease in the reproduction of the proposal by DOL. Applicants
submitting proposals in hard copy are also required to provide an identical electronic
copy of the proposal on compact disc (CD). If discrepancies between the hard copy
submission and CD copy are identified, the application on the CD will be considered the
official applicant submission for evaluation purposes. Failure to provide identical
applications in hardcopy and CD format may have an impact on the overall evaluation.
If an application is physically submitted by both hard copy and through
http://www.grants.gov, a letter must accompany the hard copy application stating which
application to review. If no letter accompanies the hard copy, we will review the copy
submitted through http://www.grants.gov . Applications that do not meet the conditions
set forth in this notice will be considered non-responsive. No exceptions to the mailing
and delivery requirements set forth in this notice will be granted. Further, documents
submitted separately from the application, before or after the deadline, will not be
accepted as part of the application.
U
U
U
U
Mailed applications must be addressed to the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment
and Training Administration, Division of Federal Assistance, Attention: Latifa Jeter,
Grant Officer, Reference SGA/DFA PY 10-12, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room
N4716, Washington, DC 20210. Applicants are advised that mail delivery in the
Washington area may be delayed due to mail decontamination procedures. Handdelivered proposals will be received at the above address. All overnight mail will be
considered to be hand-delivered and must be received at the designated place by the
specified closing date and time.
Applications that are submitted through Grants.gov must be successfully submitted at
http://www.grants.gov no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date and
then subsequently validated by Grants.gov. The submission and validation process is
described in more detail below. The process can be complicated and time-consuming.
Applicants are strongly advised to initiate the process as soon as possible and to plan
for time to resolve technical problems if necessary.
U
14
U
The Department strongly recommends that before the applicant begins to write the
proposal, applicants should immediately initiate and complete the “Get Registered”
registration steps at http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp . Applicants
should read through the registration process carefully before registering. These steps
may take as much as four weeks to complete, and this time should be factored into
plans for electronic submission in order to avoid unexpected delays that could result in
the rejection of an application. The site also contains registration checklists to help you
walk through the process. The Department strongly recommends that applicants
download the “Organization Registration Checklist” at
http://www.grants.gov/assets/Organization_Steps_Complete_Registration.pdf and
prepare the information requested before beginning the registration process. Reviewing
and assembling required information before beginning the registration process will
alleviate last minute searches for required information and save time.
U
U
U
U
As described above, applicants must have a D–U–N–S® Number and must register with
the Federal Central Contractor Registry (CCR).
The next step in the registration process is creating a username and password with
Grants.gov to become an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR). AORs will
need to know the D-U-N-S® Number of the organization for which they will be
submitting applications to complete this process. To read more detailed instructions for
creating a profile on Grants.gov visit: http://www.grants.gov/applicants/org_step3.jsp .
U
U
After creating a profile on Grants.gov, the E-Biz point of Contact (E-Biz POC) - a
representative from your organization who is the contact listed for CCR – will receive an
email to grant the AOR permission to submit applications on behalf of their organization.
The E-Biz POC will then log in to Grants.gov and approve an applicant as the AOR,
thereby giving him or her permission to submit applications. To learn more about AOR
Authorization visit: http://www.grants.gov/applicants/org_step5.jsp , or to track AOR
status visit: http://www.grants.gov/applicants/org_step6.jsp .
U
U
U
U
An application submitted through Grants.gov constitutes a submission as an
electronically signed application. The registration and account creation with Grants.gov,
with E-Biz POC approval, establishes an AOR. When you submit the application
through Grants.gov, the name of your AOR on file will be inserted into the signature line
of the application. Applicants must register the individual who is able to make legally
binding commitments for the applicant organization as the AOR; this step is often
missed and it is crucial for valid submissions.
U
When a registered applicant submits an application with Grants.gov, an electronic time
stamp is generated within the system when the application is successfully received by
Grants.gov. Within two business days of application submission, Grants.gov will send
the applicant two email messages to provide the status of the application’s progress
through the system. The first email, sent almost immediately, will contain a tracking
number and will confirm receipt of the application by Grants.gov. The second email will
indicate the application has either been successfully validated or has been rejected due
15
to errors. Only applications that have been successfully submitted by the deadline and
subsequently successfully validated will be considered. It is the sole responsibility of
the applicant to ensure a timely submission. While it is not required that an application
be successfully validated before the deadline for submission, it is prudent to reserve
time before the deadline in case it is necessary to resubmit an application that has not
been successfully validated. Therefore, sufficient time should be allotted for submission
(two business days) and, if applicable, additional time to address errors and receive
validation upon resubmission (an additional two business days for each ensuing
submission). It is important to note that if sufficient time is not allotted and a rejection
notice is received after the due date and time, the application will not be considered.
To ensure consideration, the components of the application must be saved as .doc, .xls,
.rtf, or .pdf files. If submitted in any other format, the applicant bears the risk that
compatibility or other issues will prevent us from considering the application. ETA will
attempt to open the document but will not take any additional measures in the event of
problems with opening it. In such cases, the non-conforming application will not be
considered for funding.
We strongly advise applicants to use the various tools and documents, including FAQs,
which are available on the “Applicant Resources” page at
http://www.grants.gov/applicants/resources.jsp .
U
U
ETA encourages new prospective applicants to view the online tutorial, “Grant
Applications 101: A Plain English Guide to ETA Competitive Grants,” available through
Workforce3One at: http://www.workforce3one.org/page/grants_toolkit .
U
U
To receive updated information about critical issues, new tips for users and other time
sensitive updates as information is available, applicants may subscribe to “Grants.gov
Updates” at http://www.grants.gov/applicants/email_subscription_signup.jsp .
If applicants encounter a problem with Grants.gov and do not find an answer in any of
the other resources, call 1-800-518-4726 to speak to a Customer Support
Representative or email “ [email protected] ”. The Contact Center is open 24 hours a
day, seven days a week. It is closed on Federal holidays.
U
U
U
U
Late Applications: For applications submitted on Grants.gov, only applications that
have been successfully submitted no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing
date and then successfully validated will be considered. Applicants take a significant
risk by waiting to the last day to submit by Grants.gov.
Any hard copy application received after the exact date and time specified for receipt at
the office designated in this notice will not be considered, unless it is received before
awards are made, it was properly addressed, and it was: (a) sent by U.S. Postal
Service mail, postmarked not later than the fifth calendar day before the date specified
for receipt of applications (e.g., an application required to be received by the 20th of the
month must be postmarked by the 15th of that month); or (b) sent by professional
overnight delivery service to the addressee not later than one working day before the
16
date specified for receipt of applications. ‘‘Postmarked’’ means a printed, stamped or
otherwise placed impression (exclusive of a postage meter machine impression) that is
readily identifiable, without further action, as having been supplied or affixed on the date
of mailing by an employee of the U.S. Postal Service. Therefore, applicants should
request the postal clerk to place a legible hand cancellation ‘‘bull’s eye’’ postmark on
both the receipt and the package. Failure to adhere to these instructions will be a basis
for a determination that the application was not filed timely and will not be considered.
Evidence of timely submission by a professional overnight delivery service must be
demonstrated by equally reliable evidence created by the delivery service provider
indicating the time and place of receipt.
D. Intergovernmental Review
15B
This funding opportunity is not subject to Executive Order 12372, “Intergovernmental
Review of Federal Programs.”
E. Funding Restrictions
16B
All proposal costs must be necessary and reasonable and in accordance with Federal
guidelines. Determinations of allowable costs will be made in accordance with the
applicable Federal cost principles. Disallowed costs are those charges to a grant that
the grantor agency or its representative determines not to be allowed in accordance
with the applicable Federal cost principles or other conditions contained in the grant.
Applicants, whether successful or not, will not be entitled to reimbursement of pre-award
costs.
1. Indirect Costs
25B
As specified in OMB Circular Cost Principles, indirect costs are those that have been
incurred for common or joint objectives and cannot be readily identified with a particular
final cost objective. An indirect cost rate (ICR) is required when an organization
operates under more than one grant or other activity, whether Federally-assisted or not.
Organizations must use the ICR supplied by the Federal Cognizant Agency. If an
organization requires a new ICR or has a pending ICR, the Grant Officer will award a
temporary billing rate for 90 days until a provisional rate can be issued. This rate is
based on the fact that an organization has not established an ICR agreement. Within
this 90 day period, the organization must submit an acceptable indirect cost proposal to
their Federal Cognizant Agency to obtain a provisional ICR.
26B
2. Administrative Costs
27B
Under this SGA, an entity that receives a grant to carry out a project or program may
not use more than 10 percent of the amount of the grant to pay administrative costs
associated with the program or project. Administrative costs could be direct or indirect
costs, and are defined at 20 CFR 667.220. Administrative costs do not need to be
28B
17
identified separately from program costs on the SF-424A Budget Information Form.
However, they must be tracked through the grantee’s accounting system. To claim any
administrative costs that are also indirect costs, the applicant must obtain an Indirect
Cost Rate Agreement from its Federal Cognizant agency, as specified above.
3. Salary and Bonus Limitations
29B
Under Public Law 109-234, none of the funds appropriated in Public Law 109-149 or
prior Acts under the heading “Employment and Training Administration” that are
available for expenditure on or after June 15, 2006, may be used by a recipient or subrecipient of such funds to pay the salary and bonuses of an individual, either as direct
costs or indirect costs, at a rate in excess of Executive Level II, except as provided for in
section 101 of Public Law 109-149. Public Laws 111-8 and 111-117 contain the same
limitation on funds appropriated under each of these Laws. This limitation applies to
grants funded under this SGA. The salary and bonus limitation does not apply to
vendors providing goods and services as defined in OMB Circular A-133 (codified at 29
CFR Parts 96 and 99). See Training and Employment Guidance Letter number 5-06 for
further clarification: http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/corr_doc.cfm?DOCN=2262.
30B
U
4. Intellectual Property Rights
31B
The Federal Government reserves a paid-up, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to
reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use for Federal
purposes: i) the copyright in all products developed under the grant, including a subgrant or contract under the grant or sub-grant; and ii) any rights of copyright to which the
grantee, sub-grantee or a contractor purchases ownership under an award (including
but not limited to curricula, training models, technical assistance products, and any
related materials). Such uses include, but are not limited to, the right to modify and
distribute such products worldwide by any means, electronically or otherwise. Federal
funds may not be used to pay any royalty or licensing fee associated with such
copyrighted material, although they may be used to pay costs for obtaining a copy
which is limited to the developer/seller costs of copying and shipping. If revenues are
generated through selling products developed with grant funds, including intellectual
property, these revenues are program income. Program income is added to the grant
and must be expended for allowable grant activities.
32B
If applicable, the following needs to be on all products developed in whole or in part with
grant funds:
33B
“This workforce product was funded by a grant awarded by the U.S. Department of
Labor’s Employment and Training Administration. The product was created by the
grantee and does not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of
Labor. The Department of Labor makes no guarantees, warranties, or assurances of
any kind, express or implied, with respect to such information, including any information
on linked sites and including, but not limited to, accuracy of the information or its
completeness, timeliness, usefulness, adequacy, continued availability, or ownership.
18
This product is copyrighted by the institution that created it. Internal use by an
organization and/or personal use by an individual for non-commercial purposes are
permissible. All other uses require the prior authorization of the copyright owner.”
5. Use of Grant Funds
The majority of grant funds under this solicitation must be used in support of the
mentoring services as specified in Section I.B. However, applicants may propose to
use up to 25 percent of grant funds to provide the Necessary Existing Program
Components listed under Section I.A.
F. Other Submission Requirements
17B
Withdrawal of Applications: Applications may be withdrawn by written notice to the
Grant Officer at any time before an award is made.
Section V. Application Review Process
2B
3B
A. Evaluation Criteria
This section identifies and describes the criteria that will be used to evaluate each
applicant’s technical proposal. The evaluation criteria are described below:
CRITERIA
POINTS
1. Statement of Need, Description of the
Existing Program and Program
Performance
2. Intensive Mentoring Service Strategy,
Program Integration and Participant
Recruitment
3. Program Management Capacity and
Evaluation Readiness
4. Linkages with Key Partners
25
TOTAL
100
50
20
5
1. Statement of Need, Description of the Existing Program and Program
Performance (25 points)
4B
Applicants must describe the area where the existing program is implemented. The
applicant must include information (supported by data source(s)) on the population of
the area, including economic indicators such as the poverty rate, the unemployment
rate, the school drop-out rate, and the numbers of individuals without a high school
34B
19
diploma as well as labor market information.
Applicants must fully describe their existing program and document the past
accomplishments of their program by providing annual performance data for each of the
past three years. The applicants’ description must include the Necessary Existing
Program Components described in Section I.A.
35B
Scoring under this criterion will be based on the comprehensiveness of the responses
provided to the following:
36B
•
A description of the area where the program operates, the population of the
area, the economic indicators (poverty rate, unemployment rate, school dropout rate, and number of 16-24 year olds without a high school diploma) and
the labor market information such as career projections in growing industries.
Applicants may use Census Tract Data to obtain these indicators. Go to
http://factfinder.census.gov and use the link on the left for People. In
addition, applicants are encouraged to review TEN 19-10 -- Guide to State
and Local Workforce Data: For Analysis and Informed Decision Making .); (5
points)
U
U
U
U
20
•
A description of the: 1) type of academic credential participants earn while in
the program (such as a GED or high school diploma); 2) the presence of
innovative and successful strategies that the program has used to address
low basic skills of participants including any distance learning and/or credit
retrieval that has been used; 3) the integration of the academic program with
the occupational skills training component of the program; and 4) the
program’s linkages to local high schools, community colleges and trade
schools (as applicable). (4 points)
•
A description of the occupational skills training component of the existing
program including: 1) where and how the training is conducted; 2) how the
curriculum was developed; 3) whether a career ladder exists; 4) the type of
industry-recognized credentials that result from the training; and 5) the
involvement of employers and/or industry partners in the development of the
training (as applicable). (3 points)
•
A description of the case management services that are currently provided
including: 1) how participants are identified, assessed and enrolled in the
current program; and 2) how individual service plans that include personal,
educational or employment-related goals are developed for the young parents
to ensure their full program participation. (3 points)
•
A description of the support services that are currently available to meet the
needs of participants and their children to ensure their participation and
retention in the program, including support services coordinated and funded
through other service providers such as state programs, non-profit
organizations, community-based or faith-based organizations or other
available resources. Available support services may include: 1) child care
assistance; 2) transportation assistance; 3) counseling such as substance
abuse counseling and treatment, and mental health counseling; 4) housing
assistance; and 5) economic assistance. The description must include what
funding sources and/or resources are available to provide such services. (4
points)
•
A description, supported by annual performance data for each of the past
three years, to demonstrate the applicant’s capacity to enroll 400 participants
during the two year period of enrollment. The annual performance data must
include data on: (3 points)
o Number of young parents recruited;
o Number of young parents enrolled;
o Number and percent of young parents who have completed the program;
o Number and percent of young parents receiving their GED or high school
diploma (please differentiate between the two) while participating in the
program;
o Number and percent of young parents who have entered employment;
o Employment retention rates at 6 and 12 months (if available); and
o Number and percent of young parents who have entered post-secondary
training and/or apprenticeship programs and percent of who achieved an
educational and/or training credential.
•
A description of the types of post-program transition services currently offered
to participants including: 1) the program’s job placement and retention
strategy including the types of career exploration and planning activities and
how the program works with employers and/or One-Stop Career Centers to
identify and create job openings for the young parents served by the program;
2) how follow-up is provided to young parents after completing the program;
and 3) how support services are continued post-program. (3 points)
2. Intensive Mentoring Service Strategy, Program Integration and Participant
Recruitment (50 points)
5B
Applicants must describe the proposed intensive mentoring services, how the
mentoring services will be integrated and delivered, and how young parents will be
recruited.
21
Scoring under this criterion will be based on the comprehensiveness of the
responses provided to the following elements and the extent to which they indicate
the likely effectiveness of the mentoring service strategy:
•
A description of the applicant’s proposed intensive mentoring services including
all of the elements below, which are described in Section I.B. – Intensive
Mentoring Services - to ensure that the mentoring intervention helps youth
achieve their educational, employment and personal development goals: (22
points)
o A screening process to ensure that the selected mentors (either paid
professional staff or volunteers) will develop a trusting relationship with the
youth;
o A matching process to ensure the success of the mentor and mentee
relationship;
o An orientation and training of mentors that establishes clear guidelines about
the mentoring relationship and goals for the mentors;
o A support and supervision system for the mentors to ensure that the
mentoring services meet program goals;
o A description of the duration of the mentor/mentee engagement as to ensure
mentors and mentees have enough time to develop an enduring relationship;
and
o A description of the planned caseload per mentor and how this level of
caseload will be maintained, including how staff attrition will be handled.
•
A description of the applicant’s capacity to provide mentoring services in-house
or through a partnership with another organization (such as a community-based
or faith-based organization, or private mentoring services entity), which must
describe the applicant’s relationship with the organization and the role of the
organization in implementing the proposed program and is corroborated by the
organization’s letter of commitment; (5 points)
•
A description, supported by annual performance data for each of the past three
years, demonstrating the applicant or its mentoring partner has the capacity to
enroll and provide long-term mentoring to 200 participants. Performance data
must include data on: (3 points)
o Number of young people ages 16-24 who received mentoring services each
year;
o The average age of participants ages 16-24 (or the distribution by age); and
22
o The average duration of the mentor/mentee engagement. If the past average
duration is less than 18 months, the applicant must describe its proposed
approach to ensure these engagements last at least 18 months as specified
in Section I.B.
•
Applicants must describe how the intensive mentoring services will be integrated
with the existing program, how applicants plan to coordinate and integrate the
mentoring services with the program’s existing employment and training services,
and must describe the participant’s flow through the program: (15 points)
o A description of how the mentoring services will be integrated with the
existing program of academic, skills training, career exploration and/or
employment to assist young parents to remain engaged in and complete the
education and training components.
o A description of when the mentoring services will become available to the
participant and how these services will facilitate a young parent’s participation
in the program.
o A description of the service flow that will be used in the overall proposed
program to ensure that participants receive the Necessary Existing Core
Components (i.e., assessment, case management, referrals, training, etc.)
and the intensive mentoring services. The applicant must describe how it
determines which specific services participants receive, which partner(s) will
provide such services, and how the applicant plans to interact and
communicate with all partners.
o A description of how the mentoring services incorporates follow-up retention
services intended to sustain and advance the gains made in education and
employment and increase the participants’ opportunities for economic selfsufficiency.
•
Applicants must provide a description of how eligible young parents will be
recruited, including a description of arrangements such as referrals that will be
made by other entities: (5 points)
o A description of the proposed recruitment strategy and how it will ensure that
at least 400 eligible young parents are enrolled over two years.
o A description of the special outreach efforts that will be undertaken to recruit
expectant parents and/or young parents from the high-risk categories
discussed in Section III.D.
To fully address this criterion, applicants must provide compelling arguments or
evidence for why their proposed mentoring service strategy will lead to improved
education and employment outcomes. If possible, the applicant should use research
23
evidence to support the design they propose. If rigorous evidence (i.e., a net impact
study based on random assignment and/or published in a peer-reviewed journal,
supported by citation) does not exist or the applicant is proposing an innovative
untried strategy, the proposal should make a strong case using related research,
theories or a strong logic model.
3. Program Management Capacity and Evaluation Readiness (20 points)
6B
The applicant must describe its organization and its qualifications to run the existing
program and the intensive mentoring services in a coordinated fashion.
Scoring under this criterion will be based on the extent to which applicants fully
describe a project management capacity and evaluation readiness that
demonstrates their ability to operate a successful program and to fully participate in
the evaluation. The application must include all of the following:
•
The applicant’s program management structure, including a discussion of the
organization’s current annual budget, experience operating grants from either
Federal or non-Federal sources or private organizations, its ability to handle
multiple funding streams, and its capacity for handling the data and performance
management requirements associated with monitoring at least 400 participants.
This must also include a discussion of the proposed staffing pattern, the
qualifications and experience of key staff members (including identification of an
evaluation coordinator (or description of how one will be recruited)), and the time
commitment, roles, and contributions of all proposed staff (including mentors).
(12 points)
•
The applicant’s past experience as a lead entity and evidence of its success in
managing partnerships. (3 points)
•
The applicant’s capacity to successfully participate in the evaluation of the
demonstration grant project or their experience participating in other evaluations,
including demonstrating capacity for serving increased numbers of participants in
terms of space, service structure, and staffing; hosting evaluation site visits;
accurately tracking participants’ activities at the individual level; and providing
program records and other information, as necessary. (5 points)
4. Linkages with Key Partners (5 points)
7B
Applicants must demonstrate and provide evidence that their planned services for
this demonstration project will be implemented by a partnership with the key
partner(s). Applicants must have letter(s) of commitment from the key partner(s)
attached to their technical proposal to corroborate the applicant’s proposed
program. If the applicant plans to provide the mentoring services in-house, then the
applicant only needs to demonstrate that the proposed program will be implemented
in partnership with a workforce investment board. If the applicant plans to partner
24
with an organization that provides mentoring services, then the applicant must
demonstrate that the proposed program will be implemented by a partnership with
such an organization and a workforce investment board. Commitments from other
partners are encouraged; however letters of commitment are not required.
Scoring under this criterion will be based on the extent to which applicants provide a
comprehensive approach and fully describe strong partnership(s) that contain all of
the following:
•
For the workforce investment board partner, applicants must describe their
relationship with the board to provide referrals to the young parent program,
access to assessments, employment and other career center resources such as
job placement assistance or job development services to ensure the young
parents’ success in achieving employment goals. The letter of commitment with
the workforce investment board must corroborate the applicant’s description in
the technical proposal. (3 points)
•
If other partners are engaged, the applicant must describe such partnership, the
role each partner plays and the breadth and depth of each partner’s contribution
to the proposed project. (2 points)
B. Review and Selection Process
8B
Applications for grants under this Solicitation will be accepted after the publication of
this announcement and until the closing date. A technical review panel will carefully
evaluate applications against the selection criteria. These criteria are based on the
policy goals, priorities, and emphases set forth in this SGA. Up to 100 points may be
awarded to an application, depending on the quality of the responses to the required
information described in section V.A. The ranked scores will serve as the primary basis
for selection of applications for funding, in conjunction with other factors such as
geographic balance; the availability of funds; and which proposals are most
advantageous to the government. The panel results are advisory in nature and not
binding on the Grant Officer. The Grant Officer may consider any information that
comes to his/her attention. The government may elect to award the grant(s) with or
without discussions with the applicant. Should a grant be awarded without discussions,
the award will be based on the applicant’s signature on the SF-424, including electronic
signature via E-Authentication on http://www.grants.gov, which constitutes a binding
offer by the applicant.
U
U
Section VI. Award Administration Information
9B
A. Award Notices
10B
All award notifications will be posted on the ETA Homepage ( http://www.doleta.gov ).
Applicants selected for award will be contacted directly before the grant’s execution.
Non-selected applicants will be notified by mail or email and may request a written
U
25
U
debriefing on the significant weaknesses of their proposal.
Selection of an organization as a grantee does not constitute approval of the grant
application as submitted. Before the actual grant is awarded, ETA may enter into
negotiations about such items as program components, staffing and funding levels, and
administrative systems in place to support grant implementation. If the negotiations do
not result in a mutually acceptable submission, the Grant Officer reserves the right to
terminate the negotiations and decline to fund the application. DOL reserves the right to
not fund any application related to this SGA.
B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
11B
1. Administrative Program Requirements
All grantees will be subject to all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and the
applicable OMB Circulars. The grant(s) awarded under this SGA will be subject to the
following administrative standards and provisions:
i. Non-Profit Organizations – OMB Circular A–122 (Cost Principles), relocated to
2 CFR Part 230, and 29 CFR Part 95 (Administrative Requirements)
ii. Educational Institutions – OMB Circular A–21 (Cost Principles), relocated to 2
CFR Part 220, and 29 CFR Part 95 (Administrative Requirements).
iii. State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments – OMB Circular A–87 (Cost
Principles), relocated to 2 CFR Part 225, and 29 CFR Part 97 (Administrative
Requirements).
iv. Profit Making Commercial Firms – Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) – 48
CFR part 31 (Cost Principles), and 29 CFR Part 95 (Administrative Requirements).
v. All Grant Recipients must comply with the applicable provisions of The
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Public Law No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 936 (codified as
amended at 29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.) and the applicable provisions of the regulations at
20 CFR 660 et seq. Note that 20 CFR part 667 (General Fiscal and Administrative
Rules) includes unsuccessful applicant appeal information.
vi. All entities must comply with 29 CFR Part 93 (New Restrictions on Lobbying),
29 CFR Part 94 (Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial
Assistance)), 29 CFR 95.13 and Part 98 (Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension,
and drug-free workplace requirements), and, where applicable, 29 CFR Part 96 (Audit
Requirements for Grants, Contracts, and Other Agreements) and 29 CFR Part 99
(Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations).
vii. 29 CFR Part 2, subpart D – Equal Treatment in Department of Labor
Programs for Religious Organizations, Protection of Religious Liberty of Department of
Labor Social Service Providers and Beneficiaries.
26
viii. 29 CFR Part 31 – Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the
Department of Labor—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
ix. 29 CFR Part 32 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or
Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.
x. 29 CFR Part 35 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age in Programs or
Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance from the Department of Labor.
xi. 29 CFR Part 36 – Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education
Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.
xii. 29 CFR Part 37 – Implementation of the Nondiscrimination and Equal
Opportunity Provisions of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
xiii. 29 CFR Parts 29 and 30 – Labor Standards for the Registration of
Apprenticeship Programs, and Equal Employment Opportunity in Apprenticeship and
Training, as applicable.
2. Other Legal Requirements:
i. Religious Activities
The Department notes that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C.
Section 2000bb, applies to all Federal law and its implementation. If your organization
is a faith-based organization that makes hiring decisions on the basis of religious belief,
it may be entitled to receive Federal financial assistance under Title I of the Workforce
Investment Act and maintain that hiring practice even though Section 188 of the
Workforce Investment Act contains a general ban on religious discrimination in
employment. If you are awarded a grant, you will be provided with information on how
to request such an exemption.
ii. Lobbying or Fundraising the U.S. Government with Federal Funds
In accordance with Section 18 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Public Law 10465) (2 U.S.C. 1611), non-profit entities incorporated under Internal Revenue Service
Code Section 501(c) (4) that engage in lobbying activities are not eligible to receive
Federal funds and grants. No activity, including awareness-raising and advocacy
activities, may include fundraising for, or lobbying of, U.S. Federal, State or Local
Governments (see OMB Circular A-122).
iii. Transparency Act Requirements
•
27
Applicants must ensure that it has the necessary processes and systems in
place to comply with the reporting requirements of the Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. Law 109-282, as
amended by section 6202 of Pub. Law 110-252) (Transparency Act), as
follows:
• All applicants, except for those excepted from the Transparency Act under
sub-paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 below, must ensure that they have the necessary processes
and systems in place to comply with the subaward and executive total compensation
reporting requirements of the Transparency Act, should they receive funding.
• Upon award, applicants will receive detailed information on the reporting
requirements of the Transparency Act, as described in 2 CFR Part 170, Appendix A,
which can be found at the following website:
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-22705.pdf .
U
U
The following types of awards are not subject to the Federal Funding Accountability and
Transparency Act:
(1) Federal awards to individuals who apply for or receive Federal awards as
natural persons (i.e., unrelated to any business or non-profit organization
he or she may own or operate in his or her name);
(2) Federal awards to entities that had a gross income, from all sources, of
less than $300,000 in the entities' previous tax year; and
(3) Federal awards, if the required reporting would disclose classified
information.
3. Other Administrative Standards and Provision:
Except as specifically provided in this SGA, DOL/ETA’s acceptance of a proposal and
an award of Federal funds to sponsor any programs(s) does not provide a waiver of any
grant requirements and/or procedures. For example, the OMB Circulars require that an
entity’s procurement procedures must ensure that all procurement transactions are
conducted, as much as practical, to provide open and free competition. If a proposal
identifies a specific entity to provide services, the DOL’s award does not provide the
justification or basis to sole source the procurement, i.e., avoid competition, unless the
activity is regarded as the primary work of an official partner to the application.
C. Reporting
18B
U
U
Grantees must agree to meet DOL reporting requirements. Quarterly financial reports,
quarterly progress reports, and MIS data must be submitted by the grantee
electronically. The grantee is required to provide the reports and documents listed
below:
28
1. Quarterly Financial Reports
A Quarterly Financial Status Report (ETA 9130) is required until such time as all funds
have been expended or the grant period has expired. Quarterly reports are due 45
days after the end of each calendar year quarter. Grantees must use DOL’s Online
Electronic Reporting System and information and instructions will be provided to
grantees.
2. Quarterly Performance Reports
The grantee must submit a quarterly progress report within 45 days after the end of
each calendar year quarter. Grantees will be required to submit updated aggregate
level MIS data within 45 days after the end of each quarter based on a DOL template
that will require quarterly, year-to-date, and program-to-date information on participant
demographics at time of enrollment, participant services provided, and interim and longterm participant performance outcomes. This reporting will require post-placement
follow-up and tracking of participants.
A government-procured Web-based MIS will be provided to all grantees. Grantees will
be required to have industry-standard computer hardware and high speed Internet
access in order to use the MIS system. Grant funds may be used with the prior
approval of the Grant Officer to upgrade computer hardware and Internet access to
enable projects to use the MIS system. The report must include quarterly information
about grant activities. The last quarterly progress report that grantees submit will serve
as the grant’s Final Performance Report. This report should provide both quarterly and
cumulative information on the grant activities. It must summarize project activities,
employment outcomes and other deliverables, and related results of the project, and
should thoroughly document the training or labor market information approaches used
by the grantee. DOL may require additional data elements to be collected and reported
on either a regular basis or special request basis. DOL will provide grantees with formal
guidance about the data and other information that is required to be collected.
Grantees must agree to meet DOL reporting requirements.
3. Quarterly Narrative Reports
The grantee must submit a quarterly narrative report to the designated Federal Project
Officer within 45 days after the end of each quarter, providing a detailed account of
activities undertaken during that quarter. The quarterly narrative report should be in
descriptive form and must include:
29
•
In-depth information on accomplishments, including project success stories,
upcoming grant activities, and promising approaches and processes.
•
Progress toward performance outcomes, including updates on product,
curricula, and training development.
4. Record Retention
Applicants must be prepared to follow Federal guidelines on record retention, which
require grantees to maintain all records pertaining to grant activities for a period of not
less than three years from the time of final grant close-out.
Section VII. Agency Contacts
12B
For further information about this SGA, please contact Latifa Jeter, Division of Federal
Assistance, at (202) 693-3553. Applicants should e-mail all technical questions to
[email protected] and must specifically reference SGA/DFA PY 10-12, and along with
question(s), include a contact name, fax and phone number. This announcement is
being made available on the ETA Web site at http://www.doleta.gov/grants and at
http://www.grants.gov .
U
U
U
U
U
U
Section VIII. Additional Resources of Interest to Applicants
19B
A. Web-based Resources
20B
DOL maintains a number of web-based resources that may be of assistance to
applicants. For example, the CareerOneStop portal (http://www.careeronestop.org),
which provides national and state career information on occupations; the Occupational
Information Network (O*NET) Online (http://online.onetcenter.org ), which provides
occupational competency profiles; and America's Service Locator
( http://www.servicelocator.org ), which provides a directory of our nation's One-Stop
Career Centers.
U
U
B. Industry Competency Models and Career Clusters
21B
ETA supports an Industry Competency Model Initiative to promote an understanding of
the skill sets and competencies that are essential to an educated and skilled workforce.
A competency model is a collection of competencies that, taken together, define
successful performance in a particular work setting. Competency models serve as a
starting point for the design and implementation of workforce and talent development
programs. To learn about the industry-validated models visit the Competency Model
Clearinghouse (CMC) at http://www.careeronestop.org/CompetencyModel. The CMC
site also provides tools to build or customize industry models, as well as tools to build
career ladders and career lattices for specific regional economies.
Career Clusters and Industry Competency Models both identify foundational and
technical competencies, but their efforts are not duplicative. The Career Clusters link to
specific career pathways in 16 career cluster areas and place greater emphasis on
elements needed for curriculum performance objectives; measurement criteria; scope
and sequence of courses in a program of study; and development of assessments.
Information about the 16 career cluster areas can be found by accessing at
http://www.careerclusters.org/ .
U
30
U
C. Workforce3One Resources
22B
1. ETA encourages applicants to view the information gathered through the conference
calls with Federal agency partners, industry stakeholders, educators, and local
practitioners. The information on resources identified can be found on
Workforce3One.org at http://www.workforce3one.org/view/2001008333909172195/info
23B
U
U
2. ETA encourages applicants to view the online tutorial, “Grant Applications 101: A
Plain English Guide to ETA Competitive Grants,” available through Workforce3One at
http://www.workforce3one.org/page/grants_toolkit .
U
U
D. Resources on Mentoring Programs
Applicants interested in learning more about starting mentoring programs are
encouraged visit the MENTOR/National Mentoring Partnership website at
http://www.mentoring.org/ and reviewing their guide, Elements of Effective Practice ,
and their toolkit, How to Build a Successful Mentoring Program Using the Elements of
Effective Practice .
U
U
U
U
U
U
For information on the Federal Mentoring Council, its mentoring initiatives and its
partners, resources, research findings, and contact information on youth mentoring
programs please visit the Federal Mentoring Corporation website at:
www.federalmentoringcouncil.gov
U
U
E. References relating to Youth Development and Mentoring
Allen, C. S. (2009). A prospective longitudinal investigation of effects of nonparental
social support on early adolescents academic achievement and academic outcomes.
Ph.D., Texas A&M University, College Station.
Allen, L., & Majidi-Ahi, S. (1989). Black American children. In J. T. Gibbs & L. N. Huang
(Eds.), Children of color: Psychological interventions with minority youth. The JosseyBass social and behavioral science series. (pp. 148-178). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
Allen, T. D. (2004). Protégé selection by mentors: Contributing individual and
organizational factors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65(3), 469-483.
Allen, T. D. (Pending). Mentoring relationship from the prospective of the mentor. In B.
R. Ragins & K. Kram (Eds.), Handbook of Mentoring: Sage.
Allen, T. D., Day, R., & Lentz, E. (2005). The role of interpersonal comfort in mentoring
relationships. Journal of Career Development, 31(3), 155-169.
31
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2004). Factors related to mentor reports of mentoring
functions provided: Gender and relational characteristics. Sex Roles, 50(1-2), 129-139.
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2007b). Overview and introduction. In T. D. E. Allen, Lillian T
(Ed.), The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A multiple perspectives approach (pp. pp.
3-6). Malden.
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (2008). Mentor commitment in formal mentoring relationships.
[Peer Reviewed]. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(3), 309-316. doi:
10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.016
Allen, T. D., & Eby, L. T. (Eds.). (2007c). The Blackwell handbook of mentoring: A
multiple perspectives approach. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., & Lentz, E. (2006a). Mentorship Behaviors and Mentorship
Quality Associated With Formal Mentoring Programs: Closing the Gap Between
Research and Practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 567-578.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., & Lentz, E. (2006b). The relationship between formal mentoring
program characteristics and perceived program effectiveness. Personnel Psychology,
59(1), 125-153.
Allen, T. D., Finkelstein, L. M., & Poteet, M. L. (2009). Designing workplace mentoring
programs: An evidence-based approach: Wiley-Blackwell.
Allen, T. D., & O'Brien, K. E. (2006). Formal Mentoring Programs and Organizational
Attraction. [Peer Reviewed]. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 17(1)), 43-58.
doi: 10.1002/hrdq.1160
Britner, P. A., Balcazar, F. E., Blechman, E. A., Blinn-Pike, L., & Larose, S. (2006).
Mentoring special youth populations. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 747763.
DuBois, David L., Portillo, N., Rhodes, J.E., Silverthorn, N., Valentine, J.C. (2010). How
Effective Are Mentoring Programs for Youth? A Systematic Assessment of the
Evidence: Working Paper. University of Illinois Chicago Circle, School of Public Health.
Eby, L. T., Durley, J. R., Evans, S. C., & Ragins, B. R. (2008). Mentors' perceptions of
negative mentoring experiences: Scale development and nomological validation.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 358-373.
Eccles, Jacquelynne and J. A. Gootman (eds.) 2002 Community Programs to Promote
Youth Development. National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Eckenrode, J., Hamilton, S., Cohen, S., Underwood, L. G., & Gottlieb, B. H. (2000).
One-to-one support interventions: Home visitation and mentoring Social support
32
measurement and intervention: A guide for health and social scientists. (pp. 246-277):
Oxford University Press: New York.
Halpern, R. (2005). Instrumental Relationships: A Potential Relational Model for InnerCity Youth Programs. [Peer Reviewed]. Journal of Community Psychology. Special
Issue: Youth-Adult Relationships in Community Programs: Diverse Perspectives on
Good Practices, 33(1), 11-20. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20032
Hamilton, M. A., & Hamilton, S. F. (2005). Work and service-learning. In D. L. DuBois &
M. J. Karcher (Eds.), Handbook of youth mentoring. (pp. 348-363). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications Ltd.
Hamilton, M. A., Hamilton, S. F., & Rhodes, J. E. (2002). Why mentoring in the
workplace works A critical view of youth mentoring. (pp. 59-89): Jossey-Bass: San
Francisco.
Hamilton, S. F., & Hamilton, M. A. (2004a). Contexts for mentoring: Adolescent-adult
relationships in workplaces and communities. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.),
Handbook of adolescent psychology (2nd ed.). (pp. 395-428): John Wiley & Sons Inc:
Hoboken.
Hamilton, S. F., & Hamilton, M. A. (2010). Building mentoring relationships. New
Directions for Youth Development, 2010(126), 141-144. doi: 10.1002/yd.354
Hamilton, S. F., Hamilton, M. A., Hirsch, B. J., Hughes, J., King, J., & Maton, K. (2006).
Community contexts for mentoring. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 727-746.
Keller, T.E. (2005). The stages and development of mentoring relationships. In D. L. DuBois &
M. J. Karcher (Eds.), Handbook of youth mentoring (pp. 82-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Klaw, E. L., Rhodes, J. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2003). Natural mentors in the lives of
African American adolescent mothers: Tracking relationships over time. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 32(3), 223-232.
Larose, S., Tarabulsy, G., & Cyrenne, D. (2005). Perceived autonomy and relatedness
as moderating the impact of teacher-student mentoring relationships on student
academic Adjustment. Journal of Primary Prevention. Special Issue: Mentoring with
Children and Youth, 26(2), 111-128.
Larose, S., & Tarabulsy, G. M. (2005). Academically at-Risk Students DuBois, David L.;
Karcher, Michael J (pp. (2005). Handbook of youth mentoring. The Sage program on
applied developmental science. (pp. 2440-2453). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications Ltd. xii, 2608).
Liang, B., Spencer, R., Brogan, D., & Corral, M. (2008). Mentoring relationships from
early adolescence through emerging adulthood: A qualitative analysis. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 72(2), 168-182.
33
Ragins, B. R. (1997). Antecedents of diversified mentoring relationships. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 51(1), 90-109.
Ragins, B. R., & Cotton, J. L. (1999). Mentor functions and outcomes: A comparison of
men and women in formal and informal mentoring relationships. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 84(4), 529-550.
Rhodes, J. E. (1993). Easing postpartum school transitions through parent mentoring
programs. Prevention in Human Services, 10(2), 169-178.
Rhodes, J.E., & DuBois, D.L. (2008). Mentoring relationships and programs for youth.
Association of Psychological Science, 17(4), 254-258.
Soucy, N., & Larose, S. (2000). Attachment and control in family and mentoring
contexts as determinants of adolescent adjustment at college. Journal of Family
Psychology, 14(1), 125-143.
Tierney, J. P., Grossman, J. B., Resch, N. L., (2000). Making a Difference: An Impact
Study of Big Brothers Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
Section IX. Other Information
OMB Information Collection No. 1225-0086
U
OMB Information Collection No 1225-0086, Expires November 30, 2012.
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond
to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control
number. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to
average 20 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information. Send comments about the burden estimated or
any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this
burden, to the U.S. Department of Labor, to the attention of the Departmental Clearance
Officer, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room N1301, Washington, DC 20210.
Comments may also be emailed to [email protected]. PLEASE DO NOT
RETURN THE COMPLETED APPLICATION TO THIS ADDRESS. SEND IT TO THE
SPONSORING AGENCY AS SPECIFIED IN THIS SOLICITATION.
This information is being collected for the purpose of awarding a grant. The information
collected through this “Solicitation for Grant Applications” will be used by the
Department of Labor to ensure that grants are awarded to the applicant best suited to
perform the functions of the grant. Submission of this information is required in order for
the applicant to be considered for award of this grant.
34
Signed March 29, 2011 , in Washington, D.C. by:
U
U
Latifa Jeter
Grant Officer, Employment and Training Administration
35
| File Type | application/pdf |
| File Title | DEPARTMENT OF LABOR |
| Author | frugoli.pam |
| File Modified | 2011-04-05 |
| File Created | 2011-03-30 |