Form 1 ACSI Survey of Eligible Entities

OMB Control No: 0970-0382

Expiration date: XX/XX/XXXX

THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13): Through this information collection, ACF is gathering information about planned activities related to and funded by CSBG for the upcoming fiscal year. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .33 hours per grantee, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information. This is a mandatory collection of information (Sec. 676, Pub. L. 105-285, 112 Stat. 2735 (42 U.S.C. § 9908)). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB # is 0970-0382 and the expiration date is XX/XX/XXXX. If you have any comments on this collection of information, please contact M. Monique Alcantara at [email protected].

Office of Community Services (OCS)

Community Services Block Grant (CSBG)

Satisfaction Survey 2021

Introduction

As part of OCS’ current performance management framework, and in line with its shared oversight and monitoring responsibilities, the Office of Community Services (OCS) is seeking feedback from Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) eligible entities to better understand performance in several areas addressed in the State Accountability Measures. This requires learning about your State CSBG Lead Agency’s efforts this past year in developing and implementing the State Plan. The results of this survey will provide data to the State CSBG Lead Agency that can be used in developing next year’s State Plan and in guiding improvement efforts.

Your participation, while voluntary, is critical for OCS to understand how well the state CSBG lead agencies, as part of the CSBG Network, are delivering services to local eligible entities, like yours. Our focus is on improving network efficiency and effectiveness, and on better focusing training and technical assistance.

This survey is being administered by CFI Group, an independent third-party research group. Your answers will remain anonymous and neither the State CSBG Lead Agency nor OCS will see your responses. CFI Group will provide OCS and the Lead Agencies with aggregated reports for research and evaluation purposes only.

This survey will take approximately 15-20 minutes and will be open through XX/XX/2023. It is authorized by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Control No. 0970-0382 which expires XX/XX/XXXX.

Development of the CSBG State Plan

Please think about the development of the most recent CSBG State Plan as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate:

1. Extent of your involvement in the process of developing the State Plan

2. Caliber of the opportunities provided to you to participate in developing the State Plan

3. Degree to which the State Plan reflects your input

Written Response Questions

4. How could the process of the developing the State Plan be improved?

Distribution of Funds

Please think about when funds were made available to you by the state as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate:

5. Degree to which the state’s distribution of funds ensured there was no interruption of services delivered to clients

6. Quality of the state’s process for executing grant awards

Use of Remainder/Discretionary Funds

The CSBG Act allows the state to use a portion of its block grant for discretionary purposes. Please think about how the state used its CSBG Remainder/Discretionary Funds as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate:

7. Transparency of how discretionary funds were used and distributed

8. Degree to which the use of discretionary funds was responsive to network needs

Training and Technical Assistance

Please think about the Training and Technical Assistance provided by the State CSBG Lead Agency or a state-funded provider(s) as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate:

9. Effectiveness of training provided by the state or state-funded provider(s)

10. Effectiveness of technical assistance provided by the state or state-funded provider(s)

11. Responsiveness of the State CSBG Lead Agency’s staff to your request for technical assistance

12. The overall amount of training and technical assistance provided

Written Response Question

13. What, if any, additional training and technical assistance needs do you want the State CSBG Lead Agency to address?

Monitoring and Corrective Action

Please think about the monitoring activities conducted by the State CSBG Lead Agency as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate:

14. Consistency of monitoring across the state CSBG Network

15. Adherence to the established monitoring plan for the on-site visit

16. Usefulness of monitoring visits

17. Clarity of feedback provided in the monitoring report

18. Timeliness of feedback provided in the monitoring report

19. Clarity of the state’s Corrective Action/Quality Improvement Plan Process

Written Response Questions

20. What, if any, suggestions do you have for how the State CSBG Lead Agency could improve its monitoring process?

Linkages

Please think about the State CSBG Lead Agency’s activities creating linkages within State government to facilitate the efforts of eligible entities. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate the following.

21. Awareness of the State CSBG Lead Agency’s efforts to create linkages

22. Sufficiency of the CSBG Lead Agency’s linkages with other state partners

23. Effectiveness of the partnerships created in the State to meet the needs of the eligible entities

Communication

Please think about the State CSBG Lead Agency’s communication efforts as it relates to the following areas. Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is poor and 10 is excellent, please rate the following.

24. Sufficiency of information provided by the State CSBG Lead Agency to keep you informed

25. Usefulness of the feedback received from the State CSBG Lead Agency about work plans, performance and monitoring activities

26. Frequency of communication from the State CSBG Lead Agency

27. Clarity of communications from the State CSBG Lead Agency

28. Responsiveness of the State CSBG Lead Agency’s staff to your requests for information

29. Consistency of the responses received from the State CSBG Lead Agency’s staff

Written Response Questions

30. What kinds of information, if any, would you like to receive from the State CSBG Lead Agency that you are not now getting?

Overall Satisfaction

31. Overall, how satisfied are you with the services provided by the State CSBG Lead Agency as it relates to CSBG? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 10 is very satisfied?

32. How well do the services from the State CSBG Lead Agency meet your expectations? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means falls short of expectations and 10 means exceeds expectations.

33. How do the services from the State CSBG Lead Agency compare to an ideal grant awarding agency? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not very close to the ideal and 10 means very close to the ideal.

Outcome Behaviors

34. How confident are you that the State CSBG Lead Agency is fulfilling its mission of supporting eligible entities in their mission of helping low-income individuals out of poverty? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not very confident and 10 means very confident.

35. How much do you trust the CSBG State Lead Agency to work with you to meet your organization’s needs? Please use a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not very trusting and 10 means very trusting.

Written Response Question

36. What more could OCS do to help the states and eligible entities meet the needs of low-income people in the state?

Thank you very much for providing your input.