References. Grant documents are received in DINAP occasionally which do not have proper signatures, owing to a temporary absence of a tribal chairman or other person authorized to sign them. It is important that grant documents be signed only by an individual who has the authority to legally bind an organization to carry out the provisions of the grant. This is normally the tribal chairman, or in the case of non-profit organizations, the executive director. Action. Grantees should review the signatures on all grant documents submitted for PY 1987 and PY 1988, and if any have unauthorized signatures, a letter must be prepared granting authority to the signer. The letter must be signed by the authorizing official and submitted to DINAP. In the future, any time the authorized person cannot sign a document because of temporary absence, etc., he/she must in each case sign and submit with the document a letter authorizing another individual to sign for him. Or, the authorized person may sign a letter designating one or more individuals to sign for him for the duration of the grant or other time period. Questions. Contact you DINAP Federal Representative.

Reference. DINAP Bulletin No. 87-23. Background. DINAP Bulletin No. 87-23 provided grantees with general information on the establishment of indirect cost rates. The attached Guide contains valuable additional information on that subject. Questions. Consult your DINAP Federal Representative.

References. 41 CFR Part 29-70 Information. (a) In November 1983, a 20-agency task force under the President's Council on Management Improvement (PCMI), chaired by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), was established to explore streamlining grants management and review of OMB Circular A-102. on March 12, 1987, the President directed all affected agencies to simultaneously propose and subsequently adopt a common rule verbatim, except where inconsistent with statutory requirements. Affected agencies were to propose the common rule within 90 days and adopt a final common rule within one year. To meet this schedule, 23 agencies, including DOL, proposed a government-wide "common rule" in the June 9, 1987 Federal Register. OMB proposed a revised Circular A-102 in this same issue. on March 11, 1988, OMB published the final common rule establishing Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. As such, this final rule is applicable to Federally recognized Indian Tribal Governments. DOL's adoption of the "common regulation" is contained in 29 CFR Part 97. The final common rule has a government-wide effective date of October 1, 1988, consistent with the Federal fiscal year cycle. Since this date occurs three (3) months into the Program Year (PY) 1988 grant cycle, a departmental decision has been made to delay implementation until the PY 1989 grant cycle. A copy of this Federal Register is enclosed, along with a listing of some selected implementation factors. (b) In 1987, the PCMI directed that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and OMB jointly chair a follow-on effort to review and issue a common rule and revised circular for nongovernmental grantees covered by Circular A-110, "Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Nonprofit Organizations". This regulation was reviewed, compared to the March 11, 1988, common rule, and the need to restore uniformity was considered. The March 11, 1988, common rule was amended to extend its applicability and make other necessary changes to cover nongovernmental organizations. The revised version of the common rule was published by OME in the Federal Register dated November 4, 1988, for comment by interested parties. A copy of that Federal Register is also enclosed. A final common rule for the combined circulars is scheduled to be issued in early 1989. When the revised version of the common rule is finalized it will apply to all Native American grantees, i.e., both tribal and non-tribal. Action. Tribal grantees should study the new regulations very carefully and apply them to their grant operations during PY 1989 and thereafter. Questions. Consult your DINAP Federal Representative.

Reference. DINAP Bulletin 87-7. Background. On August 11, 1987 DINAP provided grantees with information on the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). It covered the requirements and procedures for complying with IRCA. It also detailed the implications for the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). The attachment to this bulletin makes clear in a question and answer format who is covered by the law, the documents a prospective employee must produce, how the Form 1-9 is completed, and the individual's rights against employment discrimination. The information is presented in identical English and Spanish versions. Action. Grantees should add the attachment to the information provided in DINAP Bulletin 87-7, and also insure that it is prominently available to all applicants and participants. Questions. Consult your DINAP Federal Representative or the nearest office of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Reference. 20 CFR 632.3,B Clarification. a. Staff-Training. According to 20 CFR 632.36 (d) staff training is an administrative expense. Therefore, all costs, including travel costs, associated with providing training to grantee staff must be charged to the administration cost category. Such costs cannot be charged to the training cost category as a "training assistance" cost. The only exception to this rule is discussed below. b. Training Provided to Staff who will Train Participants. The cost of specialized training received by a staff member(s) to enable his/her to provide such vocational training to a participant (a) (e.g. typing, data processing, auto mechanics) is to be charged to the classroom training cost category, including any travel coats associated with such staff training. c. Staff Travel Costs Associated with Provision of Training Assistance. The cost of staff travel associated with the provision of training assistance to participants may be charged to the training coat category only if its purpose fits the definition given at 20 CFR 632.78 (d). To meet this definition, such travel must be conducted on behalf of a specific participant or group of participants, e.g., a Job developer traveling to a nearby town to attempt to find Jobs for recent classroom training graduates; a counselor traveling to a distant part of the reservation to provide counseling to a participant in danger of dropping out of the program; or a staff member traveling to a distant point in the service area to give participants an orientation to the 'World of Work' and job search assistance. Travel coats associated with the provision of training assistance and chargeable to the training cost category would be primarily of a local, non-overnight nature and would involve the use of a personally owned vehicle or a tribal vehicle. The cost of staff travel undertaken to negotiate a specific OJT contract(&) for a specific participant(s) may be charged to the training cost category, where the cost of travel to speak at an employers' meeting to explain the operation and benefits of the grantee's OJT program must be charged to the administration cost category. The cost of staff travel which enables a participant(s) to participate in programs under the Act as specified at 20 CFR 632.38 (k)(4) must be charged to the supportive services cost category. Examples of this would be where a staff member transports participants to and/or from a training or work site to which they would otherwise be unable to go because of a lack of transportation facilities. Also, the cost of sending a staff member to a remote corner of the service area to take applications from people who cannot got to the central office would also be chargeable to the supportive services cost category. d. Travel Costs Associated with Regional or National Grantee Meetings. The cost of staff (counselors, job developers, etc.) for the purpose of attending regional or national meetings to improve their skills is not to be charged to the training (i.e., training assistance) coat category. It is considered 'staff training" as specified at 20 CFR 632.38 (d) and must be charged to the administration cost category. The cost of any grantee staff to attend any national or regional meeting as specified at 20 CFR 632.38 (d) and (k)(2) must be charged to the administration cost category. e. Travel Costs of Participants who Serve in Staff Positions. All allowable participant travel costs must be charged to the supportive services cost category except in those instances where a participant (e.g. a CSE participant) is actually functioning as a program staff member. In such cases, travel costs would be charged to the appropriate cost category following the guidelines for permanent staff members set forth above. Action. If a grantee is in doubt as to the proper way to allocate a particular travel cost, a written request for guidance is to be sent to the Chief of the Division of Indian and Native American Programs immediately. Inquiries. Call your DINAP Federal Representative.

Information. The Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (PFCRA) establishes an additional administrative remedy against anyone who makes a false claim or false statement to any Department or Agency of the United States Government covered by the Act...including the Department of Labor. The attached fact sheet describes and explains the Act and includes such information as who is liable, what the penalties are, what is not covered by the Act, and how the act works. Questions. Contact your DINAP Representative.

References. JTPA Section 504; DINAP Bulletins 84-2, 84-41, and 86-39. Background. Bulletin 84-2 provided grantees with a Technical Assistance Guide (TAG) containing the legislative requirements under both JTPA and the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA) , and suggested options for implementing Section 504. Bulletin 84-41 provided additional clarifying information in a question and answer format, and Bulletin 86-39 advised grantees of new requirements pertaining to the provisions of Section 504 up to the date of that bulletin. As noted above, this bulletin supplements previous issuances. Action. Grantees are to review the attachment and insure that they are complying with the requirements. Questions. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative.

Background. On March 8, l990, OMB Circular A-133 - Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Institution was published. That Circular supersedes auditing requirements set forth in OMB Circular A-110, Attachment F, subparagraph 2h. Circular A-133 establishes audit requirements for nonprofit institutions for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 1990. The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) is also aware that many grantees lack a complete set of OMB Circulars and DOL regulations pertaining to the administration of Federal grants. ETA is, therefore, providing a complete set of circulars/ regulations to ETA grantees. It is recognized that not all of the attached circulars/regulations apply in all cases, but are provided for information purposes. Scope. The following circulars-and DOL regulations are included in the attachment: a. OMB Circular A-21- Cost Principles for Institutions of Higher Education, dated February 26, 1978 b. OMB Circular A-87- Cost Principles for State and Local Governments, dated January 28, 1981 c. DOL Regulations at 29 CFR Part 97 - Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments (Implementation of OMB Circular A-102), dated March 11, 1988) d. OMB Circular A-110 - Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Organizations, dated November 3, 1976 e. Revision to OMB Circular A-110 - Interest-Bearing Accounts, dated February 10, 1987 f. OMB Circular A-122 - Cost Principles for Nonprofit organizations, dated July 8, 1980 g. Revision to OMB Circular A-122 - Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations; "Lobbying" dated April 27, 1984 h. DOL Regulations at 29 CFR Part 96 - Audit Requirements for Grants, Contracts and Other Agreements (Implementation of OMB Circular A-128), dated April 12,1985 i. DOL Regulations at 29 CFR Part 98 - Government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement), dated May 26, 1988 and (Interim) Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants), dated January 31, 1989 j. DOL Regulations at 29 CFR Part 98 - Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants), dated February 26, 1990 k. DOL Regulations at 29 CFR Part 93 - New Restrictions on Lobbying; Interim Final Rule, dated February 26, 1990 l. Federal Register Notice - Government-wide Guidance for New Restrictions on Lobbying; Notice, dated June 15, 1990 m. OMB Circular A-133 - Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Institutions, dated March 8, 1990 Inquiries. Direct all inquiries to your Federal Representative.

References. JTPA, Section 504; DINAP Bulletins 84-2, 84-41, 86-39 and 89-37. Background. Arrangements to implement the Section 504 Selective Service registration prerequisite for participating in JTPA training have been very successful since 1983. The Selective Service System (SSS) has been able to have contact with and register substantial numbers of males 18-26 who might not have previously complied with draft registration required by the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA). In order to make it easier for the JTPA system and other Federally assisted programs to determine whether an applicant for services had complied with registration under the MSSA, Selective Service established a toll-free registration information number (1-800-621-5388) to respond to inquiries. In 1989, the Selective Service received just under 150,000 calls for information placed to this number. During the spring of 1990, call volume had increased to 6,000 - 7,000 per week, according to information provided by the Selective Service. The increasing cost of operating the "800 line" has been of growing concern to the SSS. A decision has been reached by Selective Service headquarters to discontinue this toll-free information number effective the start of the new Federal fiscal year, on October 1, 1990. The 800 line will be replaced by a regular commercial toll-charge line, 1-708-688-6888, which will allow callers to reach the SSS national information bank in its Waukegan, Illinois offices (suburban Chicago). Action. a. In view of the new cost associated with consulting the Selective Service by telephone, grantees should confirm registration status and direct other registration questions to the SSS at its registration information mailing address: Selective Service System Registration Information Office P.O. Box 4638 North Suburban, Illinois 60197-4638 b. The Selective Service has advised the Department of Labor that duplicate registrations are automatically sorted out by its computerized national registration bank, and these do not pose difficulties for the SSS. Up-front registration of all draft-age male applicants will expedite enrollment into JTPA activities, and meet the concerns of those programs which choose 100 percent pre-enrollment verification of each item documenting eligibility to participate in JTPA. Inquiries. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative.

References. JTPA Regulations at 20 CFR 632; DINAP Bulletin Nos. 90-24, 90-31, and 91-6. Background. For the first time since-JTPA's inception changes have been made in the performance standards and reporting requirements for Indian and Native American programs funded under Section 401 of JTPA. Grantees were sent program planning information and reporting forms and instructions containing proposed changes for PY 1991 in DINAP Bulletin No. 90-24, March 13, 1991. At that time grantees were advised that the instructions and reporting forms for PY 1991 were preliminary because they had not received final approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The revised performance standards were also published for comment in the Federal Register on January 8, 1991 and reporting instructions were published for comment in the Federal Register on February 8, 1991. A number of additional refinements were made as a result of the public comment process and consultation with the grantee community and other interested parties. Subsequently, grantees were sent DINAP Bulletin No. 91-6, clarifying the new reading assessment reporting requirement. This bulletin summarizes the performance standards changes and transmits the final OMB-approved reporting forms and instructions for PY 1991-92. Final Performance Standards and Reporting Instructions. The following summarizes the performance measures and significant reporting and planning line item changes from the September 1983 (and revised March 1984) reporting instructions for each form. A. Performance Standards 1. Optional Selection of Measures There will be three performance measures to assess grantee performance for the next two program years. In addition to the entered employment rate (EER) and the positive termination rate (PTR), a new measure of employability enhancements has been added. At the end of the program year grantees will need to meet the standards for two.of the three measures to be successful in their performance standards. Grantees serving more job ready participants and/or located in favorable labor markets will most likely be more successful with the current two measures. Those grantees with less skilled participants and/or located on reservations with limited job opportunities may be more successful with the new measure of employability enhancements and the positive termination rate. 2. New Measure of Employability Enhancements This new measure reflects a-more complete count of those participants who have enhanced their job-specific skills or made learning gains as a result of program participation. Unlike the previous measure of positive termination, this new performance measure excludes job placements to assess more directly how well the grantee is able to address the skill needs of its clients. Use of this measure in combination with other performance indicators will encourage grantees to better prepare their participants for advanced training, education and more stable employment. 3. Elimination of Cost Measure To encourage more intensive services to hard-to-serve clients, cost measures have been eliminated as performance indicators across JTPA programs. However, INA grantees are advised that an upper limit--an average grantee cost of $4,000 per participant has been set for purposes of planning review and program monitoring. Grantees exceeding this limit will need to justify why its services require higher per participant expenditures. 4. Clarification of Entered Employment Rate Calculation An alternative method of computing the entered employment rate was proposed during the summer training sessions that would hold grantees harmless in the EER calculation for those participants leaving the program who had attained only enhancements. Because the Department is allowing grantees to meet the two measures which best reflect their program design, it does not seem necessary to further change the EER computation to accommodate those in enhancement programs. Therefore, the current formula for computing the EER will be retained for two more years (PY 1991 and 1992) while the new optional performance measures selection is being assessed. B. Instructional changes for each form 1. Budget Information Summary (BIS) - Form 8600 Tryout Employment has been combined with On-the-Job Training. 2. Program Planning-Summary (PPS) - Form 8601 Added two new termination categories: adult/youth Employability Enhancement (EEN) outcomes that occur with or without a job placement. Tryout Employment h as been combined with On-the-Job Training. Revised significant terminee characteristics to highlight the newly added barriers to employment. 3. Financial Status Report (FSR) - Form 8602 Tryout Employment has been combined with on-the-Job Training. 4. Program Status Summary (PSS) - Form 8603 Added two new termination categories: adult/youth Employability Enhancement outcomes that occur in combination with or without a job placement. Classroom Training has been separated into two training areas: Basic Education and Job Skills. Tryout Employment has been combined with on-the-Job Training. Added a new category of program activity which includes Training Assistance and/or Supportive Services ONLY. 5. Annual Status Report (ASR) - Form 8604 Added two termination categories: adult/youth Employability Enhancement outcomes that occur in combination with or without a job placement. Revised age groupings. Combined direct and indirect placements into one line item. Added Post High School attendee. Expanded barriers to employment to include separate reporting for the following line items: Reading Skills Below the 7th Grade Level; JOBS Program Participant; and Multiple Barriers to Employment (reporting the number of participants with at least three of the twelve barriers). Added two veterans categories. Added two new categories of training duration. The first, Average Weeks in All (Specific) Training, includes all training received including training from Non-Section 401 sources, and.the second, Average Weeks in Section 401 Training, includes Section 401 training ONLY. Note: For the purpose of these items training is redefined to focus on types of training that will directly lead to basic/occupational skills acquisition and differs from the training definition used for financial reporting. Added a new section that shows the Total Funds Available, including a breakout that distinguishes between unexpended funds carried over from the preceding year and the new grant award for the current program year. General. In addition to the above mentioned changes, there have been many definitional and editorial changes to the instructions that have clarified them significantly. While the above mentioned changes refer primarily to reporting of line items, grantees are advised that some of the column headings have been changed to obtain new data or data previously reported on other lines or columns in the old reporting forms. Action. Grantees should carefully read these final instructions and familiarize themselves with the new reporting requirements before submitting any of the required reports on the attached final forms to the national office. Technical assistance on the new reporting requirements will be provided at the Program Year 1991 Training Seminar announced in DINAP Bulletin 91-18. Inquiries. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative.