Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Reference: The SCSEP regulations, at 20 CFR Sections 641.309(b) and 641.311(b)(3); section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990; and their implementing regulations. Background: A number of questions have been generated by the May 17, 1995 SCSEP regulation regarding physical examinations and disabilities. Our experience since issuing the regulations indicates that additional information would be helpful. Moreover, it appears that many enrollees are no longer taking advantage of the physical examination program benefit. A common medical recommendation for people over the age of 50 is that they receive an annual physical exam. Physicals can identify serious medical problems. Recently, after physical exams, several enrollees at a project were found to have been exposed to tuberculosis. As a result of these exams, these people were able to get appropriate medical attention. The provision of free physical examinations has been a long-standing SCSEP program benefit that has been utilized by hundreds of thousands of SCSEP participants. Unfortunately, implementation of the 1995 regulations has resulted in fewer enrollees taking advantage of this benefit. Policy: Each SCSEP enrollee must be offered a physical exam upon entrance into the program, and at least annually thereafter. It is the policy of the Employment and Training Administration to actively promote this program benefit for each enrollee. Widespread failure by projects to encourage exams through non-coercive measures may be considered a program deficiency. Documentation of waivers by enrollees of their rights to physical exams are of considerably lesser importance than are records maintained by the project showing that the enrollees have had annual medical exams. Purpose of Physical Examinations: Examinations should not be arranged for the purpose of determining whether an enrollee is "fit to work." Concerns about the expenses of workers' compensation or other liability claims should not be a programmatic matter (although they clearly do constitute a managerial consideration). Physicals should be viewed as a benefit associated with SCSEP program participation; they can be useful in helping participants make informed judgements about their ability to perform certain work assignments, and in providing them with information on their general health. Arranging Physicals: Examinations need not be financed through the SCSEP. If enrollees have health insurance, including Medicare or Medicaid, and a preferred private physician, it is acceptable for annual physicals to be conducted in that manner. Some local projects arrange for physicals in conjunction with the local Public Health Service, which is also used as a host agency worksite. One national sponsor arranges medical examinations as part of the intake process; at the conclusion of the enrollment interview, the individual is told the time, date and place of the appointment. They are asked to keep that appointment unless it is necessary to reschedule. Action: SCSEP sponsors should review the attached Questions and Answers, and share copies with appropriate staff. It may be necessary for some sponsors to remind their staff and sub-projects of the importance of the medical exam. Appropriate staff and sub- projects should be advised of low-cost ways to arrange physical exams, e.g. working with the Public Health Service, free clinics, and other sources of medical examinations. If through their own efforts enrollees obtain medical exams or have just had one, this will meet the regulatory requirement. When monitoring local projects, sponsors are encouraged to review the proportion of enrollees who are receiving physical examinations arranged by the project. The attached information should answer many questions of project sponsors and result in greater enrollee use of the free medical examination program benefit.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Reference: Section 3304(a)9(B) of the Internal Revenue Code; 20 CFR 616; ET Handbook No. 399; and UIPL No. 28-97, dated April 24, 1997. Background: Automation of the combined wage claim (CWC) activities between States involve the Request for Wage Transfer (IB4), the Report on Determination of CWC (IB5), and the Statement of Benefits Paid to CWC claimants (IB6). Model Code providing for the electronic exchange of TC-IB4 and TC-IB5 data has previously been provided to the States and these applications are operational. The IB-6 is used by the paying State of a CWC to provide the detail quarterly charges to the transferring State for reimbursement and is the final application needed to complete the automation of CWC activities. As explained in UIPL No. 28-97 dated April 24, 1997, Lockheed Martin Integrated Business Solutions (LMIBS) has developed Model Code to process and transmit the IB-6 data. This application has been pilot tested by the States of Maryland, Minnesota, and Oregon. The test results indicate that the application operates efficiently when reviewing the accuracy of the charges, identifying charges that don't reconcile with the pro rata charge distribution requirements of the IB5, and delivering outgoing and incoming IB6 data. The test States reported a major savings in the amount of staff time necessary to process outgoing and incoming IB-6s because only charges that do not pass the electronic edits need staff attention. Although the Code was completed during the summer of 1997, National distribution was delayed in consideration of the year 2000 requirements. However, since 19 States have requested and received the Code from LMIBS, the IB Committee has recommended distribution of the Code to all States with a requirement that all States be able to electronically send and receive IB6 data no later than the billing cycle for the quarter ending March 31, 1999. Distribution and Installation of the TC-IB6 Model Code: The Model Code will be distributed in February, 1998, to those IBM States that have not previously received it. Simultaneously, the programming specifications will be provided to all non-IBM States that have not previously received them. Because the IB6 data is currently electronically created and printed to paper for mailing, the programming requirements to implement the TC-IB6 should not be extensive. It is estimated that installation and testing of the Model Code will take approximately 40 programmer staff hours. The programming hours reported by the pilot States ranged from 24 to 80 hours. The amount of programming hours necessary is impacted by the degree to which the State has interfaced the TC-IB5 application. The TC-IB6 must be able to access the TC-IB5 base file during the edit and reconciliation process. Implementation - Transition From Paper Form IB6 to Electronic TC-IB6: Effective April 1, 1998, the LMIBS HUB will begin to support the implementation of the TC-IB6 by additional States. States with questions concerning technical requirements, testing, etc., should contact Michelle Wohleber at (407) 306-7133. During the transition period between April 1, 1998 and April 1999 (when all States are to be operational on this application), the CWC paying State that is operational on the TC-IB6 must ensure that it sends a quarterly IB6 in the form (electronic data or hard copy) necessary for processing by the transferring State. The paying State must also be able to handle incoming IB6s prepared under the current hard copy procedures. Action Required: SESA Administrators are requested to ensure that: 1) the TC-IB6 Model Code is installed and operational no later than for the 1st quarter of calendar year 1999 billing cycle; 2) if the State becomes operational on the TC-IB6 during the transition period, the State continues to send quarterly IB6 data in the form necessary for processing by the transferring State; and, 3) the State is able to process incoming IB6s prepared under the current procedures through the billing cycle for the quarter ending December 31, 1998.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

References. a. JTPA Regulations at 20 CFR Part 632 b. DINAP Bulletin No. 85-15, Administrative Cost limit c. DINAP Bulletin No. 88-20, Administrative Requirements for DOL Grantees d. DINAP Bulletin No. 92-26, Transition Guidance for the Implementation of the JTPA Amendments of 1992 e. DINAP Bulletin No. 94-3, Implementation of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-110 (revised) f. DINAP Bulletin No. 95-11, Instructions and Reporting Requirements Background. a. PY 98 Allocation: The PY 1998 JTPA Title IV-A, section 401 appropriation is $53.8 million; $1.3 million more than last year's funding level of $52.5 million. Title II-B funding for the summer youth program is $15.8 million. b. Reallocation Policy: DINAP Bulletins 96-15 and 97-05 outline the excess carryover policy and method by which excess funds will be recaptured and reallocated. With recent JTPA funding levels at their lowest levels, carryover amounts in excess of the allowable 20 percent level will be reallocated to those programs without excess carryover. This policy only applies to Title IV-A funding. Plan Requirements. a. Due date(s): SUMMER YOUTH PLAN (SYP) - Grantees receiving Title II-B Summer Youth funds must submit a SYP postmarked no later than April 10, 1998. COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL PLAN (CAP) - All section 401 grantees must submit a PY 1998 CAP postmarked no later than May 8, 1998. SYPs and CAPs postmarked after the above stated due dates will beconsidered late. Grantees who submit their plans late may experience a delay in plan approval and subsequent availability of PY 98 funds (Notice of Obligation). b. Technical Assistance: Each year several grantees are confronted with truly "unique circumstances" which result in late CAP submissions, (e.g., new program director, first time to complete a CAP, etc.). If your program is facing a "unique circumstance" that may potentially cause your CAP to be submitted after the May 8th due date, you need to contact your Fed. Rep. immediately to request technical assistance. This assistance should enable you to meet the May 8th due date requirement. However, if you sought TA assistance, as advised above, and still need more time to complete your CAP, you should consider the following steps if you plan to attend the National Indian and Native American Employment & Training Conference (NINAETC) in Spokane, Washington, May 11 - 14, 1998: Step 1. Keep in constant contact with your Fed. Rep. prior to the CAP due date to receive required TA to complete your CAP. Step 2. If you have taken step 1, and it still appears you are not going to complete and submit your CAP by May 8th, you may request a one-week extension from your Fed. Rep. by no later than April 17th. (No extensions will be considered if requested after April 17th.) Step 3. If a one-week extension is approved by your Fed. Rep., you must be prepared to bring all required CAP materials to the NINAETC to receive one-on-one TA. You must also be prepared to mail the completed CAP postmarked no later than May 15, 1998. c. CAPs and SYPs on Disk. Last year was the first year grantees were given the option of submitting CAPs and Summer Plans on disk. Once again, as a part of the grantee/Department partnership effort and a commitment to reduce administrative burden while increasing program results, we are providing grantees the option of submitting their CAP and SYP using the Planning Disk Program (3.5" floppy disk) or in the traditional paper document format (hard copy). All of the required CAP and SYP planning instructions, forms and performance standards requirements have been formatted to create a computer software planning program called the "DINAP Planning Disk." The software program is easy to use, insures that all CAP and SYP requirements are completed, and detects common errors. Grantees must send their plans either in the traditional paper format (hard copy) or on diskette, do not send both. The disks and instructions are enclosed. d. CAP and SYP Narratives: All grantees are required to complete a CAP and (if applicable) SYP narrative(s) for PY 1998. e. Community Service Employment (CSE) Wage: The Fair Labor Standards Act was amended to increase the Federal Minimum Wage to $4.75 per hour beginning October 1, 1996 and $5.15 per hour beginning September 1, 1997. However, pursuant to Federal Regulations at 20 CFR 632.81(b)(1) ["Maximum Wage rates for CSE"]; "The wages (including those received from overtime work and leave taken during the period of employment) paid to any CSE participant from funds under the Act shall be limited to $10,000 per year (or the hourly, weekly or monthly rate which, if full time and annualized, would equal a rate of $10,000 a year)". When calculated, this regulation limits the maximum hourly rate for CSE participants to $4.81 per hour. The current regulation at 20 CFR 632.81 contradicts the amendments to the Federal Minimum Wage of $5.15 per hour as of September 1, 1997. Therefore, grantees are directed to comply with the current Federal Minimum Wage of $5.15 per hour. In addition, "Approved rates above $10,000 are fixed at the CETA approved rate as of September 30, 1982, unless adjusted by the Secretary." Grantees must receive prior DOL approval to pay CSE participants more than $10,000 within a one-year period. f. Required SYP and CAP Items: Grantees should reference the SYP/CAP checklist (see Attachment No. 6) to ensure that all required forms and documents are properly completed and included in the appropriate plan package. Additionally, all required forms and other attachments are labeled sequentially as SYP-1 thru SYP-4 and CAP 98-1 thru CAP 98-19. Any page labeled with an identifier (i.e., SYP or CAP 98) in the upper right-hand corner must be submitted with the applicable plan. g. Number of Copies to Submit: The original and two copies of the CAP must be submitted to DINAP with a completed and signed Grant Signature Sheet (CAP 98-1). Grantees that want a copy of the CAP with an original signature for their files must provide an original signature on each of the copies (29 CFR 97.10(b)(2)). Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (CAP 98-17) and the Certification Regarding Lobbying Activities (CAP 98-19) also require grantee signatures. Grantees are advised to keep a copy of all submitted plans. Grantees who utilize the DINAP planning disk option must print out the Grant Signature sheet (CAP 98-1), Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (CAP 98-17) and the Certification Regarding Lobbying Activities (CAP 98-19) from the planning disk and submit three copies, one with an original signature, along with the planning disk. Do not use the forms in this bulletin if the program planning disk is used. Information. a. Regulations: Section 401 grantees will continue to use and comply with the existing regulations at 20 CFR Part 632, and the mandatory provisions in the 1992 amendments to JTPA referenced in DINAP Bulletin No. 92-26. b. General Waiver Provision: A request can be made for a waiver to any regulatory or program requirement not contained in the JTPA Act (20 CFR 632.70 Waiver of Regulations under Parts 632 and 636). DINAP Bulletin 95-29 provides specific instructions on how to request waivers to the regulations and other program requirements. Note: Grantees may submit a waiver request and CAP documents at the same time; however, the request must be separate from the CAP documents and not included in the CAP narrative. This is to ensure that any delay in approving a waiver request does not delay approving a CAP. Although it is preferable to have an approved waiver effective the beginning of a program year, grantees may submit a request for a waiver at any time during the program year. c. Requests for Acquisition of Real Property and Equipment: Grant Officer approval is required prior to the acquisition of all real property, including equipment, which has a useful life of more than one year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit pursuant to OMB Circulars A-102 [29 CFR 97.32] and A-110 [20 CFR 95.2(n)]. The actual request must be submitted separately from the CAP/SYP even if the grantee indicates their intention to purchase equipment in the CAP and/or SYP documents. This is to ensure that any delay in approving real property or equipment purchase requests does not delay the CAP approval process. d. "477" Grantees: The twenty-two Section 401 grantees with approved 477 plans are not required to submit a PY 98 CAP. Of the twenty-two that have included the Summer Youth Program in their approved 477 plan, a SYP will not be required for PY 1998. PY 98 funds will be transferred to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Action. If applicable, grantees must submit their Title II-B Summer Youth plans, postmarked no later than April 10, 1998. All grantees must submit their CAPs, postmarked no later than May 8, 1998 to the following address: U.S. Department of Labor ETA/Room N-4641 Division of Indian and Native American Programs 200 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210 ATTN: MIS DESK Note: Plans should be sent only to the address listed above. Only a United States Postal postmark or Express Mail service tracking label with pertinent delivery information are acceptable (i.e., Federal Express, Airborne Express, etc.) Privately owned or leased metered mail postmarks are NOT acceptable (i.e., Pitney Bowes meter machine, etc.). Inquiries. Questions should be directed to your Federal Representative Team. (East Team 202/219-5504, Midwest Team 214/767-2154 and West Team 206/553-6195).

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Click on the link below to view, save, or print out the document.

Background: Today, America s workforce is undergoing an unprecedented series of changes. While technology is rapidly reshaping the face of our economy, and business struggles to compete in an increasingly global market, a large segment of America s population, the Baby Boom Generation, is aging rapidly. Simultaneous advances in technology and demographic changes are having effects that will continue to reshape our economy well into the 21st century. Many people are familiar with facts about technology, computers and downsizing; however, relatively few know that the number of workers age 45 and over will have increased by nearly 17 million between 1994 and 2005. Ms. Imel's article, published by Ohio State University's Center on Education and Training for Employment, was commissioned by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement at the U. S. Department of Education. It summarizes a number of studies and articles that bear directly on the economic and demographic changes that society is experiencing. Findings: Many critical findings relative to older workers are found in the article. To highlight a few: a.) The number of individuals aged 55 and over in the work force is continuing to grow. b.) Since 1984, both the full- and part-time work of "retired" men younger than age 65 has increased markedly. c.) Proportionately more older workers were laid off as a result of the downsizing activities that took place from 1986 through 1991. d.) Attitudes and beliefs about older workers are ambivalent; that is, they are viewed as having both positive and negative attributes. e.) Compared to younger peers, older supervisors are more negative in their beliefs about older workers. f.) Managers almost always underestimate the productivity of older workers. g.) Much of the available data is unreliable. h.) Much of the research on aging and work performance has not included a detailed analysis of contextual factors, such as opportunities for retraining, that would provide a link between individual changes and work performance. i.) No basis exists for the stereotypes surrounding the ability of older workers to learn new skills. j.) Older workers are not treated comparably to younger workers in gaining access to training. k.) Ageism is a serious issue in the workplace, denying older workers equal opportunity and equitable treatment. l.) Older workers have served as scapegoats for corporate cost containment, with companies using existing prejudices and stereotypes to justify decisions regarding layoffs and access to training. Actions Required: a.) Sponsors should disseminate information from the article about older workers, and initiate dialogues with employers to educate them about their findings, and b.) Sponsors should promote efforts to educate employers and the general public about the benefits of hiring, retraining and retaining mature workers. Inquiries: Questions should be directed to your Federal Representative at (202) 219-5904.