References: a. Training and Employment Information Notice (TEIN) No. 2491, Change in Selective Service Advisory Opinion b. Training and Employment Information Notice (TEIN) No. 17-90, Discontinuation of Selective Service System's Toll-Free Registration Information Number c. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 4 89, Application of Selective Service Registration Requirements in Section 504 of the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) d. JTPA, Section 604 Background: In the implementation of the Section 604 Selective Service registration prerequisite for participating in JTPA training, the Department previously recommended that States suggest to the SDAs and other sub-grantees that they confirm registration status and direct other registration questions by mail to the Selective Service System (SSS). The Selective Service in turn has been responding to these inquiries in the form of advisory opinion letters. On April 9, 1993, the Selective Service implemented a policy change in the language used in the advisory opinion procedures. According to Selective Service, the change reflects that Agency's view that the decision for determining the nature of a man's failure to register rests with the Agency dispersing the benefits, rights or training. As a result, the former advisory opinion letters have been neutralized to reflect only that data which is revealed in the SSS records. Advisory opinion letters have been changed to "Registry Status Information" letters. Examples of these letters are attached. Action: State JTPA liaisons should advise their SDAs of this revision regarding the Selective Service advisory opinion letters as soon as possible. Also, advise SDAs that rather than advisory opinion letters, Selective Service will be issuing Registration Status Information letters, based on the attached guidelines, which will be favorable or unfavorable. Upon receipt of the letter, SDA's are to determine the nature of the response. If the response is favorable per the SSS letter, and the individual is otherwise eligible, then services may be provided. If the response is deemed unfavorable, the individual in question may not be served.

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

Reference: Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 11-92, dated May 19, 1993, transmitted the updated PYs 199211993 departure points. Background: Section 106(d) of JTPA provides that each Governor shall prescribe, within parameters established by the Secretary, variations in the performance standards based upon specific economic, geographic and demographic factors in the State and in service delivery areas/substate areas within the State, the characteristics of the population to be served, and the type of service to be provided. The Department has retained the six Title II-A and the Title III Secretary's measures originally implemented in PYs 1990/1991. Departure points have been revised to reflect most recent program experience in the poor economic environment. For PYs 199211993 standard setting, the attached worksheets supersede those worksheets currently in use. Policy Considerations: Initially, the Department did not update its performance standards levels in Program Year 1992 in order to maintain program management continuity amidst uncertainty about the passage of the JTPA Amendments and slow economic growth. However, a review of PY 1991 data showed a trend of declining SDA performance on the employment-related standards (i.e., the adult and welfare follow-up employment rates and the youth entered employment rate). There is little reason to believe that outcomes have declined because the quality of SDA services decreased. Rather, because of the program's sensitivity to the economic environment, the most likely explanation for the employment rates is the decline in job opportunities associated with slow economic growth. Although economic conditions are improving, they have not yet been accompanied by increased employment -- and slow employment growth is forecast for the near future. It is likely to be some time before job opportunities improve for JTPA participants, and lower program outcomes for the employment-related standards can, therefore, be expected to continue in Program Years 1992/1993. Consistent with these considerations, the following variables have been updated and are included in the attached tables: -- Departure points (core standards only), -- Tolerance ranges, -- Extreme values for outcomes/local factors, and -- Alternative performance ranges. Rationale for Adjustment worksheets: The Department's optional adjustment methodology provides Governors with a systematic adjustment approach which conforms to the Secretary's parameters for setting SDA/SSA standards. This adjustment methodology is continually being revised and improved in light of additional experience and more current data for standard-setting. The models for Title II performance measures were developed using SDA-level data from the PY 1991 JTPA Annual Status Report. The model for the Title III performance measures were developed using PY 1991 Worker Adjustment Program Report data. Title II-A and Title III worksheets: Worksheets are included to assist Governors in setting standards for the core measures and an optional average wage at placement (AWP) goal for sub state areas. National Departure Points: The national departure points for the core measures are: Title II-A -- Adult Follow-Up Employment Rate 60% -- Welfare Follow-Up Employment Rate 46% -- Youth Entered Employment Rate 41% -- Youth Employability Enhancement Rate 36% The following departure points remain unchanged: Title II -- Adult Weekly Earnings at Follow-Up $228 -- Welfare Weekly Earning at Follow-Up $207 Title III -- Entered Employment Rate 64% National standards or departure points have not been established for the non-core outcomes. The establishment of appropriate departure points for non-core outcomes is the responsibility of the Governors. How the Worksheets Were Developed: The worksheets were generated using a statistical technique called multiple regression analysis. This method estimates the factor weights presented on the worksheets. The weights represent the simultaneous influences of various participant characteristics and local economic conditions on SDA/SSA program performance. The models shown in the worksheets were reviewed by a technical work group composed of State, SDA and National representatives.

References. DINAP Bulletins 94-13 and 94-19. Background. The referenced DINAP Bulletins provided information to grantees eligible for travel and per diem reimbursement for one person to attend the subject conference. These Bulletins further detailed allowable expenses and reimbursement procedures. Action Required. Grantees eligible for reimbursement must submit a reimbursement claim no later than August 31, 1995. Any claims submitted after August 31, 1995, will not be processed for payment. All reimbursement claims are processed by ACKCO, Inc. only. Questions. Grantees should direct all questions to Ms. Kathleen Telmont with ACKCO, Inc. The toll free number is: 1-800-525-2859.

References. P.L. 97-300, Section 4(8) (JTPA); and Internal Revenue Code, Section 51 (TJTC). Background. JTPA regulations at 20 CFR 632.4 provide for the use of either of two sets of data in determining economically disadvantaged persons and program eligibility: the Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines or the LLSIL. The attached Federal Register Notice (Vol. 60, No. 79) contains updated LLSIL and detailed instructions for their use, effective April 25, 1995. Action. Grantees will use one of the three tables on pages 20285 and 20286 of the Notice to find their 70 percent LLSIL for a family of four. Those grantees in one of the 25 Metropolitan Statistical Areas will use Table 3; grantees in Alaska or Hawaii will use Table 2; all other grantees will use Table 1. Grantees using Table 1 can find which region they are in by referring to the list on page 19242. Grantees using Tables 1 or 2 must also determine if they are in a metro or non-metro area; this information can be obtained from the grantee's State JTPA. Having found the applicable 70 percent LLSIL for a family of four on Tables 1, 2 or 3, the grantee can then find the 70 percent LLSIL for a family larger or smaller than four on Table 4. For example: a grantee in a non-metro area of Arizona is in the "West" region. On Table 1 its 70 percent LLSIL is 17,600. To find the applicable 70 percent for a family of six, the grantee finds 17,600 in column "four" of Table 4 and reads across that line to Column "six" to find 24,290. Grantees should note the disclaimer on page 20284 that the figures in this notice are valid only for eligibility determination under the JTPA and TJTC programs and should not be used for any statistical purposes. DINAP grantees are to disregard the instructions to Governors on page 20284 in the paragraph entitled "Use of These Data." Questions. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative.

Background: The SPIR requirements were published in the Federal Register on November 12, 1992. An advance unofficial copy of the attached document was forwarded to State JTPA Liaisons in mid-April 1993. A SPIR User Group meeting was convened in late April 1993, at which the unofficial data specifications and coding instructions were discussed in depth. While no data items have been added to the SPIR, based on these discussions, additional responses have been established for several existing items. These refinements have been made to insure that programmatic and performance standards concerns are fully addressed. SPIR Data Items for which Additional Responses have been Established: Item 12. Program of Participation 7 = Title II-A 5% exempt from performance standards 8 = Title II-C 5% exempt from performance standards Item 12a. Concurrent Participation 1 = Yes, JTPA II-a, 204(d), II-C, III 2 = Yes, JTPA 8% 3 = Yes, II-B 4 = Yes non-JTPA 5 = Yes, both JTPA and non-JTPA Item 39. Other Terminations 8 = Objective assessment only (exempt from performance standards) 9 = Objective assessment and entered unsubsidized employment only (exempt from performance standards) Item 40. Follow-up Group/Sample 1 = In adult sample and contacted 2 = In adult sample, but not contacted 3 = Not in sample 4 = In supplemental welfare sample and contacted 5 = In supplemental welfare sample, but not contacted Highlights of Additional Technical Adjustments and Refinements: Additional technical adjustments and refinements are summarized in the attached SPIR data specifications and coding instructions. Action: State Liaisons are requested to distribute this reporting guidance to all officials within the State who need such information.

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

Background: An analysis of results from a survey of companies that provide payroll and/or tax filing services or that sell payroll software has lead to the conclusion that these companies do not have all the information necessary from State QCR forms, or within "Employer's Handbooks" provided by States, to be able to provide data which conforms to the State definition of monthly employment. This results in inaccurate data being submitted. Recommendation: This data is of vital importance in a number of national statistics and is used widely by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Department of Commerce and the Unemployment Insurance Service. Therefore, it is recommended that States add a statement such as the following to their QCR: "The monthly employment data reported on line item should be a count of all full-time and part-time workers in covered employment (subject to this State's Unemployment Compensation Law) who performed services during the payroll period which includes the 12th of the month. If no employment in the payroll period, enter zero." Further, it is recommended that this statement and more detailed information on monthly employment be included in the State's "Employer's Handbook". Action Required: State Administrators should share this information with appropriate staff. State administrators might consider forwarding inquiries on the issue to the State Labor Market Information units which should be able to respond.

References: Public Law (P.L.) 101-453 (CMIA); P.L. 102-589 (CMIA effective date extended); 31 CFR Part 205 (CMIA Final Rule), 57 Fed. Reg. 44272 (September 24, 1992); Employment Security Manual, Part V, Sections 9300-9315; ETA Handbook No. 336, 10th Edition. Background: The DOL, in consultation with the States and other interested parties, has been developing a comprehensive, integrated approach to unemployment fund cash management for an extended period. The goal of this approach is to combine modern cash management practices with the immediate deposit and limited withdrawal requirements of the Social Security Act (SSA) at Section 303(a)(4) and (5) and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) at Section 3304(a)(3) and (4). DOL published for comment a proposed State unemployment fund cash management program in the Federal Register on May 16, 1990. However, enactment of the CMIA compelled modifications to this program. Among other things, the CMIA amended 31 U.S.C. 6503. Section 6503(c)(3)(B) requires that "actual interest earnings" less "related banking costs" be returned to the State's account in the Unemployment Trust Fund (UTF). The Treasury Department published a proposed rule to implement the CMIA at 57 Fed. Reg. 10102 on March 23, 1992. Subpart B of that proposed rule addressed UTF issues. However, the final rule, 57 Fed. Reg. 44272, 44278-44279 deleted Subpart B. Treasury's rationale for the deletion was that Subpart B went beyond strict CMIA issues because it contained unemployment fund cash management program issues best left to DOL regulations. After publication of the final rule, the effective date of the CMIA regulations was extended to July 1, 1993, by P.L. 102-589. DOL plans to develop regulations which will spell out, subject to the constraints of the CMIA, specific requirements for State compliance with the immediate deposit and limited withdrawal requirements of the SSA and the FUTA. However, a final rule cannot be published by July 1, 1993, the effective date of the CMIA regulations. Therefore, States are provided this controlling interim guidance, which will remain in effect until the effective date of DOL regulations. States may not vary from this guidance without the prior approval of DOL. Interim Guidance and Instructions: The following sections provide interim guidance and instructions on the unemployment fund cash management program issues affected by the CMIA. All current UTF cash management requirements not addressed in the following sections remain unchanged (specifically the Desired Level of Achievement (DLA) for the deposit of funds for the UTF into State clearing accounts and the transfer of those funds to the UTF, and fund management requirements in the Employment Security Manual Sections 9300-9315). See ETA Handbook 336, 10th edition, for DLAs. Current ETA cash management reports (specifically, the ETA 8401, 8405, 8413, and 8414) will continue unchanged during the interim period. The DOL has requested the Office of Management and Budget to extend the expiration date of these reports to September 30, 1995. A. Performance Measures. State benefit payment account cash management performance is currently monitored through the Quality Appraisal (QA) process. State cash management performance is measured by a DLA. This DLA limits withdrawals from the State account in the UTF to an amount sufficient to maintain in the benefit payment account a balance equivalent to not more than one day's benefit payments. The CMIA makes this DLA obsolete; therefore this DLA is now rescinded. During the interim period, a State will be required to comply with the following: The withdrawal of funds from the State account in the UTF must adhere to the funding technique specified in the Treasury - State agreement executed under 31 CFR 205.9. In the absence of such an Agreement, the default provisions of the CMIA regulations will apply (Section 205.9(f)). Section 205.9 of the CMIA final rule describes the Federal-State Agreements and the essential components thereof. One required component is the selection and specification of a "Funding Technique" (Section 205.9(b)(2)). In effect, benefit payment account balance levels are now controlled by the permissible funding techniques described in Section 205.6 of the CMIA rule and, to support the CMIA, the focus for DOL performance measurement is changed from a benefit payment account balance amount to compliance with the stipulated withdrawal technique. B. Program Requirements. (1). Interest Earnings. States may have balances in their benefit payment account; in some cases these balances will be significant. Good cash management dictates that States take steps which ensure that benefit payment account balances provide value to the State unemployment fund through generation of interest or earnings credits which may be used to pay "related banking costs". Related banking costs are charges by commercial banks or State Treasurers for the maintenance of a State's benefit payment account relating to the drawdown of unemployment funds from the UTF and the disbursement of unemployment compensation checks or warrants. These steps must conserve the security and liquidity of unemployment funds. To this end, for the benefit payment account only, States may: (A) Use earnings credits generated by balances in benefit payment accounts, including benefit payment accounts residing with State Treasurers, to offset related banking costs for the maintenance of said benefit payment accounts. (B) Invest from the close of bank business one night to the opening of bank business the next business day in repurchase agreements in U.S. Government securities or securities backed by or insured by the full faith of the U.S. Government. Broker/Dealers used in such repurchase agreements must be subject to and in compliance with Treasury regulations issued under the Government Securities Act of 1986, at 31 U.S.C. 3121(h) and, 9110, and must conform in substance to the Public Securities Association master repurchase agreement. Interest earnings must be deposited into the State's account in the UTF unless used for the payment of related banking costs defined as stand-alone, non-credit services which are considered necessary and/or customary for sustaining an account in a financial institution, whether in a commercial institution or State Treasurer account. Investment service fees are not considered related banking costs under CMIA. See 31 CFR 205.13(i) for the description of the interest calculation process and 31 CFR 205.15(a)(6) for the annual requirements for reporting actual interest earned and related banking costs. (2). Federal Funds. Funds originating in the Federal Employees Compensation Account (FECA) and the Extended Unemployment Compensation Account (EUCA) are not subject to the same treatment provided funds withdrawn from the State's account in the UTF. Instead, FECA and EUCA funds are excluded under 31 CFR Part 205.13(i)(3) and are subject to the same conditions and requirements as other funds under the CMIA. Therefore, interest on FECA or EUCA funds must be returned to the respective account, and interest earned may not be used to pay related banking costs. (3). Tracking and Accounting for UTF funds. All State unemployment funds must be identifiable at all times, separately and completely accounted for, so that all types and volumes of transactions can be tracked as they flow through the State bank accounts. Moneys withdrawn from the State's account, the FECA, the EUCA, and the Federal Unemployment Account in the UTF may be deposited into the same benefit payment account. Separate tracking, accounting, and record keeping must be maintained for these commingled funds from the source in the UTF through redemption of the payment instrument. Related banking costs and actual interest earning on funds withdrawn from the State's account in the UTF must be allocated reasonably according to the appropriate source of funds. See 31 CFR Part 205.13. Action Required: SESA Administrators are requested to: A. Review the guidance and instructions in the UIPL; B. Implement changes that may be required due to the CMIA; C. Relay to the appropriate Regional Office any comments and concerns by July 15, 1993. States will be regularly apprised of the progress of the development of DOL regulations.

References. 20 CFR 632.4 and DINAP Bulletin 93-12. Background. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) published revised poverty income guidelines in the Federal Register on February 9, 1995. The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) regulations at 20 CFR 632.4 provide for the use of DHHS poverty guidelines in determining economically disadvantaged persons and program eligibility. However, DHHS has definitions of "income" and "family" which are not applicable to the JTPA program. JTPA definitions can be found at 20 CFR 632.4. Action. The revised guidelines are effective from the date of this bulletin. Questions. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative.