E. Other Requirements.

1. Contingency Planning. It is possible that there will be no separately funded WIA Section 167, National Farmworker Job Training Program (NFJP) Grantees in PY 2004. It is also possible that the Wagner-Peyser Act will be repealed and/or that the funding for core employment services will be consolidated into a block grant. Please provide a detailed assessment regarding how services to MSFWs and the rest of the agricultural community would be improved by these changes. Include a timeline of the major anticipated actions to transition from the old service delivery structure to the one currently being proposed.

2. Monitor Advocate. States must appoint a full-time Monitor Advocate as stated in 20 CFR 653.108 (b). If a State Monitor Advocate is working less than full-time, justification for the part-time status of the State Monitor Advocate must be provided to and approved by the Department of Labor (DOL). All states must provide a statement that indicates that the State Monitor Advocate has been afforded the opportunity to approve and/or comment on the PY 2003 Agricultural Services Submission as stated in 20 CFR 653.111. All states must provide a statement which indicates that the state considered the State Monitor Advocate's recommendations as presented in the annual MSFW summary developed under 20 CFR 653.109(t).

3. MSFW Affirmative Action Plans. States with designated significant Affirmative Action local offices are required to submit an Affirmative Action Plan to DOL in accordance with 20 CFR 653.111.

4. Review and Comment by WIA Section 167 National Farmworker Job Training Program (NFJP) Grantees. All states must provide information indicating that WIA Section 167 grantees, other appropriate MSFW groups, public agencies, agricultural employer organizations and other interested employer organizations, have been given the opportunity to comment on the State Agricultural Services Submission, including any required significant MSFW local office Affirmative Action Plans. States must submit a list of organizations from whom information and suggestions were solicited; any comments received and agency responses are to be submitted in the annual plan as indicated in 20 CFR 653.107 (d).

II. Assessment of Need. Under 20 CFR 653.111 (d) all states must submit an assessment of need. This assessment of need must take into account data supplied by WIA Section 167 grantees, MSFW organizations, employer organizations, federal/state agencies, Migrant Education Agency, etc. This assessment of need must include:

A. A review of the previous year's agricultural activity in the state.

ü Identify each major labor-intensive crop activity in the previous year, indicating the months of heavy activity and the geographic area of prime activity.

B. A review of the previous year's MSFW activity in the state.

ü Estimate the agricultural labor employed in each of the crops identified in item II.A. Estimate the number of MSFWs involved in each, and indicate crop areas that experienced labor shortages.

C. Projected level of agricultural activity expected in the state in the coming year.

ü Identify any changes from last year's crop activities as described in item II.A.

D. A projected number of MSFWs in the state in the coming year.

ü Identify any changes in the numbers of MSFWs involved in each crop activity as described in item II.A.

III. Outreach Activities. Each state must prepare a comprehensive outreach plan in accordance with Federal requirements at 20 CFR Part 653.107. The outreach plan must be based on the actual conditions which exist in the particular state, taking into account the State Workforce Agency’s (SWAs) history of providing outreach services, the estimated number of MSFWs in the state, and the need for outreach services in the state.

The five states with the highest estimated year-round MSFW activities must assign full-time, year-round staff to outreach activities. ETA designates these states each year. The five states designated for PY 2003 are provided in Table 5. The remainder of the top 20 significant MSFW states, indicated in Table 1, must make maximum efforts to hire outreach staff with MSFW experience for year-round positions and shall assign outreach staff to work full-time during the period of highest activity.

ETA will base its approval on whether the state outreach plan adequately addresses the following:

A. Assessment of Available Resources. The assessment of the resources available for outreach shall include:

1. The number of SWA staff positions the state will assign to outreach activities. The assessment must indicate the full-time equivalent positions for each local office to which staff must be assigned, and the number of staff assigned to the state office for this purpose. The significant MSFW local offices listed in Table 4 should assign full-time staff for outreach duties during the peak seasons, as indicated in 20 CFR 653.107(h)(3)(i).

2. Where the number of SWA staff positions assigned to outreach activities is less than in the prior year, please provide an explanation for the reduction and the expected effect of the reduction on direct outreach activities, as indicated in 20 CFR 653.107(h)(3)(i).

3. Identify resources to be made available through existing cooperative agreements with public and private community service agencies and MSFW groups. (States are encouraged to initiate cooperative agreements with WIA Section 167 grantees for outreach position.)

B. Numerical Goals. The anticipated results of these outreach efforts are provided in Item A. These goals shall include:

1. The number of MSFWs to be contacted by employment service staff during the program year, listed by local office where outreach staff is assigned, as well as the state office, as indicated in 20 CFR 653.107(c)(3).

2. The number of staff days (based on eight-hour days) to be utilized for outreach, listed by local office where outreach staff is assigned, as well as the state office.

3. The number of MSFWs contacted by other agencies under cooperative arrangements.

C. Proposed Outreach Activities. States must describe the outreach efforts to be provided to MSFWs. These efforts must include those described in 20 CFR 653.107 C (i-p). Also, describe any coordinated activities with other agencies where a possible surplus of workers may exist.

IV. Services Provided to MSFWs through the One-Stop Delivery System.

A. Planning Data for the Upcoming Year

If a state's estimated planning data for the current year indicate difficulty in meeting equity indicators, minimum services levels, or planned levels of activity, ETA will request the state submit a narrative regarding the difficulty. The following items must be included in a narrative:

1. A description of the problems;

2. Specific steps planned to meet minimum service levels; and

3. Specific steps planned to meet equity level of services.

Federal regulations at 20 CFR 653.112 require the establishment of performance indicators reflecting equity and the measurement of minimum levels of service. The indicators established by ETA include the seven minimum service level indicators and the five SWA-controlled indicators to measure equity of service. All states are required to meet at least four of the five equity indicators. Additionally, significant MSFW states are required to meet at least four of the seven minimum service level indicators.

The seven minimum service level indicators are listed in Table 3. These standards are set to encourage appropriate service to MSFWs and to assure the continuation of such services. The minimum service levels are established annually. The standards are set at a level high enough to encourage low performing states to improve their performance, but not so high as to make achievement extraordinarily difficult.

The five equity indicators for all states are:

Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs referred to jobs

Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs for whom service is provided

Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs referred to supportive services

Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs provided with career guidance

Ratio of non-MSFWs to MSFWs for whom a job development contact was made

B. Significant MSFW Local Office Affirmative Action Plans

The Department of Labor designated significant MSFW local offices, for which an Affirmative Action Plan must be developed and submitted, under 20 CFR 653.111. The designations for PY 2001 of Affirmative Action Plan local offices are provided in Table 2.

The Affirmative Action Plan (20 CFR 653.111-1(b)) must include a comparison of the racial and ethnic composition of the workforce and that of the local office staff. When the comparison shows an under-representation of a racial or ethnic group in the local office, the plan must establish a reasonable timetable with goals to remedy the imbalance.

V. Services Provided to Agricultural Employers through the One-Stop Delivery System.

A. Data Analysis.

1. Previous year's history (based on PY 2001 data):

Number of agricultural job orders and openings received

Number of agricultural job orders filled

Percent to be filled

Number of interstate clearance orders received

Number of interstate clearance orders initiated

2. Plan for upcoming year (based on estimated data):

Number of agricultural job orders expected to be received

Number of agricultural job orders projected to be filled

Percent to be filled

Estimated number of interstate clearance orders the state will receive

Estimated number of interstate clearance orders the state will initiate

B. Narrative Description.

All states must provide a description to ETA of their efforts to provide services to their agricultural employers regardless of whether the employers have an adequate labor supply of U.S. workers. These efforts should include:

ü A description of how the SWA plans to provide labor exchange services to agricultural employers.

ü A description of the process used to identify agricultural employers that are expected to utilize MSFWs.

ü A description of the process for linking available workers with the employers, including the cooperation with or the creation of coordinating bodies to assure programs are coordinated and to ensure programs respond to local needs. These coordinating groups may consist of organizations, such as the WIA Section 167 grantees, agricultural employers, migrant education groups, and migrant health groups.

ü Describe how the state will promote labor exchange services to agricultural employers, e.g., participate in employer conferences, develop marketing tools, provide labor exchange information to employers, and recruit U.S. workers.

ü Where an H-2A program operated in the state in the previous year, explain efforts to increase U.S. worker participation.

VI. Enclosures to State Planning Guidelines for Agricultural Services.

Table 1. Significant MSFW States for PY 2003

Table 2. Affirmative Action Plan--Significant MSFW Local Offices

Table 3. Minimum Service Level Indicators for PY 2003

Table 4. Significant MSFW Local Offices and Bilingual Offices for PY 2003

Table 5. States with Highest Estimated MSFW Activity

Table 1

SIGNIFICANT MSFW STATES FOR PY 2003

State MSFW Applicants

California 25,808

Texas 21,568

Florida 14,813

Washington 15,696

North Carolina 15,418

Arizona 8,000

Georgia 4,337

Michigan 8,821

Puerto Rico 3,863

South Carolina 3,817

Virginia 3,266

Oregon 3,885

Minnesota 1,086

New Mexico 2,096

New York 1741

Ohio 1,902

Pennsylvania 735

Illinois 1,999

Wisconsin 1022

Idaho 1,289

Table 2

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN--SIGNIFICANT MSFW LOCAL OFFICES

(TOP 20% OF MSFW ACTIVITY NATIONWIDE)

Local Office Region MSFW Applications

Onley, VA 2 3,945

Edinburg, TX 4 4,055

Weslaco/Mercedes, TX 4 5,361

Moses Lake, WA 6 6,070

Yuma, AZ 6 5,656

Yakima, WA 6 4,890

Sunnyside, WA 6 4,463

Federal regulations at 20 CFR 653.111(b)(1) require that “Affirmative Action Plan” local offices be designated each year. For purposes of this provision, these local offices mean those representing the top 20% of MSFW activity nationally.

Total MSFW application nationwide in PY 2001: 167,028

Table 3

MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL INDICATORS FOR PY 2003

In accordance with Federal regulations at 20 CFR 653.112, the following are the minimum service levels for PY 2003 that significant MSFW states must meet:

(1) Individuals placed in a job;

(2) Individuals placed in a job with a wage exceeding the Federal minimum

wage by at least 50 cents/hour; and

(3) Placed in long-term (over 150 days) non-agricultural jobs.

(1) (2) (3)

State MSFW Placed $.50 Placed in

Placed % Above Federal Long-term

Minimum Wage Non-Ag Jobs

California 42.5 14.0 4.9%

Texas 42.5 14.0 8.2

Florida 42.5 14.0 6.0

Washington 42.5 14.0 3.3

North Carolina????? 42.5 14.0 5.0

Arizona 42.5 14.0 3.8

Georgia 42.5 14.0 3.8

Michigan 42.5 14.0 4.2

Puerto Rico 42.5 14.0 3.0

South Carolina 42.5 14.0 6.2

Virginia 42.5 14.0 5.0

Oregon 42.5 14.0 3.9

Minnesota 42.5 14.0 5.2

New Mexico 42.5 14.0 4.3

New York 42.5 14.0 3.3

Ohio 42.5 14.0 7.3

Pennsylvania 42.5 14.0 4.2

Illinois 42.5 14.0 4.2

Idaho 42.5 14.0 4.0

Wisconsin 42.5 14.0 4.5

(4) Review of significant MSFW local offices: 100% for all significant states;

(5) Field checks on agricultural clearance orders;

(6) Outreach contacts per staff day as determined by the SWA; and

(7) Processing of complaints in accordance with 20 CFR.

Table 4

SIGNIFICANT AND BILINGUAL

MSFW LOCAL OFFICES FOR PY 2003