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

References: Section 301(a) of the Act; 631.3 of the JTPA Regulations (20 CFR 631.3) published September 22, 1989; Section 1141 of 10 U.S.C. Chapter 58, as amended by the Defense Authorization Act of 1990. Background: Typically, individuals who were discharged or released from active duty with the armed forces were unlike the traditional "dislocated workers" to be served by Title III. For most who left prior to retirement, the limited period of active duty in the armed forces was an expected step in a career path. With the advent of the volunteer army, many individuals who enlisted did so with the intent of making military service a career. With the reductions in Department of Defense expenditures which are now occurring, a number of these "employees" find themselves involuntarily separated from their chosen career. Reasonable questions, raised by several States, are whether members of the armed forces discharged or released from active duty are eligible for Title III, including the Defense Conversion Adjustment Program, and on what basis the eligibility of these individuals should be determined. Section 502 of the Defense Authorization Act of 1990 includes a definition of "involuntary separation," and authorizes benefits and services from the Department of Defense for members of the armed forces who are faced with involuntary separation. The definition of "involuntary separation" from active duty with the armed forces, now found at Section 1141 of 10 U.S.C. Chapter 58, as amended, is provided here: A member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps shall be considered to be involuntarily separated for purposes of this chapter if the member was on active duty or full-time National Guard duty on September 30, 1990, and (1) in the case of a regular officer (other than a retired officer), the officer is involuntarily discharged under other than adverse conditions as characterized by the Secretary concerned; (2) in the case of a reserve officer who is on the active duty list or, if not on the active duty list, is on full-time active duty (or in the case of a member of the National Guard, full-time National Guard duty) for the purpose of organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components, the officer is involuntarily discharged or released from active duty or full-time National Guard duty (other than a release from active duty or fulltime National Guard duty incident to a transfer to retired Status) under other than adverse conditions, as characterized by the Secretary concerned; (3) in the case of a regular enlisted member serving on active duty, the member is (A) denied reenlistment, or (B) involuntarily discharged under other than adverse conditions, as characterized by the Secretary concerned- and (4) in the case of a reserve enlisted member who is on full-time active duty (or in the case of a member of the National Guard, full-time National Guard duty) for the purpose of organizing, administering, recruiting, instructing, or training the reserve components, the member (A) is denied reenlistment, or (B) is involuntarily discharged or released from active duty (or full-time National Guard) under other than adverse conditions, as characterized by the Secretary concerned. Discussion: Included in the definition of "eligible dislocated workers" for Title III are individuals who are terminated or laid off; eligible for unemployment compensation; and unlikely to return to their previous industry or occupation (Section 301(a)(1)(A) of the Act). Following is a discussion of the three parts of this definition as they relate to individuals separated from active duty with the armed forces. Terminated or laid off. Although the provisions of 10 U.S.C. Chapter 58, Section 1141 are not directly applicable to JTPA, the determinations made under these provisions may be relevant when considering the eligibility criteria established at JTPA Section 301(a)(1). Eligible for unemployment compensation. Former members of the armed forces may be eligible for unemployment compensation for ex-service members (UCX). UCX may be considered as a form of unemployment compensation for the purpose of determining eligibility under Title III. However, not all individuals eligible for UCX will meet the "terminated or laid off" criterion discussed above. Unlikely to return to their previous industry or occupation. The Department expects that grantees will be able to follow existing procedures in determining whether a former member of the armed forces is unlikely to return to her or his previous industry or occupation. In summary, the Employment and Training Administration considers that individuals who have been involuntarily separated, as defined in 10 U.S.C. Chapter 58, including those who accept an inducement to leave the military, and are otherwise eligible, are eligible to participate in programs funded under Title III of JTPA. The State or the sub state grantee remains responsible for determination of eligibility under reasonable safeguards (Section 141(i)). Individuals who are separated from the armed forces are not necessarily "involuntarily separated." For example, the definition does not apply to individuals who have been involuntarily discharged under adverse conditions. Also, individuals who voluntarily leave the armed forces, including those who retire with or without an inducement, do not fall within the meaning of the term "involuntarily separated." States and sub state grantees may wish to consult with local veterans' employment representatives (LVERs) or other specialists to identify the documents and/or mechanisms that can be used to make an accurate eligibility determination. Additional information regarding adverse conditions is being prepared by the Department of Defense and will be shared once it becomes available. However, individuals involuntarily separated from active duty through honorable discharges are eligible. Since Title III is not an entitlement, program managers should ensure that retraining services are limited to those eligible dislocated workers who can most benefit from and are in need of such services, as required under Section 141(a) of the Act, and 631.41(d) and 631.51(d) of the regulations. In the case of members of the armed forces who have been recently separated from active duty, this might include those without marketable civilian skills. States are encouraged to develop procedures to determine "most in need" for Title III. Attached for your information is a copy of a document issued by the Assistant Secretary of Defense concerning transition services provided by the Department of Defense. Action: State and sub state grantee policy makers should review existing policies regarding eligibility under Title III in light of this policy clarification.

References: Job Training Partnership Act; Trade Act of 1974. Dual Enrollment: In consultation with the agencies responsible for service delivery in the employment and training system, enrolling TAA participants in the Title III program (if they are eligible) has been identified as a valuable program practice. Both programs offer advantages in delivering services a trade-dislocated worker may need. Closer coordination between the Trade and Title III programs provides a real opportunity to improve the quality of services and to increase customer satisfaction for Trade participants. The enrollment of Trade Act participants in Title III would also respond to some of the recommendations contained in an audit report of the TAA program issued by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in early 1994. The report included recommendations that procedures be implemented that require States to follow up on worker status after program participation and that management information systems be designed and implemented that would provide federal and State managers the necessary data to oversee program operations and evaluate effectiveness. Dual enrollment will make available participant and program data (including employment outcomes) collected for Title III program participants for the dual-enrolled Trade Act participants. In discussions with the OIG and in testimony on the Hill, the Department has identified dual enrollment as an effective way to respond to these concerns. Special Projects: All of these issues will be examined by all of the relevant parties as we seek to improve customer service and ensure quality performance. Nonetheless, the growing demands being placed on TAA training funds and the increased investment in the Title III program as of July 1 provide the impetus for early action on dual enrollment. Without such action, TAA training funds will likely be exhausted before the end of the fiscal year. All States are encouraged to undertake dual enrollment in order to increase the effectiveness of TAA services. The Department is making available Title III national reserve account funds for special projects to help States provide services which may not be available through the Trade Act. Dual enrollment of participants in TAA and Title III is already being undertaken in many States and substate areas. In such areas, the funds can be used to increase the number of persons being dual enrolled, expand the services being provided and to improve coordination between the programs in implementing dual enrollment. Attached are instructions for applying for Title III/TAA special projects. Because of the emergency nature of these special projects, the attached abbreviated application procedures will be used until further notice. Action: A. Recipients of this TEGL should make this available to appropriate officials throughout the State and substate dislocated worker system, and encourage efforts aimed at dual enrollment of adversely affected workers under a trade certification in the JTPA Title III program. B. Applications for funds, including the information required in the attachment, should be mailed to: Office of Grants and Contracts Management Division of Acquisition and Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-4203 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210, Attention: Dislocated Worker Grants, Barbara J. Carroll, Grant Officer. A copy of the application should also be submitted to the appropriate Regional Office. Applications are currently being accepted and can be submitted through December 31, 1994. The applicant should specify the period of award, not to exceed June 30, 1996.

References: a. Unemployment Compensation Amendments of 1993 (Public Law 103-152); b. Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) 8-93, dated April 25, 1994; "Final Planning Guidance for Job Training Partnership Act Title III State Plans for Program Years (PYs) 1994/1995; c. "Implementation of a System of Profiling Unemployment Insurance (UI) Claimants and Providing Them with Reemployment Services;" Supplement No. 1, Supplement No. 2. Background: Implementation of UI claimant profiling is an important component of the Department of Labor's (DOL) comprehensive workforce strategy. Claimant profiling and referral to reemployment services will become a primary way of ensuring early intervention assistance to dislocated workers. Referral of profiled UI claimants will be added to rapid response and other outreach and intake efforts for self-referral as the means by which dislocated workers will access reemployment assistance under JTPA Title III or Wagner-Peyser grants. The worker profiling and reemployment services concept encompasses two fundamental principles: 1. the early identification of UI claimants who are likely to exhaust their UI benefits before obtaining employment and, thus, who qualify as dislocated workers; and 2. the timely referral of claimants identified as likely to exhaust UI benefits to quality reemploy- ment services. This service process is designed to shorten the time required to return to productive, stable employment. It also ensures that dislocated workers who may not have been identified through rapid response will be made aware of services available under both JTPA Title III and Wagner- Peyser, so that they can begin the readjustment process as early as possible. Worker Profiling and JTPA Title III: a. Overall Objectives and Principles. The successful implementation and operation of a worker profiling and reemployment services system requires effective joint planning and cooperative efforts among all agencies and organizations responsible for adminis- tering or operating the unemployment compensation, employment service, dislocated worker and labor market information programs within the State. To be effective, the components of the system -- identification, selec- tion and referral, reemployment services, and feedback -- must be linked and must be developed at comparable levels of quality. A quality process for identification and selection does not accomplish the objective if there is not a quality set of reemployment services to which individuals can be referred. In short, the service process must operate as an integrated system of service delivery and not just a summation of service through two or more components. With an increase in funding from $500 million to $1.1 billion in Program Year 1994, the Department of Labor expects that the JTPA Title III program will be a major provider of reemployment services to UI claimants identified as likely to exhaust their UI benefits. Individuals identified through profiling will have the same characteristics and needs as dislocated workers currently being served through the Title III program. Consequently, the Department does not expect that service to individuals identified through profiling should have any negative effect on the ability of Title III service providers to meet current performance standards. At the same time, the Department recognizes that implementation of a worker profiling and reemployment services system represents a substantial impact on the JTPA Title III program, both in terms of the demand for services and the structure for providing services. The initiative creates an opportunity for using the increas- ed funds in PY 1994 to not simply increase service levels through the existing service approach, but to restructure the service approach to achieve improvements in productivity and service quality. Governors are strongly encouraged to use funds under Section 302(c), which are not subject to the minimum expenditure for retraining requirement, to provide support to the worker profiling and reemployment services system in the State. Governors are also encouraged to work with the substate grantees to explore the issues of waiving the minimum expenditure require- ment for retraining as provided for at Section 315(a)(2) of the Act so that additional amounts of Title III funds can be directed to basic readjustment services. Finally, Governors are encouraged to establish, through the State agencies responsible for implementing this initiative, seamless service delivery procedures so that eligibility determinations are completed, to the maximum extent possible, on individuals before they are referred to specific service providers for reemployment services. b. Specific Implications. Profiling becomes another source of referrals of dislo- cated workers into the Title III service system. The State and substate grantees continue to be responsible for ensuring that services are provided to eligible individuals and in accordance with the provisions of JTPA and the September 2, 1994, Regulations. Because the Unemployment Compensation Amendments create a manda- tory participation requirement for individuals identi fied through profiling and referred to reemployment service providers, the State, as suggested in the previous section, should take steps to ensure that the eligibility of individuals to receive Title III funded services is established prior to referral to Title III service providers. Current policy regarding the point at which eligible individuals must be enrolled as participants in the Title III program will continue to apply. Title III funds may be used to pay the cost of outreach, eligibility determination, and an assessment of suit- ability for available assistance prior to enrollment, but receipt of services beyond these requires that the individual be enrolled as a participant in the Title III program. In the context of the profiling and reemploy- ment services system, pre-enrollment activities can include orientation, a determination of eligibility for Title III services, and review of information to confirm that the individual has been appropriately referred to the Title III program. The implementation guidance on the Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services System states that referral of individuals identified through profiling will occur in accordance with agreements between UI and reemployment service providers on the capacity to accept and provide assistance to such individuals. The Department expects that State and substate Title III program operators will not use this provision as a basis for screening out or limiting the service capacity available for dislocated workers identified and referred through profiling. Rather, this provision will be used to ensure that individuals are not referred to providers who do not have the current capacity to provide services to them. Since UI claimant profiling will become an increasingly significant source of dislocated worker outreach and referral, the Department expects that Title III program operators will be taking steps to improve their capacity to provide quality services to larger numbers of dislo- cated workers and that a significant portion of that capacity will be available to eligible individuals identified and referred through profiling. Availability of Supplemental Funds: The Department is making available in PY 1994 up to $20 million, from Title III funds reserved for the Secretary, in supplemental financial assistance to States to ensure effec- tive implementation of a worker profiling and reemployment services system. These limited resources are available on a one-time basis only and should not be viewed as an ongoing source of financial assistance. Supple- mental funds are available for start-up and quality/productivity improvement costs only. They may not be used to increase service levels to a point which will not be sustainable in the absence of the supplemental assistance. Some of the prototype States have received supplemental funds for early implementation. First and Second Wave States that can demonstrate a need for additional, one-time funds, and have a well developed strategy for improving productivity and service quality for dislocated workers are invited to apply for supplemental Title III funds. Funds will be provided to the designated State agency which administers the JTPA Title III program. Within the State, funds can be provided to and used by any organizational entity which is involved in providing reemployment services to eligible dislocated workers through the State's Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services system. Procedures and Criteria for Award of Supplemental Funds: a. Allowable Uses of Funds. The funds which are available to the States are JTPA Title III funds and must be used in a manner consistent with the provisions of Title III of the Act. That is, funds can only be used for activities and cost items authorized under Title III for eligible dislocated workers. b. Priorities for Use of Funds. Funding requests will be evaluated according to the following criteria: -- First and foremost, the State has made or will make a substantial contribution of State formula (both Title III and Wagner-Peyser) funds to support the reemployment services component for the worker profiling and reemployment services system. -- There is a clear demonstration that the requested funds are not to cover ongoing operational costs related to increased service levels and/or that there will be a fund sour ce to pick up any continuing future operational costs. -- Highest priority will be given to costs designed to improve the long-term quality and productivity of the reemployment service system; and to effectively implement new integrated operational relationships. Such costs could include staff training in improved service methods, implementing technologies and meth- ods by which participants can self-access services and information, and integrated information systems (including the feedback mechanism required in the worker profiling and reemployment services system). -- Lowest priority will be given to funding the costs of direct service staff positions. Proposals which request funds to simply serve more individuals at current, or higher, cost per participant levels will not be considered. In general, requests should not exceed ten percent of the State's PY 1994 JTPA Title III allotment. An appro- priate percentage will vary according to the size of the State 's allotment (i.e., the percent should be smaller for States with large allotments and PY 1994 increases, and vice-versa). The guidelines described in this issuance will be used to review all requests for supplemental JTPA Title III funds from First and Second Wave States. For Prototype and First Wave States which have already received approved supplemental funding, requests for additional supplemental funding will be not be considered, but such States may submit modifications regarding the use of supplemental funds in accordance the priorities de- scribed in this issuance. c. Submission of Supplemental Requests. Requests for supplemental funds should be submitted to: The Office of Worker Retraining and Adjustment Programs U.S. Department of Labor Room N-5426 200 Constitution Ave., NW Washington, DC 20210 ATTN: Maurice Birch The request shall be submitted by an authorized signatory of the designated State agency which administers the JTPA Title III program. A copy of the request should simultaneously be submitted to the appro- priate Regional Office. The format for the submission is included as an attach- ment. d. Award of Funds. All requests from designated First Wave States should be received no later than December 1, 1994. Approved funds will be awarded within 60 days, or by February 1, 1995, as part of or through a modification to the partnership agreement. All requests from Second Wave States should be received no later than June 1, 1995. Approved funds will be awarded within 60 days, or by August 1, 1995, as part of or through a modification to the partnership agreement. Action: States which have developed plans for implementing a worker profiling and reemployment services system, and which require supplemental funds to effectively implement the reemployment services component of the system, should prepare and submit a request for such funds in accordance with the guidelines and procedures described in this issuance. For those States which have already submitted a request for supplemental Title III funds, these requests will be evaluated as submitted unless the State chooses to submit additional or modified information by the indicated deadlines.

Reference: Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 3-94, dated November 10, 1994, section 6.d. Award of Funds (p. 6). Revised Dates: The deadline for the submission of supplemental financial assistance requests for JTPA Title III funds from designated First Wave States has been revised. All such requests should be received no later than December 30, 1994. Correspondingly, approved funds will be awarded no later than February 28, 1995.

Background: Section 143(a) of the 1992 Amendments to JTPA provides that "standardized records for all individual participants" shall be maintained by Service Delivery Areas (SDAs). Such records are to be made available to the Secretary "to facilitate the uniform compilation, cross tabulation, and analysis of programmatic, participant, and financial data, on statewide and service delivery area bases," pursuant to Section 143(c) of the Amendments. The Employment and Training Administration (ETA) has for some time been concerned about the need for more meaningful feedback on whether policies that create changes in program design and client targeting actually result in program improvements. Effective program management is dependent on adequate and timely information on what local JTPA programs are accomplishing and how they are achieving these results. In addition, there has been a need for uniform participant-level data that will address important issues regarding program accountability, such as the scope of services and the nature of employment that JTPA is providing to participants, particularly the hardest-to-serve. These concerns have culminated in the development of the Standardized Program Information Reporting (SPIR) system, which was published in final form in the Federal Register on November 12, 1992. In addition, the Department's Directorate of Civil Rights has issued regulations that may affect reporting and record keeping requirements. To comply with DCR and SPIR requirements, State and SDA management information systems may have to be redesigned. Policy: Section 202(b)(3)(B) provides that funds shall be used "to provide incentive grants . . . If the full amount reserved . . . is not needed to make incentive grants . . . the Governor shall use the amount not so needed for technical assistance . . . ." Pursuant to the authority granted to the Secretary at Section 701(i) of the Amendments to issue procedures necessary for the orderly implementation of the Amendments, the following policy guidance is provided: a. Technical assistance funds under Section 202(b)(3) of the Amendments may be used if needed for MIS redesign to accommodate the SPIR and DCR data collection requirements. b. Incentive funds awarded to SDAs may be used by the SDAs for local MIS redesign, or they may be returned to the State if SDAs wish to participate in a statewide MIS redesign. c. Subject to a. and b., PY 1992 Section 202(b)(3) "six percent" funds may be used for purposes of MIS redesign. In addition, any unexpended Section 202(b)(3) funds from prior years may be used, if still available. d. PY 1992 funds need not be spent in PY 1992. They may be expended for such purposes next year or even in PY 1994 if not expended earlier. Action If MIS redesign is necessary to meet the new SPIR reporting requirements and the nondiscrimination and equal opportunity requirements of the Amendments, States and SDAs may do so immediately, using their "six percent" funds.

References: Sections 162 and 303 of the JTPA; Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 4-93, dated January 27, 1994. Background: TEGL No. 4-93 describes the reallotment process that was used to identify and reallot unexpended formula funds that were in excess of statutory limits at the end of Program Year 1993. Reallotment of funds has been based on expenditure reports submitted by the States. Action: Copies of the attachment should be distributed to appropriate staff. Equitable procedures for making funds available for reallotment, and distribution of funds requirements, are addressed in the notice.

References: Sections 162 and 303 of the JTPA; Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 2-91 dated December 27, 1991. Background: TEGL No. 2-91 describes the reallotment process that was used to identify and reallot unexpended formula funds that were in excess of statutory limits at the end of Program Year 1991. Reallotment of funds has been based on expenditure reports submitted by the States. Action: Copies of the attachment should be distributed to appropriate staff. Equitable procedures for making funds available for reallotment, and distribution of funds requirements, are addressed in the notice.

Reference: Job Training Amendments of 1992. Background: Section 121(a)(2) of the JTPA provides that "Any State seeking financial assistance under this Act shall submit a GCSSP for two program years to the Secretary describing the use of all resources provided to the State and its service delivery areas under this Act...." Section 121(b)(7) requires that a modification to the GCSSP be submitted by the Governor to the Secretary if major changes occur in labor market conditions, funding, or other factors during the period covered by the plan. Since the States' submission in May 1992 of the GCSSP's for Program Years 1992 and 1993, the JTPA Amendments of 1992 have been enacted, requiring major changes to Title II programs for Program Year 1993. Section 104(c) states that "If changes in labor market conditions, funding, or other factors require substantial deviation from an approved job training plan, the private industry council and the appropriate chief elected official... shall submit a modification of such plan....." Accordingly, all Governors are expected to review the following sections of the Amendments and interim final regulations and, where appropriate, modify the State's GCSSP for PY 1993. Development of modifications shall proceed on the basis of the statutory language and interim final regulations. In addition, all Governors of single State service delivery areas (SDA's) must modify the State's job training plan. JTPA Amendments of 1992: Modifications to the State's current GCSSP, and, as appropriate, the Statewide Service Delivery Area Job Training Plan, are necessary as a result of the following sections of the 1992 Amendments: a. Private Industry Council Section 627.475 of the JTPA regulations provide that the Governor shall establish general standards for Private Industry Council (PIC) oversight responsibilities. The required PIC standards shall be included in the GCSSP. (20 CFR 627.475) b. Governor's Coordination and Special Services Plans Section 121 (b)(2). The GCSSP shall describe the measures taken by the State to ensure coordination and avoid duplication between agencies administering the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program and programs under Title II in the planning and delivery of services. The plan shall describe the procedures developed by the State to ensure that the State JOBS plan is consistent with the coordination criteria specified in this plan; and shall identify the procedures developed to provide for the review of the JOBS plan by the State Job Training Coordinating Council (SJTCC). Section 121(b)(3). The Plan shall describe the projected use of resources, including oversight of program performance, program administration, and program financial management, capacity building, priorities and criteria for State incentive grants, and performance goals for State-supported programs. The description of capacity building shall include the Governor's plans for technical assistance to SDA's and service providers, interstate technical assistance and training arrangements, other coordinated technical assistance arrangements undertaken pursuant to the direction of the Secretary, and as applicable, research and demonstration projects. c. State Education Coordination and Grants Section 123 requires the Governor to allocate 8 percent of the State's funds to any State education agency in accordance with a jointly agreed upon plan. Pursuant to Section 123(c), the Governor shall include in the GCSSP a description of the use of State's 8 percent funds in conformance with Section 123 of the Act and 20 CFR 628.205 and 628.315 of the regulations. d. State Human Resource Investment Council Section 701 of the JTPA, as amended, authorizes the establishment of a State Human Resource Investment Council (HRIC) to advise the Governor on coordination of Federal human resource programs within the State. The HRIC may replace existing State councils dealing with Federal human resource programs. The option for the Governor to designate the HRIC to carry out the responsibilities of the SJTCC, in lieu of establishing a SJTCC, is authorized at Section 122(d)(1) of JTPA, as amended. (20 CFR 628.215) e. Services for Older Workers Section 202(c)(1)(D) of JTPA, as amended, specifies a 5 percent set-aside to support Services to Older Individuals. Plans for the use of-such funds for PY 93 shall be developed in accordance with Section 204(d) of JTPA, as amended, and 20 CFR 628.320. f. Linkages Section 205 of JTPA, as amended, requires SDA's to establish appropriate linkages with federally authorized programs including: the Adult Education Act; the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Wagner-Peyser Act; JOBS; the Food Stamp Act; the National Apprenticeship Act; the U.S. Housing Act; the National Literacy Act of 1991; Head Start; Title V of the Older Americans Act, and other provisions of JTPA. Additionally, SDA's are required to establish other appropriate linkages with other organizations and agencies, such as State and local educational agencies, local service agencies, public housing agencies, community organizations, business and labor groups, volunteer groups working with disadvantaged adults, and other training, education, employment, economic development and social service programs. ~Section 205 and 20 CFR 627.220) Nontraditional Employment for Women: The Nontraditional Employment for Women (NEW) Act requires SDAs toinclude goals in their PY 92 and 93 plans. Such goals have been included in most of the GCSSPs submitted by Governors for PY 92-93. While the Amendments do not specifically require changes to the NEW goals, the general changes in program design and targeting of services may result in changes to the NEW goals included in the GCSSP for PY 93. Furthermore, Governor's staffs may find that the goals initially set warrant refinement, given the relatively short period provided for the initial goal setting. Accordingly, Governors should consider refinement of their NEW goals in the development and submission of this modification. Format: Given the wide variety of approaches taken by the States in constructing the GCSSP and the Job Training Plan, the Department believes that it would be more expeditious if a common outline was followed. Therefore, we are Re guesting that these modifications adhere to the attached outlines. Submittal: Modifications to the PY 1992/1993 GCSSP's and the Statewide Service Delivery Area Job Training Plans must be submitted for receipt by the Administrator, Office of Job Training Programs, by May 15, 1993. Also, a copy should be sent to the appropriate ETA Regional Office. Burden Hours Estimates: The National Office estimates that the burden estimate of 40 hours includes time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

References: Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 49); 20 CFR 652 and 20 CFR 653; Job Training Partnership Act, Sections 202, 252, 262, 302, and 601, as amended by the Job Training Reform Amendments Act of 1992; Training and Employment Guidance Letter (TEGL) No. 4-88. Background: Title II-A was divided into two separate programs (II-A and II-C) under the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The revised Title II-A is the Adult Training Program, and the new Title II-C is the Youth Training Program. The JTPA Titles II-A, II-C and III allotments, and the Wagner-Peyser preliminary planning estimates, are for the program period July 1, 1993 through June 30, 1994. The Title II-B allotments are for the 1993 summer period ending September 30, 1993. These JTPA allotments and the Wagner-Peyser preliminary planning estimates will be published in the Federal Register. The allotments for Title II-B total $682,912,000, approximately the same as the previous year's level without the Emergency Supplemental appropriations. The Congress provided 1993 Summer Youth funds in two amounts totaling $682,912,000: $495,212,000 is from the PY 1992 appropriation and became available for obligation on July 1, 1992; and $187,700,000 was made available for obligation on October 1, 1993, thus it is a Fiscal Year 1993 appropriation. This requires that the funds be issued separately on the Notice of Obligation (NOO), and that States draw funds from the Payment Management System for each separate fund source. Separate financial reporting will not be required, however. The allotments for Titles II-A, II-C, and III, and the ES preliminary planning estimates, are part of the Fiscal Year 1993 funds appropriated by the Department of Labor Appropriations Act, 1993, P.L. 102-394, for PY 1993. These appropriations include $1,045,021,000 for Title II-A and $696,682,000 for Title II-C, a 1.79 percent reduction from the PY 1992 Title II-A level; $517,046,000 for Title III, a 1.9 percent reduction from PY 1992; and $810,960,000 for allotments to States under Wagner-Peyser, a 1.3 percent reduction from PY 1992. An additional $3,831,000 has been appropriated for Title II programs in rural concentrated employment programs (RCEPs). Distribution of funds for the RCEPs is discussed below under item 5. Attached for your information is a copy of the letter sent to each Governor (Attachment I) transmitting the allotments and planning estimates. JTPA/ES Joint planning and Coordination Provisions: Each State should develop plans in accordance with relevant statutory provisions and schedules issued by the Department. Particular attention should be given to the Governor's statement of goals and objectives for JTPA, and joint ES/JTPA planning initiatives (see Section 8(b) of the Wagner-Peyser Act, as amended). Employment Service plans should foster the delivery of quality services to job seekers and employers by providing: relevant labor market information to job seekers, employers, and other users in the local labor market; enhanced employability services, e.g., counseling, assessment, referral to training, and other needed services; and other appropriate services responsive to State economic needs and conditions. RCEP States: Additional funds are available to assure, to the maximum extent possible, that funding for RCEPs under Title II programs is maintained at prior year levels. The Department previously reserved $250,000 from PY 1992 RCEP funds to be used for this purpose in the CY 1993 summer program. The RCEP appropriation for PY 1993 is $3,831,000. Of this amount, $250,000 is being reserved for the CY 1994 summer program. Therefore, $3,581,000 will be available for PY 1993 Titles II-A and II-C programs. It will be necessary for the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin to provide the Department with the amount of the Titles II-A, II-B, and II-C RCEP allocations based on the allotments contained in this Training and Employment Guidance Letter. This information should be sent no later than March 5, 1993, to the following address: Mr. Hugh Davies Acting Director Office of Employment and Training Programs 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Room N-4703 Washington, D.C. 20210 Notices of Obligation (NOO): NOOs for the 1993 Title II-B summer youth program, including the additional funds for RCEPs, will be issued in April. NOOs for the PY 1993 Titles II-A, II-C, and III programs will be issued for all funds on July 1, 1993. These NOOs will include the additional Titles II-A and II-C funds for the RCEPs. A second NOO will be issued to each State after November 1 for Title III, to increase or reduce the funds available to the State to reflect the amount of reallotted funds the State gains or loses, as discussed in TEGL No. 4-88. Title II-A Allotments: Attachment II shows the PY 1993 JTPA Title II-A allotments by State. For all States, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, the following data were used in computing the allotments: -- Data for Areas of Substantial Unemployment (AS Us) are averages for the 12-month period, July 1991 through June 1992. -- The number of excess unemployed individuals or the ASU excess (depending on which is higher) are averages for this same 12-month period. -- The economically disadvantaged adult data (age 2272, excluding college students and military) are from the 1990 Census. This data will be made available on diskette to the State JTPA Liaisons. The demographics will also be rolled up to the Service Delivery Area (SDA) level. The allotments for the Insular Areas, including the Freely Associated States, are based on unemployment data from the 1990 census, or if not available, the most recent data available. A 90-percent relative share "hold-harmless" of the Title II-A PY 1992 allotments for these areas and a minimum allotment of $75,000 were also applied in determining the allotments. This minimum amount equals 60 percent of the old Title II-A minimum allotment since the JTPA Amendments of 1992 divided Title II-A into Titles II-A and II-C, and the Title II-A appropriation is 60 percent of the sum of Titles II-A and II-C. Title II-A funds are to be distributed among designated SDAs according to the statutory formula contained in Section 202(b) of JTPA, as amended by Section 701(c) of the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The formula specified by Section 701(c) of the Amendments is used since the FY 1993 appropriation level meets the conditions of that Section. This is the same formula which has been used in previous program years. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title II-B Allotments: Attachment III shows the 1993 JTPA Title II-B allotments by State and by fund source, with totals. The data used for these allotments are the same data as were used for Title II-A and II-C allotments, except for the number of economically disadvantaged. The total number of economically disadvantaged individuals (including college and military) from the 1990 census was used. This follows the "old" definition of "economically disadvantaged" rather than the definition found in the 1992 Amendments which will not be in effect until July 1, 1993, and therefore is not applicable to these Title II-B allotments. For the Insular Areas and Native Americans, the amount is based on the percentage of Title II-B funds each received during the previous summer. Title II-B funds for the 1993 Summer program are to be distributed among designated SDAs in accordance with the statutory formula contained in Section 252(b) of JTPA, prior to the Amendments of 1992. This is the same formula that has been used in previous program years. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title II-C Allotments: Attachment IV shows the 1993 JTPA Title II-C allotments by State. The data used for these allotments are the same data as were used for Title II-A allotments, except that the number of economically disadvantaged youth (age 16-21, excluding college and military) is used rather than the number of adults. The allotments for the Insular Areas, including the Freely Associated States, are based on unemployment data from the 1990 census or, if not available, the most recent data available. A 90-percent relative share "hold-harmless" of the PY 1992 Title II-A allotments for these areas and a minimum allotment of $50,000 were also applied in determining the allotments. This minimum amount equals 40 percent of the old Title II-A minimum allotment,since the JTPA Amendments of 1992 divided Title II-A into Titles II-A and II-C, and the Title II-C appropriation is 40 percent of the sum of Titles II-A and II-C. Title II-C funds are to be distributed among designated SDAs according to the statutory formula contained in Section 262(b) of JTPA, as amended by Section 701(f) of the JTPA Amendments of 1992. The formula specified by Section 701(f) of the Amendments is used since the FY 1993 appropriation level meets the conditions of that Section. In determining any necessary hold-harmless levels for SDAs, the States of Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin shall not include any additional funds provided for RCEPs. Title III Allotments: Attachment V shows the PY 1993 JTPA Title III allotments by State. The total appropriation includes 80 percent allotted by formula to the States, and 20 percent for the National Reserve, including funds allotted to the Insular Areas. Title III formula funds are to be distributed to State and sub state grantees in accordance with the provisions in Section 302(c) and (d) of JTPA, as amended. The unemployment data used for computing these State allotments, relative numbers of unemployed and relative numbers of excess unemployed, are averages for the October 1991 through September 1992 period. Long-term unemployed data used were for CY 1991. Allotments for the Insular Areas are based on the PY 1993 Title II-A allotments for these areas. Reallotments: Re allotments of these published Title III formula funds, as provided for by Section 303 of JTPA, as amended, will be based on completed program year expenditure reports submitted by the States and received by October 1, 1993. Title III allotments will be adjusted upward or downward, based on whether the State is eligible to share in reallotted funds or is subject to recapture. ES Planning Estimates: Attachment VI shows ES planning estimates for PY 1993 which have been produced using the formula set forth at Section 6 of the Wagner-Peyser Act, 29 U.S.C. 49e. These preliminary estimates are based on averages for the most current 12 months ending September 1992 for each State's share of the civilian labor force (CLF) and unemployment. Final planning estimates will be published in the Federal Register within 90 days, based on Calendar Year 1992 data, as required by the Wagner-Peyser Act. The total planning estimate does not include $19,138,700 or 2.36 percent of the total amount available. This amount is withheld from distribution to States to finance postage costs associated with the conduct of Employment Service business. The Department is proposing in a Federal Register Notice, soon to be published, that it will allocate postage resources to the States effective October 1, 1993. For information purposes, Attachment VII reflects the preliminary planning estimates including postage distribution to States for three quarters of PY 1993 (October 1, 1993 - June 30, 1994). A final decision on whether to allocate postage resources to the States will be made prior to the final allocations. The Secretary of Labor has set aside 3 percent of the total available funds to assure that each State will have sufficient resources to maintain statewide employment services, as required under Section 6(b)(4) of the Wagner-Peyser Act. In accordance with this provision, $23,754,639 is set aside for the administrative formula allocation. These set aside funds are included in the total planning estimate. Set aside funds are distributed in two steps to States which have lost in relative share of resources from the prior year. In step one, States which have a CLF below one million and are below the median CLF density are maintained at 100 percent of their relative share of prior year resources. All remaining funds are distributed on a pro rat a basis in step two to all other States losing in relative share from the prior year but which do not meet the size and density criteria for step one. Ten percent of the total sums allotted to each State shall be reserved for use by the Governor to provide performance incentives for public ES offices; services for groups with special needs; and for the extra costs of exemplary models for delivering job services. Action: a. Title II-A allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e) and 202(b) of JTPA, as amended. b. Title II-B allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e), and 252(b) of JTPA, prior to JTPA Amendments of 1992. c. Title II-C allotments are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 162(e) and 262(b) of JTPA, as amended. d. Title III funds are subject to the distribution requirements contained in Sections 302(c) and (d) of JTPA, as amended. e. RCEP States should forward the following information to the address listed in item ; above not later than March 5, 1993: (1) PY 1993 Titles II-A and II-C formula allocations for the RCEPs in Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin. (2) CY 1993 Title II-B formula allocations for RCEPs in these States. f. States should initiate PY 1993 planning consistent with provisions of the Wagner-Peyser Act and Federal Regulations at 20 CFR Part 652.