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

Background: All States are required to use a common set of administrative rules in administering Federal grants for their UI Programs. Because States are changing some of their methods for providing services to the public, including the development of systems for One-Stop Career Centers, the Department of Labor/UIS is issuing this UIPL to ensure an understanding of the existing administrative rules applicable to those grants including those governing such activities as the allocation of costs and audit requirements. This UIPL provides a brief summary of each applicable administrative rule. 29 CFR Part 97 - Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, ("Common Rule") - Attachment I The Departmental requirements applicable to Federal grants and cooperative agreements with governmental entities (State, local, and/or Indian Tribal) are codified at 29 CFR Part 97. These regulations are sometimes referred to as "the Part 97 regulations" and sometimes as "the common rule". The term "common rule" is used because all Federal agencies that administer Federal grants with governmental entities were required to adopt and publish the same set of regulations in 1988. Therefore, a grantee uses the same set of administrative rules in administering all Federal grants regardless of which Federal agency actually provided the grant. Each Federal agency codified the same set of rules (regulations), each in its own portion of the Federal Register. The Department's regulations are found at 29 CFR Part 97. These regulations, coupled with the UI Program Budget Plan (PBP), are the cornerstone of the UI Program's Federal grant management requirements. Sections of the regulation pertinent to the UI program are: 97.3 Definitions. This section defines the terms used throughout 29 CFR Part 97. 97.5 Effect on other issuances. This section indicates that all other grants administration provisions of codified program regulations which are inconsistent with Part 97 are superseded, except to the extent required by statute, or authorized in accordance with the exception provision in 97.6. 97.6 Additions and exceptions. This section sets out the circumstances under which additions and exceptions may be made to administrative requirements covered by Part 97. 97.20 Standards for financial management systems. Only paragraphs (a) and (c) apply to State grantees, including SESAs administering the UI program. Paragraph (a) basically provides that State grantees shall account for Federal grant funds in accordance with State laws and procedures for accounting for State funds, except that procedures must be in place to permit 1) preparation ofrequired Federal reports and 2) tracing of expenditures to document that funds were used for allowable UI purposes. 97.21 Payments. Paragraph (b) of this provision requires adherence to the U.S. Treasury regulations at 31 CFR Part 205, which implement the requirements of the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA). 97.22 Allowable costs. Paragraph (b) of this provision requires UI grantees to adhere to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87 (attachment 2 of this UIPL) in determining costs chargeable to UI grant funds. 97.23 Period of availability of funds. This section, coupled with Federal appropriation language, establishes the "life" of UI administrative funds. As long as DOL continues to specify five quarters for obligating UI funds, then UI grantees have 15 months from the beginning of a fiscal year to obligate the funds and an additional 90 days (quarter) to liquidate any outstanding obligations (see definitions section for "unliquidated obligations"). No expenditures may be incurred or recorded after the sixth quarter unless approval is obtained from the ETA grant officer. UI grantees have 36 months from the beginning of a fiscal year to obligate funds for automation acquisitions (as defined in the PBP) and an additional 90 days to liquidate any outstanding automation obligations. 97.25 Program income. This section defines what is program income, what is not program income, and the allowable uses of program income. 97.26 Non-Federal audit. This section requires grantees and subgrantees to obtain audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act and Departmental regulations that implement the Single Audit Act. These regulations are codified at 29 CFR Part 96 (attachment III to this UIPL). 97.31 Real property. (The definition of real property is found in section 97.3.) This section provides for the use and disposition of real property acquired with UI grant funds. It does not address the allowability of costs incurred for such acquisitions. That subject is covered in OMB Circular A-87. 97.32 Equipment. (The definition of equipment is found in section 97.3.) This section provides for the use, management, and disposition of equipment acquired with UI grant funds. It does not address the allowability of costs incurred for such acquisitions. That subject is covered in OMB Circular A-87. More specifically, paragraph (b) of this section establishes that State grantees, e.g., SESAs administering the UI program, shall follow State laws and procedures for the use, management, and disposition of equipment acquired with grant funds. State grantees are not required to abide by paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this section (unless their own State rules require it). The only other provisions of this section that apply to State grantees are paragraphs (f), Federal equipment, and (g) Right to transfer title. 97.36 Procurement. Only paragraph (a) of this section, which provides that State grantees shall follow State procurement rules, applies to State grantees. The rest of this section is not applicable to States. 97.41 Financial reporting. This section requires submission of both an SF-269 and SF-272 report. 97.42 Record retention. This section sets forth the retention and access requirements for financial and programmatic records to be maintained by grantees and subgrantees. 97.50 Closeout. This explains the closeout procedures after the grant requirements are complete. OMB Circular A-87 - Attachment II This version of OMB Circular A-87 published in the Federal Register on May 17, 1995 replaced the 1981 version. The Circular consists of five Attachments, transmitted by a short cover memorandum from the Director of OMB to the Federal department heads. Circular A-87 is incorporated by reference in 29 CFR 97.22 and thereby governs the allowability of costs incurred for UI grants. Items pertinent to UI grant recipients are: Attachment A contains the general principles for determining allowable costs (costs chargeable to Federal grants). Paragraphs A.2. and C. contain the crucial generic guidelines. Paragraph C.3., for example, contains the basic principles on allocable costs/cost allocation. These principles are rooted in a statute originally enacted in 1809 (2 Stat. 535) which specifies that "Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law." Simply stated, public funds may be used only for the purpose or purposes for which they were appropriated by Congress. Attachment B contains treatment for 42 selected items of costs. For each selected item, Attachment B describes whether it is allowable or not and, if allowable, guidelines on conditions or the extent of allowability, any documentation requirements, and any prior approval requirements applicable to the cost item. UI grant recipients should particularly review paragraph 11., Compensation for personnel services, especially subparagraph 11.h., Support of salaries and wages. Another attachment B paragraph of particular interest to UI grant recipients is paragraph 19, Equipment and other capital expenditures, which addresses the allowability of charging the acquisition cost of such assets as a direct cost to a Federal grant. Subparagraph 19c authorizes Federal agencies, at their option, to waive or delegate the Federal agency approval requirement. Attachment C contains the requirements for submission of the Statewide Central Services Cost Allocation Plan, which must be approved by HHS. Attachment D is not applicable to the UI grant. Attachment E contains the requirements for submission of the Indirect Cost Rate Proposal of the program agency or Department that administers the UI program. Paragraph F.3. was included in this Circular at the Department's request to cover the accounting system/cost allocation approval process that the Department has used for several years with a number of SESAs. It should be noted that General Administration Letter (GAL) No. 4-91 requires States to submit proposals for allocation of the cost of assessing and collecting non-UI or mixed-use taxes with the SESAs' Indirect Cost Proposals. Cost allocation, as it applies to One Stop Career Centers, is also addressed in a Training Assistance Guide (TAG). ETA developed the TAG to provide guidance to the States in developing a cost allocation system within a program environment where several organizations are coordinating or integrating their separately managed programs into a seamless delivery system. The TAG will be tested on a pilot basis in designated States, then the Department will evaluate the results of the pilot. The TAG does not replace or supersede the principles in OMB Circular A-87. 29 CFR Part 96 Audit requirements - Attachment III Audit requirements applicable to UI grant funds are codified at 29 CFR Part 96. The key section is 96.102, which requires audits to be conducted in accordance with OMB Circular A-128, which is attached to the regulations as Appendix A. While most of that Circular pertains to the non-Federal audit that each State conducts annually, paragraph 10 of the Circular addresses the right of Federal agencies to conduct Federal audits. UI Program and Budget Plan (PBP): The PBP is the grant agreement between the State and the Employment and Training Administration, and is a crucial part of the grant process and the attached documents. The Assurances section of the PBP requires the State to administer the UI program in accordance with the attached documents and also provides direction, relief, waivers, etc., within the authorities granted to ETA by the 29 CFR Part 97 regulations and OMB Circular A-87. For example, the PBP delegates the Federal approval requirement for equipment acquisition to the SESA administrator.

Reference: GAL 12-92 with changes 1-6; GAL 4-97; Public Laws 102-164, 102-182, 102-244, 102-318, 103-6, and 103-152. Background: The EUC program ended on February 5, 1994, with no benefits payable for weeks of unemployment after April 30, 1994. GAL 12-92, with Changes 1-6, provided the implementing instructions for EUC based upon Public Law 102-164 and its several amendments: Public Laws 102-182, 102-244, 102-318, 103-6, and 103-152. GAL 12-92 instructed State Employment Security Agencies (SESAs) to report EUC activity, on separate reports including the ETA-227, for four full quarters after the last payable week of the program. Thus, reporting of EUC activity should have been discontinued after June 30, 1995, for most required reports. However, a significant number of SESAs continued submitting EUC Reports beyond the June 30, 1995, cutoff. Subsequently, GAL 4-97 was issued to restate the instructions to discontinue reporting. Despite this reiteration, many SESAs continued to submit separate ETA-227 Reports for EUC through December 31, 1998, at which time the National Office prevented any further electronic reporting of EUC data by removing the data entry screens for EUC. Additionally, GAL 4-97 directed SESAs to combine any residual EUC data with that of the regular program reports with a comment made of this in the remarks section of the reports. This last instruction regarding combining EUC data with regular program data has been reconsidered. For most reports, there is little or no impact on the data because EUC activity has ceased. However, this is not true for the ETA- 227 Report, where out-standing EUC overpayments still exist. If not corrected, adherence to these instructions will have an adverse impact on the records for the ETA-227 reporting system and the performance measures derived from them by distorting the ratio of overpayment collections to overpayment establishments. Revised Instructions: The proper instructions for the cessation of reporting EUC data were those outlined in GAL 12-92. The pertinent points for the reporting and treatment of EUC overpayments are summarized as follows: Make active collection efforts, including offset, to recover EUC overpayments during the three-year period subsequent to the overpayment. During the second three-year period subsequent to an overpayment: Remove EUC overpayments from the accounting records. Retain administrative records of the overpayments. Although offset is no longer permitted, overpayments recovered by other means should be credited to the administrative records. Write off the EUC overpayment record after the second three- year period subsequent to the overpayments. Report EUC activity for four full quarters after the last payable week of the EUC program. Thus, EUC data should never be combined with the data from the regular programs for the ETA-227 Report. Action Required: SESA Administrators are requested to review their records to determine whether the ETA-227 Reports for the regular program contain any EUC data. No further action is necessary if the ETA-227 Reports for the regular program do not contain EUC data. However, if the ETA-227 Reports for the regular program contain EUC data, submit revised ETA-227 Reports (for the regular program only) excluding those data.

References. DINAP Bulletin No. 94-26; A Guide to Smartlink II, Enclosure (1), SUB-ACCOUNT STRUCTURE AND PROGRAM YEAR AND TITLE CODES. Background. Within the next few weeks, most section 401 grantees will be receiving their signed grant documents and Notices of Obligation (NOO's), which will authorize them to operate title II-B programs for the summer of 1996 and title IV-A programs for PY 1996. Grantees who use the PMS to draw down their JTPA funds will need to know and use the following subaccount codes to draw down the appropriate funds. Grantees who continue to obtain their funds through the SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, will not be affected by this bulletin. Action. The new subaccount code for PY 1996 title IV-A funds will be 8L. Because of funding uncertainty and delays, the subaccount code required to access title II-B funds for the summer of 1996 will be 8K, not 6Y as indicated in last year's DINAP Bulletin No. 94-26. The title II-B subaccount corresponds to the planning levels (printout) transmitted to all grantees with DINAP Bulletin No. 95-24. Important Reminders. A. All other previously-issued subaccount codes remain the same, including the "split" subaccounts for title II-B funds for the summer of 1993. As a reminder, the subaccount code for PY 1994 title II-B funds is 5J, and the subaccount code for PY 1995 title IV-A funds is 6X. Grantees are reminded that, when drawing down funds under either title, the oldest remaining funds should be drawn down first, so that as many subaccounts as possible can be "zeroed out." B. Because all carry-in limits have been officially removed, the only exception to the "First In, First Out" (FIFO) rule is when a grantee is transferring funds between different grants (such as from the 99-1 grant to the B-5 grant) and wishes to leave the exact amount to be transferred (by title) in the appropriate subaccount to facilitate the transfer process. Effective date. Date of this bulletin. Inquiries. Questions should be addressed to William Stewart on (202) 219-7798, Karen Tekleberhan on (202) 219-8764, Julia Murray on (202) 219-8793, or Greg Gross on (202) 219-7509.

Background: This report is the first of a series of reports on the National Job Corps Study. The National Job Corps Study is being conducted by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. under contract with the Employment and Training Administration. Its purpose is to measure the effects of Job Corps participation on students¿ post-program earnings and related outcomes. The process report provides a description of the Job Corps program model and how it was operating in 1996. Thus, it describes the context in which the evaluation was conducted. It should be noted that many of the issues raised in the process analysis are being addressed as Job Corps implements the new Workforce Investment Act. Nevertheless, the report should inform and educate policymakers and practitioners about the Job Corps program model. The next report will detail employment and earnings of Job Corps students and controls during the 30 months following random assignment. A subsequent report will describe the benefits and costs of the program at 48 months after random assignment. A conclusive assessment of Job Corps¿ effectiveness will not be available until the 48-month report is completed. Distribution: Copies of this report have been distributed under separate cover to all addressees. Additional copies are available through ETA Regional Offices.

Refernce. DINAP Bulletins Nos. 95-12 and 95-18. Background. DINAP Bulletin No. 95-18 issued initial Title IV-A planning levels based on the House funding level of $50 million. The recently-signed DHHS/DOL/DOE appropriation bill contained a revised JTPA Title IV-A funding level of $52.502 million for PY 1996. Policy. As stated on page 3 of DINAP Bulletin No. 95-18, all carry-in limits previously issued for Title IV-A funds have been withdrawn, including limits imposed on the transfer of Title IV-A funds from the now-expired 99-1 grant (July 1, 1991 to June 30, 1995) to the new B-5 grants which (for Title IV-A purposes) became effective on July 1, 1995. Action. A. FOR GRANTEES THAT HAVE NOT SUBMITTED A PY 1996 CAP: -- Attached are final allocation levels for JTPA Title IV-A funds for PY 1996. Grantees should use the increased allocation levels to complete their planning documents prior to submission to DINAP. -- The due date for submitting CAPs has been extended to May 22, 1996. B. FOR GRANTEES THAT HAVE ALREADY SUBMITTED A PY 1996 CAP: -- Grantees who have already submitted their CAPs to DINAP need ONLY submit a new original revised Budget Information Sheet (BIS). DINAP will accept a faxed revised BIS (Fax number: 202-219-6338). - A new grant signature sheet IS NOT required - A revised BIS is due by the new CAP due date of May 22, 1996. C. IMPORTANT REMINDERS: -- Grantees that have carry over funds from their 99-1 grant must submit a transfer modification, as requested in DINAP Bulletin No. 95-12. If you have already done so, thank you; however, for those grantees that have not, failure to do so will delay the issuance of a Notice of Obligation for PY 1996 Title IV-A funds. -- Grantees that submit their PY 1996 CAPs or revised BIS forms late, the Department will deduct one week's worth of funding for every week late. If your CAP or revised BIS form is going to be submitted late, you need to contact Mr. Thomas Dowd, DINAP Chief on (202) 219-8502 IMMEDIATELY. D. All CAPs and revised BIS forms should be sent by May 22, 1996, to the following address: U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration Division of Indian and Native American Programs Room N-4641 FPB 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20210 ATTENTION: MIS DESK Questions. Contact your DINAP Federal Representative Team.

Background: In today¿s competitive marketplace and complex legal environment, employers face the challenge of attracting, developing, and retaining the best employees. The Employment and Training community is frequently called upon to support employers in these efforts. This Guide provides information that will help employers and workforce development professionals understand and use employment testing and assessment services to meet their human resources needs. The Guide: The Guide is structured around employment and testing assessment principles and their applications. The information is organized so that readers from a variety of backgrounds will find the information clear and useful. Topics covered in the Guide include: Personnel Assessment Understanding the Legal Context of Assessment Understanding Test Quality Assessment Tools and Their Uses How to Select Tests Administering Assessment Instruments Using, Scoring, and Interpreting Assessment Instruments Issues and Concerns with Assessment. The information presented in the Guide will help workforce development professionals evaluate and select employment testing and assessment procedures that maximize their chances for getting the right fit between jobs and employees. The Guide will assist members of the employment and training community administer, score, and interpret the results of employment testing assessment tools in an efficient and effective manner. Importantly, the Guide will help users of assessment tools understand the professional and legal standards that need to be followed when conducting personnel assessment. Availability: The Guide is available in hard copy through the Government Printing Office; phone orders to 202/512-1800. The Guide is also available as a downloadable pdf file from the following web sites: The O*NET Project at: http://www.doleta.gov/programs/onet/ The Office of Policy and Research at: http://www.ttrc.doleta.gov/ETA/research/ The National O*NET Consortium at: http://www.ONETCENTER.ORG Action Required: Please share this TEIN with staff within your organization who require an understanding of issues related to assessments and assessment practices. This may include administrators, lawyers, educators, trainers, personnel researchers, interviewers, employment counselors, test administrators, and other workforce development professionals.

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.