ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

Chinese Immig. Daily

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 

Chinese Immig. Daily



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free
information!

Copyright
©1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:



< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

< Go back to Immigration Daily

[Federal Register: August 3, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 150)]
[Notices]               
[Page 47752-47756]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03au00-94]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

 
Refugee Resettlement Program; Availability of Formula Allocation 
Funding for FY 2000 Targeted Assistance Grants for Services to Refugees 
in Local Areas of High Need

AGENCY: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), ACF, HHS.

ACTION: Final notice of availability of formula allocation funding for 
FY 2000 targeted assistance grants to States for services to refugees 
in local areas of high need.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of funds and award 
procedures for FY 2000 targeted assistance grants for services to 
refugees under the Refugee Resettlement Program (RRP). These grants are 
for service provision in localities with large refugee populations, 
high refugee concentrations, and high use of public assistance, and 
where specific needs exist for supplementation of currently available 
resources.
    This notice continues the eligibility of those 50 counties located 
in 29 States that previously qualified for and received targeted 
assistance program (TAP) grants beginning in FY 1999 as a result of the 
three-year qualification process. The FY 2000 TAP formula allocations 
are based on the same formula as in FY 1999, updated to reflect 
arrivals during the five-year period from FY 1995 through FY 1999. The 
final notice reflects an adjustment in final allocations to States as a 
result of additional arrival data.

DATES: The closing date for submission of applications is September 5, 
2000. Applications postmarked after the closing date will be classified 
as late.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice of proposed allocations to States 
of FY 2000 funds for targeted assistance was published in the Federal 
Register on May 1, 2000 (65 FR 25341).

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13)

    Public reporting burden for this collection of information is 
estimated to average of four hours per response, including the time for 
reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed and 
reviewing the collection information.
    The project description is approved under OMB control number 0970-
0139 which expires 10/31/2000.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gayle Smith, Director, Division of 
Refugee Self-Sufficiency, (202) 205-3590; email: gsmith@acf.dhhs.gov.

I. Purpose and Scope

    This notice announces the availability of funds for grants for 
targeted assistance for services to refugees in counties where, because 
of factors such as unusually large refugee populations, high refugee 
concentrations, and high use of public assistance, there exists and can 
be demonstrated a specific need for

[[Page 47753]]

supplementation of resources for services to this population.
    The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) has available $49,477,000 
in FY 2000 funds for the targeted assistance program (TAP) as part of 
the FY 2000 appropriation for the Department of Health and Human 
Services (Pub. L. No. 106-113).
    The Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) will use 
the $49,477,000 in targeted assistance funds as follows:
    $44,529,300 will be allocated to States under the five-year 
population formula, as set forth in this notice.
    $4,947,700 (10 percent of the total) will be used to award 
discretionary grants to States under a separate grant announcement.
    The purpose of targeted assistance grants is to provide, through a 
process of local planning and implementation, direct services intended 
to result in the economic self-sufficiency and reduced welfare 
dependency of refugees through job placements.
    The targeted assistance program reflects the requirements of 
section 412(c)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 
which provides that targeted assistance grants shall be made available 
``(i) primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment and 
achievement of self-sufficiency, (ii) in a manner that does not 
supplant other refugee program funds and that assures that not less 
than 95 percent of the amount of the grant award is made available to 
the county or other local entity.''

II. Authorization

    Targeted assistance projects are funded under the authority of 
section 412(c)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as 
amended by the Refugee Assistance Extension Act of 1986 (Pub. L. No. 
99-605), 8 U.S.C. 1522(c); section 501(a) of the Refugee Education 
Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub. L. No. 96-422), 8 U.S.C. 1522 note, 
insofar as it incorporates by reference with respect to Cuban and 
Haitian entrants the authorities pertaining to assistance for refugees 
established by section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited above; section 
584(c) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related 
Programs Appropriations Act, 1988, as included in the FY 1988 
Continuing Resolution (Pub. L. No. 100-202), insofar as it incorporates 
by reference with respect to certain Amerasians from Vietnam the 
authorities pertaining to assistance for refugees established by 
section 412(c)(2) of the INA, as cited above, including certain 
Amerasians from Vietnam who are U.S. citizens, as provided under title 
II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs 
Appropriations Acts, 1989 (Pub. L. No. 100-461), 1990 (Pub. L. No. 101-
167), and 1991 (Pub. L. No. 101-513).

III. Use of Funds

    Targeted assistance funding must be used to assist refugee families 
to achieve economic independence in accordance with regulations at 45 
CFR Part 400. The term ``refugee'' includes persons who meet all 
requirements of 45 CFR 400.43 (as amended by 65 FR 15409 (March 22, 
2000)) and 45 CFR 401.2 (Cuban and Haitian entrants). In addition to 
the statutory requirement that TAP funds be used ``primarily for the 
purpose of facilitating refugee employment'' (section 412(c)(2)(B)(i)), 
funds awarded under this program are intended to help fulfill the 
Congressional intent that ``employable refugees should be placed on 
jobs as soon as possible after their arrival in the United States'' 
(section 412(a)(1)(B)(i) of the INA). Therefore, in accordance with 45 
CFR 400.313, targeted assistance funds must be used primarily for 
employability services designed to enable refugees to obtain jobs with 
less than one year's participation in the targeted assistance program 
in order to achieve economic self-sufficiency as soon as possible. 
Under 45 CFR 400.316, a State may provide the same scope of services 
under targeted assistance as may be provided to refugees under 45 CFR 
400.154 and 45 CFR 400.155, with the exception of 45 CFR 400.155(h). 
Targeted assistance services may continue to be provided after a 
refugee has entered a job to help the refugee retain employment or move 
to a better job. Targeted assistance funds may not be used for long-
term training programs such as vocational training that last for more 
than a year or educational programs that are not intended to lead to 
employment within a year.
    States may not provide services funded under this notice, except 
for referral and interpreter services, to refugees who have been in the 
United States for more than 60 months (five years). Specifically, 
States may not provide citizenship preparation services to refugees who 
have been in the United States for more than 60 months( five years) 
using targeted assistance funds.
    In accordance with 45 CFR 400.314, States are required to provide 
targeted assistance services to refugees in the following order of 
priority, except in certain individual extreme circumstances: (a) 
Refugees who are cash assistance recipients, particularly long-term 
recipients; (b) unemployed refugees who are not receiving cash 
assistance; and (c) employed refugees in need of services to retain 
employment or to attain economic independence.
    In accordance with 45 CFR 400.317, if targeted assistance funds are 
used for the provision of English language training, such training must 
be provided in a concurrent, rather than sequential, time period with 
employment or with other employment-related activities.
    Refugees who are participating in TAP-funded or social services-
funded employment services or have accepted employment are eligible for 
day care services for children. For an employed refugee, TAP-funded day 
care is limited to a maximum of one year after the refugee becomes 
employed. States and counties, however, are expected to use day care 
funding from other publicly funded mainstream programs as a prior 
resource and are encouraged to work with service providers to assure 
maximum access to other publicly funded resources for day care.
    Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of the INA, States must 
``ensure that women have the same opportunities as men to participate 
in training and instruction.'' In addition, in accordance with 45 CFR 
400.317, targeted assistance services must be provided, to the maximum 
extent feasible, in a manner that includes the use of bilingual/
bicultural women on service agency staffs to ensure adequate service 
access by refugee women.
    In accordance with 45 CFR 400.317, targeted assistance services 
must be provided in a manner that is culturally and linguistically 
compatible with a refugee's language and cultural background, to the 
maximum extent feasible. In light of the increasingly diverse 
population of refugees who are resettling in this country, refugee 
service agencies will need to develop practical ways of providing 
culturally and linguistically appropriate services to a changing ethnic 
population. Services funded under this notice must be refugee-specific 
services that are designed specifically to meet refugee needs and are 
in keeping with the rules and objectives of the refugee program. 
Vocational or job-skills training, on-the-job training, or English 
language training, however, need not be refugee-specific.
    Finally, in order to provide culturally and linguistically 
compatible services in as cost-efficient a manner as possible in a time 
of limited resources, ORR strongly encourages States and counties to 
promote and give special consideration to the provision of services 
through coalitions of refugee service organizations, such as coalitions

[[Page 47754]]

of Mutual Assistance Associations (MAAs), voluntary resettlement 
agencies, or a variety of service providers. ORR believes it is 
essential for refugee-serving organizations to form close partnerships 
in the provision of services to refugees in order to be able to respond 
adequately to a changing refugee picture. Coalition-building and 
consolidation of providers is particularly important in communities 
with multiple service providers in order to ensure better coordination 
of services and maximum use of funding for services by minimizing the 
funds used for multiple administrative overhead costs.
    The award of funds to States under this notice will be contingent 
upon the completeness of a State's application as described in section 
VIII below.

IV. Discussion of Comments Received

    ORR did not receive any comments in response to the notice of 
proposed FY 2000 allocations to States for targeted assistance.

V. Eligible Grantees

    Eligible grantees are those agencies of State governments that are 
responsible for the refugee program under 45 CFR 400.5 in States 
containing counties that qualify for FY 2000 targeted assistance 
awards.
    The Director of ORR determined the eligibility of counties for 
inclusion in the FY 2000 targeted assistance program on the basis of 
the method described in section VI of this notice.
    The use of targeted assistance funds for services to Cuban and 
Haitian entrants are limited to States that have an approved State plan 
under the Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program (CHEP).
    The State agency will submit a single application on behalf of all 
county governments that are qualified counties in that State. 
Subsequent to the approval of the State's application by ORR, local 
targeted assistance plans will be developed by the county government or 
other designated entity and submitted to the State.
    A State with more than one qualified county is permitted, but not 
required, to determine the allocation amount for each qualified county 
within the State. However, if a State chooses to determine county 
allocations differently from those set forth in the final notice, in 
accordance with Sec. 400.319, the FY 2000 allocations proposed by the 
State must be based on the State's population of refugees who arrived 
in the U.S. during the most recent five-year period. A State may use 
welfare data as an additional factor in the allocation of its targeted 
assistance funds if it so chooses; however, a State may not assign a 
greater weight to welfare data than it has assigned to population data 
in its allocation formula. In addition, if a State chooses to allocate 
its FY 2000 targeted assistance funds in a manner different from the 
formula set forth in this final notice, the FY 2000 allocations and 
methodology proposed by the State must be included in the State's 
application for ORR review and approval.
    Applications submitted in response to this final notice are not 
subject to review by State and area-wide clearinghouses under Executive 
Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.''

VI. Qualification and Allocation

A. Qualification

    The Director of ORR will determine the qualification of counties 
for targeted assistance once every three years, as stated in the FY 
1999 notice of proposed availability of targeted assistance allocations 
to States which was published in the Federal Register on March 10, 1999 
(64 FR 11927). Since ORR determined the qualification of counties for 
targeted assistance in FY 1999, those qualifying counties determined 
eligible in FY 1999 and listed in this notice as qualified to apply for 
FY 2000 TAP funding will remain qualified for TAP funding through FY 
2001 on the basis of the most current five-year refugee/entrant arrival 
data. ORR does not plan to consider the eligibility of additional 
counties for TAP funding until FY 2002, when ORR will again review data 
on all counties that could potentially qualify for TAP funds.

B. Allocation Formula

    Of the funds available for FY 2000 for targeted assistance, 
$44,529,300 will be allocated by formula to States for qualified 
counties based on the initial placements of refugees, Amerasians, 
entrants (including Havana parolees), and Kurdish asylees in these 
counties during the five-year period from FY 1995 through FY 1999 
(October 1, 1994-September 30, 1999). This is data that is available in 
the ORR Refugee Data System.
    With regard to Havana parolees, for FY 1999, the Havana parolees 
for all counties are based on actual data. For previous years, the 
Havana parolees of Florida counties are based on actual data, while 
parolees from other counties are prorated based on each county's 
proportion of the four-year (FY 1995-1998) entrant population.

VII. Allocations

    Table 1 lists the qualifying counties; the number of refugee 
(column 3) and entrant (column 4) arrivals in those counties during the 
five-year period from October 1, 1994-September 30, 1999; the number of 
Havana parolees (column 5) credited to each county during this period, 
the total number of arrivals; and the final amount of each county's 
allocation based on its five-year arrival population.
Table 1.--Final Targeted Assistance Allocations By County: FY 2000 is 
attached.
Table 2.--State totals for final targeted assistance allocations is 
attached.

VIII. Application and Implementation Process

    States that are currently operating under approved management plans 
for their FY 1999 targeted assistance program and wish to continue to 
do so for their FY 2000 grants may provide the following in lieu of 
resubmitting the full currently approved plan:
    The State's application for FY 2000 funding shall provide:
     Assurance that the State's current management plan for the 
administration of the targeted assistance program, as approved by ORR 
in FY 1999, will continue to be in full force and effect for the FY 
2000 targeted assistance program, subject to any additional assurances 
or revisions required by this notice which are not reflected in the 
current plan. Any proposed modifications to the approved plan will be 
identified in the application and are subject to ORR review and 
approval, e.g., if the State assumes local administration of the 
program or if the State chooses to determine county allocations 
differently. Any proposed changes must address and reference all 
appropriate portions of the FY 1999 application content requirements to 
ensure complete incorporation in the State's management plan.

Budget and Budget Justification

     A line item budget and justification for State 
administrative costs limited to a maximum of five percent of the total 
award to the State. Each total budget period funding amount requested 
must be necessary, reasonable, and allocable to the project.
     Targeted assistance performance goals as described under 
Section IX.

IX. Results or Benefits Expected

    All applicants must establish targeted assistance proposed 
performance goals for each of the six ORR performance outcome measures 
for each targeted

[[Page 47755]]

assistance county's proposed service contract(s) or sub-grants for the 
next contracting cycle. Proposed performance goals must be included in 
the application for each performance measure. The six ORR performance 
measures are: entered employments, cash assistance reductions due to 
employment, cash assistance terminations due to employment, 90-day 
employment retentions, average wage at placement, and job placements 
with available health benefits. Targeted assistance program activity 
and progress achieved toward meeting performance outcome goals are to 
be reported quarterly on the ORR-6, the ``Quarterly Performance 
Report.''

X. Reporting Requirements

    States will be required to submit quarterly reports on the outcomes 
of the targeted assistance program, using the same form which States 
use for reporting on refugee social services formula grants. This is 
Schedule A and Schedule C, pages 1 and 2 of the ORR-6 Quarterly 
Performance Report form (OMB #0970-0036).

XI. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13)

    This notice does not create any reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements requiring OMB clearance. The Uniform Project Description 
reads as follows:
OMB No. 0970-0139 Expires 10/31/00

ACF Uniform Project Description (UPD)

Part I--Table of Menu Options

Menu Option: Results or Benefits Expected
Menu Option: Budget and Budget Justification

Part II--The Project Description--Overview

Purpose

    The project description provides a major means by which an 
application is evaluated and ranked to compete with other applications 
for available assistance. The project description should be concise and 
complete and should address the activity for which Federal funds are 
being requested. Supporting documents should be included where they can 
present information clearly and succinctly. Applicants are encouraged 
to provide information on their organizational structure, staff, 
related experience, and other information considered to be relevant. 
Awarding offices use this and other information to determine whether 
the applicant has the capability and resources necessary to carry out 
the proposed project. It is important, therefore, that this information 
be included in the application. However, in the narrative the applicant 
must distinguish between resources directly related to the proposed 
project from those that will not be used in support of the specific 
project for which funds are requested.

General Instructions

    Cross-referencing should be used rather than repetition. ACF is 
particularly interested in specific factual information and statements 
of measurable goals in quantitative terms. Project descriptions are 
evaluated on the basis of substance, not length. Extensive exhibits are 
not required. (Supporting information concerning activities that will 
not be directly funded by the grant or information that does not 
directly pertain to an integral part of the grant funded activity 
should be placed in an appendix.) Pages should be numbered and a table 
of contents should be included for easy reference.

Part III--General Instructions for Preparing a Full Project 
Description

Introduction

    Applicants required to submit a full project description shall 
prepare the project description statement in accordance with the 
following instructions.

Results or Benefits Expected

    Identify the results and benefits to be derived. For example, when 
applying for a grant to establish a neighborhood child care center, 
describe who will occupy the facility, who will use the facility, how 
the facility will be used, and how the facility will benefit the 
community which it will serve.

Budget and Budget Justification

    Provide line item detail and detailed calculations for each budget 
object class identified on the Budget Information form. Detailed 
calculations must include estimation methods, quantities, unit costs, 
and other similar quantitative detail sufficient for the calculation to 
be duplicated. The detailed budget must also include a breakout by the 
funding sources identified in Block 15 of the SF-424.
    Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the 
categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness, 
and allocability of the proposed costs.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 93.584)
    Dated: July 27, 2000.
Lavinia Limon,
Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement.

                       Table 1.--Final Targeted Assistance Allocations by County: FY 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Total       Total FY
               County and State                  Refugees     Entrants      Havana    arrivals  FY   2000  final
                                                   \1\                     parolees     1995-1999    allocation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\2\--------------------------------
 1. Maricopa County, Arizona.................        8,929          818          514        10,261    $1,211,318
 2. Fresno County, California................        1,799            2            1         1,802       212,727
 3. Los Angeles County, California...........       13,313          351          390        14,054     1,659,084
 4. Orange County, California................        8,367           24           19         8,410       992,806
 5. Sacramento County, California............       11,646            4            7        11,657     1,376,117
 6. San Diego County, California.............        6,973          397          344         7,714       910,643
 7. San Francisco, California................        6,288           33           34         6,355       750,212
 8. Santa Clara County, California...........        8,322           47           37         8,406       992,334
 9. Yolo County, California..................        1,341            5            3         1,349       159,250
10. Denver County, Colorado..................        3,085            1            5         3,091       364,895
11. District of Columbia, District of                3,626           15           14         3,655       431,475
 Columbia....................................
12. Broward County, Florida..................          790        1,421        1,287         3,498       412,941
13. Dade County, Florida.....................        7,885       26,710       38,238        72,833     8,597,986
14. Duval County, Florida....................        4,239           21           51         4,311       508,916
15. Hillsborough County, Florida.............        1,654          646        1,142         3,442       406,330
16. DeKalb County, Georgia...................        7,902           12            9         7,923       935,315
17. Fulton County, Georgia...................        5,145          196          153         5,494       648,570

[[Page 47756]]


18. Cook/Kane, Illinois......................       15,790          368          298        16,456     1,942,642
19. Polk County, Iowa........................        3,612            1            2         3,615       426,753
20. Jefferson County,\3\ Kentucky............        3,813        1,353          621         5,787       683,159
21. Hampden County, Massachusetts............        2,281            9            6         2,296       271,044
22. Suffolk County, Massachusetts............        4,285           53           59         4,397       519,069
23. Ingham County, Michigan..................        1,927          647          290         2,864       338,097
24. Kent County, Michigan....................        2,836           73           34         2,943       347,432
25. Hennepin County, Minnesota...............        6,601            3            4         6,608       780,079
26. Ramsey County, Minnesota.................        2,024           10            7         2,041       240,941
27. City of St. Louis, Missouri..............        8,606            1            1         8,608     1,016,180
28. Lancaster County, Nebraska...............        2,378           38           25         2,441       288,162
29. Clark County,\4\ Nevada..................        1,566        1,261          867         3,694       436,079
30. Hudson County, New Jersey................        1,327          665          825         2,817       332,549
31. Bernalillo County, New Mexico............        1,051        1,006          827         2,884       340,458
32. Monroe County, New York..................        2,730          833          452         4,015       473,973
33. New York, New York.......................       42,317          590          531        43,438     5,127,885
34. Oneida County, New York..................        4,698            1            0         4,699       554,720
35. Guilford County, North Carolina..........        2,430            7           10         2,447       288,870
36. Cass County, North Dakota................        1,791            3            2         1,796       212,019
37. Cuyahoga County, Ohio....................        3,600            7            8         3,615       426,753
38. Multnomah, Oregon........................       11,319          776          404        12,499     1,475,515
39. Erie County, Pennsylvania................        1,922            0            0         1,922       226,893
40. Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania........        4,833           44           37         4,914       580,101
41. Minnehaha County,\5\ South Dakota........        1,592            0            0         1,592       187,937
42. Davidson County, Tennessee...............        3,248           54           42         3,344       394,761
43. Dallas/Tarrant, Texas....................       11,248          525          485        12,258     1,447,065
44. Harris County, Texas.....................        8,525          348          137         9,010     1,063,636
45. Davis/Salt Lake, Utah....................        5,135            1            3         5,139       606,662
46. Fairfax County, Virginia.................        3,152            7           10         3,169       374,103
47. City of Richmond, Virginia...............        2,310          103           72         2,485       293,356
48. King/Snohomish, Washington...............       13,378           51           34        13,463     1,589,316
49. Pierce County, Washington................        2,421           10            7         2,438       287,808
50. Spokane County, Washington...............        3,255            0            1         3,256       384,373
                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................      289,305       39,551       48,349       377,205   44,529,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refugees include refugees, Kurdish asylees, and Amerasian immigrants from Vietnam.
\2\ For FY 1999, the Havana parolees for all counties are based on actual data. For previous years, the Havana
  parolees of Florida counties are based on actual data, while parolees from other counties are prorated based
  on each county's proportion of the four-year (FY 1995-1998) entrant population.
\3\ The allocation for Jefferson County, Kentucky will be awarded to the Kentucky Wilson/Fish project.
\4\ The allocation for Clark County, Nevada will be awarded to the Nevada Wilson/Fish project.
\5\ The allocation for Minnehaha County, South Dakota will be awarded to the South Dakota Wilson/Fish project.


   Table 2.--Targeted Assistance--Final Allocations by State: FY 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           State                               Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona...................................................    $1,211,318
California................................................     7,053,173
Colorado..................................................       364,895
District of Columbia......................................       431,475
Florida...................................................     9,926,173
Georgia...................................................     1,583,885
Illinois..................................................     1,942,642
Iowa......................................................       426,753
Kentucky..................................................       683,159
Massachusetts.............................................       790,113
Michigan..................................................       685,520
Minnesota.................................................     1,021,020
Missouri..................................................     1,016,180
Nebraska..................................................       288,162
Nevada....................................................       436,079
New Jersey................................................       332,549
New Mexico................................................       340,458
New York..................................................     6,156,578
North Carolina............................................       288,870
North Dakota..............................................       212,019
Ohio......................................................       426,753
Oregon....................................................     1,475,515
Pennsylvania..............................................       806,994
South Dakota..............................................       187,937
Tennessee.................................................       394,761
Texas.....................................................     2,510,701
Utah......................................................       606,662
Virginia..................................................       667,459
Washington................................................     2,261,497
                                                           -------------
    Total FY 2000 allocation..............................    44,529,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-19649 Filed 8-2-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P




Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: