ILW.COM - Grants For Refugees

[Federal Register: May 28, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 102)]
[Notices]
[Page 36905-36914]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28my02-77]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families

Refugee Resettlement Program; Proposed Availability of Formula
Allocation Funding for FY 2002 Targeted Assistance Grants for Services
to Refugees in Local Areas of High Need

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed availability of and request for comments on
formula allocation funding for FY 2002 targeted assistance grants to
States for services to refugees \1\ in local areas of high need.

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

\1\ Eligibility for targeted assistance includes refugees,
asylees, Cuban and Haitian entrants, certain Amerasians from Vietnam
who are admitted to the U.S. as immigrants, certain Amerasians from
Vietnam who are U.S. citizens, and victims of a severe form of
trafficking who receive certification or eligibility letters from
ORR. (See section II of this notice on ``Authorization,'' and refer
to 45 CFR 400.43 and the ORR State Letter #01-13 on the
Trafficking Victims Protection Act dated May 3, 2001.) The term
``refugee,'' used in this notice for convenience, is intended to
encompass such additional persons who are eligible to participate in
refugee program services, including the targeted assistance program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice and request for comments announces the proposed
availability of funds and award procedures for FY 2002 targeted
assistance grants for services to refugees under the Refugee
Resettlement Program (RRP). These grants are for service provision in
localities with large refugee

[[Page 36906]]

populations, high refugee concentrations, and high use of public
assistance by refugees, and where specific needs exist for
supplementation of currently available resources.
This notice proposes that the qualification of counties for funding
be based on refugee and entrant arrivals during the five-year period
from FY 1997 through FY 2001, and on the concentration of refugees and
entrants as a percentage of the general population. Under this
proposal, nine new counties would qualify for targeted assistance and
five counties which previously received targeted assistance grants
would no longer qualify for targeted assistance funding.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by June 27, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Address written comments, in duplicate, to:
Gayle Smith, Office of Refugee Resettlement, Administration for
Children and Families, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC
20447.
Due to delays in mail delivery to Federal offices, a copy of
comments should also be faxed to: Gayle Smith at (202) 401-0981.

Application Deadline: The deadline for applications will be established
by the final notice; applications should not be sent in response to
this notice of proposed allocations.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 93.584.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose and Scope

This notice announces the proposed 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 by refugees,
there exists and can be demonstrated a specific need for
supplementation of resources for services to this population.
The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) has available $49,477,000
in FY 2002 funds for the targeted assistance program (TAP) as part of
the FY 2002 appropriation for the Department of Health and Human
Services (Pub. L. 107-116).
The Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) proposes
to use the $49,477,000 in targeted assistance funds as follows:
[sbull] $44,529,300 will be allocated to States under the 5-year
population formula, as set forth in this notice.
[sbull] $4,947,700 (10% of the total) will be used to award
discretionary grants to States under continuation grant awards.
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: (1)
Section 412(c)(2) of the (INA), as amended by the Refugee Assistance
Extension Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-605), 8 U.S.C. 1522(c); (2) section
501(a) of the Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 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; (3) 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. 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. 100-461), 1990 (Pub. L.
101-167), and 1991 (Pub. L. 101-513); and (4) section 107(b)(1)(A) of
the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (Pub. L.
106-386), insofar as it states that a victim of a severe form of
trafficking shall be eligible for federal and certain State benefits
and services to the same extent as a refugee.

III. Client and Service Priorities

Targeted assistance funding must be used to assist refugee families
to achieve economic independence. To this end, States and counties are
required to ensure that a coherent family self-sufficiency plan is
developed for each eligible family that addresses the family's needs
from time of arrival until attainment of economic independence. (See 45
CFR 400.79 and 400.156(g).) Each family self-sufficiency plan should
address a family's needs for both employment-related services and other
needed social services. The family self-sufficiency plan must include:
(1) A determination of the income level a family would have to earn to
exceed its cash grant and move into self-support without suffering a
monetary penalty; (2) a strategy and timetable for obtaining that level
of family income through the placement in employment of sufficient
numbers of employable family members at sufficient wage levels; (3)
employability plans for every employable member of the family; and (4)
a plan to address the family's social services needs that may be
barriers to self-sufficiency. In local jurisdictions that have both
targeted assistance and refugee social services programs, one family
self-sufficiency plan may be developed for a family that incorporates
both targeted assistance and refugee social services.
Services funded through the targeted assistance program are
required to focus primarily on those refugees who, either because of
their protracted use of public assistance or difficulty in securing
employment, continue to need services beyond the initial years of
resettlement. 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 (5 years).
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 addition to the statutory requirement that TAP funds be used
``primarily for the purpose of facilitating refugee employment''
(section 412(c)(2)(B)(i) of the INA), funds awarded under this program
are intended to help fulfill the Congressional intent that ``employable

[[Page 36907]]

refugees should be placed in 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. 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.
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.
A portion of a local area's allocation may be used for services
which are not directed toward the achievement of a specific employment
objective in less than one year but which are essential to the
adjustment of refugees in the community, provided such needs are
clearly demonstrated and such use is approved by the State. Refer to 45
CFR 400.316.
Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of the INA, States must
``insure that women have the same opportunities as men to participate
in training and instruction.'' In addition, in accordance with 45 CFR
400.317, 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. The
Director of ORR also strongly encourages the inclusion of refugee women
in management and board positions in agencies that serve refugees. In
order to facilitate refugee self-support, the Director also expects
States to implement strategies which address simultaneously the
employment potential of both male and female wage earners in a family
unit.
States and counties are expected to make every effort to obtain
child care services, preferably subsidized child care, in order to
allow women with children the opportunity to participate in employment
services or to accept or retain employment. To accomplish this, child
care may be treated as an employment-related service under the targeted
assistance program. Refugees who are participating in targeted
assistance-funded or social services-funded employment services or have
accepted employment are eligible for child care. States and counties
are expected to use child care funding from other publicly-administered
programs as a prior resource and are encouraged to work with service
providers to ensure mainstream access to other publicly funded
resources for child care. For an employed refugee, targeted assistance-
funded child care should be limited to situations in which no other
publicly funded child care funding is available. In these cases, child
care services funded by targeted assistance should be limited to one
year after the refugee becomes employed.
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 which 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.
We strongly encourage States and counties when contracting for
targeted assistance services, including employment services, to give
consideration to the special strengths of mutual assistance
associations (MAAs), whenever contract bidders are otherwise equally
qualified, provided that the MAA has the capability to deliver services
in a manner that is culturally and linguistically compatible with the
background of the target population to be served. We also strongly
encourage MAAs to ensure that their management and board composition
reflect the major target populations to be served.
ORR defines MAAs as organizations with the following
qualifications:
a. The organization is legally incorporated as a nonprofit
organization; and
b. Not less than 51% of the composition of the Board of Directors
or governing board of the mutual assistance association is comprised of
refugees or former refugees, including both refugee men and women.
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
of 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
IX, below.

IV. {Reserved for Discussion of Comments in the Final Notice{time}

V. Eligible Grantees

Eligible grantees are: 1. Those agencies of State governments that
are responsible for the refugee program under 45 CFR 400.5 in States
containing counties which qualify for FY 2002 targeted assistance
awards; and 2. those non-State agencies funded under the Wilson-Fish
program which administer, in lieu of a State, a statewide refugee
assistance program containing counties which qualify for FY 2002
targeted assistance formula funds.
The Director of ORR proposes to determine the eligibility of
counties for inclusion in the FY 2002 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 is limited to States which have an approved State plan
under the Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program (CHEP).
The State/Wilson-Fish agency will submit a single application on
behalf of all county governments of the qualified counties in that
State. Subsequent to the approval of the State/Wilson-Fish's agency
application by ORR, local targeted assistance plans will be developed
by the county government or other designated entity and submitted to
the State/Wilson-Fish agency.
A State with more than one qualified county is permitted, but not
required, to

[[Page 36908]]

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 45 CFR 400.319, the FY 2002 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 5-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 2002
targeted assistance funds in a manner different from the formula set
forth in the final notice, the FY 2002 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 the 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

For FY 2002, ORR proposes to continue to use the formula that bases
allocation of targeted assistance funds on the most current 5-year
refugee/entrant arrival data. Targeted assistance services are limited
to refugees residing in qualified counties who have been in the U.S.
five years or less. The Director of ORR proposes to 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). The FY 1999-FY 2001
three-year project cycle has expired. In preparation for re-qualifying
counties for FY 2002, ORR has reviewed data on all counties that could
potentially qualify for TAP funds on the basis of the most current 5-
year refugee/entrant \2\ arrival data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Each time the term ``refugee/entrant'' is used, we refer to
arrival data for refugees and Cuban and Haitian entrants that is
available in the ORR refugee data system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Qualifying Counties

In order to qualify for application for FY 2002 targeted assistance
funds, a county (or group of adjacent counties with the same Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, or SMSA) or independent city, would be
required to either: (1) Rank above a selected cut-off point of
jurisdictions for which data were reviewed, based on two criteria: (a)
The number of refugee/entrant arrivals placed in the county during the
most recent five-year period (FY 1997-FY 2001); and (b) the five-year
refugee/entrant arrival population as a percent of the county overall
population; or (2) have received 3,000 or more refugee/entrant arrivals
during this same 5-year period.
In regard to the first qualification criteria, each county would be
ranked on the basis of its five-year arrival population and its
concentration of refugees, with a relative weighting of two to one
respectively, because we believe that large numbers of refugee/entrant
arrivals into a county create a significant impact, regardless of the
ratio of refugees to the county general population.
Each county would then be ranked in terms of the sum of a county's
rank on refugee arrivals and its rank on concentration. To qualify for
targeted assistance based on rank, a county would have to rank within
the top 50 counties. ORR has decided to limit the number of qualified
counties based on rank to the top 50 counties in order to target a
sufficient level of funding to the most impacted counties.
A county could also qualify for targeted assistance based on
resettling at least 3,000 refugee/entrant arrivals during the most
recent five-year period. Three counties qualified according to this
criteria. ORR decided that counties with 3,000 or more arrivals should
qualify for targeted assistance after analyzing the arrival data and
discovering that there were three counties which ranked high in arrival
numbers (27, 29, and 38) but would not qualify for targeted assistance
based solely on the sum of the ranks formula. ORR concluded that these
counties which ranked high nationally in refugee population were
impacted by high numbers of refugee arrivals, and thus should qualify
for Targeted Assistance.
ORR has screened data on all counties that have received awards for
targeted assistance since FY 1983 and on all other counties that could
potentially qualify for TAP funds based on the criteria proposed in
this notice. Analysis of these data indicates that: (1) 44 counties
which have previously received targeted assistance would continue to
qualify; (2) five counties which have previously received targeted
assistance would no longer qualify; and (3) nine new counties would be
qualified.
Table 1 provides a list of the counties that would remain qualified
and the new counties that would qualify, the number of refugee/entrant
arrivals in those counties within the past five years, the percent that
the five-year arrival population represents of the overall county
population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula
described above.
Table 2 lists the counties that have previously received targeted
assistance which would no longer qualify, the number of refugee/entrant
arrivals in those counties within the past five years, the percent that
the five-year arrival population represents of the overall county
population, and each county's rank, based on the qualification formula.
The proposed counties listed in this notice as qualified to apply
for FY 2002 TAP funding would remain qualified for TAP funding through
FY 2004. ORR does not plan to consider the eligibility of additional
counties for TAP funding until FY 2005, when ORR will again review data
on all counties that could potentially qualify for TAP funds based on
the criteria contained in this proposed notice. We believe that a more
frequent redetermination of county qualification for targeted
assistance would not provide qualifying counties a sufficient period of
time within a stable funding climate to adequately address the refugee
impact in their counties, while a less frequent redetermination of
county qualification would pose the risk of not considering new
population impacts in a timely manner.

B. Allocation Formula

Of the funds available for FY 2002 for targeted assistance,
$44,529,300 would 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 1997 through FY 2001
(October 1, 1996-September 30, 2001). This is data that is available in
the ORR refugee data system.
For fiscal years 1999 through 2001, Havana parolees were derived
from actual data. For fiscal years 1997-1998, INS provided the number
of actual Havana parolees. The State of Florida supplied ORR with the
actual number of these parolees which arrived in Florida. The remaining
parolees were not identified with any other State of arrival. To
account for these arrivals, ORR prorated the non-Florida parolee
numbers to qualifying counties in other States based on the counties'
proportion of the five-year entrant population in the U.S.
If a county does not agree with ORR's population estimate for
refugees and

[[Page 36909]]

entrants and believes that its five-year population for FY 1997-FY 2001
was undercounted, the county must provide the following evidence in
order for ORR to reconsider its population estimate: the county must
submit to ORR a letter from each local voluntary agency that resettled
refugees in the county that attests to the fact that the refugees/
entrants listed in an attachment to the letter were resettled as
initial placements during the five-year period from FY 1997-FY 2001 in
the county making the claim.
Documentation must include the name, alien number, date of birth
and date of arrival in the U.S. for each refugee/entrant claimed.
Listings of refugees who are not identified by their alien numbers will
not be considered. Counties should submit such evidence separately from
comments on the proposed formula no later than 30 days from the date of
publication of this notice by e-mail as an attachment in Excel or other
compatible format to: lbussert@acf.dhhs.gov or via overnight mail to:
Loren Bussert, Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency, Office of Refugee
Resettlement, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Sixth Floor East,
Washington, DC 20447, telephone: (202) 401-4732. Failure to submit the
required documentation within the required time period will result in
forfeiture of consideration.
Counties that have served asylees during the past year also may
submit the following information in order to have their population
estimate adjusted to include those asylees whose asylum was granted
within the 60 month period ending September 30, 2001: (1) Name, (2)
alien number, (3) date of birth, (4) the date asylum was granted, and
(5) country of origin.
(Please note: The file should include the date that asylum was
granted, not the date of entry into the U.S. or the date that the
asylee was provided social services. Only persons granted asylum
between October 1, 1996 and September 30, 2001 may be included in the
file.)
Counties which have served victims of a severe form of trafficking
during the past year may submit the following information in order to
have their population estimate adjusted to include these trafficking
victims: (1) Name, (2) alien number if available, (3) date of birth,
(4) certification letter number, and, (5) date on certification letter.
Please submit the above data on asylees and victims of a severe
form of trafficking served on separate Excel spreadsheets as an email
attachment within 30 days of the publication date of this announcement
to: lbussert@acf.dhhs.gov or via overnight mail to: Loren Bussert,
Division of Refugee Self-Sufficiency, Office of Refugee Resettlement,
370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Sixth Floor East, Washington, DC 20447,
telephone: (202) 401-4732.

VII. Allocations

Table 3 lists the proposed qualifying counties, the number of
refugee and entrant arrivals in those counties during the five-year
period from October 1, 1997-September 30, 2001, the number of Havana
parolee arrivals in those counties for this five-year period, the sum
of the third, fourth, and fifth columns, and the proposed amount of
each county's allocation based on its five-year arrival population.
Table 4 provides State totals for proposed targeted assistance
allocations. Table 5 indicates the areas that each proposed qualifying
county represents. Tables 1 through 5 follow.

Table 1.--Top 53 Proposed Eligible Counties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year
County State arrival Concentration Sum of
total percent ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
44 Targeted Assistance Counties Eligible for Continuation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dade County............................... FL 60,757 2.6963 4
City of St. Louis......................... MO 9,784 2.8100 23
DeKalb County............................. GA 8,887 1.3347 34
Sacramento County......................... CA 10,647 0.8702 35
Multnomah................................. OR 12,048 0.6733 39
Oneida County............................. NY 4,743 2.0143 42
Jefferson County.......................... KY 6,108 0.8806 45
King/Snohomish............................ WA 12,561 0.4877 50
Hennepin/Ramsey........................... MN 10,331 0.6355 51
New York.................................. NY 26,779 0.3344 62
Polk County............................... IA 3,769 1.0061 66
DuVal County.............................. FL 4,989 0.6405 66
Maricopa County........................... AZ 11,174 0.3637 69
Kent County............................... MI 3,893 0.6778 76
Suffolk County............................ MA 4,011 0.5815 77
Fulton County............................. GA 4,332 0.5309 77
Ingham County............................. MI 3,253 1.1646 79
Davis/Salt Lake........................... UT 5,704 0.3788 83
Dallas/Tarrant............................ TX 10,580 0.2887 87
Cook/Kane................................. IL 14,102 0.2439 92
City of Richmond.......................... VA 2,520 1.2741 95
Spokane County............................ WA 3,165 0.7573 97
Santa Clara County........................ CA 5,431 0.3228 98
Harris County............................. TX 9,041 0.2659 100
Fairfax County............................ VA 4,305 0.3263 105
Davidson County........................... TN 3,222 0.5654 106
Monroe County............................. NY 3,351 0.4557 107
Cass County............................... ND 2,113 1.7160 111
Lancaster County.......................... NE 2,314 0.9245 112
Hillsborough County....................... FL 3,434 0.3438 118
Guilford County........................... NC 2,419 0.5745 122
Denver County............................. CO 2,673 0.4819 124
Los Angeles County........................ CA 14,035 0.1474 125

[[Page 36910]]

Philadelphia County....................... PA 3,966 0.2613 126
Erie County............................... PA 2,087 0.7431 132
Hampden County............................ MA 2,326 0.5098 132
San Diego County.......................... CA 5,461 0.1941 134
Minnehaha County.......................... SD 1,740 1.1734 140
District of Columbia...................... DC 2,349 0.4106 141
San Francisco............................. CA 3,866 0.2233 143
Clark County.............................. NV 3,473 0.2524 143
Broward County............................ FL 3,465 0.2135 155
Cuyahoga County........................... OH 3,048 0.2187 169
Orange County............................. CA 3,763 0.1322 184
-------------------------------------------
9 New Counties That Qualify
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onondaga County........................... NY 3,027 0.6604 106
Ada County................................ ID 2,292 0.7617 120
Warren County............................. KY 1,867 2.0179 123
Blackhawk County.......................... IA 1,794 1.4014 129
Erie County............................... NY 3,176 0.3342 131
Palm Beach County......................... FL 3,303 0.2920 134
Pinellas County........................... FL 2,914 0.3162 146
Wayne County.............................. MI 3,997 0.1939 149
Kansas City............................... MO 2,582 0.3177 149
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2.--Counties That No Longer Qualify
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year
County State arrival Concentration Sum of
total percent ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yolo County............................... CA 1,249 0.7444 179
Pierce County............................. WA 2,006 0.2862 184
Bernalillo County......................... NM 1,593 0.2862 207
Hudson County............................. NJ 1,335 0.2192 240
Fresno County............................. CA 654 0.0818 379
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3.--Proposed Targeted Assistance Allocations by County: FY 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$44,529,300
Refugees Havana Total Total FY 2002
County State \1\ Entrants Parolees arrivals final
\2\ FY97-FY01 allocation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maricopa County................................. Arizona........................... 10,211 617 346 11,174 $1,434,040
Los Angeles County.............................. California........................ 13,811 44 180 14,035 $1,801,213
Orange County................................... California........................ 3,737 9 17 3,763 $482,932
Sacramento County............................... California........................ 10,643 0 4 10,647 $1,366,406
San Diego County................................ California........................ 5,441 3 17 5,461 $700,849
San Francisco................................... California........................ 3,852 3 11 3,866 $496,151
Santa Clara County.............................. California........................ 5,418 5 8 5,431 $697,000
Denver County................................... Colorado.......................... 2,670 0 3 2,673 $343,045
District of Columbia............................ District of Columbia.............. 2,335 4 10 2,349 $301,464
Broward County.................................. Florida........................... 585 1,529 1,351 3,465 $444,689
Dade County..................................... Florida........................... 6,486 13,635 40,636 60,757 $7,797,386
Duval County.................................... Florida........................... 4,889 25 75 4,989 $640,274
Hillsborough County............................. Florida........................... 1,678 335 1,421 3,434 $440,710
Palm Beach County............................... Florida........................... 493 1,541 1,269 3,303 $423,898
Pinellas County................................. Florida........................... 2,804 20 90 2,914 $373,975
DeKalb County................................... Georgia........................... 8,871 6 10 8,887 $1,140,533
Fulton County................................... Georgia........................... 4,281 14 37 4,332 $555,957
Ada County\3\................................... Idaho............................. 2,292 0 0 2,292 $294,149
Cook/Kane....................................... Illinois.......................... 13,990 15 97 14,102 $1,809,812
Polk County..................................... Iowa.............................. 3,767 0 2 3,769 $483,703
Blackhawk....................................... Iowa.............................. 1,794 0 0 1,794 $230,237
Jefferson County\3\............................. Kentucky.......................... 3,618 1,594 896 6,108 $783,884
Warren County\3\................................ Kentucky.......................... 1,867 0 0 1,867 $239,606
Hampden County.................................. Massachusetts..................... 2,326 0 0 2,326 $298,512
Suffolk County.................................. Massachusetts..................... 3,880 77 54 4,011 $514,761
Ingham County................................... Michigan.......................... 2,080 752 421 3,253 $417,481

[[Page 36911]]

Kent County..................................... Michigan.......................... 3,422 293 178 3,893 $499,617
Wayne County.................................... Michigan.......................... 3,994 0 3 3,997 $512,964
Hennepin/Ramsey................................. Minnesota......................... 10,318 5 8 10,331 $1,325,852
City of St. Louis............................... Missouri.......................... 9,784 0 0 9,784 $1,255,652
Kansas City..................................... Missouri.......................... 2,544 9 29 2,582 $331,367
Lancaster County................................ Nebraska.......................... 2,306 5 3 2,314 $296,972
Clark County\3\................................. Nevada............................ 1,916 966 591 3,473 $445,715
Erie County..................................... New York.......................... 3,062 73 41 3,176 $407,599
Monroe County................................... New York.......................... 2,456 570 325 3,351 $430,058
New York........................................ New York.......................... 26,233 256 290 26,779 $3,436,743
Oneida County................................... New York.......................... 4,743 0 0 4,743 $608,704
Onodaga County.................................. New York.......................... 2,170 548 309 3,027 $388,477
Guilford County................................. North Carolina.................... 2,403 2 14 2,419 $310,448
Cass County\3\.................................. North Dakota...................... 2,113 0 0 2,113 $271,177
Cuyahoga County................................. Ohio.............................. 3,042 1 5 3,048 $391,172
Multnomah....................................... Oregon............................ 11,135 584 329 12,048 $1,546,207
Erie County..................................... Pennsylvania...................... 2,087 0 0 2,087 $267,840
Philadelphia County............................. Pennsylvania...................... 3,932 14 20 3,996 $508,985
Minnehaha County\3\............................. South Dakota...................... 1,740 0 0 1,740 $233,307
Davidson County................................. Tennessee......................... 3,202 2 18 3,222 $413,503
Dallas/Tarrant.................................. Texas............................. 10,254 171 155 10,580 $1,357,808
Harris County................................... Texas............................. 8,080 600 361 9,041 $1,160,297
Davis/Salt Lake................................. Utah.............................. 5,699 2 3 5,704 $732,036
Fairfax County.................................. Virginia.......................... 4,290 1 14 4,305 $552,492
City of Richmond................................ Virginia.......................... 2,492 16 12 2,520 $323,410
King/Snohomish.................................. Washington........................ 12,547 4 10 12,561 $1,612,044
Spokane County.................................. Washington........................ 3,164 0 1 3,165 $406,187
-------------------------------------
Total....................................... .................................. 272,947 24,350 49,674 346,971 44,529,300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refugees includes refugees, Kurdish aslees, and Amerasian immigrants from Vietnam.
\2\ For FY 1999-FY 2001, Havana parolees from actual data. For FY 1997-FY 1998, actual data for Florida counties; for all other counties, parolees
estimated from entrant arrivals.
\3\ Allocation to be awarded to a Wilson/Fish grantee, if approved by the Director.

Table 4.--Targeted Assistance Proposed Allocations by State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$44,529,300
State Total FY 2002
allocation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona................................................ $1,434,040
California............................................. 5,544,551
Colorado............................................... 343,045
District of Columbia................................... 301,464
Florida................................................ 10,120,932
Georgia................................................ 1,696,490
Idaho.................................................. 294,149
Illinois............................................... 1,809,812
Iowa................................................... 713,940
Kentucky............................................... 1,023,490
Massachusetts.......................................... 813,273
Michigan............................................... 1,430,062
Minnesota.............................................. 1,325,852
Missouri............................................... 1,587,019
Nebraska............................................... 296,972
Nevada................................................. 445,715
New York............................................... 5,271,581
North Carolina......................................... 310,448
North Dakota........................................... 271,177
Ohio................................................... 391,172
Oregon................................................. 1,546,207
Pennsylvania........................................... 776,825
South Dakota........................................... 223,307
Tennessee.............................................. 413,503
Texas.................................................. 2,518,105
Utah................................................... 732,036
Virginia............................................... 875,902
Washington............................................. 2,018,231
----------------

[[Page 36912]]

Total.............................................. 44,529,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 5.--Targeted Assistance Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Targeted
State assistance area Definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona......................... Maricopa County...
California...................... Los Angeles County
Orange County.....
Sacramento County.
San Diego.........
San Francisco..... Marin, San
Francisco, and
San Mateo
Counties.
San Clara County..
Colorado........................ Denver............
District of Columbia............
Florida......................... Broward County
Dade County.......
Duval County......
Hillsborough
County.
Palm Beach County.
Pinellas County...
Georgia......................... DeKalb County
Fulton County.....
Idaho........................... Ada County........
Illinois........................ Cook and Kane
Counties.
Iowa............................ Polk County
Blackhawk County..
Kentucky........................ Jefferson County
Warren County.....
Massachusetts................... Hampden County
Suffolk County....
Michigan........................ Ingham County
Kent County.......
Wayne County......
Minnesota....................... Hennepin/Ramsey...
Missouri........................ City of St. Louis
Kansas City....... Jackson County,
Missouri, and
Wyandotte County,
Kansas.
Nebraska........................ Lancaster County..
Nevada.......................... Clark County......
New York........................ Erie County
Monroe County..... ..................
New York.......... Bronx, Kings,
Oneida County..... Queens, New York,
Onondaga County... and Richmond
Counties.
North Carolina.................. Guilford County...
North Dakota.................... Cass County.......
Ohio............................ Cuyahoga County...
Oregon.......................... Multoman.......... Clackamas,
Multnoman, and
Washington
Counties, Oregon,
and Clark County,
Washington.
Pennsylvania.................... Erie
Philadelpha.......
South Dakota.................... Minnehaha County..
Tennessee....................... Davidson County...
Texas........................... Dallas/Tarrant
Harris County.....
Utah............................ Davis/Salt Lake... Davis, Salt Lake,
and Utah
Counties.
Virginia........................ Fairfax........... Arlington and
Fairfax Counties
and the cities of
Falls Church,
Fairfax, and
Alexandria.
City of Richmond..
Washington...................... King/Snohomish
Spokane County....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 36913]]

VIII. Application and Implementation Process

Under the FY 2002 targeted assistance program, States/Wilson-Fish
agencies may apply for and receive grant awards on behalf of qualified
counties in the State. A single allocation will be made to each State
by ORR on the basis of an approved State application. The State/Wilson-
Fish agency will, in turn, receive, review, and determine the
acceptability of individual county targeted assistance plans.
Pursuant to 45 CFR 400.210(b), FY 2002 targeted assistance funds
must be obligated by the State agency no later than one year after the
end of the Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the
grant. Funds must be liquidated within two years after the end of the
Federal fiscal year in which the Department awarded the grant. A
State's final financial report on targeted assistance expenditures must
be received no later than 90 days after the end of the two-year
expenditure period. If final reports are not received on time, the
Department will deobligate any unexpended funds, including any
unliquidated obligations, on the basis of the State's last filed
report.
The requirements regarding the discretionary portion of the
targeted assistance program will be addressed under separate
continuation grant awards. Continuation applications for these funds,
therefore, are not subject to provisions contained in this notice but
to other requirements which will be published separately.

IX. Application Requirements

In applying for targeted assistance funds in response to the Final
Targeted Assistance Notice, a State agency will be required to provide
the following:
A. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used in
accordance with the requirements in 45 CFR part 400.
B. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will be used primarily
for the provision of services which are designed to enable refugees to
obtain jobs with less than one year's participation in the targeted
assistance program. States must indicate what percentage of FY 2002
targeted assistance formula allocation funds that are used for services
will be allocated for employment services.
C. Assurance that targeted assistance funds will not be used to
offset funding otherwise available to counties or local jurisdictions
from the State agency in its administration of other programs, e.g.
social services, cash and medical assistance, etc.
D. If administered locally, the name of the local agency
administering the funds, and the name and telephone number of the
responsible person.
E. The amount of funds to be awarded to the targeted county or
counties. In instances where a State receives targeted assistance
funding for impacted counties contained in a standard metropolitan
statistical area (SMSA) which includes a county or counties located in
a neighboring State, the State receiving those funds must provide a
description of coordination and planning activities undertaken with the
State Refugee Coordinator of the neighboring State in which the
impacted county or counties are located. These planning and
coordination activities should result in a proposed allocation plan for
the equitable distribution of targeted assistance funds by county based
on the distribution of the eligible population by county within the
SMSA. The proposed allocation plan must be included in the State's
application to ORR.
F. Assurance that county targeted assistance plans will include:
1. A description of the local planning process for determining
targeted assistance priorities and services, taking into consideration
all other ORR-funded services available to the refugee population,
including formula social services.
2. Identification of refugee/entrant populations to be served by
targeted assistance projects, including approximate numbers of clients
to be served, and a description of characteristics and needs of
targeted populations. (As per 45 CFR 400.314)
3. Description of specific strategies and services to meet the
needs of targeted populations.
4. The relationship of targeted assistance services to other
services available to refugees/entrants in the county including formula
allocated ORR social services to States/Wilson-Fish agencies.
5. Analysis of available employment opportunities in the local
community. Examples of acceptable analyses of employment opportunities
might include surveys of employers or potential employers of refugee
clients, surveys of presently effective employment service providers,
and review of studies on employment opportunities/forecasts which would
be appropriate to the refugee populations.
6. Description of the monitoring and oversight responsibilities to
be carried out by the county or qualifying local jurisdiction.
G. Assurance that the local administrative budget will not exceed
15% of the local allocation. Targeted assistance grants are cost-based
awards. Neither a State nor a county is entitled to a certain amount
for administrative costs. Rather, administrative cost requests should
be based on projections of actual needs. All TAP counties will be
allowed to spend up to 15% of their allocation on TAP administrative
costs, as need requires. However, States and counties are strongly
encouraged to limit administrative costs to the extent possible to
maximize available funding for services to refugees.
H. For any State that administers the program directly or otherwise
provides direct service to the refugee/entrant population in a
qualified county (with the concurrence of the county), the State must
have the same information contained in a county plan prior to issuing a
Request for Proposals (RFP) for services.
I. A description of the State's plan for conducting fiscal and
programmatic monitoring and evaluations of the targeted assistance
program, including frequency of on-site monitoring.
J. Assurance that the State will make available to the county or
designated local entity not less than 95% of the amount of its formula
allocation for purposes of implementing the activities proposed in its
plan, except in the case of a State that administers the program
locally as described in item H above. Allocable costs for State
contracting and monitoring for targeted assistance, if charged, must be
charged to the targeted assistance grant and not to general State
administration.

X. Results or Benefits Expected

All applicants will be required to establish proposed targeted
assistance performance goals for each of the six ORR performance
outcome measures for each impacted 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.''
States which are currently grantees for targeted assistance funds
should base projected annual outcome goals on past performance. Current
grantees should have adequate baseline data for all of the six ORR
performance outcome

[[Page 36914]]

measures based on a history of targeted assistance program experience.
States identified as new eligible targeted assistance grantees are
also required to set proposed outcome goals for each of the six ORR
performance outcome measures. New grantees may use baseline data, as
available, and current data as reported on the ORR-6 for social
services program activity to assist them in the goal-setting process.
New qualifying counties within States that are current grantees are
also required to set proposed outcome goals for each of the six ORR
performance outcome measures. New counties may use baseline data, as
available, and current data as reported on the ORR-6 for social
services program activity to assist them in the goal-setting process.
Proposed targeted assistance outcome goals should reflect
improvement over past performance and strive for continuous improvement
during the project period from one year to another.
Final targeted assistance outcome goals are due November 15, 2002,
in conjunction with the ORR Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) cycle.

XI. Budget and Budget Justification

In response to the Final Targeted Assistance, applicants will be
required to provide line item detail and detailed calculations for each
budget object class identified on the Budget Information form--Standard
Form (SF) (424A). 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. Forms may be obtained from the ORR Web site at:
www.hhs.gov/programs/orr.
Provide a narrative budget justification that describes how the
categorical costs are derived. Discuss the necessity, reasonableness,
and allocability of the proposed costs. The Office of Refugee
Resettlement is particularly interested in the following:
A line item budget and justification for State administrative costs
limited to a maximum of 5% of the total award to the State. Each total
budget period funding amount requested must be necessary, reasonable,
and allocable to the project. States that administer the program
locally in lieu of the county, through a mutual agreement with the
qualifying county, may request administrative costs that add up to, but
may not exceed, 10% of the county's TAP allocation to the State's
administrative budget.

XII. Reporting Requirements

States are required to submit quarterly reports on the outcomes of
the targeted assistance program, using Schedule A and Schedule C of the
ORR-6 Quarterly Performance Report (0970-0036).

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

All information collections within this program notice are approved
under the following valid OMB control numbers: SF 424 (0348-0043); SF
424A (0348-0044); SF 424B (0348-0040); Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities (0348-0046); Uniform Project Description (0970-0139),
Expiration date 12/31/2003; Financial Status Report (SF-269) (0348-
0039); and ORR Quarterly Performance Report (0970-0036).
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.
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is
estimated to average 10 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
reviewing the collection of information.

Dated: May 15, 2002.
Nguyen Van Hanh,
Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement.
[FR Doc. 02-13088 Filed 5-24-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P

• 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
• Questions/Comments
• Make us Homepage
• Homepage

Share this page | Bookmark this page