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

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