Regional Rulemaking Training

1. Regional Rulemaking Training November 15, 2005 – Boise, ID

2. Rulemaking Training The Intended Audience: AmeriCorps State and National grantees and subgrantees Desired Outcome: Participants will understand the implications of the new AmeriCorps Rule in terms of the development of their 2006-2007 grant applications and the operation of their programs.

3. Rulemaking Training Agenda: CNCS Staff Presentation on AmeriCorps Rule Criteria and Selection Process Sustainability Matching Requirements Match and In-kind Documentation Member Activities Performance Measures and Evaluation LUNCH Aligning Performance Measures Small Group Discussions: Rural Recruitment Implementing the Rule Closing & Evaluation

4. Why rulemaking? The new AmeriCorps rule has four main goals: 1. Make the AmeriCorps program stronger; 2. Better leverage federal dollars; 3. Increase AmeriCorps’ stability and predictability; and 4. Position AmeriCorps for continued growth.

5. When does the rule take effect?

6. What resources are available? • CNCS Website http://www.americorps.gov/about/ac/rulemaking.asp • New AmeriCorps Rule (PDF) • Side-by-Side Comparison of New Rule With Current Requirements (PDF) • Summary of New Rule (PDF) • Frequently Asked Questions (To Be Continually Updated) • State Commission Staff • National Program Staff • CNCS AmeriCorps State and National Program Staff

7. Rulemaking Resources Online

8. Grant Selection Criteria and Process

9. Grant Selection Criteria(Operational 2006)

10. Program Design • Rationale and Approach • Member outputs and outcomes • Community outputs and outcomes

11. Definitions ENROLLMENT RATE = Total slots filled/total slots awarded RETENTION RATE = Total members exiting with an education award/total slots filled

12. Standards for Enrollment and Retention • This year, we consider 90% to be a reasonable rate of enrollment and retention. • If your enrollment and retention figures are below these levels, provide an explanation and describe your plans for improvement. NOTES: Many programs not yet meeting these rates are nevertheless performing well in their individual circumstances. Retention may vary among effective programs depending on the target populations for those programs.  However, in order to leverage our limited program dollars, we expect our programs to strive toward improving their rates of enrollment and retention.

13. Organizational Capability • Sound structure • Sound record of accomplishment • Securing community support that recurs, expands in scope, increase in amount, or is more diverse • May consider: • Age and rate of growth • Resource base of community

14. Outside Information(Operational 2006) • Corporation may consider outside information to clarify or verify proposal information including: • Websites • Corporation system of records • Publicly-available information

15. AmeriCorps Program Portfolio • The Corporation will seek to insure its portfolio includes: • Meaningful representation of proposals representing one or more selection preferences; and • Programmatically, demographically, and geographically diverse programs including: • Innovative programs and • projects in rural, high poverty and economically distressed areas.

16. New Programs Up to 15% of non-continuation competitive funds targeted annually for new programs. • Definition of “new”: organizations that have not received any AmeriCorps funding – including formula funding – for at least the past five years. • This definition aligns with the regulations’ definition of new organizations for the match scale.

17. Old Narratives Screen

18. New Narratives Screen

19. Cost Effectiveness of Programs • Cost effectiveness is based on: • Cost per MSY (Member Service Year) • Other indicators including: • Extent of diverse non-Federal resources • Extent to which you are increasing program share • Extent to which you are proposing broader reach and deeper impact

20. Cost Per Member Service Year (MSY) (Effective 2006) • Cost per MSY for Individual Programs • Budgeted grant costs divided by MSYs awarded (excluding child care and education award) • $12,600 for 2006 • Average Cost per MSY for State Commissions • Budgeted grant costs for all programs in portfolio divided by the total number of MSYs, including EAP, (excluding child care, education awards, and commission administrative grants) • CNCS will review maximum average cost per MSY annually

21. Budget Adequacy? • Budget adequacy is based on: • Program age, or the extent to which you bring in new sites • Location in a resource poor community (rural, remote, high poverty, scarcity of corporate or philanthropic resources) • Location in a high cost economically distressed community • Whether your costs are higher because you are focused on difficult to reach populations, or achieving greater program impact

22. Sustainability

23. What is sustainability? “The Corporation agrees that sustainability includes many elements beyond cost, and has modified rule language in several places to bring greater emphasis on multiple and diverse measures of sustainability.”

24. Examples of Sustainability Strategies • Partnerships • Local support • Program quality • Cost structure • Leveraged resources

25. Match Requirements(Effective 9/6/2005) • Programs must match a minimum of: • 15% of member support (non-Federal cash) (Same) • 33% of operational costs (cash or in-kind) (Same) • In years 4 -10, match increases incrementally to 50% • With waiver - alternative match increases to 35%

26. What Year Are We In?

27. Waivers of Match Requirements The Corporation will consider 2 types of waivers: 1. Waiver of the Regulatory Match requirements (maximum 50% match) to use the Alternative Match table (maximum 35% match) (§ 2521.60) 2. Waiver of any matching requirement in whole or in part (§ 2521.70), also sometimes called a “Statutory waiver”

28. Waiver of the Regulatory Match Requirements (§ 2521.60) Waiver of the Regulatory Match Requirements (maximum 50% match) to use the Alternative Match table (maximum 35% match) • Only existing programs • Request must be made with continuation request for following year’s new grant period (i.e. one year in advance) • Must be unable to meet primary match requirements • Rural or severely economically distressed community • Describe history of fundraising and current plans • If rural, see US Dept of Agriculture Beale Codes, if severely economically distressed community see economic data. Information on both is in Appendix L of 2006 AmeriCorps Application Instructions

29. AlternativeMatch Waiver • Deadline: November 7, 2005 • Questions to be answered: • Program name • Grant Number • County and state of legal applicant address • Justification for requesting alternative match

30. Waiver of Any Matching Requirement in Whole or in Part (§ 2521.70) Waiver of any matching requirement in whole or in part (§ 2521.70), also called a “Statutory Waiver” • Very unusual and rarely done. • Corporation must determine that a waiver would be equitable because of a lack of available financial resources at the local level.

31. Match

32. Member Activities

33. Member Service Activities(Effective 9/6/2005) • Maintains current activities • Adds: • No more than 10% of term of service for fundraising • Volunteer recruitment or support required unless Corporation waiver

34. New WBRS Screen Member Time Log Susan Allison AmeriCorps Program

35. Volunteer Recruitment and Support Waiver Requirement to Recruit or Support Volunteers (§. 2520.35) • Some component of your program must involve recruiting or supporting volunteers (broadly interpreted) • Must request waiver in Narrative and Executive Summary of Application • Must state specific reasons why this requirement would require a fundamental alteration of the program structure

36. Applying for Volunteer Leveraging Waiver

37. Volunteer Leveraging Waiver

38. Tutoring(Effective 9/6/2005) • Requirements apply to any program with primary goal of increasing academic achievement in reading or other core subjects through planned, consistent, one-to-one or small-group sessions. • Articulate appropriate criteria for selecting and qualifying tutors, including high school diploma or equivalent (cross-age tutors exempt); or passing effective proficiency test. • Tutoring Curriculum must be high-quality and research-based, consistent with the instructional program of the LEA or state standards. • Include appropriate member supervision by individuals with tutoring expertise. • Pre- and in-service tutor training required. • Identify strategies/tools to assess student progress and measure student outcomes.

39. Performance Measurement and Evaluation

40. Performance Measures(Operational 2006) • At least one set of aligned measures that relate to program’s primary activity (or area of significant activity) • One output • One intermediate outcome • One end outcome • Corrective action plans if unable to meet PMs • After period of correction, Corporation may take action including suspending or terminating a grant if the program fails to meet its PMs

41. Performance Measures Entry

42. Performance Measures Entry

43. Performance Measures Entry

44. Corrective Action Plans • Must be in writing and include: • Factors impacting your performance • Actions you will take to get back on track to achieve your performance measures • Timeframe • Must be submitted within 30 days of determining that you are not on track to meet your performance measures

45. Evaluation: What and When(Operational 2006) • State competitive or national AmeriCorps grantees with average annual grant of $500,000 or more are required to have an independent evaluation • State competitive or national AmeriCorps grantees with average annual grant of less than $500,000 and EAP grantees are required to perform an internal evaluation • State formula grantee must conduct an evaluation, as required by their state commission • In first competitive recompete application - provide summary of evaluation plan • In second competitive recompete application - provide completed evaluation

46. Evaluation(Operational 2006) • Evaluation must cover at least 1 year • More in-depth, rigorous effort to measure impact • Uses scientifically-based research methods to compare observed program outcomes with what have happened in the absence of the program • Compares outcomes of individuals receiving service with similar individuals not receiving a service or participating in a program

47. Internal versus Independent Evaluation • Internal Evaluation – An evaluation performed “in house without the use of an independent external evaluator” • Independent Evaluation – An evaluation conducted by an independent person(s) external to the program/organization.

48. For More Information • Contact your Commission or National Program Representative • Check the CNCS website frequently for updates to FAQs and other materials

49. Afternoon Options 1:30 – 3:00 pm Aligning Performance Measures (Project STAR) 3:00 – 4:00 pm Small Group Discussion (choose one) • Rural Recruitment • Taking the Rule Back Home (Implementation Strategies) 4:00– 4:15 Closing