# Corporation Grant Programs and Support and Investment Activities

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-322

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Proposed Rule
- **Published:** January 7, 1994
- **Citation:** 59 FR 1194

## Text

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National and Community Service (the
Corporation) is issuing this rule concerning the Corporation's
grantmaking programs and various support and investment activities as
authorized by the National and Community Service Act of 1990, as
amended by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (the
Act). The activities and grants described in this rule are designed to
help address the Nation's human, educational, environmental, and public
safety needs through national and community service. This rulemaking
describes the different types of national and community service
programs the Corporation may support, funding available for those
programs, processes by which grants will be awarded, training and
technical support services available for program development and
applications, and Corporation plans to invest in service
infrastructure.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule, as well as the draft
applications, must be received no later than February 7, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to the Corporation for National and
Community Service, P.O. Box 34680, Washington, DC 20043-4680. Comments
received may also be inspected at the Corporation for National and
Community Service, Office of the General Counsel, Room 9200, 1100
Vermont Avenue, Washington, DC 20525, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
The Corporation also will make available copies of drafts of
applications for programs described in these regulations. These
applications may be obtained by writing to the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Russell, (202) 606-4949 (Voice)
or (202) 606-5256 (TDD), between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time. For individuals with disabilities, information will be
made available in alternative formats, upon request.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Supplementary Information section
explains the basis and purpose of the proposed regulations--providing a
context for understanding the policy decisions that underly them--and
provides information on the Corporation's plans for fiscal year 1994.
This Supplementary Information section should not be viewed as
comprehensive. Congress made numerous policy decisions that went into
the writing of the Act. These decisions, along with minor decisions
made by the Corporation in interpreting the Act, are not discussed.

Invitation to Comment

Regulations

The Corporation invites written comments on the text of the
proposed regulations and requests that the comments identify the
specific regulatory provisions to which they relate. However, comments
on the Supplementary Information section should focus on policy issues
rather than specific language or construction.

Applications

Interested parties may obtain copies of drafts of the various grant
applications from the Corporation as they become available. These
applications will be in draft form, however, and should not be used to
apply for funds. The forms are being reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget. We estimate that, on average, it will take
approximately ten hours to fill out each of the forms. Any comments on
the forms should be sent as soon as possible to the Corporation at the
above address, as well as to the U.S. Office of Management and Budget,
Attention: Steve Semenuk, New Executive Office Building, room 3001,
Washington, DC 20503.

The Corporation's Mission and the Purpose of This Rule

Overall Mission

The Corporation's mission is to engage Americans of all ages and
backgrounds in community-based service. This service will address the
Nation's educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs to
achieve direct and demonstrable results. In doing so, the Corporation
will foster civic responsibility, strengthen the ties that bind us
together as a people, and provide educational opportunity for those who
make a substantial commitment to service.

Purpose of this Rule

The purpose of this rule is to establish policies and procedures
for the activities the Corporation will undertake to achieve the goals
described above. This rule should serve as a guide to explain the
eligibility requirements, application processes, selection criteria,
program requirements, and other relevant information for individuals,
programs, public and private nonprofits, institutions of higher
education, States, Indian tribes, and other entities wishing to
participate.

Impact of Programs

All programs under the National and Community Service Act have in
common the goal of achieving three types of impact: ``getting things
done,'' improving the lives of participants, and strengthening the ties
that bind communities together. All programs, whether they involve
elementary school children or senior citizens, are equally able to
achieve the last ``community-building'' impact--by involving people of
different backgrounds together in a common effort, by promoting civic
responsibility so that every member of a community feels responsibility
for its stewardship, and by breaking down barriers of mistrust and
misunderstanding. The other two impacts are weighted differently for
different program types based on the age and experience of the
participants.
At the one extreme, the service-learning programs for school-age
youth may indeed help to solve the pressing problems of communities,
but their primary impact will be and should be on the lives of the
participants. They should improve their educational motivation and
achievement, citizenship skills, teamwork, and problem solving
abilities. At the other extreme, for a professional corps of adults who
are highly educated and highly skilled, the primary impact must be on
getting things done in communities, with the receipt of an educational
award for loan repayment as the main participant impact. Given the
higher costs of these programs and the advanced education level of the
participants, it is imperative that the work they do be highly valued
by communities and the Nation. Programs like youth corps, which lie
somewhere in the middle in terms of age and education level of
participants, should achieve a balance of impacts. By keeping this
calculus in mind, potential applicants can appropriately gauge the
amount of program resources that should be dedicated to participant
education, life skills training, and other types of participant
support.

STATE PLAN ISSUES

(1) General Purpose

Section 178(e) of the Act requires every State Commission to
prepare a national service plan (the ``State Plan'') for submission to
the Corporation for approval. The law requires that the State Plan (a)
be developed through an open and public process that ensures outreach
to diverse community-based agencies that serve underrepresented
populations, and (b) cover a three year period and be updated annually.
With the exception of section 122(c) of the Act, which requires each
State to establish State-based priorities through the State Plan, the
law is silent as to the overall purpose and content of the plan itself.
In part 2513 of this rule, the Corporation has clarified the
purpose of the State Plan, indicating the information it must contain
and the criteria by which it will be evaluated. In general, the
Corporation intends for the State Plan to be an essential component of
a State's overall application; it should indicate a State's strategy
for supporting national and community service activities--including
proposed programs and other volunteer activities--within the State. The
State Plan is intended to bring diverse constituencies within the State
together for the purpose of promoting and supporting national and
community service, and it will be a factor in the Corporation's
evaluation of State applications.

(2) Development of the State Plan

The State Plan should be developed through an open, public and
inclusive process (such as through regional forums, hearings, or other
means) that provides for maximum participation and input from national
and community service programs within the State and other interested
individuals, including representatives of the private sector,
organizations involved in meeting educational, public safety, human,
and environmental needs, community-based organizations, and
constituencies that might not otherwise be formally involved with
national and community service programs. The State Plan should also be
developed in a non-partisan, non-political manner.

(3) Required Components

Section 2513.30 of this rule details the required components of the
State Plan. The following information is provided as supplemental
information on three aspects of the Plan:
(a) Overview of State experience and ``historical context'' for
service programming. The State Plan, especially in the first year,
should provide a context for understanding the development of national
and community service activities within the State, including the extent
to which the State has been involved in the development or support of
such activities. It should also provide an overview of the broad array
of organized service activities within the State, including, to the
extent practicable, activities not funded by the Corporation. The
primary goal for this section is to gain a ``snapshot'' of service
within the State, and to determine the extent to which States have an
established infrastructure to support high quality national and
community service programs, including the capacity to provide technical
assistance to prospective applicants and funded programs. In this
regard, the Plan will provide a baseline against which the Corporation
may assess future progress and activities.
(b) Establishment of goals and priorities. This section of the plan
should detail the goals and strategies identified by the State to
achieve the purposes of the Plan set forth above. In addition, any
State priorities that will govern the programs proposed for support
with formula funding should be clearly identified and explained,
including if appropriate a description of why the priorities were
established and how they relate to the national priorities established
by the Corporation.
(c) Description of process. The State Plan must specifically
describe the manner in which the State has conducted an open and
inclusive process to develop the State Plan and the priorities.

(4) Evaluation Criteria

The State Plan will be evaluated on two principal criteria: quality
and sustainability. These criteria are described in part 2513.40. In
addition, the quality of the State Plan itself will also be factored
into the Corporations overall evaluation of a State Commission's
application. Specifically, the submission of a State Plan that meets
the quality criteria established by the Corporation is an eligibility
requirement for States seeking formula funding under the national and
community service grant program. The quality of the State Plan will
also be factored into the Corporation's selection of programs for
competitive State funding. Finally, the Corporation may consider the
quality of the State Plan in determining whether to renew State
Commission administrative support under part 2550 of this rule.

SERVICE-LEARNING ISSUES

The K-12 service-learning programs--i.e., the school- and
community-based programs described in parts 2516 and 2517 of this
rule--as well as the Higher Education service-learning programs
described in part 2519 of this rule, aim to engage school-age youth and
students of all ages in activities to help meet the educational, public
safety, human, and environmental needs of America's communities.
Service-learning programs provide participants with structured,
sometimes curriculum-based opportunities to reflect on and learn from
their service experiences, often enhancing their academic skills, their
sense of civic responsibility, their ability to solve community
problems, and their understanding of important concepts such as
community, diversity, and citizenship.
In similar ways, the higher education programs strive to develop
the academic and civic skills of students by supporting efforts of
colleges and universities to help meet community needs.

(A) K-12 SERVICE-LEARNING ISSUES

(1) Coordination With State Plans

Any State or grantmaking entity that applies for school-or
community-based K-12 service-learning support must coordinate its
service-learning activities with the development of the comprehensive
State Plan described in part 2513 of this rule. This requirement is
designed to facilitate the integration of K-12 service-learning
programs into the overall national service efforts of each State.
The Corporation will consider the extent and quality of
coordination with the development of the State Plan in assessing the
merits of applications submitted by States or grantmaking entities.
However, because State Plans will be in different stages of
development, any applicant that makes a good faith effort at
coordination will not be disadvantaged in the selection process.

(2) Terms of Grants

The Corporation has set the maximum term of most grants at three
years, subject to satisfactory performance and annual appropriations.
In addition to facilitating coordination with the State Plan, the three
year term (a) allows programs to evolve and improve over time, learning
from mistakes and making adjustments to ensure quality, and (b) allows
the Corporation to track and learn from the development of programs
over time.
A one-year term will be set for planning grants made to school-
based program applicants, as well as grants to local partnerships
States not participating. This policy reflects the purpose of a
planning grant: to move programs from a sound program concept to the
brink of implementing a fully operational program. These grants thus
should be used for such activities as seeking community input, building
partnerships, developing curricula and materials, recruiting staff,
etc.

(3) Treatment of ACTION Student Community Service Program and
Commission on National and Community Service Grantees

High quality programs that received ACTION Student Community or
Commission funds are encouraged to seek Corporation grants.

(4) Stipends

The Act prohibits using school-based service-learning funds to
provide stipends to participants. With this rule, the Corporation
extends this restriction to Corporation funds awarded to community-
based service-learning programs in order to conserve and focus the
relatively small amount of funds available for community-based
programs.

(B) HIGHER EDUCATION SERVICE-LEARNING ISSUES

(1) Coordination With State Commissions

The Act is silent on the extent to which Higher Education service-
learning programs should be coordinated with State Commissions. In
considering this issue, the Corporation sought to balance (1) a desire
to promote coordination among national and community service programs
within each State, with (2) the concerns that programs not be unduly
burdened with bureaucratic procedures and that the Corporation, as the
direct funder of Higher Education service-learning programs, retain
control of selection, monitoring, and evaluation.
As a result, in fiscal year 1994 the Corporation is requiring an
assurance that, prior to submitting a Higher Education service-learning
application, applicants will send one copy of the final proposal to the
State Commission in each State where the program will operate. The
State will have no part in selecting programs to be funded. However, as
stated in the selection criteria of the application, evidence of
support from a State Commission or consistency with a State
comprehensive plan may improve the competitiveness of a program in the
review process.

(2) Educational Awards

Section 119(f) of the Act states that ``a participant in a program
funded under this part shall be eligible for the national service
educational award if the participant served in an approved national
service position.'' However, the Act provides no guidance on what kinds
of Higher Education service-learning programs involve participants in
positions eligible to be approved AmeriCorps positions.
Since institutions of higher education are eligible to apply for
AmeriCorps program support, campus-based programs fitting one or more
of the AmeriCorps program types described in Sec. 2522.110 should apply
as AmeriCorps programs rather than as Higher Education service-learning
programs. This reflects the idea that Higher Education service-learning
programs should have a distinctive service-learning emphasis; it was
not intended to be a grant program that merely supplements the
AmeriCorps funds.
The Corporation examined whether certain other types of positions
in a Higher Education service-learning programs should be provided
AmeriCorps educational awards. In Sec. 2519.320 of this rule, the
Corporation retains flexibility on this issue. In the fiscal year 1994
application, the Corporation expects to provide AmeriCorps educational
awards only to programs with positions designed to increase
participation in community service on campus, to develop projects and
partnerships in the community, or to facilitate service-learning in
campus-based programs. They are similar to other AmeriCorps positions
such as service-learning coordinators for school-based service-learning
programs or crew leaders in youth corps. Positions of this type are
essential for the longevity and progress of the service movement.
Any Higher Education service-learning program whose participants
receive educational awards must meet the minimum AmeriCorps program
requirements described in Section 2522.100 of this rule. As Higher
Education service-learning programs, however, they will be reviewed
according to selection criteria and priorities that apply to all Higher
Education service-learning applicants.

(3) Treatment of Existing Grantees of the ACTION Student Community
Service Program and the Commission on National and Community Service

ACTION and Commission grantees may seek funds to continue and build
on activities carried out under their current grants. In the fiscal
year 1994 application, the Corporation requires these grantees to
submit an application that will be reviewed on a competitive basis
according to the selection criteria applicable to all Higher Education
service-learning applicants. However, the Corporation will give
preference to applicants that offer evidence of positive performance
relative to stated objectives under their existing grants. This policy
is consistent with the Corporation's intent to select among all Higher
Education service-learning applicants on the basis of quality, while
giving existing grantees in good standing sufficient opportunity to
develop and become self-sustaining.
Applicants for renewal funding are expected to reduce their
dependence on Federal funds and to demonstrate clearly their potential
for sustainability, in accordance with the guidelines in the
application.

(4) Priorities

This rule gives priority to proposals that (among other
characteristics) demonstrate the commitment of the higher education
institution as a whole and specify how grant funds will be used to
strengthen the capacity of institutions of higher education to support
service.
The Corporation aims to fund programs supported not only by
students but also by the college or university presidents, faculty
members, and even trustees. An institutional commitment, beginning with
the institution's top leadership, enhances program quality and
sustainability by making resources from diverse areas of the
institution available to the program, by ensuring continuity of the
program as students come and go, and by signaling to the community that
the institution views the program as an integral part of--not an ``add-
on'' to--its core functions.
Moreover, as colleges and universities across the Nation develop
more model programs, the Corporation aims to fund efforts to link
individual initiatives within a campus or across several campuses in
supportive networks that facilitate replication of effective models,
delivery of training and technical assistance, access to information
and resources, development and dissemination of materials, and
evaluation of impacts. These activities, which build the capacity of
higher education institutions to improve the quality of community
service and service-learning programs, require strong infrastructures
within and across institutions.

AMERICORPS PROGRAM ISSUES

Section I: Programmatic Issues

(A) Overview and Purpose of Grant Program: ``Getting Things Done''

AmeriCorps is about getting things done. It will engage the energy
and idealism of the American people, especially young people, in
addressing the most critical educational, public safety, human, and
environmental needs of our communities. It will strengthen communities
and the civic character of our people through service, and reward those
who answer the call to service with enhanced educational opportunity.
The purpose of the AmeriCorps grant program, therefore, is to support
locally driven programs that meet rigorous national standards. This
strategy will enable communities across the Nation to channel the
unique talents and creativity of America toward effectively addressing
these most important needs. For these efforts to be successful,
however, it is essential to ensure that they provide direct and
demonstrable benefits that are valued by communities.
To achieve this outcome, the Corporation has attempted through
these regulations to provide clear guidance to programs seeking
assistance under the grant program. First, the regulations clarify the
nature of service activities eligible for support under the Act.
Second, to enhance the collective impact that all programs will have
within the four broad issue areas specified by law, the Corporation has
also exercised its authority to establish national priorities. Third,
to ensure that each of the diverse programs supported through the grant
program is of the highest possible quality, the Corporation has also
specified minimum program requirements that all programs must address.
And finally, the Corporation has clarified issues pertaining to
participant eligibility and benefits.

(B) Eligible Service Activities

(1) Description of Eligible Service Activities
There are numerous pressing needs throughout our communities that
may be appropriately addressed by AmeriCorps programs. But given the
realities of limited resources and the extent to which other public,
private and non-profit responses to many of these needs already exist,
it is important that an AmeriCorps program undertake activities that
are appropriate to the program's overall mission and capacity and that
achieve the greatest positive impact possible. To this end, the
Corporation has provided a framework for eligible service activities
that builds on the parameters specified in the law.
The Corporation's proposed regulation (as set forth in part 2520)
limits service to activities that provide a direct benefit to the
community where they are performed or that involve the supervision of
participants or volunteers whose service provides a direct benefit to
the community where it is performed. The Corporation determined, based
upon the inclusion in the Act of several program types involving such
supervision, such as service-learning coordinator programs, that
Congress intended for supervision of participants or others performing
service to be included as an eligible service activity, provided that
the service of those supervised would itself qualify.
In determining whether service ``provides a direct benefit to the
community where it is performed,'' the Corporation will take into
consideration several factors, including whether the service must be
performed physically in the community to be effective and whether the
service brings participants face-to-face with residents of the
community served or in contact with the physical environment that is
the ``beneficiary'' of the service. Direct service includes physical
projects like renovating low-income housing or creating a playground in
a vacant lot, as well as less tangible projects like tutoring,
mentoring and conflict resolution.
To further define what constitutes a ``direct benefit,'' the
Corporation's proposed regulation offers several examples of activities
that would not meet this test: fundraising, clerical work, and
research. This list is not intended to be limiting; other activities
may also fail the ``direct benefit'' test. However, if an activity does
not provide a direct benefit, it is not necessarily altogether
prohibited. Rather, unless it falls into one of the ``prohibited''
categories discussed below, the activity may be performed if it is
incidental to the direct service. For example, a team whose project
involves providing meals, transportation, and health services to the
homebound might conduct a door to door survey of community residents to
help locate those in need of services; if they then went on to provide
those services, this kind of research would be an appropriate activity
for the team.
(2) Prohibited Activities
Prohibited activities (specified in Sec. 2520.30) may not be
performed by participants in the course of their duties, at the request
of program staff, or in a manner that would associate the activities
with the AmeriCorps program or the Corporation. These activities
include: influencing legislation, as defined in the section of the IRS
code relating to non-profit organizations; organizing protests,
petitions, boycotts, or strikes; assisting, promoting or deterring
union organizing; participating in partisan political activities; and
performing religious activities, such as conducting worship services or
engaging in religious proselytization. Of course, participants may
engage in any of these activities at their own initiative, on their own
time, and in a manner that is not associated with their participation
in the program.
(3) General Guidance
In all cases, service activities must result in a specific
identifiable service or improvement that otherwise would not be
provided with existing funds or volunteers and that does not duplicate
the routine functions of workers or displace paid employees. Further,
service opportunities should be appropriate to the skill levels of
participants, and they should provide a long-lasting, identifiable, and
demonstrable benefit that is valued by the community.
While the Corporation reserves the right to further restrict
eligible service, it has not done so because it recognizes that the
character of service often depends on its content and context. For
example, distributing leaflets may provide a ``direct benefit'' if the
leaflets inform readers about the availability of free immunizations or
how to conserve energy in the home. Conversely, distributing leaflets
supporting a political candidate, or urge individuals to write their
legislators about an issue, would be prohibited. Given the great
educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs of our
communities, it should not be difficult for programs to identify
projects that clearly provide a direct benefit.

(C) Establishment of State and National Priorities

(1) State Priorities
As discussed earlier, States must establish and, through the State
planning process, periodically alter priorities in the areas of
educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs. These
priorities apply to programs that receive assistance (funding or
AmeriCorps educational awards) provided on a formula basis as described
in Sec. 2521.30(a)(1). The State priorities will be subject to
Corporation review as part of the AmeriCorps application process under
Subpart C of part 2522 of this rule.
(2) National Priorities
In order to concentrate national efforts on addressing certain
educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs, the
Corporation will establish and, after review of the strategic plan
approved by the Corporation's Board of Directors, periodically alter
priorities regarding the AmeriCorps programs that will receive
assistance (funding or AmeriCorps educational awards) and the purposes
for which such assistance may be used. These priorities apply to
assistance provided on a competitive basis as described in
Sec. 2521.30(a)(2) and (b)(3), and to any assistance provided through a
subgrant of such funds.
(a) National Priorities for Fiscal Year 1994. For fiscal year 1994,
the Corporation has established the following national priorities
within each of the four broad issue areas:
(i) Education. (A) School Readiness: Furthering early childhood
development; and
(B) School Success: Improving the educational achievement of
school-age children.
(ii) Public safety. (A) Crime Prevention: Reducing the incidence of
violence; and
(B) Crime Control: Improving criminal justice services, law
enforcement, and victim services.
(iii) Human needs. (A) Health: Providing independent living
assistance and home-and community-based health care; and
(B) Home: Rebuilding neighborhoods and helping people who are
homeless.
(iv) Environment. (A) Neighborhood Environment: Reducing community
environmental hazards; and
(B) Natural Environment: Conserving, restoring, and sustaining
natural habitats.
(b) Application of Priorities to Programs. The National priorities
established by the Corporation apply to programs seeking State
competitive and national direct grants from the Corporation, as
specified in Sec. 2521.30 of this rule. Programs included in the State
formula application are not governed by these priorities, but rather by
priorities established by the State consistent with part 2513 of this
rule. A more thorough description of how these National priorities will
affect program selection in each of the major grant areas is described
in Section II, Subsection B, Number 3 of this Supplementary Information
section, below.

(D) Minimum Program Requirements To Ensure Quality

In an effort to ensure that all programs supported by the
Corporation are high quality, the Corporation has specified a number of
minimum requirements (in addition to those already provided in the law)
that all programs must satisfy. These provisions, specified in
Sec. 2522.100 of this rule, seek not only to enhance the quality of
individual programs, but to further the ability of each program to
contribute to the achievement of the overall goals and purposes of
AmeriCorps as set forth by the Corporation.
Because the minimum program requirements represent elements
essential to the success of any AmeriCorps program, every program
receiving assistance from the Corporation through part 2522 of this
rule is required to address each requirement. The following sections
discuss the most salient of these requirements:
(1) Getting Things Done
First and foremost, every AmeriCorps program that receives funding
or AmeriCorps educational awards from the Corporation must address
educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs, and provide
a direct and demonstrable benefit that is valued by the community. This
requirement reflects the Corporation's intent to make efficient use of
limited funds--to have every grant made to an AmeriCorps program in
some way help to address our Nation's most pressing needs.
(2) Strengthening Communities
In addition to addressing the Nation's most pressing community
needs, the Corporation also seeks to strengthen the communities in
which we live through AmeriCorps programs. As social and economic
forces continually drive people apart, the need arises to promote
opportunities for diverse Americans to enjoy common experiences and
share common values that, in the words of the President, ``strengthen
the cords that bind us together as a people.'' Thus, the Corporation
has established the requirement that each program must seek ``to
strengthen communities and encourage mutual respect and cooperation
among citizens of different races, ethnicities, socioeconomic
backgrounds, educational levels, among both men and women and
individuals with disabilities.''
This requirement reinforces several of the Corporation's goals for
AmeriCorps. First, it affirms that a necessary ingredient of active,
productive citizenship is the ability of diverse citizens to live and
work together, notwithstanding differences in race, class, gender,
physical or mental ability, etc. Second, the requirement supports the
objective of strengthening not just individual relationships among
people, but the collective relationships among all Americans as
expressed in the spirit of community and in citizens' sense of personal
responsibility to that community. Third, it acknowledges that diversity
within programs can be an effective resource for community problem-
solving. Finally, the requirement supports a number of legislative
objectives and requirements found within the Act.
For example, an initial finding of the statute is that ``Americans
desire to affirm common responsibilities and shared values, and join
together in positive experiences, that transcend race, religion,
gender, age, disability, region, income, and education.'' Furthermore,
section 179 of the Act instructs the Corporation to evaluate programs
based on their effectiveness in ``recruiting and enrolling diverse
participants * * * based on economic background, race, ethnicity, age,
marital status, education levels, and disability.'' These legislative
provisions thus reinforce the Corporation's objective.
One way in which this important objective may be accomplished is to
involve diverse participants in programs. Therefore, the Corporation
requires each program to seek actively to engage participants from
diverse backgrounds in AmeriCorps, including individuals from the
community served. It also recognizes that in practice, it is not always
possible (or in some cases desirable) for this objective to be realized
in every case. Specifically, the Corporation recognizes two instances
in which programs may lack diversity in one or more ways:
First, despite its best efforts, a program simply may be unable to
recruit the participants necessary to achieve diversity in some
respect. In recognition of this the Corporation requires that programs
``seek to achieve'' rather than ``ensure'' diversity. However, programs
will be required to specify the specific strategy or activities to be
undertaken to recruit participants in accordance with this provision.
Second, some programs may have legitimate, substantive or
philosophical reasons to involve individuals who share a particular
characteristic. Examples of such programs include, but are not limited
to the following: (1) A youth corps or other program might be designed
to impart specific job skills and provide basic education through
service-learning and thus might lack educational or economic diversity
by design; (2) a professional corps that requires participants to
possess specific post-secondary training necessarily would lack
educational diversity.
Although such programs would thus lack diversity in one or more of
the required aspects, they nevertheless must strive for diversity in
other areas. For instance, a professional corps enlisting participants
of a common educational background would still be required to seek to
include a racially and ethnically diverse group of individuals,
individuals with disabilities, and both men and women. Equally
important, all programs should undertake activities that will provide
opportunities for citizens who might not otherwise serve, work or learn
together to do so, regardless of what the overall composition of the
program might be.
While the Corporation is committed to making AmeriCorps
opportunities available to Americans of all backgrounds, it will also
ensure, consistent with the Act, that at least 50 percent of
Corporation funds provided to States will go to programs that operate
in areas of greatest need and that place a priority on recruiting
participants who are residents in these high need areas (as specified
in Sec. 2521.30(a)(3)(iii) of this rule), or on Federal or other public
lands. The Corporation does not consider this requirement, which
affects the overall national composition of programs and participants,
at odds with its goals of encouraging the participation of citizens of
all backgrounds.
The Corporation recognizes that recruiting and retaining diverse
participants requires special efforts. This is particularly true for
qualified individuals with disabilities, including people with mental
disabilities . Because the Corporation intends to assist programs in
achieving the goal of diversity, the Corporation anticipates making
technical and other assistance available to programs to assist in the
attainment of recruitment goals. In addition to program development
assistance for strengthening recruitment or outreach components of
individual programs, the Corporation will make other resources
available to programs, including financial support for programs seeking
to involve qualified individuals with disabilities (as described in
Sec. 2524.50 of this rule), as well as referral information on
participants identified through the national recruiting system
described in Sec. 2522.210 of this rule and in section (E)(3), below.
(3) Participant Selection Requirements
Through this rule, the Corporation offers guidance to programs
regarding participant selection. First, the proposed regulation
encourages programs to select participants who possess leadership
potential and a commitment to the goals of the AmeriCorps program. This
guidance is not intended to discourage the enrollment of individuals
who have not attained educational or job success; rather, it
acknowledges that within every social strata, there are people who
possess leadership ability that has not been tapped or directed at
productive activities. Second, the regulation calls for programs to
select participants in a non-political, non-partisan, and non-
discriminatory manner. The third participant selection rule is found in
the Act itself--the requirement that programs establish minimum
qualifications for participants. Among other things, this provision
prohibits AmeriCorps participants from performing service that (1) is
or was recently performed by paid employees (2) would infringe upon the
promotional opportunities of paid employees (3) would supplant the
hiring of employees or (4) would reduce the hours, wages, or benefits
of paid employees.
Finally, although the Corporation expects that most programs will
involve young adults or recent college graduates as participants, the
regulations encourage programs to consider intergenerational approaches
because of the natural mentoring relationships that arise in these
programs. For example, a youth corps might involve seniors on each crew
or a corps of young attorneys might include retired lawyers
volunteering on a part-time basis.
In addition, the Corporation may require programs to establish pre-
service orientation and training periods for participants. The goal of
such periods would be to establish a common orientation process for all
programs and participants that would be tied to the efforts to create a
national identity. The Corporation might specify, for example, that the
official AmeriCorps logo may not be worn until participants have
satisfactorily completed the orientation period and have been
officially enrolled in the program through the administration of a
national oath. These efforts, among other things, may reduce
prospective attrition rates and contribute to a positive esprit de
corps across programs.
The statute also directs the Corporation to establish a national
leadership pool and a national system for the recruitment of
participants; States also must establish recruitment systems. National
and State recruitment will contribute to the diversity of the overall
participant pool by supplementing local recruitment with participants
from across the Nation and with participants who possess specialized
skills or training. The national and State recruitment efforts will
also facilitate the participation of individuals who desire to serve
but live in areas where there are few or no AmeriCorps programs
available. The Corporation may therefore require programs to select a
small percentage of participants from the national recruitment pool. In
addition, as specified in the application materials, the Corporation
may provide for the coverage of certain relocation expenses for a
limited number of participants who are recruited through the national
referral system. While the Corporation will not require programs to
select any participants through the national system in fiscal year
1994, programs are strongly encouraged to do so.
(4) AmeriCorps Identification
In addition to those activities noted in paragraph (3) above, the
Corporation will also require programs to agree to identify themselves
as part of a larger national effort and to participate in such
AmeriCorps activities as the Corporation may specify. Examples might
include the use of a national logo or common application and
informational materials as well as participation in special activities
such as a national service day, a conference or common training, or the
use of a common orientation component. This provision would not
preclude an AmeriCorps program from developing its own training or
materials, or from using its own name as the primary identification for
the program. These efforts not only will enhance the visibility of the
AmeriCorps programs but will contribute to a national recognition of
the value and importance of the work being undertaken by the programs.
(5) Promoting Active, Productive Citizenship
In addition to ``Getting Things Done'' in communities throughout
the Nation, another central goal for all AmeriCorps programs is to
promote active, productive citizenship on the part of all participants,
which may include fostering a sense of personal responsibility and a
life-long ethic of service. To this end, programs are encouraged to
design projects that employ service-learning methods to enhance
participants understanding of the relationship between the activities
undertaken to address needs and the larger social context in which the
efforts are made. In addition, programs must provide participants with
appropriate training and support to carry out assignments, including
background information on the community in which the service will be
performed and on why the particular project is needed. Finally, because
AmeriCorps programs seek to promote active citizenship, and because
voting is a critical component of citizenship in any democracy, every
program must encourage, in a non-partisan manner, each participant
eligible to do so to register to vote.
(6) Start of Operations
To further the goal of creating a national identity for programs,
this rule requires all programs to agree to begin operations at such
times as the Corporation may reasonably require. Creating ``classes''
of participants who all begin and ``graduate'' from their terms of
service during the same time period will foster a greater sense of
national identity. The Corporation's current policy requires
participants to begin service in June, September, or January. The
Corporation may waive this requirement for programs that can
demonstrate compelling reasons for alternative starting dates.
This requirement should also contribute toward the achievement of
other programmatic goals. For example, common schedules and operating
timelines will enable the Corporation to support, where appropriate,
staff and participant training. In addition, this provision will enable
many programs' term of service to track the traditional school year,
making the recruitment of college and college-bound participants
easier. For example, a program that begins in January and ends in
October would require participants to miss two years of school, whereas
a program that begins in September and ends in June would only require
participants to miss one year of school.
In addition, this rule states that programs must agree to comply
with any policy the Corporation may implement regarding filling
approved AmeriCorps positions left vacant by attrition. The Corporation
is currently considering a policy which would allow programs to fill
such vacant positions only within the first month of the enrollment of
a given class of participants. The Corporation encourages interested
parties to comment on this proposed policy. This provision is aimed at
providing a sense of cohesion within each AmeriCorps program.
Experience shows, especially in team- or crew-based programs, that the
process of continually filling positions left vacant by attrition tends
to erode the sense of teamwork and identity among participants and can
interrupt an efficient flow of operations, thereby affecting the
quality of service provided in the community. Through this provision,
the Corporation would require programs to wait until the next approved
intake period before enrolling additional participants.
(7) Allocation of Educational Awards Within Programs
Because of the limited amount of funding available for program
assistance, the Corporation anticipates that in some cases programs
(especially existing programs) may not apply for or receive adequate
support for all participants enrolled in the program, and the potential
may thus arise for some participants (who are serving in approved
AmeriCorps positions) to receive AmeriCorps educational awards while
others do not. The Corporation is therefore requiring every applicant
to describe the rationale for its distribution of educational awards to
program participants in those cases where distinctions among
participants are necessary. In general, this distribution should treat
equally all participants doing the same or essentially similar work.
This reflects a matter of principle as well as a pragmatic concern for
the equal treatment of participants within a single program.
The Corporation recognizes that equal treatment may not be feasible
or desirable in some instances. For example, an intergenerational
program or a program with a specialized component or division assigned
special projects may make distinctions among participants that justify
the provision of educational awards to some but not to others.
Similarly, a program may choose to offer alternative post-service
benefits to participants in lieu of the AmeriCorps educational awards
provided by the Corporation. AmeriCorps programs are strongly
encouraged to offer alternative post-service benefits to participants
who will not receive AmeriCorps educational awards. The Corporation
will evaluate on a case-by-case basis the rationales of programs that
do not plan to provide all participants with educational awards.
However, the Corporation anticipates that it will not approve
rationales based solely on a determination of economic need of
participants.
(8) Evaluation Requirements
In order to ensure that only high quality programs continue to
receive Corporation support, AmeriCorps programs must perform
continuous monitoring and evaluation. The provisions of this rule
emphasize the importance of monitoring and evaluation at all levels--by
individual programs, States or grantmaking entities, and the
Corporation.
This rule allows programs to conduct internal rather than
independent evaluations. The Corporation will conduct independent
evaluations at the national level because, due to economies of scale,
that is where they will be most cost-effective. Each program, State,
and grantmaking entity must collect data and cooperate fully in all of
the Corporation's monitoring and evaluation activities.
A key provision of the Corporation's evaluation strategy requires
all programs to set annual objectives in concert with the Corporation
and applicable grant-making entity. Programs will be required to track,
and report to the Corporation, progress towards these objectives.
Programs will be evaluated annually, in part, based on their success at
achieving their objectives.
Finally, this rule promotes continuous quality improvement and
provides examples of techniques available to programs.

(E) Program Types and Size

(1) Program Types
Section 2522.110 of this rule lists fourteen discrete types of
service programs that may qualify for AmeriCorps program funding. These
types, while sharing the goal of meeting our Nation's pressing needs,
differ in terms of which need is addressed, how the participants are
organized, the age and background of the participants, and the nature
of the sponsoring organization.
After careful and thorough consideration, the Corporation decided
not to include in the regulations any program types not listed in the
Act. This decision is not an attempt to restrict the types of eligible
AmeriCorps programs. On the contrary, it was specifically intended to
leave open-ended the types of programs that may be eligible.
The Act states that the Corporation may designate other AmeriCorps
types aside from those listed to qualify for AmeriCorps grants. The
Corporation decided that instead of attempting to list additional types
of programs, it would interpret this provision broadly, allowing for
the eligibility of any program type that meets the criteria applicable
to all programs.
The fourteen program types listed are clearly eligible for support,
and they may serve as guidelines for developing programs. However,
programs that meet the Corporation's eligibility and quality criteria
but that do not fit one of these types will not be disadvantaged in the
selection process. Conversely, because the Corporation wishes to fund
the highest quality programs that meet the Nation's most pressing
needs, the Corporation will not give priority to a program simply
because it fits the description of one of the listed program types.
Finally, any organization considering applying should determine
whether they are more appropriately a project sponsor than a program. A
program is responsible for recruiting, selecting, and training
participants, providing them benefits and support services, engaging
them in regular group activities, and placing them in projects. While
the program may also serve as the project sponsor by supervising the
day-to-day service of participants, the program may instead place
participants in projects overseen by another organization.
For example, a local police department could apply for funds to run
a community policing support program. It would recruit and select
participants, train them, and supervise them in a variety of projects.
In this case, the police department would be both the program and the
project sponsor. Alternatively, an organization that runs a program may
work in collaboration with one or more other organizations that will
serve as project sponsors. For example, a community-based organization
(CBO) may apply for funds to operate an early childhood development
corps. The CBO, as the program, would recruit and select participants,
provide them with specialized training in child development, and bring
them back together regularly for additional training and other
activities. The participants would be assigned individually or in small
groups to child care, Head Start, and preschool programs in the
community, which would serve as project sponsors.
In general, organizations who can engage productively no more than
four participants or that lack the capacity to perform the duties,
required of programs should consider becoming project sponsors. Such an
organization may form a partnership with another organization in the
community with a shared vision and mission that is interested in
becoming a program sponsor. Together, the organizations in the
partnership should be able to present a coherent program, including
common training and ongoing group activities, rather than a loosely
federated consortia with unrelated elements. Such an organization may
also contact the State Commission for information about funded programs
in the area that might place participants with the organization, or
contact the State ACTION office about the possibility of a VISTA being
assigned there.
(2) Minimum Program Size
It is extremely important for all programs, regardless of type, to
be large enough to achieve a demonstrable impact on the community
served. Thus, while the actual size of each program may vary depending
on the size of the community in which it operates, the design of the
program, and other factors, in general the Corporation encourages
programs to enroll at least twenty full-time equivalent participants,
regardless of whether participants are placed individually or in teams.
And while the Corporation will likely fund programs that exceed this
preferred minimum size, any applicant seeking support for a program
that does not intend to enroll at least twenty participants should
demonstrate why a smaller program is necessary or appropriate to a
specific circumstance.
This guideline should not only enhance the impact that programs
will have on a particular issue or within specific communities, but it
should also increase the ability of the Corporation and State
Commissions to ensure the delivery of high quality programming and
compliance with legislative and regulatory requirements. Accomplishing
these outcomes would be significantly more difficult with many small
groups of participants dispersed throughout a State or region.
It is important to note that this requirement relates to programs,
not to project sponsors. Thus, while programs should enroll at least
twenty participants, there is no minimum requirement for the number of
AmeriCorps participants which may be placed in an approved service site
or organization.

(F) Participant Eligibility and Benefits

(1) Terms of Service
Section 2522.220 specifies appropriate definitions and guidance
pertaining to terms of service. This rule clarifies that participants
shall receive benefits, including AmeriCorps educational awards, only
for their first two terms of service, regardless of whether those terms
of service are full-time, part-time, or a combination of both. It also
establishes that admission to a second or further term of service is
contingent upon successful completion and a positive performance review
of the first term. (Sec. 2522.220(c)(i) of this rule explains the
performance review.)
Participants and programs have substantial latitude in mixing
different types of terms of service. For example, a high school
graduate could participate full-time in a youth corps for one year, use
his or her educational award to pay for two years of community college,
participate in a part-time AmeriCorps program during college, and earn
another award to help pay the costs of attending a four-year
university. Alternatively, a participant could serve two consecutive
1\1/2\ year part-time terms of service while attending college; such a
participant would thus, in total, serve 1800 hours and earn two part-
time educational awards. A good example of this type of mixing of terms
of service would be a during-college program analogous to the Reserve
Officer Training Corps program, which engages participants in part-time
service during college, followed by a full-time placement after
graduation.
(2) Release from Terms of Service
Generally, participants can be released for two reasons: (i) they
want to be released due to compelling personal circumstances; or (ii)
they are released from the program for cause. In both cases, this rule
puts primary responsibility for determining when to release a
participant in the hands of the programs. Programs should be aware that
participants released due to compelling personal circumstances may
receive prorated educational awards whereas those released for cause
may not.
In addition, this rule requires programs to establish in writing
clear guidelines that establish the circumstances under which
participants will be released for cause. These documents must be signed
by the participant and by a representative of the program. The
Corporation encourages programs to establish attainable but high
standards for participant conduct. The Corporation requires programs to
release participants for cause if they are convicted of a felony. If
participants are charged with a violent felony or the sale or
distribution of a controlled substance, or if they are convicted of the
possession of a controlled substance, programs must suspend their
service without a living allowance and without receiving credit for
hours missed.
A participant who is wrongly released or suspended for cause will
receive credit for any service missed and reimbursement for missed
stipends. This rule further describes the conditions under which
participants whose service has been suspended may be reinstated, the
impact of release for cause, and the grievance procedure available to
participants. (See Sec. 2522.230)
(3) Living Allowances
In general, the Act requires that all programs receiving
Corporation assistance provide living allowances to full-time
participants. The amount of the living allowance must be at least the
average annual amount provided to VISTA volunteers (approximately
$7,440 for FY 1994 or about $4.40 per hour assuming a total of 1700
hours served) but not more than twice that amount. Of this, the
Corporation's share may not exceed 85% of the basic VISTA allowance (or
approximately $6,375). Programs must therefore provide a cash match for
their share of the stipend.
There are a number of exceptions to these requirements: a program
that was in existence prior to September 21, 1993, is by law exempt
from meeting the minimum stipend requirement; programs may, but are not
required to, provide living allowances to part-time participants; and
the Corporation may waive or reduce the minimum requirement at its
discretion (see Sec. 2522.240(b)(4) of this rule).
With this rule the Corporation also clarifies that the
Corporation's share will not exceed 85% of the living allowance,
regardless of whether the allowance has been reduced or prorated from
the minimum full-time allowance. Thus, if a program provides part-time
participants who serve 900 hours per year with an annualized stipend of
$3,960, the Corporations share would not exceed $3,366 (85% of the
part-time allowance).
Finally, the Corporation will pay no share of participant stipends
for a professional corps described in Sec. 2522.110(b)(3) that provides
stipends to participants in excess of the maximum allowance. However, a
program involving professionals that wishes to seek Corporation support
for participant stipends or benefits while not technically a
``professional corps'' may do so by applying under the general
provision (Sec. 2522.110(g)). Such a program would be subject to the
same restrictions on stipends as other AmeriCorps programs.
(4) Child Care
The Act requires that programs provide child care or a child care
allowance to any full-time participant who needs such assistance in
order to participate. The regulations define need based on three
factors: total family income of the participant must be less than 75
percent of the State median income; the participant must reside with
and be a parent or guardian of a child under the age of 13; and the
participant must not be receiving child care assistance from another
source at the time of acceptance into the program, unless the
participant would become ineligible for child care by virtue of
enrollment in the program. These requirements were selected to be
consistent with the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990,
the major program through which the Federal government provides child
care to low- and middle-income families. To ensure that funded care
meets minimum health and safety standards, the regulations also tie
eligible providers and the amount of the child care allowance to the
Child Care and Development Block Grant of 1990. In implementing this
provision, the Corporation expects to reserve program funds for child
care benefits. Programs are asked in their applications to indicate how
many participants they expect to require such benefits. This will help
the Corporation determine the amount of funds that should be reserved.
(5) Health Insurance
The legislation requires the provision of health care benefits to
full-time AmeriCorps participants who are not otherwise insured. The
regulations provide for the Corporation to establish a minimum benefits
package and to tie the amount of funding for health care policies to an
affordable policy that provides these minimum benefits. The Corporation
welcomes comments on the contents of the minimum benefits package. Any
program wishing to provide alternative benefits may do so with approval
from the Corporation, provided that the policy has a fair market value
equal to or greater than the minimum benefits package.

Section II: Available Grants and Distribution of Funds

(A) Types of Grants Available

Eligible applicants may apply for planning, operating, or
replication grants. Applicants seeking operating or replication grants
also may apply for AmeriCorps educational awards. In addition, an
applicant may seek AmeriCorps educational awards only.
(1) Planning Grants
The purpose of a planning grant is to bring a program to the verge
of implementation so that it may compete successfully for operating
assistance in the following grant cycle. The Corporation will make
planning grants available to eligible applicants that already have
identified a sound concept for an AmeriCorps program, but that require
resources in order to plan, develop, and prepare the program for
implementation. (In this sense, planning grants more accurately may be
called ``development grants.'')
For example, a planning grant might be appropriate for an applicant
that has already identified the type of program to be developed,
including key design elements such as the specific need(s) to be
addressed, types of projects to be conducted, and kinds of participants
to be recruited. The program might lack, however, a specific training
or education curriculum, or it might need to build additional community
partnerships to identify specific service projects and activities to be
conducted. It might also lack a specific staffing or recruitment plan
and materials, or it might need to raise additional matching funds.
Thus, while the specific elements of the program might require
developmental assistance, the program design is nevertheless clear
enough to enable the Corporation to evaluate fully the nature of the
program and the prospective activities that it will undertake
(including the expected impact it will have on a particular issue or
problem). While the average size of grants awarded for planning and
development will vary by circumstance and need, in general, grants will
range from $50,000 to $250,000, depending on the size of the
prospective full-time program, and may cover a period of between six
months and one year, depending on the expected timing of the next grant
cycle.
(2) Operating Grants
The purpose of an operating grant is to support an applicant that
is ready to implement a fully developed new or expanded program.
Operating grants may include a short planning phase to complete the
final stages of program development before implementation. The
Corporation may award operating grants for a term of up to three years,
with annual renewal funding subject to periodic assessment of program
quality, successful performance against stated objectives, and
availability of appropriations. In general, the size of an operating
grant will reflect the size and costs of the proposed program. However,
the Corporation anticipates making few operating grants in excess of $4
million. While there are no absolute limitations on the number of
AmeriCorps educational awards an applicant may seek, the Corporation
will apportion these positions in a manner consistent with the
reasonable needs of programs. Moreover, programs are encouraged to take
a cost-effective approach based on per-participant costs. The
Corporation also encourages new or start-up programs to start
relatively small (generally between 20 and 50 participants, depending
on the needs of the program) in order to ensure high quality operations
in the first year. For new programs proposing multi-State or multi-site
operations, the Corporation also encourages piloting efforts in a
limited number of communities or locations to ensure quality before
undertaking significant expansion.
(3) Replication Grants
The purpose of a replication grant is to support the replication to
other sites or programs of a program model or component that has a
track record of success, identifiable core elements that account for
its effectiveness, and sufficient adaptability to local circumstances.
In its first year, the Corporation will evaluate proposals for
replication against criteria similar to those that apply to operating
grants. In future years, the Corporation may establish criteria that
are specific to replication grants, including a requirement for
independent evaluation results demonstrating the quality and
effectiveness of the program seeking replication.
The terms and size of replication grants, as well as the allotment
of AmeriCorps educational awards, are the same as for operating grants
as described in paragraph 2 above.
(4) Educational Awards Only
For programs that have adequate resources to cover program costs
and that meet all the requirements for an AmeriCorps program set forth
in part 2522 of this rule, the Corporation may make grants consisting
only of AmeriCorps educational awards. This rule clarifies that these
grants may be made either to programs that do not apply for program
assistance or to programs that apply for but do not receive program
assistance (see Sec. 2521.30(c)).
These types of grants are integral to the overall success of
AmeriCorps: they are an efficient use of limited resources; and they
allow for the inclusion of high-quality programs that might otherwise
be excluded due to the supplantation rule (which states that
Corporation assistance cannot supplant State, local or private funds).
However, programs that receive this type of grant must be of at least
as high-quality as programs that receive program assistance.
(5) Other Assistance
(a) Program development, training and technical assistance. The
Corporation will make grants to provide program development, training,
and technical assistance to improve the quality of service projects,
assist in the recruitment of diverse participants, improve educational
or other materials, and for other purposes (see Sec. 2524.40 of this
rule; also see part 2532, which describes other grants available for
training and technical assistance).
(b) Challenge grants. Section 2524.40 of this rule allows the
Corporation to make challenge grants to programs already receiving
Corporation assistance. With these challenge grants the Corporation may
provide up to $1 in assistance for every dollar raised by a program in
excess of the matching funds required for its existing Corporation
grant. More details concerning the specifics of this program are
provided in Sec. 2524.40 of this rule.
The Corporation views the challenge grant program as an important
component of its efforts to support AmeriCorps. It allows the
Corporation to leverage funds and expand the scope and reach of the
highest-quality AmeriCorps programs. However, because programs
generally will not receive AmeriCorps program grants until three-
quarters of the way through the fiscal year, the Corporation
anticipates making only a limited number of challenge grants in fiscal
year 1994 .
(c) Grants for outreach to qualified individuals with disabilities.
The Act authorizes the Corporation to make grants:
(i) To assist AmeriCorps grantees in placing applicants who require
reasonable accommodation (as defined in Sec. 101(9) of the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990) (42 U.S.C. 12111(9)) or auxiliary aids
and services (as defined in section 3(1) of such Act) (42 U.S.C.
12102(1)) in an AmeriCorps program; and
(ii) To conduct outreach activities to qualified individuals with
mental or physical disabilities to recruit them for participation in
AmeriCorps programs.
(d) Disaster relief. With this rule, the Corporation has determined
that in light of limited resources for this grant program, disaster
relief grants will only be made available to enable national and
community service programs to respond quickly and effectively to a
Presidentially-declared disaster.
The Corporation has also clarified eligibility requirements by
specifying that any AmeriCorps program (including youth corps, the
National Civilian Community Corps, VISTA, and other programs authorized
under the Domestic Volunteer Services Act) or grant making entity (such
as a State or Federal agency) that is supported by the Corporation may
apply to the Corporation for disaster relief grants.
Finally, the Corporation has specified that due to the limited
duration of disaster relief activities, it may waive certain matching
or program requirements if appropriate.

(B) Distribution of AmeriCorps Funds and Educational Awards

(1) State Formula Allotment and Corresponding Educational Awards
The Act specifies that of amounts available for allocation under
the grant program, the Corporation will make one-third available to
eligible State applicants through a population-based formula. For
fiscal year 1994, the Corporation expects that $51,833,333 will be
available for award by formula allotment. Because the Corporation is
committed to supporting only high quality AmeriCorps programs, this
formula distribution is not and will not be treated as an entitlement
for states. These regulations specify that only those applicants that
submit high quality applications consistent with the requirements
contained in part 2522 of this rule and have an approved State Plan
under part 2513 will receive their formula allotment. The Corporation
is committed to working with States to ensure that the programs funded
through their formula allotment will meet the quality standards
established in this rule. For fiscal year 1994, all States must submit
to the Corporation a notice of intent to apply for formula funds by
March 31, 1994. The formula allotment for States not intending to apply
(or that do not submit a notice of intent to apply by the required
date) will be made available to eligible local applicants within the
State consistent with Sec. 2521.30(d) of this rule.
In addition, the Act instructs the Corporation to distribute to
States receiving their formula allotment a ``corresponding allotment''
of AmeriCorps educational awards; however, the statute does not clarify
what ``corresponding allotment'' means. The Corporation has therefore
determined that the appropriate interpretation of the legal meaning of
the expression ``corresponding allotment'' is the number of educational
awards that directly corresponds with the expected number of approved
AmeriCorps positions to be supported with program assistance.
Because a direct correlation does not exist between program dollars
and educational awards, the Corporation determined that it needed to
establish a plausible monetary relationship between the total value of
a State's formula award and the number of educational awards it would
receive. This relationship was determined by dividing each State's
formula award by the anticipated average Federal share of the cost of
an AmeriCorps position, calculated at $13,800 per participant (Program
Money$13,800=Educational Awards).\1\ Basing the definition of
``corresponding allotment'' on a relationship between program dollars
and educational awards reflects the Corporation's intent to ensure that
any State receiving program assistance for the support of AmeriCorps
participants would be ensured of receiving the requisite number of
educational awards for those participants. Thus, according to the above
calculus, Ohio, for example, will receive $2,228,498 through its
formula allotment and will also receive 161 AmeriCorps educational
awards. The overall expected distribution of formula grants and
educational awards is provided by State in the table below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\This amount is exclusive of the national service educational
award, which is provided separately through the National Service
Trust Fund. This award represents an average estimated cost per
participant for start-up programs based on the experience of the
national service model programs funded by the Commission on National
and Community Service. Average costs for established programs,
including youth corps programs, are generally significantly lower.
Because the Corporation anticipates funding start-up programs as
well as programs that build on the infrastructure of existing
programs and organizations, and because the Corporation will
strongly encourage programs to exceed the minimum matching
requirements, it is expected that many programs will achieve
significantly lower average costs per position.

Formula Allocation of Program Funds and AmeriCorps Educational Awards to
States\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Educational
State funds awards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama....................................... $831,565 60
Alaska........................................ 112,977 8
Arkansas...................................... 483,521 35
Arizona....................................... 752,837 55
California.................................... 6,107,718 443
Colorado...................................... 677,088 49
Connecticut................................... 674,582 49
Delaware...................................... 136,874 10
District of Columbia.......................... 124,841 9
Florida....................................... 2,661,624 193
Georgia....................................... 1,332,191 97
Hawaii........................................ 228,283 17
Idaho......................................... 207,141 15
Illinois...................................... 2,347,085 170
Indiana....................................... 1,138,927 83
Iowa.......................................... 570,551 41
Kansas........................................ 508,771 37
Kentucky...................................... 757,132 55
Louisiana..................................... 867,509 63
Maine......................................... 252,425 18
Maryland...................................... 982,217 71
Massachusetts................................. 1,234,071 89
Michigan...................................... 1,909,484 138
Minnesota..................................... 897,970 65
Mississippi................................... 529,412 38
Missouri...................................... 1,051,644 76
Montana....................................... 164,498 12
Nebraska...................................... 324,351 24
Nevada........................................ 246,884 18
New Hampshire................................. 228,004 17
New Jersey.................................... 1,586,048 115
New Mexico.................................... 311,489 23
New York...................................... 3,693,483 268
North Carolina................................ 1,362,733 99
North Dakota.................................. 131,279 10
Ohio.......................................... 2,228,498 161
Oklahoma...................................... 646,322 47
Oregon........................................ 584,123 42
Pennsylvania.................................. 2,440,838 177
Puerto Rico................................... 736,670 53
Rhode Island.................................. 205,912 15
South Carolina................................ 717,574 52
South Dakota.................................. 143,281 10
Tennessee..................................... 1,002,281 73
Texas......................................... 3,491,927 253
Utah.......................................... 353,656 26
Vermont....................................... 115,641 8
Virginia...................................... 1,272,453 92
Washington.................................... 1,000,500 72
West Virginia................................. 368,770 27
Wisconsin..................................... 1,004,349 73
Wyoming....................................... 93,332 7
-------------------------
Totals...................................... 51,833,333 3,756
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The actual amount of each State's grant will be proportionally
reduced if the Corporation chooses to set aside money for participant
health and/or child care costs. In addition, numbers are based on the
1990 census but will be updated to incorporate the latest census
estimates from the Census Bureau.

The Corporation will consider the number of educational awards that
corresponds to a State's formula allotment as a minimum, and not as a
maximum, number of educational awards potentially provided to a State.
Thus, a State's ``minimum'' formula and award allotments should not
necessarily drive the design or size of programs applying for
assistance through State applications. Indeed, insofar as the formula
application includes high quality, cost-effective programs that request
more educational awards than would otherwise be provided through the
minimum allotment, those programs would be eligible to receive
additional awards from the Corporation on a competitive basis.
This mechanism for distributing educational awards not only
satisfies the legislative requirement but also makes sense for policy
and programmatic reasons. In making this determination, the Corporation
did, however, consider other alternatives. For example, the Corporation
considered the possibility of distributing the awards on a basis
proportional to the distribution of formula grants. Thus a State
receiving 12% of the total amount of funding available by formula
allocation would also receive the same percentage of educational
awards. The Corporation did not choose this option for several reasons.
First, from a legal standpoint, if the Congress had intended for
there to be a direct, proportional correlation between the overall
distribution of program funds and the overall distribution of
AmeriCorps educational awards, it would not have created educational
award set-asides for VISTA and CCC volunteers; nor would it have
allowed for the distribution of educational awards to programs the
Corporation does not fund or programs, such as professional corps, that
necessitate different levels of Federal support than other programs.
Second, from a programmatic standpoint, the distribution of
educational awards on a strict proportional basis would have resulted,
in some cases, in the unfortunate consequence of leaving some States
with insufficient programmatic funds to support the number of
participants for whom they would have received educational awards.
Finally, this approach also would have resulted in a lack of
flexibility on the part of the Corporation to provide support to
programs on the basis of quality and need, rather than on the basis of
an arbitrary proportional rule that, as noted above, bears no
relationship to anticipated or real program costs.
In short, the Corporation's need to support quality programs, to
ensure adequate financial support for all approved AmeriCorps positions
and educational awards within those programs, and the need to retain
flexibility to respond to individual State and program needs are
addressed through this distributive scheme.
(2) State Competition
In order to receive consideration for competitive funds, a State
must receive its formula allotment. In addition to the grants made
available to States by formula allocation, the Corporation will make at
least one-third of program funds, as well as an appropriate number of
educational awards as determined by the Corporation, available to
States on a competitive basis. For fiscal year 1994, the Corporation
expects that $51,833,333 will be available for this competition. The
following priorities will govern the competitive distribution of
AmeriCorps funds and educational awards to States:
(a) Priority for small states. The Corporation is committed to
ensuring that every State is able to participate in a meaningful way in
the AmeriCorps grant program. Specifically, the Corporation seeks to
enable every State that so desires to support at least one high quality
AmeriCorps program that meets the preferred minimum size guidelines of
20 full-time equivalent participants as stipulated in section I(D)(2),
above. Thus, for fiscal year 1994 the Corporation has established a
priority for small States, whereby any State that: (i) Does not
otherwise receive through the legislatively required formula allocation
adequate funding to support at least 20 full-time AmeriCorps positions,
and the same number of educational awards, and (ii) which can
demonstrate the existence of a high quality program(s), will receive
priority consideration for assistance through competitive State
funding.
In essence, this priority effectively establishes a small State
floor in the amounts of $276,100\2\ and 20 AmeriCorps educational
awards for those affected States (indicated in the table in section
II(B)(1)) that meet the quality and need criteria indicated above. This
priority does not, however, constitute a guarantee of assistance to any
State. Although the priority for small States will result in programs
otherwise supported through a State's formula allotment receiving
limited competitive funding, these programs will not be required to
address the national priorities established by the Corporation,
notwithstanding the provision specified in Sec. 2522.410(b)(1)(ii) of
this rule. Thus, every State meeting the guidelines will be able to
support at least one program of the minimum preferred size that
addresses State-based priorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\This figure was calculated by multiplying the preferred
minimum number of national service participants per state (20) by
the average Federal cost per participant ($13,800)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) National issue priorities. All programs, except those affected
by paragraph (a) above, that are submitted through State applications
for competitive funding should address the national issue priorities
explained in section I(C)(2) of this supplementary section. In general,
most activities conducted by programs should substantially address one
or more of the national priorities. However, the Corporation may grant
waivers if a program demonstrates that its proposed activities are (i)
more essential for their communities and (ii) not being met in any
other way.
(c) Priority for existing grantees. In fiscal year 1994, the
Corporation will give priority to National Service Demonstration
Programs and American Conservation and Youth Service Corps Programs
that received funding from the Commission on National and Community
Service. While this one-year priority does not constitute a guarantee
for renewal funding, the Corporation expects that those programs that
meet the minimum requirements and quality standards stipulated in this
rule will receive support. In addition, States should give priority to
these programs as well.
(3) Direct National Competition
(a) Allocation. After funds have been allotted to the States and
set aside for Indian tribes and U.S. territories, any remaining
AmeriCorps program funds will be distributed directly by the
Corporation on a competitive basis. In fiscal year 1994, the
Corporation anticipates making $48.8 million available for award in
this category. In general, subdivisions of States, Indian tribes,
public or private nonprofit organizations (including labor
organizations), institutions of higher education, and Federal agencies
may apply for these funds, although no more than one-third may go to
Federal agencies. Unless a program has a clear and compelling reason
not to do so, programs funded through this competition should address
any national priorities established pursuant to Sec. 2522.410(b)(1)(ii)
of this rule.
(b) Limitations for fiscal year 1994. The Corporation will limit
this category of funding in fiscal year 1994 to the following:
(i) Programs operated or funded by Federal agencies.
(ii) Programs operated or funded by national nonprofit
organizations.
(iii) Professional corps programs.
(iv) Programs operated in more than one State.
The Corporation intends to use this category of funding primarily
to support programs that are national or regional in scope.
In general, programs that are operated locally by nonprofits,
subdivisions of States or institutions of higher education can and
should apply through their respective States; doing so will increase
the chances that the programs are part of a comprehensive State plan,
which will enable the Corporation to ensure that all local programs are
appropriately monitored and receive technical assistance necessary to
support high-quality programs.
To clarify the eligibility of applicants in fiscal year 1994, the
Corporation will consider a national nonprofit organization to be one
whose membership, activities, constituencies, or mission is national in
scope. In addition, although programs operated or funded by States are
not otherwise eligible to receive direct national competitive funds,
those National Service Demonstration Programs supported by the
Commission on National and Community Service that operate in more than
one State may compete for support in fiscal year 1994.
(c) Agreements with Federal agencies. Technically, when a Federal
agency competes for and receives program funds under this category, the
Corporation will not give that agency a grant but rather will enter
into a contract or cooperative agreement that includes the transfer of
funds. Federal agencies may either subgrant to other nonprofits or
other eligible entities, or operate programs directly. Through this
rule the Corporation has clarified the scope and purposes of the
prospective awards to Federal Agencies as follows:
(i) AmeriCorps grants should serve as ``seed money'' to leverage
agencies' existing resources and grant-making capacity toward the goal
of integrating service more fully into agencies' programs and
activities. Agencies should plan, ultimately, to support independently
service initiatives developed or expanded with Corporation assistance.
(ii) Only Cabinet level departments and independent agencies may
apply. Bureaus, division, and local and regional offices of such
departments and agencies can only apply through the central department
or agency. An application may, however, include proposals for more than
one program. The primary purpose of this restriction is to ensure that
all national and community service efforts within a department or
agency are centrally coordinated and are part of a coherent strategy.
The Corporation also expects that many programs supported by
Federal agencies with Corporation assistance will be sub-granted or
operated in partnership with community-based organizations.

(C) Application Requirements/Issues

(1) Content and Degree of Specificity
In Secs. 2522.300-320 of this rule, the Corporation specifies the
application requirements for all applicants seeking AmeriCorps program
assistance, including national service educational awards. While the
Corporation will provide applicants with additional guidance through
approved application materials, the Corporation will require every
applicant--regardless of whether the applicant is a State or other
eligible entity applying directly to the Corporation--to include a
complete, detailed description of the proposed program(s) to be funded.
In essence, applicants will not be able to apply to the Corporation
for assistance for the purpose of subgranting awards to programs or
organizations that are not yet known at the time of application.
Especially in the case of States or other subgranting entities,
applicants will therefore need to know the specific programs to be
proposed and will need to provide required information on such programs
at the time of application. This requirement will ensure that the
Corporation will have complete information with which to select the
highest quality programs.
In general, this requirement will apply to States for both formula
and competitive applications, although the degree of specificity about
programs may vary slightly. In fiscal year 1994, the Corporation--
through the application materials--will require States to summarize in
the narrative of the proposal information on programs proposed under
the formula allotment (although States will be required to provide a
complete application for each program in the appendix to the State's
application). Specific, detailed information will be required for each
individual program included in any application for competitive funding.
In addition, the statute requires that the Corporation obtain
certain information on all programs prior to making any award. This
information includes:
(a) A description of service placements. The Act requires that an
application for AmeriCorps program funds and/or educational awards
include a description of the positions into which participants will be
placed, as well as a description of the minimum qualifications that
individuals must meet to be placed in those positions.
With this rule, the Corporation requires that such descriptions
describe the nature of specific tasks to be performed by participants.
Although individual ``job descriptions'' are not required for every
participant, applicants should clearly identify the specific nature of
assignments to be performed by participants within service projects.
This provision not only addresses a legislative requirement but also
provides additional information that will enable the Corporation to
assess the expected impact the program will achieve.
(b) Coordination with State Plan. The Corporation proposes to
require all applicants that are not States coordinate their activities
with the application of the State, including the State Plan, so as to
build upon existing programs and not duplicate efforts. Applicants
applying directly to the Corporation in fiscal year 1994 will be
required to coordinate their planned efforts with the State in which
the program(s) will operate, notwithstanding the fact that the
application of the State will be due to the Commission after the
applications of applicants other than States. The application should
identify efforts undertaken to this effect, including documentation of
meetings or correspondence.
(2) Special Requirements for State Applicants
(a) Number of programs in the competitive portion of a State
application. To ensure that States submit only the highest quality
programs for funding, the Corporation has limited the number of
programs a State may include in its application for competitive funding
as indicated in the table below. Every State may include at least three
programs, and each State may include an additional program for each
full percentage point of the population that State contains. New York,
for example, will receive the initial three, plus an additional seven
corresponding to the 7% of the total population New York contains, for
a total of ten.

Maximum Number of Programs That May Be Included in States' Applications
for Competitive Funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
State number of
programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..................................................... 5
Alaska...................................................... 3
Arkansas.................................................... 4
Arizona..................................................... 4
California.................................................. 15
Colorado.................................................... 4
Connecticut................................................. 4
Delaware.................................................... 3
District of Columbia........................................ 3
Florida..................................................... 8
Georgia..................................................... 6
Hawaii...................................................... 3
Idaho....................................................... 3
Illinois.................................................... 8
Indiana..................................................... 5
Iowa........................................................ 4
Kansas...................................................... 4
Kentucky.................................................... 4
Louisiana................................................... 5
Maine....................................................... 3
Maryland.................................................... 5
Massachusetts............................................... 5
Michigan.................................................... 7
Minnesota................................................... 5
Mississippi................................................. 4
Missouri.................................................... 5
Montana..................................................... 3
Nebraska.................................................... 4
Nevada...................................................... 3
New Hampshire............................................... 3
New Jersey.................................................. 6
New Mexico.................................................. 4
New York.................................................... 10
North Carolina.............................................. 6
North Dakota................................................ 3
Ohio........................................................ 7
Oklahoma.................................................... 4
Oregon...................................................... 4
Pennsylvania................................................ 8
Puerto Rico................................................. 4
Rhode Island................................................ 3
South Carolina.............................................. 4
South Dakota................................................ 3
Tennessee................................................... 5
Texas....................................................... 10
Utah........................................................ 4
Vermont..................................................... 3
Virginia.................................................... 5
Washington.................................................. 5
West Virginia............................................... 4
Wisconsin................................................... 5
Wyoming..................................................... 3
-----------
Totals................................................ 256
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because of the limited amount of funding available, the selection
process will be very competitive, with only about one in five proposed
programs likely to receive support. Furthermore, the Corporation does
not anticipate that any one State will receive more than a third of the
available funds, and most States will receive considerably less. States
are advised to submit applications proposing only coherent, high
quality programs that: address the program and size requirements
explained in part 2522 of this rule; are consistent with the State
plan; and are cost-effective. States will not increase the chances of
their programs receiving funding by increasing the total number of
programs they submit.
(b) Use of competitive funds to support programs included in the
formula portion of a State application. The cost of programs included
in the formula application may not exceed a State's formula allotment.
However, from the competitive State funds, States may request
additional funds and educational awards for programs listed in the
formula section of the applications if either (i) the State receives
small State priority consideration (as explained in Sec. II(B)(2),
above), or (ii) programs listed in the formula portion of the
application meet the national priorities explained in Sec. I(C)(2),
above. Nevertheless, States should clearly indicate which programs will
be supported with formula assistance if competitive funding is not
received.
(c) Limitation on State-run programs. The Act requires an assurance
that at least sixty percent of Corporation assistance provided to a
State will be used to support programs that are not operated by the
State or State agency. However, the Corporation may waive this
requirement if a State demonstrates that it did not receive an adequate
number of acceptable applications from applicants other than States
during the competitive selection process.
The Corporation recognizes that this provision may be problematic
for some States with large existing AmeriCorps programs previously
supported by the Commission on National and Community Service,
especially if the programs are operated by the State (through a
department or agency). Such States should not attempt to comply with
the 60% requirement if doing so would necessitate submission of more
than five program proposals for competitive funding, proposals with
inflated budgets, or proposals for programs that are not of high
quality. In order to ensure that States with large existing grantees
may participate, the Corporation will consider such States unable to
comply.

(D) Selection Criteria Issues

In order to preserve maximum flexibility from year to year to
respond to changing priorities, the proposed regulations do not
substantively add to or modify the selection criteria listed in the
statute, except that, for State applicants, the quality of the State
plan will be a criterion in the selection of programs. As explained in
the ``State Plan'' section of this Supplementary Section above, the
quality of the State plan will be one factor in determining whether a
State's application for its formula allotment is accepted or rejected,
and insofar as a State has a high-quality State plan it will benefit
those programs in the competitive selection process as well. Other
changes or additions to the selection criteria will be provided
annually in the Corporation's application materials.

Investment for Quality and Innovation Issues

(1) Purpose
The Investment for Quality and Innovation activities are a
relatively small but nevertheless critical component of the
Corporation's overall national and community service efforts.
Activities funded under this part aim to build service infrastructure,
and include training, technical assistance, fellowships, service
awards, clearinghouses, research, recruitment, and innovative and
demonstration programs.
The Investment for Quality and Innovation activities apply to a
broad spectrum of service areas, including, but not limited to, the
service-learning and AmeriCorps programs described in parts 2515-2524
of this rule. (Conversely, the training and technical assistance
activities described in part 2524 of this rule target strictly the
AmeriCorps programs described in parts 2520-2523.) All of these
activities, however, are aimed at improving the quality of the service
field and, ultimately, at finding the best ways to meet the Nation's
needs through service.
(2) Priorities
This rule divides these activities into three groups: Innovative
and Special Demonstration Programs; Technical Assistance, Training, and
Other Service Infrastructure-building Activities; and Special
Activities. The precise activities that are allowable under each area
are specified in parts 2531-2533. Given the limited resources that will
be allotted to these activities (the Corporation anticipates the
availability of $15 million in fiscal year 1994), the Corporation may
exercise its statutory authority to set priorities that will limit the
categories of activities that will be eligible for funding. If the
Corporation chooses to establish such priorities for fiscal year 1994,
it will seek to concentrate funds on those activities that will be most
effective and efficient in building service infrastructure.

Miscellaneous Requirements

Interested parties should be advised that because the assistance
provided under the authority of this rule constitutes Federal financial
assistance for the purposes of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(which bars discrimination based on race, color, or national origin),
title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (which bars discrimination
on the basis of gender), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (which bars
discrimination on the basis of disability), and the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975 (which bars discrimination on the basis of age), grantees
will be required to comply with the aforementioned provisions of
Federal law.
Grant recipients will be expected to expend Corporation grants in a
judicious and reasonable manner, consistent with pertinent provisions
of Federal law and regulations. Grantees must keep records according to
Corporation guidelines, including records that fully disclose the
amount and disposition of the proceeds of a Corporation grant. The
Inspector General of the Corporation (or other authorized official)
shall have access, for the purpose of audit and examination, to the
books and records of grantees that may be related or pertinent to the
Corporation grant.
Grantees should further be advised that Uniform Administrative
Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local
Governments, and Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative
Agreements to other than State and Local Governments, as well as
regulations for the Privacy Act, Freedom of Information Act, Sunshine
Act, Government-wide Debarment and Suspension, and Government-wide
Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace will also be published prior to
awarding grants.
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, it is hereby
certified that this rule will not have a significant impact on small
business entities.
The Corporation has separately submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget, under the terms of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
application packages to be used by applicants when applying for
Corporation grants. To request copies of the applications, please
contact the Corporation for National and Community Service at the
address listed above.
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, the Corporation
will submit the information collection requirements contained in this
rule to the Office of Management and Budget for its review (44 U.S.C.
3504(h)). The information collection requirements are needed in order
to provide assistance to parties affected by these regulations, in
accordance with statutory mandates.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 94.003 for State
Commissions, Alternative Administrative Entities, and Transitional
Entities; 94.004 for K-12 Service-Learning Programs; 94.005 for
Higher Education Service-Learning Programs; 94.006 for AmeriCorps
Programs; 94.007 for Investment for Quality and Innovation Programs)

List of Subjects

45 CFR Part 2510

Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2513

Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2515

Grant programs--social programs, Nonprofit organizations,
Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2516

Elementary and secondary education, Grant programs--social
programs, Indians, Nonprofit organizations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2517

Community development, Grant programs--social programs, Nonprofit
organizations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2518

Grant programs--social programs, Nonprofit organizations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2519

Colleges and universities, Grant programs--social programs,
Nonprofit organizations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2520

AmeriCorps, Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2521

AmeriCorps, Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2522

AmeriCorps, Grant programs--social programs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2523

AmeriCorps, Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2524

AmeriCorps, Grant programs--social programs, Technical assistance,
Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2530

Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2531

Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2532

Grant programs--social programs, Volunteers, Technical assistance.

45 CFR Part 2533

Decorations, Medals, Awards, Scholarships and fellowships,
Volunteers.

45 CFR Part 2540

Administrative practice and procedure, Grant programs--social
programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volunteers.

Dated: January 3, 1994.
Catherine Milton,
Vice President and Director of National and Community Service Programs.

Accordingly, the Corporation amends title 45, chapter XXV of the
Code of Federal Regulations by adding parts 2510, 2513, 2515 through
2524, 2530 through 2533, and 2540 to read as follows:

PART 2510--OVERALL PURPOSES AND DEFINITIONS

Sec.
2510.10 What are the purposes of the programs and activities of the
Corporation for National and Community Service?
2510.20 Definitions.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.

Sec. 2510.10 What are the purposes of the programs and activities of
the Corporation for National and Community Service?

The National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 established
the Corporation for National and Community Service (the Corporation).
The Corporation's mission is to engage Americans of all ages and
backgrounds in community-based service. This service will address the
Nation's educational, public safety, human, and environmental needs to
achieve direct and demonstrable results. In doing so, the Corporation
will foster civic responsibility, strengthen the ties that bind us
together as a people, and provide educational opportunity for those who
make a substantial commitment to service. The Corporation will
undertake activities and provide assistance to States and other
eligible entities to support national and community service programs
and to achieve other purposes consistent with its mission.

Sec. 2510.20 Definitions.

The following definitions apply to terms used in 45 CFR parts 2510
through 2550:
Act. The term Act means the National and Community Service Act of
1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.).
Administrative costs. The term administrative costs means costs
associated with the overall administration of a Corporation program.
(1) Administrative costs include such costs as the following:
(i) Indirect costs (i.e., costs identified with two or more cost
objectives but not identified with a particular cost objective) as
described in applicable provisions of Office of Management and Budget
Circulars that relate to indirect costs.
(ii) Costs for financial, accounting, or contracting functions.
(iii) Costs for insurance that protects the entity that operates
the program.
(iv) Costs for salaries and benefits of the director and any other
administrative staff of the program.
(2) Administrative costs do not include allowable costs directly
related to program operations. These program costs include such costs
as the following:
(i) Costs for living allowances and training of participants.
(ii) Costs for staff training.
(iii) Costs for travel.
(iv) Costs related to the evaluation of the program.
(v) Costs for salaries and benefits of staff who recruit, train,
place, or supervise participants.
(3) Particular costs such as those associated with staff who
perform both administrative and program functions may be prorated
between administrative costs and costs directly related to program
operations.
Adult volunteer. The term adult volunteer means an individual, such
as an older adult, an individual with a disability, a parent, or an
employee of a business or public or private nonprofit organization,
who--
(1) Works without financial remuneration in an educational
institution to assist students or out-of-school youth; and
(2) Is beyond the age of compulsory school attendance in the State
in which the educational institution is located.
AmeriCorps. The term AmeriCorps means the combination of all
AmeriCorps programs and participants.
AmeriCorps educational award. The term AmeriCorps educational award
means a national service educational award described in section 147 of
the Act.
AmeriCorps participant. The term AmeriCorps participant means any
individual who is serving in--
(1) An AmeriCorps program;
(2) An approved AmeriCorps position; or
(3) Both.
AmeriCorps program. The term AmeriCorps program means--
(1) Any program that receives approved AmeriCorps positions;
(2) Any program that receives Corporation funds under section 121
of the Act; or
(3) Both.
Approved AmeriCorps position. The term approved AmeriCorps position
means an AmeriCorps position for which the Corporation has approved the
provision of an AmeriCorps educational award as one of the benefits to
be provided for successful service in the position.
Carry out. The term carry out, when used in connection with an
AmeriCorps program described in section 122 of the Act, means the
planning, establishment, operation, expansion, or replication of the
program.
Chief Executive Officer. The term Chief Executive Officer, except
when used to refer to the chief executive officer of a State, means the
Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation appointed under section 193
of the Act.
Community-based agency. The term community-based agency means a
private nonprofit organization (including a church or other religious
entity) that--
(1) Is representative of a community or a significant segment of a
community; and
(2) Is engaged in meeting educational, public safety, human, or
environmental community needs.
Corporation. The term Corporation means the Corporation for
National and Community Service established under section 191 of the
Act.
Economically disadvantaged. The term economically disadvantaged
means, with respect to an individual, an individual who is determined
by the Chief Executive Officer to be low-income according to the latest
available data from the Department of Commerce.
Elementary school. The term elementary school has the same meaning
given the term in section 1471(8) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2891(8)).
Indian. The term Indian means a person who is a member of an Indian
tribe, or is a `Native', as defined in section 3(b) of the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(b)).
Indian lands. The term Indian lands means any real property owned
by an Indian tribe, any real property held in trust by the United
States for an Indian or Indian tribe, and any real property held by an
Indian or Indian tribe that is subject to restrictions on alienation
imposed by the United States.
Indian tribe. The term Indian tribe means--
(1) An Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or
community, including--
(i) Any Native village, as defined in section 3(c) of the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(c)), whether organized
traditionally or pursuant to the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known
as the `Indian Reorganization Act', 25 U.S. C. 461 et seq.); and
(ii) Any Regional Corporation or Village Corporation, as defined in
subsection (g) or (j), respectively, of section 3 of the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602 (g) or (j)), that is recognized
as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the
United States under Federal law to Indians because of their status as
Indians; and
(2) Any tribal organization controlled, sanctioned, or chartered by
an entity described in paragraph (1) of this definition.
Individual with a disability. Except as provided in section 175(a)
of the Act, the term individual with a disability has the meaning given
the term in section 7(8)(B) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29
U.S.C. 706(8)(B)), and includes an individual with a physical or mental
impairment.
Infrastructure-building activities. The term infrastructure-
building activities refers to activities that increase the capacity of
organizations, programs and individuals to provide high quality service
to communities.
Institution of higher education. The term institution of higher
education has the same meaning given the term in section 1201(a) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141(a)).
Local educational agency (LEA). The term local educational agency
has the same meaning given the term in section 1471(12) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2891(12)).
National nonprofit. The term national nonprofit means any nonprofit
organization whose mission, membership, activities, or constituencies
are national in scope.
National service laws. The term national service laws means the Act
and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4950 et
seq.).
Objective. The term objective means a desired accomplishment of a
program.
Out-of-school youth. The term out-of-school youth means an
individual who--
(1) Has not attained the age of 27;
(2) Has not completed college or its equivalent; and
(3) Is not enrolled in an elementary or secondary school or
institution of higher education.
Participant. (1) The term participant means an individual enrolled
in a program that receives assistance under the Act.
(2) A participant may not be considered to be an employee of the
program in which the participant is enrolled.
Partnership program. The term partnership program means a program
through which an adult volunteer, a public or private nonprofit
organization, an institution of higher education, or a business assists
a local educational agency.
Program. The term program, unless the context otherwise requires,
and except when used as part of the term academic program, means a
program described in section 111(a) (other than a program referred to
in paragraph (3)(B) of that section), 117A(a), 119(b)(1), or 122(a) of
the Act, or in paragraph (1) or (2) of section 152(b) of the Act, or an
activity that could be funded under sections 198, 198C, or 198D of the
Act.
Program sponsor. The term program sponsor means an entity
responsible for recruiting, selecting, and training participants,
providing them benefits and support services, engaging them in regular
group activities, and placing them in projects.
Project. The term project means an activity, carried out through a
program that receives assistance under the Act, that results in a
specific identifiable service or improvement that otherwise would not
be done with existing funds, and that does not duplicate the routine
services or functions of the employer to whom participants are
assigned.
Project sponsor. The term project sponsor means an organization, or
other entity, that has been selected to provide a placement for a
participant.
Qualified individual with a disability. The term qualified
individual with a disability has the meaning given the term in section
101(8) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C.
12111(8)).
School-age youth. The term school-age youth means--
(1) Individuals between the ages of 5 and 17, inclusive; and
(2) Children with disabilities, as defined in section 602(a)(1) of
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1401(a)(1)),
who receive services under part B of that Act.
Secondary school. The term secondary school has the same meaning
given the term in section 1471(21) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2891(21)).
Service-learning. The term service-learning means a method under
which students or participants learn and develop through active
participation in thoughtfully organized service that--
(1) Is conducted in and meets the needs of a community and is
coordinated with an elementary school, secondary school, institution of
higher education, or community service program, and with the community;
(2) Helps foster civic responsibility;
(3) Is integrated into and enhances the academic curriculum of the
students or the educational components of the community service program
in which the participants are enrolled; and
(4) Includes structured time for the students and participants to
reflect on the service experience.
Service-learning coordinator. The term service-learning coordinator
means an individual trained in service-learning who identifies
community partners for LEAs; assists in designing and implementing
local partnerships service-learning programs; provides technical
assistance and information to, and facilitates the training of,
teachers; and provides other services for an LEA.
State. The term State means each of the several States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United
States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands. The term also includes Palau, until the
Compact of Free Association is ratified.
State Commission. The term State Commission means a State
Commission on National and Community Service maintained by a State
pursuant to section 178 of the Act. Except when used in section 178,
the term includes an alternative administrative entity for a State
approved by the Corporation under that section to act in lieu of a
State Commission.
State educational agency (SEA). The term State educational agency
has the same meaning given that term in section 1471(23) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 2891(23)).
Student. The term student means an individual who is enrolled in an
elementary or secondary school or institution of higher education on a
full-time or part-time basis.
Subdivision of a State. The term subdivision of a State means a
governmental unit within a State other than a unit with Statewide
responsibilities.

PART 2513--STATE PLAN: PURPOSE, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND
SELECTION CRITERIA

Sec.
2513.10 Who must submit a State Plan?
2513.20 What are the purposes of a State Plan?
2513.30 What information must a State Plan contain?
2513.40 How will the State Plans be evaluated?

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12501 et seq.

Sec. 2513.10 Who must submit a State Plan?

The fifty States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, through
a Corporation-approved State Commission, Alternative Administrative
Entity, or Transitional Entity must submit a comprehensive national and
community service plan (``State Plan'') in order to apply to the
Corporation for support under parts 2515 through 2524 of this chapter.

Sec. 2513.20 What are the purposes of a State Plan?

The purposes of the State Plan are:
(a) To set forth the State's plan for promoting national and
community service and strengthening its service infrastructure,
including how Corporation-funded programs fit into the plan;
(b) To establish specific priorities and goals that advance the
State's plan for strengthening its service program infrastructure and
to specify strategies for achieving the stated goals;
(c) To inform the Corporation of the relevant historical background
of the State's infrastructure for supporting national and community
service and other volunteer opportunities, as well as the current
status of such infrastructure;
(d) To assist the Corporation in making decisions on applications
to receive formula and competitive funding under Sec. 2521.30 of this
chapter and to assist the Corporation in assessing a State's
application for renewal funding for State administrative funds as
provided in part 2550 of this c

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-322. Public record. Not legal advice.