Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
289844728
label
State Structure Meeting, [7/21/93] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
289844728
contentType
document
title
State Structure Meeting, [7/21/93] [1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Office of National Service (Clinton Administration)
Sarah Whitman's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
289844728
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
287311044-20130661F-Seg2-030-024-2023
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
403feecdcb08db4c
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2013-0661-F (2)
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
National Service
Series/Staff Member:
Sarah Whitman
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
1289
FolderID:
Folder Title:
State Structure Meeting, [7/21/93] [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
66
2
5
3
STATE STRUCTURE MEETING
July 21, 1993
4pm rm 472
State Structure Working Group
Additional issues to be considered:
I. State Selection Process (Don & Catherine)
A. What is the process for grant distribution?
B. What should be in state plan and who will evaluate it?
1) Drafting model state structures?
2) Is it legal to set up a state commission without
state legislation?
C. What kind of communication will there be between
state and Governors?
1) State by state outreach programs? (Mike)
D. What training and technical assistance will be available
to the states?
1) Regional mtgs?
2) Staff development?
3) Personal training on state level?
II. Lead Agencies
A. Get state legislative models
B. Look to non profit organizations as lead agencies for
flexibility and short term advantages (transition option?)
1) Is it legal?
2) How feasible?
C. Get Federal reps to deal with states?
III. Laws and Regulations
A. What is important to be included in regulations on the
program side? (Catherine)
B. Consistency with policy guidelines needed
IV. Federal V State Employees
A. Classification of employees for state workers
B. Individual state merit awards vary greatly (Mike)
V. Fiscal (Judy)
A. What are the resources for the budget? (Catherine)
B. Look at capacity for fiscal issues
C. Get up-to-date list of state auditors
1) Look at differences in auditing by state
ACTION MEETING
Regional Grant Offices
July 20, 1993
Sarah,
3:15pm
rm. 500 E
Here is a draft
of the notes from
]
I. Regional Office Organization
yesterday's meeting.
I'm still trying to
*see chart
figure out the chart
? ?s Tina
II. Interaction with State Offices
*State offices act as intermediary between regional offices
and grantees
*Grant offices provide ongoing training for state offices
III. Major Responsibilities of Regional Offices
A. Application and Approval Process
*Establishes correct funding levels
*Negotiates grants through state office
*Ensure proper allocation of funds
*Makes recommendations to the regional office
*Deals with financial mismanagement (problems go to the
Inspector General)
B. Negotiation of Budget
*State offices handle review of budget
*State offices submit application to regional office
(regional office then approves of paperwork)
*Time period from application to receiving grant-180
days
Further comments:
-training and technical assistance needed for fiscal and
management efficiency
-fiscal people needed at meetings
C. Cash Disbursement
*Handle grantee requests for funding, advances,
reimbursements
*Reviews Financial Status Reports
D. Difficult Problems/Time Consuming Tasks
*Reviewing grants
*Problems with grants
IV. Communication with Grantees/Organizations
*Two phone lines
*Govt and Fiscal staff
*Project Directors
V. Advantages of Regional Offices
*Teamwork
*Experts at the fiscal level
*Liaison between state and federal offices
*Provide support for the State
VI. Concerns/Comments
*Need more staff
*Redo current automated fiscal management system
*Training for regional offices
*Need more computers
*Concerns about civil service status
JUL 20 '93 05:06PM NAT'L GOVERNORS'ASSOCIATION
NATIONAL
Roy Romer
Raymond C. P.1/3 Scheppsch
Governor of Colorado
Executive Director
GOVERNORS
Chairman
Hall of the States
ASSOCIATION
Carroll A. Campbell Je.
444 North Capitol Street
Governor of South Carolina
Washington. D.C. 20001-1572
Vice Chairman
Telephone (202) 624-5300
NGA FAX TRANSMISSION FORM
DATE: 7/20/93
TO:
FAX NUMBER:
Sarah Whitman
456-6430
FROM:
PATRICIA SULLIVAN
202-624-7723 (Commercial)
202-624-5313 (fax)
NUMBER OF PAGES: 3
(including this page)
REMARKS: Sorry for the delay!
PLEASE CALL JACKIE HALL AT 202-624-5341 WITH ANY PROBLEMS.
JUL 20 '93 05:07PM NAT'L GOVERNORS'ASSOCIATION
P.2/3
July 20, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Sarah Whitman
FROM: Patty Sullivan
OF
RE: Possible preparatory activities to assure timely
implementation of the National Service Trust Act
I've listed below a number of activities that can be completed
during the next few months that will help lay the groundwork for the
implementation of the National Service Trust Act from & state
perspective.
1) Continued outreach between the Office of National Service and the
nation's Governors. Special efforts should be made to engage
Governors other than Romer, who will be leaving the NGA chairmanship
in August of 1993. Perhaps efforts could be targetted on lead
states or others identified by the Commission as strong service
states.
2) Development of basic information to educate Governors' staffs on
the mechanics of the National Service program. This effort would
build on the current materials that have been distributed during the
legislativo process and could include a short "implementation guide"
that would lay out the specific steps that need to be taken by a
Governors' office. Such materials should be developed jointly by
the NGA, the Office of National Service and where appropriate, the
Commission.
3) Convene a working group of governors' staff from interested
states to help identify the potential barriers to the timely
lementation of the National Service program. The Commission
could again help to identify states and individuals that would serve
on such a working group. Based on the lessons learned from the
existing programs, the group could help anticipate the potential
problems in implementation and assist in working out some of these
problems in advance. NGA could convene the working group from the
Governors.
JUL 20 '93 05:07PM NAT'L GOVERNORS'ASSOCIATION
P.3/3
Sarah Whitman
p.2
July 20, 1993
4) Work with the National Conference of State Legislatures, the
State Budget Officers and other state related groups LO Identify
potential barriers to implementation from a more technical
perspective. For example, what sort of model memorandum of
understanding exist between state agencies that have helped to
facilitate transfer of funds within state agencies.
5) Develop a long-term strategy to develop broad-based support for
the National Service program among the governors. NGA will continue
to keep the governors informed on the progress of the legislation
and then the implementation of the program. Efforts will also be
made to include national and community service as an agenda item at
NGA meetings, Informal technical assistance will be provided to
encourage governors to incorporate service programs into larger
initiatives.
ROBERT R. MCCORMICK TRIBUNE FOUNDATION
435 N. MICHIGAN AVENUE, SUITE 770
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60611-4041
312/222-3512
NEAL CREIGHTON
President and
Chief Executive Officer
July 13, 1993
C. Richard Allen
Deputy Assistant to the President
Office of National Service
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. Allen:
Just a note to follow up on our short conversation when I visited the White House
last month with the group from Americans for National Service. If you will
remember, we talked about an idea that our Foundation has under consideration
for funding. The concept is to develop a model plan for a state to work with the
new Corporation that will be established under the pending legislation for National
Service. We would use Illinois as the model and have informally discussed this
with the Governor.
Of course, there is not much we can do until the actual legislation passes on the
Hill. Tentatively, we have discussed an initial meeting of key people in Springfield
early in 1994, followed by a conference at our center just west of Chicago several
months later. At the conference, we would present a draft plan for discussion.
Following the conference we would publish a revised plan as the model. Hopefully,
this would be the plan that Illinois would use and it could serve as a guide for the
other states. Participation by your office in all phases of the project would certainly
enhance the chance that the outcome would be something useful for the country.
I called Sara Whitman as she requested shortly after our visit to the White House.
She said she would get back to us at the appropriate time. I imagine that most of
your efforts now are directed toward the passage of the legislation. We wish you
success in that endeavor.
I appreciate the time you took to brief us when we were in Washington. And, we
look forward to working with you in the future.
Sincerely,
Neal Creighton
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
sent 7/16/93
July 15, 1993
Mr. Neal Creighton
Robert R. McCormick Tribune Foundation
435 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 770
Chicago, Illinois 60611-4041
Dear Neal:
Thank you very much for your kind letter. We are, of course,
thrilled by the generous interest of the McCormick Foundation in
helping to make Illinois a national model for the relationship
between a state and the new Corporation for National Service.
Although you correctly surmised that much of our attention is
focused on the current Congressional consideration of the
national service legislation, we also have begun internal
consideration of a variety of critical strategic planning issues
for the future, including those related to developing effective
state commissions.
We will be having the next in a series of internal discussions on
that issue in the middle of next week, and I would accordingly
look forward to calling you on Friday, July 23, to discuss the
subject further.
Once again, thank you for your interest and leadership.
Very truly yours,
S/CRA
C. Richard Allen
Deputy Assistant to the President
Deputy Director, Office of National Service
07/08/93
18:17
202 724 0607
CNCS #2
1
002
SUMMARY OF STATE IMPLEMENTATION
COORDINATION MEETING
Thursday, July 8, 1993
It was agreed that the Commission would do the following:
1. Produce by Monday, July 12 an updated list of all grantees in the states for FY
93.
2. Art Ochoa would continue to work on draft of a letter to be sent to the
Governors from Eli Segal. Art will share a rough outline of the letter with the
group by July 21. The letter will be sent very soon after the signing of the
legislation
3. Youth Service America, a Commission grantee, will produce five state case
studies of the planning/implementation/oordination/subgranting proces
under the National and Community Service Act of 1990. These will be completed
by the end of August and the information revealed will be passed along to the
Governors as "best practice" models.
It was agreed that CTION/Janet Green would do the following:
1. Contact Trish Thompson at the Commission to set up a meeting about Abt
research data collection (she is expecting the call).
2. Redrait the letter from Eli to State Action Directors to reflect, in particular the
morning's discussion about avoiding the appearance of "stepping on the toes" of
state and local service policymakers and program people.
It was further agreed that SaraWhitman would convene the group again, at a
time and date to be determined. The meeting should include a representative
from POLF.
State Structure
1. What are the functions now handled by the ACTION state offices? Strengths and
weaknesses? Ability to handle (or cooperate with) federal presence at the state level called for
in the legislation?
2. The Commission on National and Community Service operates through state lead agencies.
Are these effective transition mechanisms to the new state commissions? Are there other
entities that could handle the transition more effectively?
3. What are the responsibilities of the corporate representative in the state structure and what is
the overall relationship between state commissions and the corporation beyond the statutory
requirements? (eg., What information about the programs will the states need to report to the
corporation? Will the commissions assist local programs in meeting their matching
requirements?)
4. How do we best inspire each Governor to create state commissions quickly and pick the best
board members?
5. What resources do the states need to get established (money, technical assistance)?
6. Do we have these resources? Where can we get them?
7. How do we avoid fraud at the local level? How do we make sure that money is being spent
well and that certain programs do not get preferential treatment?
current ficit)
Who is watching K-12?
yareas
ONS
Chris laura, Dana Mel, Bob Judy Denny ,Areuza, Ochoa, Terry Janet
State Structure
7/7/93
1)
ACTION believes it's state offices can staff
Federal function in states.
Next w/c
will do state by state next wk (staffing)
Money moves at regional levels - not state
2)
CNCS sees State Comm being staffed from
lead agencies.
4 State commission.
Their knowledge of which lead agencies are goal
& which aren't is anecdotal YSA study now due
Oct /Nov. Case studies in Aug,
Next
CNCS will advance (rush) which states are
week
bad.
3)
Patty will (NGA) will / ook at fiscal
processing (how to get fed funds into dont of state)
niving Freezes, commission creation (quasi-exec delegation, tc) problem,
Need bad agency N. re whether eg. Ed
Next
wr
Dept can do Public safety program. CNCS will do
Denny (IG) will look into states' reps for
Next
WK
handling fed funds
4)
Janet's letter has 8/27 due date to ACTION,
state lead State voluntarism,
will be an assignment Summary memo SHW
MEMORANDUM
Date:
June 22, 1993
From:
Sarah Whitman
To:
Rick Allen
John Briscoe
Mel Coles
Bob Currie
Jack Lew
Terry Russell
Shirley Sagawa
Eli Segal
Jeff Watson
NGA Representative
Subject:
State Structure working group meeting for the Office of National Service
Thank you for agreeing to come to the "state structure" working group meeting on Monday June
28th in the OEOB room 145 from 4:00 - 5:30. Deciding how we structure our state offices and
how they interact with the corporation is a vital piece of the strategic plan, and I appreciate your
taking the time to help us work through the issues.
I have attached a list of questions that we will want to address in the meeting. I would
appreciate it if you would notify me if there are any additional questions that you feel need to be
discussed during the meeting so that I can add them to the agenda. Since I will be out of town
tomorrow, you should fax any suggestions to the office at 202456-6420.
Thank you for your help.
State Structure
1. What state entities exist now both for both ACTION and the Commission on National and
Community Service? What is their role? What are their strengths and weaknesses? How will
they interact with or overlap with the state commissions?
2. How will ACTION's and CNCS's state offices and other existing state structures act as
transition mechanisms to the state commissions?
3. What are the responsibilities of the corporate representative in the state structure and what is
the overall relationship between state commissions and the corporation beyond the statutory
requirements? (eg., What information about the programs will the states need to report to the
corporation? Will the commissions assist local programs in meeting their matching
requirements?)
4. How do we best inspire each Governor to create state commissions quickly and pick the best
board members?
5. What resources do the states need to get established (money, technical assistance)?
6. Do we have these resources? Where can we get them?
7. How do we avoid fraud at the local level? How do we make sure that money is being spent
well and that certain programs do not get preferential treatment?
07/07/93
15:39
202 724 0607
CNCS #2
5
001/003
The Commission
CNCS
on
/
National and Community Service
Facsimile Transmission
The National Press Building, Suite 452
529 14th Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20045
Phone: (202) 724-0600
Fax: (202) 724-0608
Please deliver to: Sarah Whiteen
Organization: ONS
Fax Number:
Phone Number:
From: Teny /ArtOchoa
Date:
We are transmitting a total of 3 pages, including this cover page.
Re:
Please Note: The information n contained in the facsimile message is privileged and confidential. and is intended
only for the use of the individual named above and others who have been specifically authorized to
receive it If you are not the intended recipient. you are hereby notified that any dissemination.
distribution. OI copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, or if any problems occur with the transmission, please notify us
immediately at the telephone number above.
Message:
see you at 4:00pm
07/07/93
15:39
202 724 0607
CNCS #2
1
002/003
CERVE AMERICA
CONDESTING ON CNCS NATIONAL & CORDITION THANK
Cov MISSION ON NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
To:
State Sts ucture Planning Committee
From:
Terry Russell, General Counsel
Date:
7/7/93
Re:
State in plementation issues
After our last meeting, I had discussions with Commission staff, Youth Service
America (YSA), and the National Governors' Association (NGA) about problems
and opportunities related to the transition from state lead agencies to state
commissions. Below are some preliminary thoughts on what the our State
Structure Planning Committee identified as the big transition issues.
Structures for State I nplementation of Legislation
While the issue of which "ideal" state structures, either currently existing or to be
created, would most smoothly effectuate the transition to the new state structure
called for in the legis lation is an interesting one, the reality is that in almost all
cases, the current state lead agency will be the entity to oversee the transition to
the state commission. Since one of our main goals is a speedy and effective
transition, it would not be in our best interest to ask states to abandon their lead
agencies and designate another transition entity. This would delay the transition
process, and in some cases it would involve difficult political battles, as well as
regulatory and statutory changes.
Current state lead agencies are the right entities to implement the state
commission structures. Lead agencies have existing relationships with other
state agencies and officials. In addition, they are also networked with local and
regional governments, and state and local nonprofit organizations. Early
outreach to these kinds of constituencies is essential to building an effective state
commission.
There will be, however, cases where a Governor may wish to designate an
alternative transitional agent. Governors should be informed of this possibility
in a letter from the newly formed Corporation to Governors that discusses the
states role in implementing the legislation and outlines principles of best practice
for state planning and development.
529 14th Street, N.W. Suite 452, Washington, D.C. 20045
202/724-0600
Fax 202/724-0608
07/07/93
15:40
202 724 0807
CNCS #2
1
003.003
Resources Available for State Transition Efforts
We need to ensure that current state lead agencies have the adequate resources
and assistance to plan and execute the transition. Perhaps the single most
important way we can insure effective and timely transitions to state
commissions is to provide adequate technical assistance to the states. Technical
assistance could include an implementation guide (currently being discussed
with NGA), regional and/or national meetings for the transition entities in the
states, conference calls, etc. The overall TA team should include Corporation
staff and Board, NGA (and other national association representatives), national
nonprofits including Youth Service America and the Points of Light Foundation.
This would also increase the likelihood that the TA would cover all key transition
areas. Although no one has ever made this transition before, the study of some
current state structures may prove useful in identifying what other kinds of
assistance is necessary. We have asked Youth Service America, a Commission
grantee, to step up its technical assistance research. YSA has agreed to deliver to
us, by the end of the summer, case studies on the implementation of the National
and Community Service Act in five states. We expect these studies to provide
information that will be useful to us in helping states make the transition to the
state commission structure. Also, these studies may reveal how other states have
used in-state resources to their advantage in implementing the National and
Community Service Act.
Challenges
The biggest challenge is going to be dealing with state statutes and regulations
regarding the format of new entities. These regulations and laws may require
lengthy processes, or they may prohibit or severely restrict the development of
the state commissions. In most, if not all states, there is the need for enabling
legislation for state commissions, as well as laws and regulations that govern the
appointment of Board members. State budgetary constraints may make the
creation of a new enlity politically difficult for a Governor or legislature. In
addition, a lack of funds may have produced a hiring freeze that would prevent
knowledgeable staffing of the new state commission. Also, since state
legislatures must "reappropriate" federal funds, this may slow down the
implementation process.
The key to a successful transition to the new state commissions is providing
technical assistance to the state lead agencies quickly, when the transition
planning in the States is beginning. We must be able to provide direction and
assistance to the states at both the staff and elected official levels.
FEDERAL THE DOMESTIC ACTION VOLUNTEER AGENCY
ACTION
1100 VERMONT AVENUE, NW
WASHINGTON, DC 20525
.
U.S.A.
July 6, 1993
Ms. Sarah Whitman
Office of National Service
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Ms. Whitman:
The enclosed materials are in response to requests made at
the close of the meeting on state structure last week. These
were developed by Mal Coles. We may bring some further
information to the July 7 meeting; however, this enclosure will
be the foundation for any additional comments.
Please let me know if further specifics are needed.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Danc
Dana Rodgers
Executive Officer
Domestic and Anti-Poverty
Operations
Enclosure
CC: Gary Kowalczyk, Acting Director
ACTION'S MISSION
To stimulate voluntary citizen participation in addressing the needs of American communities,
particularly those of the poor, the disadvantaged and the elderly
JUL-06-1993 12:33 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.03
QUESTIONS FROM JUNE 28, 1993 STATE STRUCTURE MEETING
Q.1
What are the functions now handled by the ACTION State
Offices ? Strengths and weaknesses ? Ability to handle
(or cooperate with) federal presence at the state level
called for in the legislation.
A.1
For functions, see Attachment A.
For strengths/weaknesses see Dana Rodgers listing of
June 28, 1993 ( Attachment B.)
Regarding ability to cooperate with federal presence at the
state level, the ACTION State Offices provide a national
network capable of providing technical assistance to both
emerging state commissions and new Corporation grantees as
well.
Q.2
Are the current lead agencies through which the CNCS
currently operates effective transition mechanisms to new
state commissions ? Could other entities handle the
transition more effectively ?
A.2
Although this would necessarily require a state-by-state
review in order to assess current capacity, it is assumed
that the present lead agencies would be preferred vehicles.
Possible shifts could be envisioned in some states (e.g from
Department of Employment/Training to Department of Education
or vice versa) if the availability of funds in a particular
one of the four program areas prompts a rethinking of a
state's priorities.
JUL-06-1993 12:34 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921 P.04
p.2
Q.3 How do we best inspire each Governor to create state
commissions quickly and pick the best board members ?
A.3
Probably best addressed from the vantage point of enlightened
self interest. In particular, Governors will be positively
inclined to elevate the stature of a state commission if its
purpose is seen to reenforce the priorities and goals of
his/her administration. As well, the total amount of
Corporation funds available in a given state will influence
gubernatorial commitment.
Q.4 What resources do the states need to get established (money,
technical assistance) ? DO we have these resources ? Where can
we get them ?
A.4 The best resource base would be technical assistance from
states that have already established up-and-running
commissions. Representatives from these commissions could
conduct technical assistance workshops on a regional basis
for other states involved in the commission development
process. These experienced representatives could include,
as appropriate, individual state commissioners, lead agency
staff and ACTION State Directors.
As well, planning grants could supplement commission start-up
activities.
Q.5 How do we avoid fraud at the local level ? How do we make sure
that money is being well spent and that certain programs do
not get preferential treatment ?
Q.5 In addition to the provisions of the legislation that specify
the role of the Corporation's Inspector General, fraud and
preferential treatment situations can be minimized by the
structuring of state commissions that have the broadest and
most diversified composition. This checks and balances system
would be further reenforced by prohibiting the awarding of
commission funding to any organization or agency that had a
representative on the state commission.
JUL-06-1993 12:34 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.05
p.3
Q.6 Responsibilities of Corporation Representative in the state
structure.
Q.6 As a voting member of a state commission, the corporate
representative will play a pivotal role in its "steering not
rowing" approach to awarding and administering Corporation
resources. As well, the corporate representatives can be
critically instrumental in the process of determining the type
and scope of data and information retrieval systems that
funded programs should provide to individual state
commissions.
On the matter of matching funds, it is problematic how state
commissions, as primary funders, could also assist local
programs in meeting this requirement.
JUL-06-1993 12:34 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.06
ATMCHMENT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
CORPORATION ON NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
STATE STRUCTURE ISSUES
I. CURRENT ACTION STATE OFFICE FUNCTIONS AND SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL
ONES TO BE INCLUDED IN CORPORATION STATE OFFICE:
A. NETWORKING AND REPRESENTATION:
- Identification of key resources and providers that can be
instrumental in furthering Corporation goals.
- Promotion of public awareness of Corporation mission and goals
through contact with media, personal appearances and
presentations at public events.
- Liaison with Governor's Office and major organizations,
agencies and groups in effort to develop roster of nominees
for State Commission.
- Leveraging financial resources to augment successful
initiatives.
B. PLANNING:
- Retain ACTION State Office function to develop annual State
Plan for utilization of current categorical programs
(Current Year Operating Plan.)
- Assist State Commission in development of three year strategic
national service plan and its annual updating.
JUL-06-1993 12:34 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.07
ATTRAMENT A
R2
p.2
C. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
- Interfacing with current ACTION categorical program sponsors
and grantees to enhance optimal development of new Corporation
initiatives.
- Identification of current programming models that can be
replicated within a state.
- Dissemination of information on Corporation programs to
prospective grantees.
D. PROJECT MONITORING
- Establishment of project monitoring system, including on-site
visitations and written reporting procedures, designed to
promote successful programming outcomes and to enhance
quality control.
- Implementation of fiscal monitoring and review system
designed to provide both safeguarding of Corporation's
financial resources.
E. PROJECT SUPPORT AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
- Provision of assistance to State Commission and projects in
design of a recruitment, placement and information
dissemination system for service applicants.
- Design and delivery of training for servers, volunteers,
project staff and sponsor/grantee Boards of Directors.
- Provision of technical assistance to applicant organizations
seeking funding through the State Commission.
F. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
G. OFFICE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
JUL-06-1993 12:35 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.08
ATTACHMENT B
ACTION STATE PROGRAM OFFICES
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
State Program Offices have responsibilities which include networking and
representation, project development, project support and project oversight.
NETWORKING AND REPRESENTATION
Comprehensive knowledge of volunteer and service activities in the
State.
-
Know many/most of major players in volunteerism and service,
usually on a working Basis.
Knowledge of areas of program concern (such as health, education,
substance abuse, senior programs) based on experience developing
volunteer projects addressing these areas.
Advocate volunteerism/service in State (media, personal contacts,
attendance at relevant events).
-
Experience working closely with Governor's office.
-
Experience bringing different persons/groups together from diverse
backgrounds for joint programs/project development.
-
Leveraging financial resources to augment successful initiatives.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
-
Location in State makes State staff accessible, knowledgeable about
needs/realities in State.
-
Knowledge of ACTION projects enables State Office to provide
accurate, relevant information to prospective grantees.
Ability to provide common-sense, knowledgeable review of
proposed grants/projects.
JUL-06-1993 12:35 FROM ACTION REGION I
TO
8 202-606-4921
P.09
B
R2
PROJECT SUPPORT
Accessible for project site visits for technical assistance, monitoring,
training, etc.
Either takes lead or works with Regions in providing training for
VISTAs.
Conducts annual training conferences for OAVP Project Directors
in State, and participates in periodic regional training conferences.
PROJECT OVERSIGHT
-
Conducts periodic monitoring site visits to assure compliance with
Agency/Federal requirements. Provides constructive assistance to
Project Directors and follows up.
-
Reviews grant fiscal documents, periodic project reports, etc.
WEAKNESSES
-
Does not have authority to approve projects, or to waive
requirements of policy (most now in Headquarters).
-
Does not have capability to award grants (grants units are in
regions).
-
Not completely automated (not yet networked into regions and
Headquarters).
-Actica
****DRAFT****
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 7, 1993
MEMORANDUM TO ACTION STATE DIRECTORS
COMMISSION STATE LEAD AGENTS
STATE OFFICES ON VOLUNTEERISM
FROM:
ELI J. SEGAL
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NATIONAL SERVICE
SUBJECT:
Assessing Volunteer Activity at the State Level
The President's National Service Initiative will bring together
the outstanding programs of ACTION and the Commission for
National and Community Service and integrate them into an
exciting, new Corporation for National Service. This Corporation
will provide a broad portfolio of volunteer and service learning
opportunities at the national, state, and local level.
The legislation for the Corporation is enjoying the support of
many active sponsors and is expected to pass within this session
of Congress. However, as we think toward the future, we must
begin to consider the placement of a mammoth influx of new
volunteers. The current legislation calls for 25,000 full-time
volunteers in FY 1994, although the level of resources and number
of volunteers that will be funded has not been finalized.
To begin this process, I would ask the ACTION State Director, as
there is one in every state, coordinate a state task force
consisting of the ACTION State Director, Commission State Lead
Agents, the Director of the State Office on Volunteerism. It is
vital that you begin discussions about the future directions for
the Corporation, specifically identifying what opportunities
exist or can be created for the placement of full-time volunteers
in your state. We are particularly interested in your state's
capacity to absorb full-time volunteers into one of four areas
called for by legislation: education; environment; health and
human needs; and public safety.
I have attached some areas of discussion which might be helpful
to use as guidelines. Please try to cover all of them, but
certainly, do not let them limit your flow of thought. We would
like to receive your recommendations in writing no later than
August 26, 1993.
As always, if you have any questions related to this activity,
please do not hesitate to contact Janet V. Green or Laura Gassner
at the White House Office of National Service at (202) 456-6444.
Thank you for all your assistance and hard work and we look
forward to hearing from you.
Discussion Areas
The following are provided only as guides and are not meant to
limit your flow of thought. Please keep in mind that this is a
work in progress and is not intended to be a final "wish list"
for your state. We will be contacting you once we receive your
written comments to hold further discussions.
A.
Please discuss with each other the degree that you could
expand your programs next year with growth in VISTA as well
as other full-time volunteer programs.
1. How many new volunteers can your state accommodate?
2. In which areas (i.e., education, environment, health and
human needs, and public safety) are these volunteers
needed the most?
3. How many full-time volunteers can be accommodated in each
area? Part-time?
SOUNDS
4. The legislation calls for a match of federal dollars and
equal
private monies -- realistically, what activities could
your state support?
match
B.
Additionally, if there are new areas that you would like to
develop in terms of grantees or new types of volunteer roles,
please provide us with that information as well.
1. Are there other areas of unmet needs into which you could
expand full-time volunteer services?
2. Is your state currently providing unique services through
a program that you feel could serve as an example for
other states who have yet to meet such needs still unmet
in their states? Please provide examples of these
programs and any relevant information about them.
C.
What types of recruitment, evaluation, or technical
assistance could your state use to gauge program evolution
and development?
Please return by August 26, 1993 to the address listed below:
Janet V. Green or Laura Gassner
White House Office of National Service
Old Executive Office Building
Room 145
Washington, DC 20500-0145
rogram Name I
Filename: STATESBL.XLS
Program Name
Number of Volunteer Slots
Average Number of Vols. Per Term
Required Age of Volunteers
Age of Volunteers
Females (%)
Males (%)
African-American (%)
Hispanic (%)
Asian (%)
Native American (%)
Caucasian (%)
Other (%)
High School Students (%)
College Students (%)
Graduate Students (%)
Non-Students (%)
Eligibility Requirements
Page 1
Stipend Range
Post-Service Benefit Range
Specific Use for Benefit
Scholarships Available
Job Counseling/Follow-up
Time Commitment by Volunteers
Length of Volunteer Term
Average Length in Program
Volunteer Term Limitation
Educational Projects
Environmental Projects
Health Projects
Public Safety Projects
Projects with Other Focuses
Year Established
Length of Program
Program Cost per Volunteer
Program Cost per Volunteer Hour
Annual Budget
County/Municipal Funding
State Funding
Federal Funding
Last Updated: 6/28/93
Fee-for-Service Contracts
Private Contributions
Comparable/Competitive projects
Last Evaluation
How often evaluated
PennSERVE / PA Corps
TEL: 717-787-9458
Jun 16,93 7:31 No.001 P.01
PennSERVE: The Governor's Office of Citizen Service
Department of Labor and Industry
1304 Labor & Industry Building
Seventh & Forster Streets
Harrisburg, Pa 17120
Phone: (717) 787-1971 or (717) 787-7290
FAX: (717) 787-9458
DATE: 6/16/93
TO: Sarah Wentworth
Telephone:
OFFICE ONS
FAX# 202.456.6420
FROM: John Briscre
Telephone:
OFFICE
BRIEF MESSAGE:
NUMBER OF PACES NOT INCLUDING TRANSMITAL SHEET
PennSERVE / PA Corps
TEL: 717-787-9458
Jun 16,93 7:31 No.001 P.02
PennSERVE
The Governor's Office of Citizen Service
1304 Labor & Industry Building
Harrisburg. PA 17120
717.787-1971 nr 7290
FAX 787-9458
TO:
Sarah Wentworth
(Did I get your name right?)
ONS
FROM: John Briscoe
RE:
Setting Up the Corporation
WOW! You have taken on a substantial responsibility. Given
the delightfully flexible nature of most of this legislation there is
going to be great scope for creative structuring and administration of
this beast!
Here 1s my memo to Gene Sofer on the legislation and a long-age
one to Rick Allen
I would love to be of assistance but I bring far more questions
than answers to the field! 1 also bring a nasty schedule over the next
couple of weeks, but I'll call to see 1f 1 can help!
PennSERVE / PA Corps
TEL: 717-787-9458
Jun 16,93 7:31 No. .001 P.03
PennSERVE
The Governor's Office of Citizen Service
1304 Labor & Industry Building
Harrisburg. PA 17120
717-787-1971 of 7290
FAX 787-9458
May 20, 1993
TO:
Gene Sofer
House Education and Labor Committee
FROM:
John Briscoe
RE:
Suggestions For H.R. 2010 National Service Trust Act of 93
This is Part I my response to your kind invitation to put my
suggestions into written form. I will polish this up and take a first
crack at some "report language" over the weekend, but I wanted to get
this off to you in case you are workaholic enough to take things with
you over the weekend.
Congratulations on the Economic Package vote yesterday!
There are three areas in which I have concerns:
I. STATE COMMISSIONS:
II. REINVENTING GOVERNMENT:
III. PROGRAM FOCUS/LEVERAGE:
I. STATE COMMISSIONS:
I. State officials should be voting members of State
Commissions.
State Commissions must be more than distribution
centers for federal funds. They must have the capacity to
attract, influence, direct and spend state - and private -
funds. "That's where the money 1s!" B.G. Pennsylvania will
spend more than $7 billion of state money on education. If we
are going to ask state officials for a piece of this money we
want them to be real players on state commissions and
therefore they need to be voting, albeit minority members.
II. State Commissions should have the explicit right to raise,
PennSERVE / PA Corps
TEL: 717-787-9458
Jun 16,93 7:31 No.001 P.04
control and spend "private" money through the establishment of
a foundation or other appropriate non-profit.
The Corporation is built around the
concept of reinventing government and public-private
partnerships. Although it is possible for foundations and
corporations to give money to state governments, getting it in
and out is a pain and few donore are very interested in doing
it.
It is perhaps worth noting that California, Massachusctts,
Maryland and Pennsylvania have all found ways to build
non-profit organizations into state government in order to
solve this problem and to provide for flexible and prompt
sources of money.
III. The State Commission should be the sole applicant within
a state,
Under the current draft both non-profits and higher
educational institutions can circumvent the State Commission
and go directly to the Commission. Why go to the trouble of
building this rather elaborate state structure with its
interesting possibilities of attracting state support and then
as soon as anyone complains about -- in anticipation -- allow
people to run around it to Washington. There really is some
synergy involved in requiring a state plan and demanding that
applicants flow through it. At least they all get on the same
mailing list! I encourage you to take us State Commissions
seriously; try us for a couple of years and then if we turn
out to be hopeless, scrap us, but don't take our power away
and then complain when we can't produce a workable and
comprehensive state plan.
IV. The 5% Administrative Cap is unrealistic.
Creating community service and service-learning
programs is information and people intensive. It demands
training, support, evaluation, persuasion and promulgation.
Even the 15% in Serve-America that is allowed for
administration, training and evaluation is low. Tf you're
serious about reinventing government you ought to be getting
rid of this kind of nit-picking-
tie-them-up-in-administrative-knots kind of legislating. You
ought to be telling us what you want and holding us
responsible for delivering it and then we'll tell you how much
"administration" it will take.
II. REINVENTING GOVERNMENT:
I. Aside from the soft rhetoric in purpose 5 and perhaps some
implications about the corporation's role there is precious
little in this act about reinvented government --- in
PennSERVE / PA Corps
TEL: 717-787-9458
Jun 16,93 7:31 No.001 P.05
particular I note that there is nothing about relnventing
State Government upon whom you are depending for 2/3 of your
administration/funding.
Example: I. The Commission on National and Community
Service approves a grant budget with travel funds in it for
PennSERVE. Does that mean I can travel when and where I want
to provided I stay within my budget? No, of course not!
I have to get every request for out-of-state travel approved
separately and I am not infrequently turned down even when
doing it with Commission funds, II. If I have grant money for
printing something I can't take it out for contract, but have
to go through state printing where the waiting list is
normally 4 months.
I don't know how far you can go with statute language on
this, but I strongly urge that Report Language direct the
Corporation to use the fact that federal regulations normally
over-ride state ones, to really blow holes in the Pennsylvania
Administrative of 1929 under which I operate. I also urge you
to let the State Commissions establish foundations to create
the flexible possibility of escaping the clutches of long
ossified state bureaucratic procedures. Finally, ask the
Vice-President's Committee to take on the new Corporation as a
case study on how to create a non-bureaucratic state agency
from scratch!
III. PROCRAM FOCUS/LEVERAGE:
I. There is language in the bill which allows the Corporation
to "focus" National Service Efforts, but little indication that they
seriously want to do SO. I believe that focussing efforts to provide for
synergy and win us some early victories will go far to solve the "such
sums as may be
problem for the "out-years.
Once again I suspect that this is an area for report language
and future oversight, with one exception: The criteria for evaluating
proposals language --both for states and [UI locals -- could be
strengthened by adding a clause which specifically mentioning the
importance of focus at the state level and perhaps responsiveness to the
nationally established foci. (1'll try something by way of report
Language on this!)
CC Jack Lew
Marty Rodgers
I'am Sander
(A:genesofr,doc)
/
Action Crt list where
shout of Resaurces
how does heat
2
Patty lead Agence
the in with
Acnew
/ week
3
List agencies c/ Problem tead
what you
are clary ?
- Two Coup bites State plan
- Provision of anisstance
- Can detains ability of state action offices
A
Qe take an Slaffy pucluse la state Commussions
- member plan of Cann Rep' Coup, help dealt shalepic
B
Fulfill pclual Role
- Commission so off and hire new stall or Aenon stall from
offices
- Do age 47 flices have aboility
- Does man parce exist Yes
they also need deceased from wesh.
- these are not cost centus > Regiens are cost centas
Teny
State Commissions state lead agency Cen stall
State commission - institutional progrem hnowledge
Stall from state Slendpoint
-
State by State cen had ant whose have heles
ACTION Capacity -Queshen
CNCS- - General idea what States wash well ! which
cres do not
YSA - Frank Slohig lase Studies
/
Questions and
le au his ngut agency to cany at programs
2.
lead Agency's transitional vehicles
Need
Systematic Survey -
-
Patty Sullivan
-Stant ul list of States
- loch at pseal process
- She will tell cs-
Action
Lemmussing Skete Ollies Volenteees
Janet
letter going at Eli to all DAction State Preetous
2
2
as
Camm Good your
3. Ga Office
ash parter what Whe to do when here are
in met needs in each of hea slates
- letter will ash have may valuateus
Janet/laina - hnal mapt of he letter
- Rt logeher Calalyn slate idention programs
meet are evisting
YSA Study
August 27th
August
National Crituria
Gov.
Agenda
/NGAI
Fileral
Patty
-
list States have due Shout them bissy-bach
2
makeng sure procedures in States
do not have
1. Stall by Shale Cap.
2, Robern areas had Using
3. NGA - Patty Sceller
1
Q
3
Shout to
4. Comm. Revew.
5.
Privale Sector Mancy
mayors capable
- Files Sheete by state to see what enganeis
dong
Terry - lawyer
-handles cong. relations - tailing independed tach
- worried is people being able to apply Nat Lo States
- have an avalance of
Pan Gips
Ruby -
Natalie Augustin
Reg Rosabemy
Jessica - Budjet
40 million
20 million CCC money net been obligated
Dich
Jessica:
A'F -locating Space
Slarly Fash
TodoList
QUESTIONS FROM JUNE 28, 1993 STATE STRUCTURE MEETING
Q.1
What are the functions now handled by the ACTION State
Offices ? Strengths and weaknesses ? Ability to handle
(or cooperate with) federal presence at the state level
called for in the legislation.
A.1
For functions, see Attachment A.
For strengths/weaknesses see Dana Rodgers listing of
June 28, 1993 ( Attachment B.)
Regarding ability to cooperate with federal presence at the
state level, the ACTION State Offices provide a national
network capable of providing technical assistance to both
emerging state commissions and new Corporation grantees as
well.
Q.2
Are the current lead agencies through which the CNCS
currently operates effective transition mechanisms to new
state commissions ? Could other entities handle the
transition more effectively ?
A.2
Although this would necessarily require a state-by-state
review in order to assess current capacity, it is assumed
that the present lead agencies would be preferred vehicles.
Possible shifts could be envisioned in some states (e.g from
Department of Employment/Training to Department of Education
or vice versa) if the availability of funds in a particular
one of the four program areas prompts a rethinking of a
state's priorities.
p.2
Q.3
How do we best inspire each Governor to create state
commissions quickly and pick the best board members ?
A.3 Probably best addressed from the vantage point of enlightened
self interest. In particular, Governors will be positively
inclined to elevate the stature of a state commission if its
purpose is seen to reenforce the priorities and goals of
his/her administration. As well, the total amount of
Corporation funds available in a given state will influence
gubernatorial commitment.
Q.4 What resources do the states need to get established (money,
technical assistance) ? Do we have these resources ? Where can
we get them ?
A.4 The best resource base would be technical assistance from
states that have already established up-and-running
commissions. Representatives from these commissions could
conduct technical assistance workshops on a regional basis
for other states involved in the commission development
process. These experienced representatives could include,
as appropriate, individual state commissioners, lead agency
staff and ACTION State Directors.
As well, planning grants could supplement commission start-up
activities.
Q.5 How do we avoid fraud at the local level ? How do we make sure
that money is being well spent and that certain programs do
not get preferential treatment ?
Q.5 In addition to the provisions of the legislation that specify
the role of the Corporation's Inspector General, fraud and
preferential treatment situations can be minimized by the
structuring of state commissions that have the broadest and
most diversified composition. This checks and balances system
would be further reenforced by prohibiting the awarding of
commission funding to any organization or agency that had a
representative on the state commission.
p.3
Q.6 Responsibilities of Corporation Representative in the state
structure.
Q.6 As a voting member of a state commission, the corporate
representative will play a pivotal role in its "steering not
rowing" approach to awarding and administering Corporation
resources. As well, the corporate representatives can be
critically instrumental in the process of determining the type
and scope of data and information retrieval systems that
funded programs should provide to individual state
commissions.
On the matter of matching funds, it is problematic how state
commissions, as primary funders, could also assist local
programs in meeting this requirement.
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
CORPORATION ON NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
STATE STRUCTURE ISSUES
I. CURRENT ACTION STATE OFFICE FUNCTIONS AND SUGGESTED ADDITIONAL
ONES TO BE INCLUDED IN CORPORATION STATE OFFICE:
A. NETWORKING AND REPRESENTATION:
- Identification of key resources and providers that can be
instrumental in furthering Corporation goals.
- Promotion of public awareness of Corporation mission and goals
through contact with media, personal appearances and
presentations at public events.
- Liaison with Governor's Office and major organizations,
agencies and groups in effort to develop roster of nominees
for State Commission.
- Leveraging financial resources to augment successful
initiatives.
B. PLANNING:
- Retain ACTION State Office function to develop annual State
Plan for utilization of current categorical programs
(Current Year Operating Plan.)
- Assist State Commission in development of three year strategic
Federal
national service plan and its annual updating.
role
(not staffing
the State
commission)
ATTEHMENT A
p2
p.2
C. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
- Interfacing with current ACTION categorical program sponsors
and grantees to enhance optimal development of new Corporation
initiatives.
- Identification of current programming models that can be
replicated within a state.
- Dissemination of information on Corporation programs to
prospective grantees.
D. PROJECT MONITORING
- Establishment of project monitoring system, including on-site
visitations and written reporting procedures, designed to
promote successful programming outcomes and to enhance
quality control.
- Implementation of fiscal monitoring and review system
designed to provide both safeguarding of Corporation's
financial resources.
E. PROJECT SUPPORT AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
- Provision of assistance to State Commission and projects in
design of a recruitment, placement and information
dissemination system for service applicants.
- Design and delivery of training for servers, volunteers,
project staff and sponsor/grantee Boards of Directors.
- Provision of technical assistance to applicant organizations
seeking funding through the State Commission.
F. HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
G. OFFICE MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
ATTACHMENT B
ACTION STATE PROGRAM OFFICES
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
State Program Offices have responsibilities which include networking and
representation, project development, project support and project oversight.
NETWORKING AND REPRESENTATION
Comprehensive knowledge of volunteer and service activities in the
State.
-
Know many/most of major players in volunteerism and service,
usually on a working basis.
Knowledge of areas of program concern (such as health, education,
substance abuse, senior programs) based on experience developing
volunteer projects addressing these areas.
Advocate volunteerism/service in State (media, personal contacts,
attendance at relevant events).
Experience working closely with Governor's office.
Experience bringing different persons/groups together from diverse
backgrounds for joint programs/project development.
Leveraging financial resources to augment successful initiatives.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
Location in State makes State staff accessible, knowledgeable about
needs/realities in State.
Knowledge of ACTION projects enables State Office to provide
accurate, relevant information to prospective grantees.
Ability to provide common-sense, knowledgeable review of
proposed grants/projects.