Museado / NARA Collection rr-0840 — Collection rr-0840
Recent Folios
Login Register
English (angol) español (spanyol) magyar हिन्दी (hindi)

Survos folio page chat

California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7)

Ask the Scholar

Page 1 of 1
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 1

OCR

Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections. Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers, 1966-74: Press Unit Folder Title: California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7) Box: P27 To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected] Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ SECTION Q-VIII THE OEO REGIONAL OFFICE AND THE SEOO RATING QUES. # REF. #6. 7501-1 Has the Regional Office jointly worked out a yes no 7f. written agreement with the SEOO - dividing don't know 6f. responsibilities as staff capability and interest dictate - to assure maximum of coordination and a minimum of overlapping of activities and functions carried out by their respective field representatives? #7. 7501-1 Has the Regional Office invited - with adequate yes no 7g. advance notice --- the SEOO to all "pre-reviews" don't know 4b. held with other OEO grantees in the state? W.P. LIST the pre-reviews during the past 6 III-A months, with dates when notices were mailed. DESCRIBE cases when the SEOO has been par- ticularly helpful to the Regional Office Field Representative. #8. 7501-1 Has the Regional Office ensured that a copy yes no 7h. of all applications and requests for OEO funds don't know 6d. as well as requests for reprogramming, submitted to the Regional Office for approval is sent by the applicant simultaneously to the SEOO for information and comment, with written notice upon the receipt of all applications and with written comment by the SEOO on funding request, which receives serious consideration and response by the Regional Office prior to funding? LIST grant applications with written SEOO comments (favorable and unfavorable) during the past six months which particularly re- ceived serious consideration. DESCRIBE the significant cases in relation to efforts to reach agreement. SECTION Q-VIII RATING QUES. # REF. #9. 7501-1 Has the Regional Office invited the SEOO to yes no 7i. participate in all OEO staff evaluation teams don't know 4c. which review the overall effectiveness of a 6e. grantee's program; has shared with the SEOO, the findings and recommendations of such teams eval- uations immediately upon completion of the written report; has jointly worked out a follow- up procedure and plan to ensure implementation of OEO's recommendations? LIST for evaluations conducted during the past six months: (1) when invitation was sent to SEOO (2) when findings and recommendations were sent to SEOO. (3) when follow-up procedures and plans were worked out. DESCRIBE significant successes or failures in joint participation. #10. 7501-1 Has the Regional Office worked through - or yes no 7j. in consultation with - the SEOO in any of its don't know dealings with other state agencies, unless it has arranged for a by-pass agreement with the SEOO for specific types of contacts elsewhere in the state government? #11. 7501-1 Have the Regional Director and the SEOO yes no 7k. Directors jointly planned and participated in don't know regular meetings - to be held at least quarter- ly - to discuss mutual problems, exchange in- formation and explore new and innovative ways to increase their effectiveness in working to- gether? -28- SECTION Q-IX HEADQUARTERS/OEO AND THE SEOO RATING QUES. # REF. #1. 7501-1 Has the Office of Operations fostered an ex- yes no 8c. change of information and program experience don't know among all the SEOOs and the Regional Offices? LIST occasions during the past six months when this was done. #2. 7501-1 Has the Office of Operations sponsored and yes no 8c. jointly planned with the SEOOs and the Regional don't know Offices an annual national conference for all SEOO Directors? #3. 7501-1 Has OEO Headquarters consulted with the SEOO yes no 8e. to ascertain national and inter-regional don't know training and technical assistance needs of the SEOOs and to assist them in meeting such needs by the use of OEO personnel or through contractors? LIST occasions when such consultation took place during the past year. Identify assistance given and OEO staff or con- tractors involved. #4. 7501-1 How well has the Office of Operations assisted good poor 8h. the SEOO in its dealings with the Headquarters don't know offices or other federal agencies? #5. 7501-1 Has each OEO Headquarters funding office insured yes no 8i. the providing to the SEOO of one copy of each don't know 6d. official application (or an "information packet" summarizing the application), submitted to that office for approval and insured that written comment by the SEOO - received serious con- sideration by OEO Headquarters prior to funding? LIST when during the past six months such applications were submitted to the SEOO and the number of days before the grant date and when written comments were sent to OEO. -29- SECTION Q-X RATING QUES. # REF. SEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT #1. 7501-1 A. ORGANIZATION 1- Is the SEOO located at a high level in the state yes no government structure, readily accessible to the don't know Governor? DESCRIBE the levels of supervision and con- trol exist between the SEOO and the Gov- ernor. #2. Does the organizational location of the SEOO yes no compare favorably with other similar state don't know agencies? 3. Are certain SEOO functions assigned to other - - yes no state offices, e.g. financial accounting, pro- don't know gram operations? LIST delegated functions. #4. CAP 81 How well is the SEOO organized to effectively good poor I-A utilize staff and financial resources? don't know W.P. I-C/D #5. W.P. How well does the internal organization of the good poor I-D SEOO match its priority functions of: don't know LIST: 1. Advisor to Governor GPD 2. Resource Mobilization G P. D 3. Coordination and Planning G P D : 4. Advocacy for the Poor GPD i -30- SECTION Q-X SEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT RATING QUES. # REF. #5. W.P. 5. Technical Assistance G P D I-D (cont'd) 6. Grant Review/Monitoring/Evaluation G P D 7. Management G P D 8. Other G P D DESCRIBE the proportion of SEOO resources allocated to each major task or function. #6. B. STAFFING Do personnel perform job functions contained in the yes no approved job descriptions. don't know DESCRIBE any departures of job function from approved job descriptions. #7. Are staff personnel qualified for jobs? yes no don't know LIST personnel job title and qualifications. #8. Has the SEOO employed poor persons and minority persons? yes no don't know LIST the persons according to poverty or minority backgrounds and give dates of employment and job positions. #9. Has the SEOO prepared and implemented an affirmative action yes no plan in accordance with CAP Form 11? don't know #10. C. STAFF SUPERVISION AND TRAINING : Does each staff person receive clear instructions and yes no. orientation on his responsibilities and place within the don't know overall program? -31- SECTION Q-X SEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT RATING QUES. # REF. #11. Is each person evaluated - -- with performance yes no indicators explained and monitored? don't know DESCRIBE how often #12. W.P. Is there pre-service training? yes no II-D don't know LIST training events during past 6 months. #13. W.P. Is there in-service training? yes no II-D don't know LIST training events during past 6 months. 1. D. PROGRAM PLANNING AND GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS Is the SEOO CAP 81 Planning Process followed? yes no don't know #15. Are goals and priorities quantified? yes no don't know #16. Are goals and priorities realistic? yes no don't know #17. 7501-1 Is the SEOO draft work program checkpointed yes no 9f. with all CAAs in the state for comment and don't know such signed checkpoint forms (76) included as part of the annual SEOO refunding request? #18. 7501-1 Does the SECO use the forms and follow the yes no 9a. application procedures for SEOOs outlined in don't know OEO Notice 6710-2 of February 26, 1969? -32- SECTION Q-X SEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT RATING QUES. # REF. #19. 7501-1 Are the SEOO Plans and Priorities submitted to yes no 9c. OEO no later than 90 days before Program Year don't know End? #20. 7501-1 Are SEOO Refunding Requests submitted 60 days yes no 9a. before Program Year End? don't know #21. 7501-1 Does the SEOO include as part of its annual yes no 9d. refunding request a progress or self-evaluation don't know report on its activities for the previous year, giving a candid assessment of its successes and failures in meeting its Work Program? E. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT #22. W.P. Is there a career development program? yes no II-C don't know #23. Are job classification procedures adequate? yes no don't know F. REPORTS #24. 7501-1 Are CAP 15s on time? yes no don't know #25. Are field trip reports adequate, reviewed? yes no don't know G. FILES #26. Are files in such shape that documents requested yes no can be readily found? don't t know -33- SECTION Q-XI SEOO WORK PROGRAM California RATING QUES. # REF. (Points Not Covered in Earlier Sections) #1. CAP 81 Has the SEOO reached the goal "To develop yes no II-B demonstration projects in the use of volunteer don't know services, excess property, and community college resources, in programs of technical aid to Indians, disadvantaged youth, and Head Start day-care projects; and in other specialities as indicated"? LIST the demonstration projects and pro- grams of technical aid which have been developed during the past year. #2. CAP 81 Has the SEOO reached the three-year goal "to ac- yes no II-C celerate the spin-off of effective anti-poverty don't know programs to established social agencies"? LIST the accomplishments reached to date this past year. DESCRIBE significant successes toward this goal. #3. CAP 81 Has the SEOO reached toward the three-year goal yes no II-C "to new public and private efforts for the don't know prevention of poverty"? LIST the accomplishments reached to date this past year. DESCRIBE significant successes toward this goal. #4. CAP 7-e Has the SECO served "as a central personnel yes no IV-g. "clearinghouse" for the CAAS, upon request"? don't know W.P. LIST requests made and results this past year. IV-G -34- SECTION Q-XI SEOO WORK PROGRAM RATING QUES. # REF. #5. CAP 81 Has the SEOO provided "review of and yes no II-B assistance to grantees in greater depth don't know by an increased and better trained analyst W.P. staff "? I-B #6. CAP 81 Has the SEOO provided "sufficient intensity yes no and continuity of state-CAA relationships don't know II-B to resolve as many areas as possible of mutual W.P. concern about programs prior to the refunding I-B review stage. !?? #7. W.P. Has the SEOO provided "higher quality multi- yes no IV-A specialty technical assistance to CAAS" in this don't know program year through the "addition of four management Specialists, eight Field Analysts, and three Special Programs Coordinators"? #8. W.P. Has the SEOO outstationed analysts in one of yes no I-C/D three (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and don't know Sacramento) SEOO Administrative regions? SEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Attachments REF. PAGE ORGANIZATION CHART 13 CPA ASSIGNMENTS 16 FORMAT for MONTHLY NARRATIVES 16 CAA COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST 16 LEGAL SERVICES EVALUATION dtd 2/4/71 16 INFORMATION PACKAGE REVIEW 16 i L. CHICKERING L. UHLER J. SAWICKI Dep. Director Administrative Comm. Dev. and Director Assistant Gen. Counsel (Fuller) (Sekafetz) (Galyan ) B. SCHUR L. DOWN Dep. Director Dep. Director for Program Planning, Bud- Analysis get. Finance ( Collins) D. MCKEE B. HAWKINS J. SAWICKI Assist. Dir. Assist. Dir. Assist. Dir. Legal Operations Administration Fattorini, Russo, (Davis) (Pearson, Arnold, Varela, Trigger (Fuller) Elwell. Young) CPA CPA VISTA Technical Assistance Oakland North South B. Schur - Chief Monitor Clark Archuletta McInnes Frane Espana Charlton Petersen Blaker Archer (Davis) McGrath Brown Cunningham Carter Gurule Kludjian Whiteley Goff Thies Taylor (Brown) (Singleton) (Davis) (Gray, Drockman Approved--Lewis Approx 15 Feb-1921 CPA ASSIGNMENTS Northern California (6) Clark Sonoma Napa Oakland Lake Mendocino Charlton Monterey San Benito San Francisco Santa Clare San Mateo McGrath Placer El Dorado Lassen-Modoc-Plumas-Tehama Sierra Butte Shasta Gurule Santa Cruz Kern Kings Fresno Merced Tulare San Luis Obispo Madera Goff Marin Contra Costa Alameda Senta Clara San Joaquin Stanislaus Hawkins Sacramento Yolo Solano Berkeley Southern California (5) Archuletta EYOA Quechan Indian Tribe Single Purpose Grants Petersen Santa Barbara EYOA Ventura Casa Loma College Southern California (Continued) Brown EYOA Compton-Willowbrook San Diego San Bernardino Housing Opportunities Center Kludjian EYOA VCIU Imperial Thies Orange Riverside Rio Hondo Pasadena REPORTING FORMAT FOR MONTHLY NARRATIVES Instructions: One of these forms should be completed for each CAA or Delegate Agency visited and all turned in at end of each month. KEEP IT BRIEF!! 1. Name of staff member 2. CAA visited Duration of visit 3. Type of service rendered (i.e., evaluation, technical assistance, special projects, etc.) ACTIVITIES 4. Strong points 5., Week points 6. Observations (How do you rate CAA in accomplishing its goals?) Duoc purpose : / WONKsheet for CPA & TA to wake tis monthly refore 2 material for Chark to make monthly Opus report REPORTING FORMAT FOR MONTHLY NARRATIVES Instructions: One of these forms should be completed for each CAA or Delegate Agency visited and all turned in at end of each month. KEEP IT BRIEF!! 1. Name of staff member 2. CAA visited Duration of visit (DATE): 3. Type of service rendered (i.e., evaluation, technical assistance, special projects, etc.) ACTIVITIES 4. Strong points 5. 1 Week points 6. Observations (How do you rate CAA in accomplishing its goals?) CAA COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST FISCAL REQUIREMENTS SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK 243a, EOA Statement of responsibility of accounting system for grantee and delegate agency (ies) 243c, EOA Annual independent audit completed or scheduled in last 12 months AP Memo 60, Par. 3 Respond to audit within 60 days Inst. 6807-1 Administrative costs 15% less than total cost Inst. 6910-1 Travel Policies in accordance with Standardized Government Travel Regulations DEO Inst. 6910, Par. 4 & 5 Out of community travel approved CAP Grantee Finan- Submitted inventory of property on hand and cial Policy & list of what will be required for program. Procedures Guide, All inventories must be current Vol. V, Chap. 1 ,uide, Vol. II, Regional approval of all purchases over rt I, Par. 2f $500.00 All purchases within budget Contract files documented to show purchases authorized, less than GSA price, bids made competitively or by rotation and received by someone other than paying official. i All program expenditures within budget Supervisors' approval of Time and Attendance reports showing hours worked and all leave CAP Memo 44-a All CAP 15's (Grantee Monthly Financial Report) current and mailed 90 days after end of program year, final CAP 15 and CAP 28 to OEO BOARD COMPOSITION AND COMMITTEES SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHE( CAP Memo 81 Part C Par. 1. Membership 51 or less Part C Par. 3 At least 1/3 representatives of the poor Part C Par. 2. No more than 1/3 public officials Part C Par. 3c All representatives of the poor democratically elected Part D Par. 2 All board members (other than public officials) served less than 3 consecutive years and less than 6 years total Part D Par. 1 Each member representing geographical area reside in that area Part C Par. 5 Rules of operation include petition procedure for membership of new groups Part D Par. 5 Committees reflect composition of board P D Par. 3 Quorum requirement for meetings of the board and executive committee at least 50% of total membership Part C Par. 1 Membership of board divisible by 3 $1 " Membership of committees divisible by 3 i CIVIL RIGHTS SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK Inst. 6710-1 Written policy of nondiscrimination in 1 Conditions, employment on grounds of race, creed, 7; CAP Memo 23-A, color, national origin, sex and age t C Par. 1 " Policy communicated to all applicants, employees, supervisors and minority groups 11 Policies and procedures stating affirmative action to be taken to insure no discrimi- nation in recruitment, employment and all other personnel actions 0 Inst. 6710-1 CAP Form 11 on file in region n'l Conditions, I. 6; OEO Notice CAA and delegate agencies installed affirmative 04-2; Requirement action plan I Affirmative Civil ghts, Action Program Outreach program designed to reach all tle 45, Chap. X ethnic groups 11 All ethnic groups included in policy making bodies, participation in planning and setting priorities $1 Location of facilities so it is accessible by all ethnic groups 11 Staff members who can communicate with all ethnic groups by way of language and culture i " Program participants are reasonable representa- tion of all ethnic groups 11 Periodic self-evaluation of affirmative action plan Written procedure for informing all persons or any class of individuals of their rights to file a complaint with the regional office if they believe themselves subjected to discrimi- nation. PERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES DURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK emo 23-A Rules governing vacations, sick leave, D Par. 1 periodic increases and other conditions = Rules for promotion, separation, resolution of grievances and regulation of employee conduct " Description of benefit plans with details on employer and employee contributions " Salary and salary ranges for each position and class of positions Memo 23-A A Formal education not required for positions if candidate has ability to perform duties except where limited by state law B Par. 1 No wages or salaries less than federal minimum wage laws B Par. 2 Regional approval to hire for positions over $5,000 which is an increment of 20% over previous salary. Previous salary must be documented B Par. 3 Employees over $7,000/year receive no overtime B Par. 4 Reimbursement for interview expenses limited to director or deputy director B Par. 5 OEO approval prior to paying moving expenses Inst. 6909-1 Agency free from nepotism Inst. 6909-4 Prohibition against acceptance of gifts and gratuities Memo 23-B Submission of list of employees earning over B $10,000 as of June 30 D Par. 3 Records of all personnel actions including hiring, discharge, promotion, discipline, time and attendance, and previous salary E Biographical information on Director, Deputy Director, Fiscal and Personnel Officers Inst. 6903-1 OEO approval for salaries over $15,000 Inst. 6907-1 Statement prohibiting political activity Inst. 6907-3 Statement prohibiting participation in direct action in violation of law Memo 23B, Part A Wage comparability CE DESCRIPTION CHECK How "bench mark" positions are identified Explanation on procedures used to obtain data to establish "bench mark" positions and how other jobs related to these Copies of certification or other back-up information i DELEGATE AGENCY CONTRACTS SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK P Guide, Vol. 1 All delegate agency contracts signed and on file It Contracts include minimum requirements of appendix F, OEO Instruction 6710-1 " Procedures for monitoring delegate agency contracts Established procedures for funding delegate agencies RESIDENT PARTICIPATION SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK 0 Inst. 6005-1 Adequate provision for CAA to involvement of r 1 b (3) the poor through advisory committees and target area councils r 2 b (5) Same policies and procedures for involvement of the poor in delegate agency contracts 11 2 a (1) Progress report on implementation of OEO Instruction 6005-1 submitted with CAP 81 by each delegate agency and CAA ar 2 a (2) Progress report include section prepared by representatives of the poor 1 PUBLIC MEETINGS SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHECK 30 Inst. 7042-1 Public board meetings at least once every 10 ir 1 weeks or in response to written request ir 2 All meetings held at time and in place convenient to all ar 2 Public notice of each meeting, giving time, place and agenda distributed at least 10 days in advance ar 3 Minutes kept of each meeting PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION JRCE DESCRIPTION CHECK st. 7041-1 Books and records available to public in accordance with OEO Instruction 7041-1 NEWS LETTERS AND HOUSE ORGANS SOURCE DESCRIPTION CHE CAP Memo 77 Grant funds may not be used for publishing newspapers for general distribution in the community Newsletters & house organs: Free to participants and employees Contain no paid commercial advertising Non-partisan I PROGRAMS SOURCE DESCRIPTIONS CHEX uth Programs - OEO Instruction 6168-la Par 4 Youth involvement in planning, operation and evaluation of program Par 5 Program operated on 12 month basis Par 6 Economic opportunity program, not recreational Par 7 Grantee providing training & evaluation to upgrade program Par 8 Program serving most needy and alienated youth 16-21 years of age Par 9 Coordinated with other activities of youth FAMILY PLANNING - CAP Memo 37-A Par 2 Information only supplied to those requesting it Information consistent with individual's moral, philosphical or religious beliefs Participation not requisite to participation in other CAA programs COMPREHENSIVE WORK AND TRAINING - Title 1B-EOA Sect. 124 a 1 No perticipant may be involved on projects involving political parties, sectarian instruction or religious worship Sect. 124 a 2 Program may not result in displacement of employed workers, impair existing contracts for services or result in substitution of federal for other program funds HOUSING - Sec, 214 EOA Housing Development Corporations prohibited from: Insuring mortages Providing long term financing SENIOR OPPORTUNITIES AND SERVICES Sect. 126 EOA Title I manpower programs deal with long term unemployed 55 years and older Sect. 221 Local initiative programs include programs for elderly State of California LEGAL Memorandum To : Legal Staff Ciral Date : February 4, 1971 Checklist Subject: Legal Services Evaluations From : Dennis McKee We have several legal service programs which will be coming up for refunding very shortly. It is my hope that we can develop a general methodology for thorough and efficient evaluation of these programs. The following sets forth the procedure to be followed: Structure of a Legal Service Program Evaluation 1) Depending on whether the program you are going to evaluate is in the North or South, check with Geoff Clark or Gil Archuletta to obtain the name of the Program Analyst for that CAP. (Most legal service programs are a delegate agency within a CAP). The program anal: should be able to give you some useful background information and possibly some valuable do's and dont's as regards your evaluative effort for that particular program. 2) Utilize the telephone to as great an extent as possible. With the small staff that we have and the large number of legal service programs it will be necessary for us to conserve time in every way that we can. Try to set up your agenda prior to arriving in an area. (Allow yourself sufficient flexibility SO that you can handle unexpected contingencies). 3) It would be preferrable for your first appointment to be with the attorneys in the O.E.O. Legal Service program which is being evaluated. We want to take a positive approach in this respect. Let's find out how we might help the program. Attached find a sample Evaluation Checklist. IM:lff attach: ntact: 1) Leg ) service program Was this done? attorneys (If not, why not?) Remarks About: a) Policies: # of cases handled, kinds of cases. Ask to see paperwork to back up these figures. b) Office hours kept, interview schedule, etc. c) Interview some clients if possible (randomly select several which may be in the office when you are there) - with permission of legal service attorneys. d) Ask what the attorneys think the thrust of their programs is, ask what they think it should be. e) Ask who we should talk to in the community. f) In-kind contributions? 5) Tell them we wish to offer any assistance we can. h) What do they see as problems? i) What improvements do they suggest? Evaluation C. klist - 1A 1) Legal Service program Was this done? attorneys - cont. 'If not, why not?) Remarks K About: j) Office Procedure. HOW are cases logged in, how assigned, what documentation is kept, are hours per client or case kept by attorneys, etc. k) What are case priorities? i.e. What cases are programed to be handled? HOW are these priorities set? 1) Check to see if there are any mechanical bottlenecks. i.e. are there some classes of cases which are flooding the office that could be handled in a more specialized manner? Evaluation C. klist - 2 ntact: 2) School Officials (generally Was this done? school supt.) (If not, why not?) Remarks sk About: Relations with the program? a) Legal b) Non-legal c) Any suggested people to talk with? 3) Police Dept. Ask About: Relations with the program? a) Legal b) Non-legal c) Any suggested people to talk with? 4) Welfare Dept. Ask About: a) DO they refer clients to the O.E.O. Lawyers? Any feedback? b) Legal c) Non-legal Evaluation ecklist - 3 Contact: 1 5) District Attorney's Office Was this done? (If not, why not?) Remarks Ask About: a) Referrals? Feedback? b) Do Legal Service Attorneys appear in criminal cases? c) Any suggested people to talk with? a) General rapport with Legal Service Attorneys? 6) Public Defender Ask About: a) Referrals? Feedback? b) Do Legal Service Attorneys appear in criminal cases? c) Any suggested people to talk with? d) General rapport with Legal Service Attorneys? 7) Local Bench and Bar Ask About: a) Working relationship with O.E.O. attorneys? Legal, Non-legal? b) Do O.E.O. attorneys refer out fee generating cases (P.I., etc.)? Evaluation cklist - 4 Contact: 8) Local Government Officials Was this done? (If not, why not?) Remarks Ask About: Relationship with program? a) Legal b) Non-legal c) Suggested people to talk with? 9) Local groups (Urban league, Was this done? churches, Chicano Organiza- (If not, why not?) Remarks tions, NAACP, etc.) Ask About: a) Are poor helped? (One group more than another?) b) How could service be improved? c) What do they like about program? a) Any suggested people to talk with? 10) CAP Director Ask About: How effective is the legal service element of the CAP? Contact: 11) Local legal aid groups Was this done? (If not, why not?) Remarks Ask About: a) Coordination with O.E.O. attorneys? (Overlap, etc.) b) Efficient utilization of resources? 12) CAP Board of Directors Ask About: Their opinion of the program? Note: Must be completed and turned in two (2) days before due at Governor' NAME OF ANALYST: DATE: PROGRAM ANALYZED: Guideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program In each instance be specific and support all generalizations and conclusion 1) General analysis of the program: 2) Weak points: Strong points: 4) Suggested Changes: i 5) Help we can provide (asked for or not?): 6) Suggested conditions in grant, if any: 7) Required information we need (in event we lack information you believe is necessary for our examination and analysis): Guideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program - 2 8) Suggested position State Office of Economic Opportunities should take on refunding - and why: a) Veto: b) Sustain: c) Let lapse (i.e. no vetoe, but no positive approval): d) Veto unless certain conditions put in grant (list and explain): e) Interim Veto because we haven't been supplied required information to base our decision on: i 9) Suggested changes in our examination procedures, if any: 10) People to deal with in future examinations (i.e. was CAP director helpful? Legal Services Director?): 11) Suggested sources of information on this program (i.e. were church groups useful here? NAACP? etc.?): Guideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program - 3 12) Bottlenecks in examination (i.e. were there any dead-ends? Did certain sources or people close up on you or prove misleading? If so, why?): INFORMATION PACKAGE REVIEW ALYST NAME DATE SUBMITTED USE BLANK CONTINUATION SHEETS AS NEEDED FOR EXPANDED EXPLANATIONS. KEEP VISIBLE INDEX IDENTIFICATION CARD ATTACHED! REPORT REQUIRED FOR EACH COMPONENT OR PRO- GRAM. IS THE INFORMATION ON THE VISIBLE INDEX CARD CORRECT? IF NOT, NOTE CORRECTIONS AND NOTIFY STAFF ASSISTANT FOR PLANNING IMMEDIATELY: CIRCLE CAP FORM NO. MISSING FROM PACKAGE: 1 5 7 11 25 46 77 81 EXPLAIN OMISSIONS: OEO FIELD REP. OEO DISTRICT SUPERVISOR I. GRANTEE INFORMATION (COMPLETE OR CORRECT AS NECESSARY) A. NAMES AND HOME ADDRESSES OF GRANTEE PERSONNEL: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR FISCAL OFFICER OTHER KEY STAFF SUCH AS PROGRAM DIRECTORS: TITLE NAME ADDRESS BOARD CHAIRMAN NAMES OF OTHER BOARD MEMBERS: B. NAMES AND HOME ADDRESSES OF DELEGATE AGENCY ("X" OUT IF NOT APPLICABLE) : PROJECT DIRECTOR DEPUTY PROJECT DIRECTOR FISCAL OFFICER OTHER KEY STAFF: i NAME TITLE ADDRESS / ADVISORY BOARD CHAIRMAN OTHER BOARD MEMBERS (NAMES ONLY) : -2- HISTORY OF GRANTEE A. DATE AGENCY FORMED DELEGATE AGENCY B. BUDGET HISTORY (INCLUDE ALL SOURCES, I.E., OEO, DOL, HUD, ETC.) C. PERSONNEL: NO. OF PROFESSIONALS NON-PROFESSIONALS D. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF PAST PERFORMANCE (SPECIAL SUCCESSES OR FAILURES) : E. SPECIAL NOTEWORTHY EVENTS RELATED TO AGENCY OR PROGRAM: : F. HAVE ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS ELECTED TO "OPT OUT" OF PAST PROGRAMS? (GREEN AMENDMENT) EXPLAIN FULLY: II. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND EVALUATION TECHNIQUES A. DO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM FIT INTO THE LONG TERM GOALS OF THE AGENCY? WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIVES? B. ARE THE OBJECTIVES COMPATIBLE WITH THE STATED OBJECTIVES IN SECTION 201 OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT? (REFER- ENCE OEO INSTRUCTION 6320-1) EXPLAIN SPECIFICALLY: C. WHAT EVALUATION TECHNIQUES HAVE BEEN BUILT INTO THE PRO- GRAM TO MEASURE ATTAINMENT OF STATED OBJECTIVES?

Page data

Page
1
Source index
0
Type
document
Media ID
512c2b9004fc5a90
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
118564686
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data 
{
    "id": "118564686",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686",
    "identifierLocal": "840",
    "collections": [
        "Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit",
        "California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity 
{
    "localId": "118564686",
    "label": "California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7)",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686"
}
Document source metadata 
{
    "id": "118564686",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "California State Office of Economic Opportunity - Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7)",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686",
    "identifierLocal": "840",
    "collections": [
        "Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit",
        "California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras 
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/118564686",
    "naId": 118564686,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1975-12-31",
        "year": 1975
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1967-01-01",
        "year": 1967
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context 
{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/reagan/7408627/40-840-7408627-P27-006-2017.pdf",
    "mediaId": "512c2b9004fc5a90",
    "ocrText": "Ronald Reagan Presidential Library\nDigital Library Collections\nThis is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.\nCollection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,\n1966-74: Press Unit\nFolder Title: California State Office of Economic Opportunity\n- Evaluation Report 03/26/1971 (6 of 7)\nBox: P27\nTo see more digitized collections visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library\nTo see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:\nhttps://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection\nContact a reference archivist at: [email protected]\nCitation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing\nNational Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/\nSECTION\nQ-VIII\nTHE OEO REGIONAL OFFICE AND THE SEOO\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#6.\n7501-1\nHas the Regional Office jointly worked out a\nyes no\n7f.\nwritten agreement with the SEOO - dividing\ndon't know\n6f.\nresponsibilities as staff capability and interest\ndictate - to assure maximum of coordination and\na minimum of overlapping of activities and\nfunctions carried out by their respective field\nrepresentatives?\n#7.\n7501-1\nHas the Regional Office invited - with adequate\nyes no\n7g.\nadvance notice --- the SEOO to all \"pre-reviews\"\ndon't know\n4b.\nheld with other OEO grantees in the state?\nW.P.\nLIST the pre-reviews during the past 6\nIII-A\nmonths, with dates when notices were mailed.\nDESCRIBE cases when the SEOO has been par-\nticularly helpful to the Regional Office\nField Representative.\n#8.\n7501-1\nHas the Regional Office ensured that a copy\nyes no\n7h.\nof all applications and requests for OEO funds\ndon't know\n6d.\nas well as requests for reprogramming, submitted\nto the Regional Office for approval is sent by\nthe applicant simultaneously to the SEOO for\ninformation and comment, with written notice\nupon the receipt of all applications and with\nwritten comment by the SEOO on funding request,\nwhich receives serious consideration and response\nby the Regional Office prior to funding?\nLIST grant applications with written SEOO\ncomments (favorable and unfavorable) during\nthe past six months which particularly re-\nceived serious consideration.\nDESCRIBE the significant cases in relation\nto efforts to reach agreement.\nSECTION\nQ-VIII\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#9.\n7501-1\nHas the Regional Office invited the SEOO to\nyes no\n7i.\nparticipate in all OEO staff evaluation teams\ndon't know\n4c.\nwhich review the overall effectiveness of a\n6e.\ngrantee's program; has shared with the SEOO, the\nfindings and recommendations of such teams eval-\nuations immediately upon completion of the\nwritten report; has jointly worked out a follow-\nup procedure and plan to ensure implementation\nof OEO's recommendations?\nLIST for evaluations conducted during the\npast six months:\n(1) when invitation was sent to SEOO\n(2) when findings and recommendations were\nsent to SEOO.\n(3) when follow-up procedures and plans\nwere worked out.\nDESCRIBE significant successes or failures\nin joint participation.\n#10.\n7501-1\nHas the Regional Office worked through - or\nyes no\n7j.\nin consultation with - the SEOO in any of its\ndon't know\ndealings with other state agencies, unless it\nhas arranged for a by-pass agreement with the\nSEOO for specific types of contacts elsewhere in\nthe state government?\n#11.\n7501-1\nHave the Regional Director and the SEOO\nyes no\n7k.\nDirectors jointly planned and participated in\ndon't know\nregular meetings - to be held at least quarter-\nly - to discuss mutual problems, exchange in-\nformation and explore new and innovative ways\nto increase their effectiveness in working to-\ngether?\n-28-\nSECTION\nQ-IX\nHEADQUARTERS/OEO AND THE SEOO\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#1.\n7501-1\nHas the Office of Operations fostered an ex-\nyes no\n8c.\nchange of information and program experience\ndon't know\namong all the SEOOs and the Regional Offices?\nLIST occasions during the past six months\nwhen this was done.\n#2.\n7501-1\nHas the Office of Operations sponsored and\nyes no\n8c.\njointly planned with the SEOOs and the Regional\ndon't know\nOffices an annual national conference for all\nSEOO Directors?\n#3.\n7501-1\nHas OEO Headquarters consulted with the SEOO\nyes no\n8e.\nto ascertain national and inter-regional\ndon't know\ntraining and technical assistance needs of the\nSEOOs and to assist them in meeting such needs by\nthe use of OEO personnel or through contractors?\nLIST occasions when such consultation took\nplace during the past year. Identify\nassistance given and OEO staff or con-\ntractors involved.\n#4.\n7501-1\nHow well has the Office of Operations assisted\ngood poor\n8h.\nthe SEOO in its dealings with the Headquarters\ndon't know\noffices or other federal agencies?\n#5.\n7501-1\nHas each OEO Headquarters funding office insured\nyes no\n8i.\nthe providing to the SEOO of one copy of each\ndon't know\n6d.\nofficial application (or an \"information packet\"\nsummarizing the application), submitted to that\noffice for approval and insured that written\ncomment by the SEOO - received serious con-\nsideration by OEO Headquarters prior to funding?\nLIST when during the past six months such\napplications were submitted to the SEOO\nand the number of days before the grant\ndate and when written comments were sent\nto OEO.\n-29-\nSECTION\nQ-X\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\nSEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT\n#1.\n7501-1\nA. ORGANIZATION\n1-\nIs the SEOO located at a high level in the state\nyes no\ngovernment structure, readily accessible to the\ndon't know\nGovernor?\nDESCRIBE the levels of supervision and con-\ntrol exist between the SEOO and the Gov-\nernor.\n#2.\nDoes the organizational location of the SEOO\nyes no\ncompare favorably with other similar state\ndon't know\nagencies?\n3.\nAre certain SEOO functions assigned to other - -\nyes no\nstate offices, e.g. financial accounting, pro-\ndon't know\ngram operations?\nLIST delegated functions.\n#4.\nCAP 81\nHow well is the SEOO organized to effectively\ngood poor\nI-A\nutilize staff and financial resources?\ndon't know\nW.P.\nI-C/D\n#5.\nW.P.\nHow well does the internal organization of the\ngood poor\nI-D\nSEOO match its priority functions of:\ndon't know\nLIST:\n1. Advisor to Governor\nGPD\n2. Resource Mobilization\nG P. D\n3. Coordination and Planning\nG P D\n:\n4. Advocacy for the Poor\nGPD\ni\n-30-\nSECTION\nQ-X\nSEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#5.\nW.P.\n5. Technical Assistance\nG P D\nI-D\n(cont'd)\n6. Grant Review/Monitoring/Evaluation\nG P D\n7. Management\nG P D\n8. Other\nG P D\nDESCRIBE the proportion of SEOO resources\nallocated to each major task or function.\n#6.\nB. STAFFING\nDo personnel perform job functions contained in the\nyes no\napproved job descriptions.\ndon't know\nDESCRIBE any departures of job function from approved\njob descriptions.\n#7.\nAre staff personnel qualified for jobs?\nyes no\ndon't know\nLIST personnel job title and qualifications.\n#8.\nHas the SEOO employed poor persons and minority persons?\nyes no\ndon't know\nLIST the persons according to poverty or minority\nbackgrounds and give dates of employment and job\npositions.\n#9.\nHas the SEOO prepared and implemented an affirmative action\nyes no\nplan in accordance with CAP Form 11?\ndon't know\n#10.\nC. STAFF SUPERVISION AND TRAINING\n:\nDoes each staff person receive clear instructions and\nyes no.\norientation on his responsibilities and place within the\ndon't know\noverall program?\n-31-\nSECTION\nQ-X\nSEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#11.\nIs each person evaluated - -- with performance\nyes no\nindicators explained and monitored?\ndon't know\nDESCRIBE how often\n#12.\nW.P.\nIs there pre-service training?\nyes no\nII-D\ndon't know\nLIST training events during past 6 months.\n#13.\nW.P.\nIs there in-service training?\nyes no\nII-D\ndon't know\nLIST training events during past 6 months.\n1.\nD. PROGRAM PLANNING AND GRANT APPLICATION\nPROCESS\nIs the SEOO CAP 81 Planning Process followed?\nyes no\ndon't know\n#15.\nAre goals and priorities quantified?\nyes no\ndon't know\n#16.\nAre goals and priorities realistic?\nyes no\ndon't know\n#17.\n7501-1\nIs the SEOO draft work program checkpointed\nyes no\n9f.\nwith all CAAs in the state for comment and\ndon't know\nsuch signed checkpoint forms (76) included as\npart of the annual SEOO refunding request?\n#18.\n7501-1\nDoes the SECO use the forms and follow the\nyes no\n9a.\napplication procedures for SEOOs outlined in\ndon't know\nOEO Notice 6710-2 of February 26, 1969?\n-32-\nSECTION\nQ-X\nSEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#19.\n7501-1\nAre the SEOO Plans and Priorities submitted to\nyes no\n9c.\nOEO no later than 90 days before Program Year\ndon't know\nEnd?\n#20.\n7501-1\nAre SEOO Refunding Requests submitted 60 days\nyes no\n9a.\nbefore Program Year End?\ndon't know\n#21.\n7501-1\nDoes the SEOO include as part of its annual\nyes no\n9d.\nrefunding request a progress or self-evaluation\ndon't know\nreport on its activities for the previous year,\ngiving a candid assessment of its successes\nand failures in meeting its Work Program?\nE. PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT\n#22.\nW.P.\nIs there a career development program?\nyes no\nII-C\ndon't know\n#23.\nAre job classification procedures adequate?\nyes no\ndon't know\nF. REPORTS\n#24.\n7501-1\nAre CAP 15s on time?\nyes no\ndon't know\n#25.\nAre field trip reports adequate, reviewed?\nyes no\ndon't know\nG. FILES\n#26.\nAre files in such shape that documents requested\nyes no\ncan be readily found?\ndon't t know\n-33-\nSECTION\nQ-XI\nSEOO WORK PROGRAM\nCalifornia\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n(Points Not Covered in Earlier Sections)\n#1.\nCAP 81\nHas the SEOO reached the goal \"To develop\nyes no\nII-B\ndemonstration projects in the use of volunteer\ndon't know\nservices, excess property, and community college\nresources, in programs of technical aid to\nIndians, disadvantaged youth, and Head Start\nday-care projects; and in other specialities\nas indicated\"?\nLIST the demonstration projects and pro-\ngrams of technical aid which have been\ndeveloped during the past year.\n#2.\nCAP 81\nHas the SEOO reached the three-year goal \"to ac-\nyes no\nII-C\ncelerate the spin-off of effective anti-poverty\ndon't know\nprograms to established social agencies\"?\nLIST the accomplishments reached to date\nthis past year.\nDESCRIBE significant successes toward this\ngoal.\n#3.\nCAP 81\nHas the SEOO reached toward the three-year goal\nyes no\nII-C\n\"to new public and private efforts for the\ndon't know\nprevention of poverty\"?\nLIST the accomplishments reached to date\nthis past year.\nDESCRIBE significant successes toward this\ngoal.\n#4.\nCAP 7-e\nHas the SECO served \"as a central personnel\nyes no\nIV-g.\n\"clearinghouse\" for the CAAS, upon request\"?\ndon't know\nW.P.\nLIST requests made and results this past year.\nIV-G\n-34-\nSECTION\nQ-XI\nSEOO WORK PROGRAM\nRATING\nQUES. #\nREF.\n#5.\nCAP 81\nHas the SEOO provided \"review of and\nyes no\nII-B\nassistance to grantees in greater depth\ndon't know\nby an increased and better trained analyst\nW.P.\nstaff \"?\nI-B\n#6.\nCAP 81\nHas the SEOO provided \"sufficient intensity\nyes no\nand continuity of state-CAA relationships\ndon't know\nII-B\nto resolve as many areas as possible of mutual\nW.P.\nconcern about programs prior to the refunding\nI-B\nreview stage. !??\n#7.\nW.P.\nHas the SEOO provided \"higher quality multi-\nyes no\nIV-A\nspecialty technical assistance to CAAS\" in this\ndon't know\nprogram year through the \"addition of four\nmanagement Specialists, eight Field Analysts,\nand three Special Programs Coordinators\"?\n#8.\nW.P.\nHas the SEOO outstationed analysts in one of\nyes no\nI-C/D\nthree (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and\ndon't know\nSacramento) SEOO Administrative regions?\nSEOO ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT\nAttachments\nREF.\nPAGE\nORGANIZATION CHART\n13\nCPA ASSIGNMENTS\n16\nFORMAT for MONTHLY NARRATIVES\n16\nCAA COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST\n16\nLEGAL SERVICES EVALUATION dtd 2/4/71\n16\nINFORMATION PACKAGE REVIEW\n16\ni\nL. CHICKERING\nL. UHLER\nJ. SAWICKI\nDep. Director\nAdministrative\nComm. Dev. and\nDirector\nAssistant\nGen. Counsel\n(Fuller)\n(Sekafetz)\n(Galyan )\nB. SCHUR\nL. DOWN\nDep. Director\nDep. Director\nfor Program\nPlanning, Bud-\nAnalysis\nget. Finance\n( Collins)\nD. MCKEE\nB. HAWKINS\nJ. SAWICKI\nAssist. Dir.\nAssist. Dir.\nAssist. Dir.\nLegal\nOperations\nAdministration\nFattorini, Russo,\n(Davis)\n(Pearson, Arnold, Varela,\nTrigger (Fuller)\nElwell. Young)\nCPA\nCPA\nVISTA\nTechnical Assistance\nOakland\nNorth\nSouth\nB. Schur - Chief\nMonitor\nClark\nArchuletta\nMcInnes\nFrane\nEspana\nCharlton\nPetersen\nBlaker\nArcher\n(Davis)\nMcGrath\nBrown\nCunningham\nCarter\nGurule\nKludjian\nWhiteley\nGoff\nThies\nTaylor\n(Brown)\n(Singleton)\n(Davis)\n(Gray, Drockman\nApproved--Lewis\nApprox 15 Feb-1921\nCPA ASSIGNMENTS\nNorthern California\n(6)\nClark\nSonoma\nNapa\nOakland\nLake\nMendocino\nCharlton\nMonterey\nSan Benito\nSan Francisco\nSanta Clare\nSan Mateo\nMcGrath\nPlacer\nEl Dorado\nLassen-Modoc-Plumas-Tehama\nSierra\nButte\nShasta\nGurule\nSanta Cruz\nKern\nKings\nFresno\nMerced\nTulare\nSan Luis Obispo\nMadera\nGoff\nMarin\nContra Costa\nAlameda\nSenta Clara\nSan Joaquin\nStanislaus\nHawkins\nSacramento\nYolo\nSolano\nBerkeley\nSouthern California\n(5)\nArchuletta\nEYOA\nQuechan Indian Tribe\nSingle Purpose Grants\nPetersen\nSanta Barbara\nEYOA\nVentura\nCasa Loma College\nSouthern California (Continued)\nBrown\nEYOA\nCompton-Willowbrook\nSan Diego\nSan Bernardino\nHousing Opportunities Center\nKludjian\nEYOA\nVCIU\nImperial\nThies\nOrange\nRiverside\nRio Hondo\nPasadena\nREPORTING FORMAT FOR MONTHLY NARRATIVES\nInstructions: One of these forms should be completed for\neach CAA or Delegate Agency visited and all turned in at\nend of each month. KEEP IT BRIEF!!\n1. Name of staff member\n2. CAA visited\nDuration of visit\n3. Type of service rendered (i.e., evaluation, technical\nassistance, special projects, etc.)\nACTIVITIES\n4. Strong points\n5., Week points\n6. Observations (How do you rate CAA in accomplishing its\ngoals?)\nDuoc purpose :\n/\nWONKsheet for CPA & TA to wake tis monthly refore\n2\nmaterial for Chark to make monthly Opus report\nREPORTING FORMAT FOR MONTHLY NARRATIVES\nInstructions: One of these forms should be completed for\neach CAA or Delegate Agency visited and all turned in at\nend of each month. KEEP IT BRIEF!!\n1. Name of staff member\n2. CAA visited\nDuration of visit (DATE):\n3. Type of service rendered (i.e., evaluation, technical\nassistance, special projects, etc.)\nACTIVITIES\n4. Strong points\n5. 1 Week points\n6. Observations (How do you rate CAA in accomplishing its\ngoals?)\nCAA COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST\nFISCAL REQUIREMENTS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\n243a, EOA\nStatement of responsibility of accounting\nsystem for grantee and delegate agency (ies)\n243c, EOA\nAnnual independent audit completed or\nscheduled in last 12 months\nAP Memo 60, Par. 3\nRespond to audit within 60 days\nInst. 6807-1\nAdministrative costs 15% less than total cost\nInst. 6910-1\nTravel Policies in accordance with Standardized\nGovernment Travel Regulations\nDEO Inst. 6910,\nPar. 4 & 5\nOut of community travel approved\nCAP Grantee Finan-\nSubmitted inventory of property on hand and\ncial Policy &\nlist of what will be required for program.\nProcedures Guide,\nAll inventories must be current\nVol. V, Chap. 1\n,uide, Vol. II,\nRegional approval of all purchases over\nrt I, Par. 2f\n$500.00\nAll purchases within budget\nContract files documented to show purchases\nauthorized, less than GSA price, bids made\ncompetitively or by rotation and received by\nsomeone other than paying official.\ni\nAll program expenditures within budget\nSupervisors' approval of Time and Attendance\nreports showing hours worked and all leave\nCAP Memo 44-a\nAll CAP 15's (Grantee Monthly Financial\nReport) current and mailed\n90 days after end of program year, final\nCAP 15 and CAP 28 to OEO\nBOARD COMPOSITION AND COMMITTEES\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHE(\nCAP Memo 81\nPart C Par. 1.\nMembership 51 or less\nPart C Par. 3\nAt least 1/3 representatives of the poor\nPart C Par. 2.\nNo more than 1/3 public officials\nPart C Par. 3c\nAll representatives of the poor democratically\nelected\nPart D Par. 2\nAll board members (other than public officials)\nserved less than 3 consecutive years and less\nthan 6 years total\nPart D Par. 1\nEach member representing geographical area\nreside in that area\nPart C Par. 5\nRules of operation include petition procedure\nfor membership of new groups\nPart D Par. 5\nCommittees reflect composition of board\nP\nD Par. 3\nQuorum requirement for meetings of the board\nand executive committee at least 50% of total\nmembership\nPart C Par. 1\nMembership of board divisible by 3\n$1\n\"\nMembership of committees divisible by 3\ni\nCIVIL RIGHTS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\nInst. 6710-1\nWritten policy of nondiscrimination in\n1 Conditions,\nemployment on grounds of race, creed,\n7; CAP Memo 23-A, color, national origin, sex and age\nt C Par. 1\n\"\nPolicy communicated to all applicants,\nemployees, supervisors and minority groups\n11\nPolicies and procedures stating affirmative\naction to be taken to insure no discrimi-\nnation in recruitment, employment and all\nother personnel actions\n0 Inst. 6710-1\nCAP Form 11 on file in region\nn'l Conditions,\nI. 6; OEO Notice\nCAA and delegate agencies installed affirmative\n04-2; Requirement\naction plan\nI Affirmative Civil\nghts, Action Program\nOutreach program designed to reach all\ntle 45, Chap. X\nethnic groups\n11\nAll ethnic groups included in policy making\nbodies, participation in planning and\nsetting priorities\n$1\nLocation of facilities so it is accessible\nby all ethnic groups\n11\nStaff members who can communicate with all\nethnic groups by way of language and culture\ni\n\"\nProgram participants are reasonable representa-\ntion of all ethnic groups\n11\nPeriodic self-evaluation of affirmative\naction plan\nWritten procedure for informing all persons\nor any class of individuals of their rights to\nfile a complaint with the regional office if\nthey believe themselves subjected to discrimi-\nnation.\nPERSONNEL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES\nDURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\nemo 23-A\nRules governing vacations, sick leave,\nD Par. 1\nperiodic increases and other conditions\n=\nRules for promotion, separation, resolution of\ngrievances and regulation of employee conduct\n\"\nDescription of benefit plans with details on\nemployer and employee contributions\n\"\nSalary and salary ranges for each position\nand class of positions\nMemo 23-A\nA\nFormal education not required for positions\nif candidate has ability to perform duties\nexcept where limited by state law\nB Par. 1\nNo wages or salaries less than federal minimum\nwage laws\nB Par. 2\nRegional approval to hire for positions over\n$5,000 which is an increment of 20% over\nprevious salary. Previous salary must be\ndocumented\nB Par. 3\nEmployees over $7,000/year receive no overtime\nB Par. 4\nReimbursement for interview expenses limited\nto director or deputy director\nB\nPar.\n5\nOEO approval prior to paying moving expenses\nInst. 6909-1\nAgency free from nepotism\nInst. 6909-4\nProhibition against acceptance of gifts and\ngratuities\nMemo 23-B\nSubmission of list of employees earning over\nB\n$10,000 as of June 30\nD Par. 3\nRecords of all personnel actions including\nhiring, discharge, promotion, discipline,\ntime and attendance, and previous salary\nE\nBiographical information on Director, Deputy\nDirector, Fiscal and Personnel Officers\nInst. 6903-1\nOEO approval for salaries over $15,000\nInst. 6907-1\nStatement prohibiting political activity\nInst. 6907-3\nStatement prohibiting participation in direct\naction in violation of law\nMemo 23B, Part A Wage comparability\nCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\nHow \"bench mark\" positions are identified\nExplanation on procedures used to obtain\ndata to establish \"bench mark\" positions\nand how other jobs related to these\nCopies of certification or other back-up\ninformation\ni\nDELEGATE AGENCY CONTRACTS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\nP Guide, Vol. 1\nAll delegate agency contracts signed and\non file\nIt\nContracts include minimum requirements of\nappendix F, OEO Instruction 6710-1\n\"\nProcedures for monitoring delegate agency\ncontracts\nEstablished procedures for funding delegate\nagencies\nRESIDENT PARTICIPATION\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\n0 Inst. 6005-1\nAdequate provision for CAA to involvement of\nr 1 b (3)\nthe poor through advisory committees and target\narea councils\nr 2 b (5)\nSame policies and procedures for involvement\nof the poor in delegate agency contracts\n11 2 a (1)\nProgress report on implementation of OEO\nInstruction 6005-1 submitted with CAP 81\nby each delegate agency and CAA\nar 2 a (2)\nProgress report include section prepared by\nrepresentatives of the poor\n1\nPUBLIC MEETINGS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\n30 Inst. 7042-1\nPublic board meetings at least once every 10\nir\n1\nweeks or in response to written request\nir 2\nAll meetings held at time and in place\nconvenient to all\nar 2\nPublic notice of each meeting, giving time,\nplace and agenda distributed at least 10\ndays in advance\nar\n3\nMinutes kept of each meeting\nPUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION\nJRCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHECK\nst. 7041-1\nBooks and records available to public in\naccordance with OEO Instruction 7041-1\nNEWS LETTERS AND HOUSE ORGANS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTION\nCHE\nCAP Memo 77\nGrant funds may not be used for publishing\nnewspapers for general distribution in the\ncommunity\nNewsletters & house organs:\nFree to participants and employees\nContain no paid commercial advertising\nNon-partisan\nI\nPROGRAMS\nSOURCE\nDESCRIPTIONS\nCHEX\nuth Programs - OEO Instruction 6168-la\nPar 4\nYouth involvement in planning, operation and\nevaluation of program\nPar 5\nProgram operated on 12 month basis\nPar 6\nEconomic opportunity program, not recreational\nPar 7\nGrantee providing training & evaluation to\nupgrade program\nPar 8\nProgram serving most needy and alienated youth\n16-21 years of age\nPar 9\nCoordinated with other activities of youth\nFAMILY PLANNING - CAP Memo 37-A Par 2\nInformation only supplied to those requesting it\nInformation consistent with individual's moral,\nphilosphical or religious beliefs\nParticipation not requisite to participation in\nother CAA programs\nCOMPREHENSIVE WORK AND TRAINING - Title 1B-EOA\nSect. 124 a 1\nNo perticipant may be involved on projects\ninvolving political parties, sectarian instruction\nor religious worship\nSect. 124 a 2\nProgram may not result in displacement of\nemployed workers, impair existing contracts for\nservices or result in substitution of federal\nfor other program funds\nHOUSING - Sec, 214 EOA\nHousing Development Corporations prohibited\nfrom:\nInsuring mortages\nProviding long term financing\nSENIOR OPPORTUNITIES AND SERVICES\nSect. 126 EOA\nTitle I manpower programs deal with long term\nunemployed 55 years and older\nSect. 221\nLocal initiative programs include programs\nfor elderly\nState of California\nLEGAL\nMemorandum\nTo\n:\nLegal Staff\nCiral\nDate\n: February 4, 1971\nChecklist\nSubject: Legal Services\nEvaluations\nFrom :\nDennis McKee\nWe have several legal service programs which will be coming up\nfor refunding very shortly. It is my hope that we can develop\na general methodology for thorough and efficient evaluation of\nthese programs.\nThe following sets forth the procedure to be followed:\nStructure of a Legal Service Program Evaluation\n1) Depending on whether the program you are going to evaluate\nis in the North or South, check with Geoff Clark or Gil Archuletta\nto obtain the name of the Program Analyst for that CAP. (Most\nlegal service programs are a delegate agency within a CAP). The\nprogram anal: should be able to give you some useful background\ninformation and possibly some valuable do's and dont's as regards\nyour evaluative effort for that particular program.\n2) Utilize the telephone to as great an extent as possible.\nWith the small staff that we have and the large number of legal\nservice programs it will be necessary for us to conserve time in\nevery way that we can.\nTry to set up your agenda prior to arriving in an area. (Allow\nyourself sufficient flexibility SO that you can handle unexpected\ncontingencies).\n3) It would be preferrable for your first appointment to be with\nthe attorneys in the O.E.O. Legal Service program which is being\nevaluated. We want to take a positive approach in this respect.\nLet's find out how we might help the program.\nAttached find a sample Evaluation Checklist.\nIM:lff\nattach:\nntact:\n1) Leg ) service program\nWas this done?\nattorneys\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nAbout:\na) Policies: # of cases handled,\nkinds of cases. Ask to see\npaperwork to back up these\nfigures.\nb) Office hours kept, interview\nschedule, etc.\nc) Interview some clients if\npossible (randomly select\nseveral which may be in the\noffice when you are there) -\nwith permission of legal service\nattorneys.\nd) Ask what the attorneys think\nthe thrust of their programs\nis, ask what they think it\nshould be.\ne) Ask who we should talk to in\nthe community.\nf) In-kind contributions?\n5) Tell them we wish to offer any\nassistance we can.\nh) What do they see as problems?\ni) What improvements do they\nsuggest?\nEvaluation C. klist - 1A\n1)\nLegal Service program\nWas this done?\nattorneys - cont.\n'If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nK About:\nj)\nOffice Procedure. HOW are\ncases logged in, how assigned,\nwhat documentation is kept,\nare hours per client or case\nkept by attorneys, etc.\nk) What are case priorities?\ni.e. What cases are programed\nto be handled? HOW are these\npriorities set?\n1) Check to see if there are any\nmechanical bottlenecks. i.e.\nare there some classes of cases\nwhich are flooding the office\nthat could be handled in a\nmore specialized manner?\nEvaluation C. klist - 2\nntact:\n2) School Officials (generally\nWas this done?\nschool supt.)\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nsk About:\nRelations with the program?\na) Legal\nb) Non-legal\nc) Any suggested people to\ntalk with?\n3) Police Dept.\nAsk About:\nRelations with the program?\na) Legal\nb) Non-legal\nc) Any suggested people to\ntalk with?\n4) Welfare Dept.\nAsk About:\na) DO they refer clients to the\nO.E.O. Lawyers? Any feedback?\nb) Legal\nc) Non-legal\nEvaluation ecklist - 3\nContact:\n1\n5) District Attorney's Office\nWas this done?\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nAsk About:\na) Referrals? Feedback?\nb) Do Legal Service Attorneys\nappear in criminal cases?\nc) Any suggested people to talk\nwith?\na) General rapport with Legal\nService Attorneys?\n6) Public Defender\nAsk About:\na) Referrals? Feedback?\nb) Do Legal Service Attorneys\nappear in criminal cases?\nc) Any suggested people to talk\nwith?\nd) General rapport with Legal\nService Attorneys?\n7) Local Bench and Bar\nAsk About:\na) Working relationship with\nO.E.O. attorneys? Legal,\nNon-legal?\nb) Do O.E.O. attorneys refer out\nfee generating cases (P.I.,\netc.)?\nEvaluation cklist - 4\nContact:\n8) Local Government Officials\nWas this done?\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nAsk About:\nRelationship with program?\na) Legal\nb) Non-legal\nc) Suggested people to talk\nwith?\n9) Local groups (Urban league,\nWas this done?\nchurches, Chicano Organiza-\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\ntions, NAACP, etc.)\nAsk About:\na) Are poor helped? (One group\nmore than another?)\nb) How could service be\nimproved?\nc) What do they like about\nprogram?\na) Any suggested people to talk\nwith?\n10) CAP Director\nAsk About:\nHow effective is the legal service\nelement of the CAP?\nContact:\n11) Local legal aid groups\nWas this done?\n(If not, why not?)\nRemarks\nAsk About:\na) Coordination with O.E.O.\nattorneys? (Overlap, etc.)\nb) Efficient utilization of\nresources?\n12) CAP Board of Directors\nAsk About:\nTheir opinion of the program?\nNote: Must be completed and turned in two (2) days before due at Governor'\nNAME OF ANALYST:\nDATE:\nPROGRAM ANALYZED:\nGuideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program\nIn each instance be specific and support all generalizations and conclusion\n1) General analysis of the program:\n2) Weak points:\nStrong points:\n4) Suggested Changes:\ni\n5) Help we can provide (asked for or not?):\n6) Suggested conditions in grant, if any:\n7) Required information we need (in event we lack information you believe\nis necessary for our examination and analysis):\nGuideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program - 2\n8) Suggested position State Office of Economic Opportunities should take\non refunding - and why:\na) Veto:\nb) Sustain:\nc) Let lapse (i.e. no vetoe, but no positive approval):\nd) Veto unless certain conditions put in grant (list and explain):\ne) Interim Veto because we haven't been supplied required information\nto base our decision on:\ni\n9) Suggested changes in our examination procedures, if any:\n10) People to deal with in future examinations (i.e. was CAP director\nhelpful? Legal Services Director?):\n11) Suggested sources of information on this program (i.e. were church\ngroups useful here? NAACP? etc.?):\nGuideline For Report Following Examination of Legal Service Program - 3\n12) Bottlenecks in examination (i.e. were there any dead-ends? Did certain\nsources or people close up on you or prove misleading? If so, why?):\nINFORMATION PACKAGE REVIEW\nALYST NAME\nDATE SUBMITTED\nUSE BLANK CONTINUATION SHEETS AS NEEDED FOR EXPANDED\nEXPLANATIONS. KEEP VISIBLE INDEX IDENTIFICATION CARD\nATTACHED! REPORT REQUIRED FOR EACH COMPONENT OR PRO-\nGRAM.\nIS THE INFORMATION ON THE VISIBLE INDEX CARD CORRECT? IF NOT, NOTE\nCORRECTIONS AND NOTIFY STAFF ASSISTANT FOR PLANNING IMMEDIATELY:\nCIRCLE CAP FORM NO. MISSING FROM PACKAGE:\n1 5 7 11 25 46 77 81\nEXPLAIN OMISSIONS:\nOEO FIELD REP.\nOEO DISTRICT SUPERVISOR\nI. GRANTEE INFORMATION (COMPLETE OR CORRECT AS NECESSARY)\nA. NAMES AND HOME ADDRESSES OF GRANTEE PERSONNEL:\nEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR\nDEPUTY DIRECTOR\nFISCAL OFFICER\nOTHER KEY STAFF SUCH AS PROGRAM DIRECTORS:\nTITLE\nNAME\nADDRESS\nBOARD CHAIRMAN\nNAMES OF OTHER BOARD MEMBERS:\nB. NAMES AND HOME ADDRESSES OF DELEGATE AGENCY (\"X\" OUT IF\nNOT APPLICABLE) :\nPROJECT DIRECTOR\nDEPUTY PROJECT DIRECTOR\nFISCAL OFFICER\nOTHER KEY STAFF:\ni\nNAME\nTITLE\nADDRESS\n/\nADVISORY BOARD CHAIRMAN\nOTHER BOARD MEMBERS (NAMES ONLY) :\n-2-\nHISTORY OF GRANTEE\nA. DATE AGENCY FORMED\nDELEGATE AGENCY\nB. BUDGET HISTORY (INCLUDE ALL SOURCES, I.E., OEO, DOL,\nHUD, ETC.)\nC. PERSONNEL:\nNO. OF PROFESSIONALS\nNON-PROFESSIONALS\nD. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF PAST PERFORMANCE (SPECIAL SUCCESSES\nOR FAILURES) :\nE. SPECIAL NOTEWORTHY EVENTS RELATED TO AGENCY OR PROGRAM:\n:\nF. HAVE ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS ELECTED TO \"OPT OUT\" OF\nPAST PROGRAMS? (GREEN AMENDMENT) EXPLAIN FULLY:\nII. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND EVALUATION TECHNIQUES\nA. DO THE OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM FIT INTO THE LONG TERM\nGOALS OF THE AGENCY? WHAT ARE THE OBJECTIVES?\nB. ARE THE OBJECTIVES COMPATIBLE WITH THE STATED OBJECTIVES\nIN SECTION 201 OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT? (REFER-\nENCE OEO INSTRUCTION 6320-1) EXPLAIN SPECIFICALLY:\nC. WHAT EVALUATION TECHNIQUES HAVE BEEN BUILT INTO THE PRO-\nGRAM TO MEASURE ATTAINMENT OF STATED OBJECTIVES?"
}