(i) SF-424, Federal Assistance (including all comments received from clearinghouses);

(ii) CSA Form 419, Summary of Work Program and Budget; and

(iii) CSA Form 515, Grantee Budget Information (pages 1 and 2) (See OMB Circular A-102.)

(4) If delegating programs, the following additional documents must be submitted as part of the formal funding request:

(i) CSA Form 85, Administering Agency Funding Estimate;

(ii) CSA Form 87, Delegate Agency Basic Information; and

(iii) CAP Form 11, Assurance of Compliance with Civil Rights Act.

§ 1061.90-7 Post funding requirements. Grantees receiving funds under section 231 must comply with all CSA rules applicable to grants funded under this section. See §1000.1 of this Chapter for a listing of all such rules.

title II of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, if such assistance is administered by the Community Services Administration.

§ 1064.1-2 Effective date.

March 14, 1972 (CSA Instruction 6441– 1).

§ 1064.1-3 Legislation.

Section 604(1) of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, provides in part:

"The Director shall prescribe procedures to assure that * * * (1) special notice of and an opportunity for a timely and expeditious appeal to the Director is provided for an agency or organization which would like to serve as a delegate agency under Title II and whose application to the community action agency has been wholly or substantially rejected or has not been acted upon within a period of time deemed reasonable by the Director."

§1064.1-4 Policy.

This subpart implements section 604(1) by providing procedures to ensure a timely and expeditious appeal for organizations which submit initial or renewal applications to a Community Action Agency (CAA) to serve as delegate agencies and by establishing standards for resolving appeals in a manner which preserves for a CAA the primary responsibility for the planning, administration and evaluation of community action programs in the community which it serves.

$1064.1-5 Requirement that CAA notify prospective delegate agency. When an organization informs the CAA that it desires to apply for, or renew delegate agency status, the CAA shall promptly inform such organization of the approximate date by which an application must be submitted in order to be considered for the next funding period. Such applications should be submitted no later than 180 days before the end of the CAA's funding period in order to be considered during the CAA's planning cycle for the coming funding period. In addition, the CAA shall promptly inform each agency which submits an application to become or to continue to be a delegate agency of the provisions of this subpart and the date it expects to re

ceive funding guidance. Applications which are submitted after the planning cycle begins will normally not be considered. (Further instructions and procedures are set forth in CSA Instruction 6710-1).

1064.1-6 Appeal procedure for rejected applicant.

(a) If a CAA either rejects, wholly or substantially, such an application or fails to act upon the application by the time it receives funding guidance from CSA, the agency submitting the application may appeal the rejection or failure to act to the CSA official responsible for approving the grant awarding financial assistance to the CAA. Ordinarily, this official will be the CSA Regional Director for the appropriate Region. If the CAA rejects the application in response to an exercise by CSA of authority under the grant, the agency may also appeal the decision through these procedures.

(b) The agency making such an appeal shall submit to the responsible CSA official a copy of all material it submitted to the CAA in its application as well as a statement setting forth how the application would:

(1) Involve activities which can be closely coordinated with community action programs.

(2) Involve significant new combinations of resources or new or innovative approaches to the problems of the poor. Or;

(3) Be structured in a manner which will, within the limits of the activities contemplated, most fully and effectively promote the purposes of the Act.

(c) In addition, if it is seeking to replace an existing delegate agency or to operate a program currently operated by the CAA, the rejected applicant should explain why it believes it could operate the program more effectively than the CAA or existing delegate agency. If it is seeking to operate a new program not currently operated either by the CAA or an existing delegate agency, the applicant should explain why its proposed program would be superior to those currently operated by or through the CAA. The statement submitted by the rejected applicant shall also contain a description of its efforts to combine the proposed activi

ties with those of the CAA and the CAA's response to such efforts. The rejected applicant shall send a copy of the statement to the CAA at the same time the statement is submitted to the responsible CSA official.

(d) The CAA may, within 10 days of receiving a copy of the appeal, submit to the responsible CSA official material in reply to the appeal. The CAA shall also send a copy of such material to the applicant making the appeal.

§ 1064.1-7 Criteria for resolving appeal.

(a) The responsible CSA official shall, whenever possible, decide the appeal before the CAA submits its formal funding request. To maintain the principle of local initiative in community action programs, the responsible CSA official will sustain the action of the CAA unless he/she finds that:

(1) The CAA did not give fair and adequate consideration to the rejected applicant's application,

(2) Or the decision of the CAA will have a decidedly adverse effect on the quality of the overall community action program in the local community or would preclude achievement of the objectives of a Special Emphasis program as described in section 222(a) of the Act.

(b) If the responsible CSA official concludes that the CAA did not provide fair and adequate consideration of the application, he/she shall return it to the CAA with the requirement that it reconsider the application and inform the responsible CSA official in writing of the steps taken to reconsider the application and of the decision reached.

(c) If the applicant has received a fair and adequate consideration, the responsible CSA official may nonetheless review the case to ascertain whether criterion in paragraph (a)(2) of this section has been met. In reviewing the case, the CSA official shall bear in mind the amount of funds available to both the CAA and/or the prospective applicant. Options open to the reviewing official include, but are not limited to:

(1) Sustaining the rejection of the applicant;

(2) Direct funding of the rejected applicant in those instances where CSA is

§1067.4-1 Applicability.

This subpart applies to all grants made under titles I, II, III-B, and VII of the Community Services Act as amended if the assistance is administered by the Community Services Administration.

$1067.4-2 Definitions of terms as used in this subpart.

(a) Program. The provision of federal funds and administrative direction to accomplish a prescribed set of objectives through the conduct of specified activities. Example: Senior Opportunities and Services Program.

(b) Project. The implementation level of a program where resources are used to produce an end product that directly contributes to the objectives of the

program. 1020 Example: Meals on Wheels (in the local community)

(c) Standard. A general statement describing one or more elements of program and project effectiveness. Example: Stimulation and creation of additional services and programs to remedy gaps and deficiencies in presently existing services and programs (for the elderly). (See appendix E to subpart 1067.4)

(d) Program and Project Effectiveness-he extent to which identifiable progress is being made toward (1) the overall purposes of the Community Services Act and (2) the specific purposes of the program authorities under various titles of the Act.

§ 1067.4-3 Purpose.

The purpose of this subpart is to outline standards against which the effectiveness of programs and projects funded by the Community Services Administration will be assessed. It is not the purpose of this subpart to establish standards for conducting evaluations. The focus is on the accomplishments which constitute program and project effectiveness.

§ 1067.4-4 Policy.

(a) Standards of Program and Project Effectiveness. (1) The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 as amended states that "It is *** the policy of the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this Nation** *.”

(2) In furtherance of the goal of working toward the elimination of poverty Congress mandated numerous program authorities, each with its specific purposes, through which various national programs and local projects are funded. The purposes of each of these authorities are in fact the standards of effectiveness against which programs and projects will be assessed. Through the use of these standards CSA aims to provide a consistent framework within which grantees will proceed to establish priorities, goals and project designs to meet local needs.

(3) The Appendices of this subpart outline the standards of effectiveness derived from the authorizing legislation for the program authorities under titles I, II, III-B, and VII of the Community Services Act. Exception: There are several cases where additional standards are included which are derived from project management experi

ence.

(b) Applicability of Standards of Effectiveness. Beginning with FY 1976 fundings, projects operated by grantees must be developed consistent with the requirements stated under each of the following titles:

(1) Titles I and III-B: Projects funded under the above titles must be consistent with one or more of the standards for the particular program or project. (See appendices B and N.)

(2) Title II: This title includes both general and specific standards. General standards are standards that are applicable to all program authorities under title II, e.g. maximum feasible participation. Specific standards are those that are stated for the various program authorities under title II, e.g. Senior Opportunities and Services.

(i) As a result, title II programs and projects must address general standards of effectiveness PLUS specific standards.

(ii) Therefore, each project developed by grantees and funded under title II must be developed consistent with the following:

(a) One or more of the general standards applicable to all title II programs (See appendix A to subpart 1067.4), and (b) One or more of the specific standards developed for the particular program (appendices B through M).

(iii) It should be noted that although each project must address at least one of the general standards, grantees must assure that their work program as a whole addresses all of the general standards.

EXAMPLES: Emergency Food and Medical Services, section 222(a)(5): General standards: One or more standards in appendix A to subpart 1067.4; Specific standards: One or more standards in appendix D to subpart 1067.4.

State Agency Assistance, (SEOOs), section 231: General standards: One or more standards in appendix A to subpart 1067.4; Specific standards: One or more standards in appendix M to subpart 1067.4.

(a) Measures are needed in order to determine whether programs and projects are effective. These measures will be the project goals developed locally by the grantee. Each grantee is already required to establish planning goals as part of its regular grant application process. The additional requirement established by this subpart is that such goals must be consistent with and directly related to the legislative standards of program and project effectiveness.

(b) As title II also contains general standards in addition to the specific standards of effectiveness, project goals for title II programs must be developed in such a manner as to insure that the activities undertaken in pursuing these goals will address the general title II standards as well as the specific standards for that program.

(c) Project goals must be specific as to both the character and the extent of progress which should be accomplished during the funding period. Goals should be stated in terms which are clearly measurable and should define the quantity as well as the quality and character of the improvements to be achieved. In addition, they must be logically related to the legislative standards which they are designed to meet.

(d) The various appendices of this Instruction provide examples of project goals which address the legislative standards for each program. These examples are provided only as a guide to grantees who must develop their own goals based on local needs and conditions.

§ 1067.4-6 Procedures.

(a) Grantees should establish their local goals consistent with the stand