Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Serving Communities and Country U NDERSTANDING S CHOOL T URNAROUND A MERI C ORPS S ELECTION C RITERIA O RIENTATION S ESSION II—PART II.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Serving Communities and Country U NDERSTANDING S CHOOL T URNAROUND A MERI C ORPS S ELECTION C RITERIA O RIENTATION S ESSION II—PART II."— Presentation transcript:

1 Serving Communities and Country U NDERSTANDING S CHOOL T URNAROUND A MERI C ORPS S ELECTION C RITERIA O RIENTATION S ESSION II—PART II

2 AGENDA  Welcome  Overview  Evidence-Basis  Criteria I-Program Design  Criteria II-Organizational Capability  Criteria III-Budget Cost Effectiveness  Wrap Up  Post Assessment

3 Serving Communities and Country S ELECTION C RITERIA Outline

4  Overview  Categories  NOFO Guidance  Assessment Factors  Keep in Mind NOFO GUIDANCE—NOFO PAGE # ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE #

5 Serving Communities and Country O RGANIZATIONAL CAPABILITY

6 O RGANIZATIONAL C APABILITY O VERVIEW  Applicant demonstrates organizational background and staffing to ensure sustainability, compliance, accountability, and continuous improvement.  Ability to provide Program Compliance Oversight.  Ability to provide Fiscal Compliance Oversight.

7 O RGANIZATIONAL C APABILITY C ATEGORIES  Organizational Background and Staffing  Sustainability  Compliance and Accountability  Continuous Improvement

8 O RGANIZATIONAL B ACKGROUND AND S TAFFING NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 20 Mission and history Structure Roles, responsibilities, and experience Training and technical assistance to staff Prior experience with federal funds/AmeriCorps grants Existing Programs Track Record ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 20 Capability to plan, implement, and evaluate the proposed project Qualifications Plans and infrastructure

9 S USTAINABILITY NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 20 School and LEA leadership Involvement Partnerships Building State Commission Consultation Fundraising Track Record Long Term Impact CNCS Share of Total Operational Budget ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 20 Plan for securing school and community support involvement Likelihood of sustainability of efforts

10 C OMPLIANCE AND A CCOUNTABILITY NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 21 Prevent Detect Enforce Current | Former Grantee Track Record ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 21 Capability to Ensure Compliance

11 C ONTINUOUS I MPROVEMENT NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 21 Use of Feedback Data Driven Decision Making ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 21 Use of data or performance feedback. Assessment of Progress Ongoing Corrections

12 K EEP IN M IND  How will I know if they are a current or former grantee?  No set rules on staff size or staffing structure  Sustainability is defined broader than just financial; it includes stakeholder buy-in and support  Grants provide only partial funding necessary to operate the program; programs must raise funds through other sources to operate the program  Expectations for coordination, page 14

13 Serving Communities and Country C OST -E FFECTIVENESS & B UDGET A DEQUACY

14 C OST -E FFECTIVENESS & B UDGET A DEQUACY O VERVIEW  The budget is clear, reasonable, cost-effective, and in alignment with the program narrative.  The requested funds do not exceed the maximum cost per MSY, or for existing programs, have not increased over previous years unless warranted.  Whether the program is a cost-effective approach for addressing the community need(s) identified in the application.  The applicant’s demonstrated understanding of total program cost necessary to support the project and the capacity to raise the additional resources.

15 C OST -E FFECTIVENESS & B UDGET A DEQUACY C ATEGORIES  Cost Effectiveness  Budget Adequacy

16 C OST E FFECTIVENESS NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 22 Reasonable Cost-Effective Supplement, and not supplant Existing AmeriCorps programs: Rationale for a higher cost per MSY Special Circumstances ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 22 Reasonable Cost-Effective

17 B UDGET A DEQUACY NOFO GUIDANCE—PAGE 22 Non-CNCS funding and resources Budget Adequacy Financial Commitments Potential Commitments ASSESS THE QUALITY OF THE APPLICATION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTORS: PAGE 23 Clarity and Alignment Sufficient Resources

18 K EEP IN M IND AmeriCorps Budget  Budget is broken down by three sections: Program Operating Costs Member Costs Administrative /Indirect Costs  Budget is divided into grantee share and Federal (CNCS) share

19 K EEP IN M IND  Allowable Conform to any limitation or exclusion set forth in the OMB Cost Principles or in the grant award Be consistent with organization’s policies and procedures Be determined in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) Be adequately documented  Reasonable A cost is reasonable if, in its nature or amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the costs

20 K EEP IN M IND Unallowable Costs  Lobbying  Fundraising  Fines and penalties  Expenses not necessary to meet program objectives  Costs that would constitute fraud, waste, and abuse  Unreasonable costs from a “prudent person” perspective  Costs with no logical basis for allocating to your program

21 K EEP IN M IND Match Requirements | Cost Share  Grantees must meet minimum requirements up to 50% overall match  Must provide match source, type of contribution(cash and in-kind), and amount in application  No match required EAP Fixed-Amount Grants Grantee pays all program costs over the amount per MSY provided by CNCS

22 K EEP IN M IND Cost Per MSY  Cost per MSY is NOT the same as the living allowance  Maximum Cost Per MSY can be found on page 9 of the Notice  One MSY = 1700 service hours, a full-time AmeriCorps position  Cost per MSY = CNCS share of budgeted grants costs divided by number of MSYs requested Cost per MSY does not include child care or the cost of the education award  MSY and Cost per MSY are automatically calculated in eGrants

23 T HANK Y OU We hope this information will help you to understand and apply the program criteria during your review!

24 P OST A SSESSMENT To check for understanding and verify that you have completed this orientation session, please complete the Assessment on the next three slides and our answers to Subject: Programmatic Orientation

25 P OST A SSESSMENT 1.List the 3 Selection Criteria. 2.True or False: Cost Per MSY is the same thing as the member living allowance. 3.Which aspect of the application should not be considered in your assessment? a)AmeriCorps member recruitment and training plans b)The role that volunteers will have in the project c)The organizational capacity d)None of the above

26 P OST A SSESSMENT 4.What type of approach refers to an applicant’s use of research, evaluations, or performance results to explain why it is proposing an intervention of a particular type, frequency and/or intensity to address the identified community problem/need? a)Performance Measures b)Evidence-Informed c)Outcomes and Community Impact


Download ppt "Serving Communities and Country U NDERSTANDING S CHOOL T URNAROUND A MERI C ORPS S ELECTION C RITERIA O RIENTATION S ESSION II—PART II."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google