FAQ

• Q : Based on guidelines described in SECTION I. GENERAL PURPOSE & APPLICANT INFORMATION 1.1 Purpose, the following question is being submitted.
  ODJFS expects to award multiple grants, in amounts of $300,000-$500,000. Will applicants be considered if applying for multiple grants serving several WIB regions? In essence, can a single applicant provide services to multiple WIBs with multiple grants?
  A : An organization may propose services for more than one Workforce Investment Board (WIB) region, and may be a party to more than one grant application. It is also acceptable for a member of an applicant partnership to offer service -- or to receive grant funds for service -- strictly outside its own WIB region, as long as it is deemed capable of doing so by the proposal review team. The one caveat involves Workforce Investment Boards themselves. A WIB may only offer grant- funded services to residents of a region other than its own, if the board for that other region is also a party to the grant application. While a WIB may legally serve customers from any part of the state, every WIB in a grant proposal’s service area will have an important role to play in identifying local resources and service options, helping with program design, etc.
  


• Q :. May a partnering organization (specifically, a campus of the University System of Ohio) participate in more than one proposal/project?
  A : Yes. (See answer to Q1, above)


• Q :. What constitutes a Local Workforce Investment Board (LWIB)? Can an Local Advisory Committee of Area 7 be the LWIB participant? or must it be the board of Area 7?
  A :. In a large WIA region with multiple advisory committees or other consultative groups at the local level, the fiscal agent and mandatory WIA partner for Constructing Futures would still be the Workforce Investment Board (WIB) for the whole region. The local groups might be included as optional partners for program planning and service provision, but only at the discretion of the WIB. They cannot serve the function of fiscal agent or mandatory WIA partner under this grant.


• Q : Please provide more definition around "matching funds"? Can employer wages or stipends paid for
  internships count as matching funds? Can current grants supporting participating partner programs count
  as matching funds?
  A : Rather than stipulate matching funds per se, this RFP requires subrecipients to provide leveraged resources in an amount greater than or equivalent to the Constructing Futures Grant awarded through this RFP. Leveraged resources consist of a contribution of other funding to operate the grant (including but not limited to other ARRA funding, WIA funding, or third party cash contributions) or other costs paid by the subrecipient, which are allowable under the grant. Up to 25% of the leveraged resources provided may be in-kind resources (such as services, equipment and supplies, space etc). The value of in-kind leveraging must be substantiated and documented. Requirements for determining the value of an in-kind contribution may be found in 29 CFR 97.24(b)(7) and 29 CFR 95.23 (c-h).


• Q : The RFP states that “up to 25% of the leveraging amount may be obtained from in-kind sources.” Please give examples of acceptable in-kind sources.
  A : (See answer to Q4, above.)


• Q : Please provide examples of acceptable leveraging for the remaining 75%. In particular, please clarify if, for example, ABLE program costs (personnel, instructional materials, etc.) can be counted as leveraged dollars. Can program costs for a community-based organization that assists women and minorities be counted as leveraged dollars?
  A : In order to qualify for leveraging, costs must meet the federal cost principals (per OMB Circulars A- 87, A-21, and A-122), must be allowable under WIA and ARRA, and also be allowable costs for activities and services in operating the Constructing Futures Grant.


• Q : Is there a page limitation for Tabs 2-6?
  A : There is no page limit for the proposal as a whole. The RFP does limit two segments of the proposal to eight pages each: a description of organizational capabilities, as described in Section 2.1; and information about leadership positions in the grant project, as described in Section 2.2. It is very important to note that excessive length and/or unnecessary verbiage will affect a proposal’s
  chance of success. Section 5.2.A of the RFP stipulates that “ODJFS reserves the right not to review submitted appendices which includes information/materials not required in the RFP.” RFP Section 6.1 (re: Scoring) notes that “Proposals containing assumptions, ... poor organization, lack of proofreading and unnecessary use of self-promotional claims will be evaluated accordingly.”
  This provision of Section 6.1 is also relevant: “Applicants submitting a response will be evaluated based on the capacity and experience demonstrated in their Technical and Project budget as well as the quality of the project design” One measure of capacity and design quality is the ability to communicate objectives and plans concisely. The same section of the RFP also provides ODJFS
  some latitude in judging the overall fitness of a proposal as follows: “The PRT reserves the right to reject any and all proposals, in whole or in part, received in response to this request.”


• Q : What is the designated minimum acceptable number of points to achieve on the technical proposal out of the maximum possible points and still qualify for continued consideration? See page 33 of RFP
  A : Please see Attachment D of the RFP for the minimum scoring threshold.
• Q : Please define in-kind sources for the leveraging support.
  A9. (See answer to Q4, above.)


• Q : The RFP mentions "research-based training models" several times. The Applicant's Library does not cite any research-based sources. Are their specific models that can be identified that would assist in designing a best-practice program design?
  A : Research-based training models and best-practice information, are what ODJFS expects to elicit through this grant offering. As noted throughout the RFP, pre-apprenticeship training for adults is an area of programming that requires further development. What already exists is a researchedbased foundation for designing elements of the program. Ohio’s experience with customized
  industrial training, Career-Technical Transfer & Articulation, and other aspects of adult instruction, have laid the groundwork; Ohio’s Labor Market Information tools and the curriculum expertise of campuses in the University System of Ohio are also valuable resources for developing a pre-apprenticeship model. Information about these and other relevant topics is available through
  the Applicants’ Library in RFP Section 1.9.


• Q : Will wages and related costs paid by employers to participants in the program be accepted as cash match?
  A : Participant wages are an allowable cost under this grant. Therefore, if an employer paid the wage rather than Constructing Futures, the amount of those participant wages would be considered leveraged. However, employer paid benefits and overtime are not permitted as leverage.


• Q : What are the documentation requirements for cash match and in-kind match?
  A : Leveraged costs will be reported via the County Finance Information System and through the submission of quarterly Constructing Futures reports. Supporting documentation may consist of invoices and cancelled checks for leveraged costs, copy of a deposit and journal entry of a leveraged cash contribution or even a letter signed by an employer attesting to the amount of base
  wages paid to a participant(s). This documentation would not be submitted to ODJFS but will rather be retained by the WIA fiscal agent and reported to ODJFS. For the purpose of submitting the proposals, subgrantees need only indicate what amount they
  will leverage. An explanation of the leveraged resources should be provided in the budget narrative. See the example below.
  
  • Leveraged Resources
    A. $124,000 – Leveraged Employer Paid Participant Wages
    B. $ 9,600 – In-Kind Use of the XYZ facility to conduct training sessions
    C. $ 45,000 – Leveraged Local WIA formula funds
  • A. Employer LMN will employ 5 participants for 40 hours per week at a rate of $12.00 per hour while for the duration of the 52 week training program.
    B. XYZ facility is providing use of their facility at a no cost. The normal rental rate for this facility (per signed letter from XYZ company) is $800 per month.
    C. The local WIB will leverage their local formula funds to operate this grant.
• Q : So long as the match requirements as to type are met, will the State accept match that is not identified as a source of match in the initial grant application?
  A : Yes. As long as the subrecipient provides leverage in an amount greater than or equal to the amount of Constructing Futures funding provided, they may modify the source of their leveraged resources. For example, if due to unforeseen circumstances, employer LMN was to only employ 2 participants, the WIB could make up the difference by providing additional local formula funds to meet the leverage requirements. Should a subrecipient change the make up of the resources they plan to leverage, that may be explained in narrative of the quarterly report submitted to ODJFS.

Reference document - APPLICANT QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CONSTRUCTING FUTURES RFP#: R-1011-15-8024