1 / 35

Federal Grant Processes and Opportunities

Federal Grant Processes and Opportunities. July 6, 2010. Annette Reichman Liaison, Office of Special Institutions Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services U.S. Department of Education. Office of Special Institutions.

donkor
Télécharger la présentation

Federal Grant Processes and Opportunities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Federal Grant Processes and Opportunities July 6, 2010 Annette ReichmanLiaison, Office of Special InstitutionsOffice of Special Education and Rehabilitative ServicesU.S. Department of Education

  2. Office of Special Institutions • As the liaison officer of the Office of Special Institutions in the Office of the Assistant Secretary, I work as the principal liaison of the U.S. Department of Education to statutorily funded special institutions for the education of youths with disabilities. • These institutions are Gallaudet University, National Technical Institute for the Deaf, and the American Printing House for the Blind. 2

  3. Responsibilities of the Office of Special Institutions • Monitoring of the three special institutions to ensure compliance with their respective authorizing legislation, the Education of the Deaf Act of 1986, and the 1879 Act to Promote the Education of the Blind; • Ensuring that federal funds appropriated to the institutions are used appropriately; and • Providing policy interpretation and formulation for school-aged, postsecondary, adult and career education programs for children and youths with disabilities enrolled in or served by these institutions. 3

  4. Authorizing Legislation • The Education of the Deaf Act (EDA) of 1986 authorizes Gallaudet University and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf. The EDA is reauthorized every five years. It was last reauthorized in 1998. • The 1879 Act to Promote the Education of the Blind authorizes an annual appropriation for the American Printing House for the Blind. 4

  5. Overview of Today’s Presentation • Overview of federal spending; • Overview of federal programs serving individuals with disabilities; • GAO recommendations on federal spending; • What does this mean for state agencies serving deaf and hard of hearing individuals; and • Looking for federal grants. 5

  6. Federal Spending 1966 1986 2006 • Defense 43% 28% 20% • Social Security 15% 20% 21% • Medicare & 1% 10% 19% Medicaid • Net Interest 7% 14% 9% • All Other Spending 34% 29% 32% Sources: Office of Management and Budget and U.S. Department of Treasury 6

  7. Federal Spending for Mandatory and Discretionary Programs 1966 1986 2006 • Discretionary 67% 44% 38% • Competitive grants • Mandatory 26% 42% 53% • Formula grants • “Statutory” earmarks • Source: Office of Management and Budget

  8. A Side Note About “Earmarks” • Citizens Against Government Waste found that in fiscal year 2008, Congress added 11,610 projects for a total of $17.2 billion – its second-highest total ever – into its spending bills (earmarks). • Earmarks are funds for “special projects” that Senators and Representatives add to the budget for one or two years without a statutory (law) change and without a competitive grant process. • Source: www.govexec.com on April 3, 2008

  9. Federal Programs Serving Individuals With Disabilities • Over 20 different federal agencies administer almost 200 programs that provide a wide range of assistance to persons with disabilities. • Four agencies – Health and Human Services, Education, Veterans Affairs, and Labor – are responsible for over 65% of these programs. Source: federal Disability Assistance – GAO Report to Congress, June 2005 9

  10. Federal Programs Serving Individuals With Disabilities Include – • Social Security Administration • SSI and SSDI • Health and Human Services • Medicare/Medicaid • Department of Education • Personal assistant services (Independent Living Services) • Vocational Rehabilitation • IDEA requirements for free and appropriate public education • Gallaudet University and National Technical Institute for the Deaf Source: Federal Disability Assistance – GAO Report to Congress, June 2005 10

  11. Federal Programs Serving Individuals With Disabilities Also Include – • Federal Communications Commission • Telecommunications Relay • Housing and Urban Development • Subsidized and public housing • Transportation • Bus accessibility • Department of Labor • Work incentives grants • Workforce Investment Centers • Department of Justice • ADA, and other protections Source: Federal Disability Assistance – GAO Report to Congress, June 2005 11

  12. In 2003, the Federal Spending Included – • Over $120 billion for programs that provided assistance only to individuals with disabilities. • Funds were spent according to the following: • 86% on monetary support (e.g., SSI and SSDI); • 8% on education; • 2% on medical care; • 2% on employment – related; and • 1% on other assistance. • Source: Federal Disability Assistance – GAO Report to Congress, June 2005

  13. Growing Number of SSI and SSDI Beneficiaries • In 1996, 14.5 million beneficiaries receive VA Pension, SSI and SSDI monthly payments. • In 1996, these beneficiaries received $83.4 million total in cash benefits. • In 2006, 18.1 million beneficiaries receive VA Pension, SSI and SSDI monthly payments: • Most of the increase is from SSI and SSDI. • In 2006, these beneficiaries received $158 million total in cash benefits.

  14. Current Fiscal Challenges • GAO states that we face large and growing deficits mostly from demographic trends and rising health care costs. • The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) show that balancing the budget in 2040 could require – • Cutting total federal spending by 60 percent, or • Raising the federal taxes to two times higher. Source:www.gao.gov/cghome.htm 14

  15. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – February 17, 2009 • The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Act) seeks to immediately create job creation through these challenging economic times by cutting taxes and investing billions of dollars over the next two years in critical sectors such as energy, health care, infrastructure, and education. • For fiscal years 2009 and 2010, this Act added: • $540 million in funds to Vocational Rehabilitation state grants, • $18.2 million in funds to state Independent Living state grants, • $87.5 million to Independent Living Centers, and • $34.3 million to independent living services for older blind individuals. 15

  16. GAO Recommends That Congress and the White House: • Improve financial reporting, public education, and government performance metrics / accountability through the development of key national (outcomes-based) indicators on economic, security, social and environmental issues; • Strengthen budget and legislative processes and controls, including the restoration of discretionary spending caps and imposing limits on earmarks and emergency funds; and • Re-examine and change the budget for the 21st century (e.g., entitlement programs, public health insurance, other spending and tax policy) to be able to demonstrate results and to better respond to the public need. Source:www.gao.gov/cghome.htm 16

  17. GAO Proposes That Congress and the President – • Develop key national (outcome-based) indicators on economic, security, social and environmental issues to chart the country’s progress; • Restore discretionary spending caps; • Impose limits on earmarks emergency funds; and • Restructure entitlement programs (Social Security and public health insurance). • Source:www.gao.gov/cghome.htm

  18. Another Side Note -- • We still do not know how to measure the effectiveness and performance of the Federal government. • Having a government that works lends credibility to other sectors of society; that is, if governments can prove that their regulatory systems are strong and fair, investors and business may be able to trust this system of regulation. • Yet, the U.S. government is ahead of the curve after all when it comes to performance management. • Source:www.govexec.com, April 4, 2008

  19. Implications for State Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Communities 19

  20. 1) Limited Federal Fiscal Resources • Increasingly limited federal/state VR resources; • Fewer federal discretionary grant opportunities; and • Increasing competition for less federal funds. 20

  21. 2) Increased Emphasis on Accountability and Results • The federal government is experiencing an “accountability revolution” that began with the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA) in 1993; that is: • Programs that receive federal funds must clearly define the expected long-term outcomes (which is very different from outputs); • Conduct activities and provide services that support those outcomes; • Develop assessment instruments or performance measures/indicators of expected outputs and outcomes; • Collect data to analyze the results of activities or services; and • Revise the program activities or services according to assessment results. 21

  22. 3) Focus on Institutional Impact • This is the “so what” question. • For example, if the state VR program did not exist, how would the lives of individuals with disabilities be different? • What evidence do we have that demonstrates the impact of state VR agencies in enhancing employment opportunities and the quality of life for individuals with disabilities? • What measures can be developed to assess this impact? 22

  23. What Can State Agencies Serving the Deaf and Hard of Communities Do To Tap Into Federal Funds?

  24. Suggestions for Developing Grant Proposals • Focus on long-term strategic planning; • Identify “results” or “outcomes” expected from services being provided or being proposed by the grant application, and how this will be measured (that is, develop a performance measurement system); • Become creative in exploring for grant opportunities and in grant writing; and • Explore partnerships with other agencies.

  25. Looking for Federal Grants • First check: www.grants.gov • Other Web sites: • U.S. Department of Education • www.ed.gov(click on “grants and contracts”) • U.S. Department of Labor • www.dol.gov (click on “faith based and community initiatives”) • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services • www.hhs.gov (click on “grants and funding”) • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development • www.hud.gov (click on “grants”) • U.S. Department of Transportation • www.dot.gov/grantsgov.htm (will refer to www.grants.gov)

  26. www.grants.gov

  27. www.dol.gov

  28. www.hhs.gov

  29. Final Suggestion • With the increasing competition for limited Federal funds through discretionary grants and corresponding more complex requirements to demonstrate accountability and results, professionals looking for grants and in need of developing grant writing skills may want to consider joining American Association of Grant Professionals (www.go-aagp.org). • This organization is establishing a formal credentialing process, with an affiliate organization, Grant Professional Certification Institute. • AAGP is identifying and developing standards for grant writers within an ethical framework.

  30. QUESTIONS?

More Related