Finding
Finding 1: WTCS restricted federal eligibility for applicants applying for AEFLA funds.
A review of the WTCS 2021 AEFLA grant application revealed that WTCS improperly applied the definition for eligible provider established in section 203(5) of WIOA. Section 203(5) states, “(5) ELIGIBLE PROVIDER — The term ‘‘eligible provider’’ means an organization that has demonstrated effectiveness in providing adult education and literacy activities that may include—
(A) a local educational agency;
(B) a community-based organization or faith-based organization;
(C) a volunteer literacy organization;
(D) an institution of higher education;
(E) a public or private nonprofit agency;
(F) a library;
(G) a public housing authority;
(H) a nonprofit institution that is not described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (G) and has the ability to provide adult education and literacy activities to eligible individuals;
(I) a consortium or coalition of the agencies, organizations, institutions, libraries, or authorities described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (H); and
(J) a partnership between an employer and an entity described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I).”
WTCS’ grant guidelines states, “A consortium must designate one of the applicant organizations to serve as the primary or lead applicant agency and the fiscal agent for the grant. A for-profit employer is not eligible to serve as the primary applicant.” According to the statute, any organization that can demonstrate effectiveness may apply. However, WTCS restricted eligibility of a consortium applicant and excluded for-profit agencies from applying as lead applicants of consortia. Thus, WTCS improperly applied eligibility criteria for eligible providers under AEFLA and restricted potential applicants that might have been able to demonstrate effectiveness in providing adult education and literacy activities.
Section 231(c) of WIOA; 34 CFR § 463.20(c)(1)