Narrative: III. b. 5. B. ii.

The Adult Education Section ensured that all eligible providers were given direct and equitable access to compete for Title II, AEFLA sections 225 (Correctional/Institutional), 231 (Direct and Equitable), and 243 (Integrated English Literacy and Civics Education) federal funds. The same grant announcement, application, and process were used for all eligible providers, and each proposal was treated the same way in the evaluation. 

The Request for Proposal (RFP) announcement was placed in the statewide newspaper, both physical and online edition. In addition, the announcement was placed on the Adult Education Section’s website. Before the announcement of an RFP, the Adult Education Section staff provided training on the RFP process by the Adult Education Senior Management Team, which includes the State Director, to ensure internal control and standardization. Once the RFP has been publicly announced, no staff member may discuss anything regarding the RFP application or process with any applicant. Any inquiries were e-mailed to adulted@arkansas.gov. Every week, the date, name of the person, question, and response were placed on the website in a cumulative RFP Questions and Answers spreadsheet. This ensures that all eligible applicants have direct and equitable access to the questions.

All applicants who have shown and met the demonstrated effectiveness requirement will also be evaluated using the 13 Statutory Considerations found in the law at 231 (e) (1-13). The considerations included:

In accordance with 34 CFR Sec. 463 Subpart C, eligible programs will be funded as stated in “Distribution of Funds for Core Programs” using the previously stated competitive processes. Respondents must describe: 

(1). The degree to which the eligible provider would be responsive to—  

(i) Regional needs as identified in the local workforce development plan; and  

(ii) Serving individuals in the community who were identified in such plan as most in need of adult education and literacy activities, including individuals who—  

(A) Have low levels of literacy skills; or  

(B) Are English language learners;  

(2) The ability of the eligible provider to serve eligible individuals with disabilities, including eligible individuals with learning disabilities;  

(3) The past effectiveness of the eligible provider in improving the literacy of eligible individuals, especially those individuals who have low levels of literacy, and the degree to which those improvements contribute to the eligible agency meeting its State-adjusted levels of performance for the primary indicators of performance described in § 677.155;  

(4) The extent to which the eligible provider demonstrates alignment between proposed activities and services and the strategy and goals of the local plan under section 108 of the Act, as well as the activities and services of the one-stop partners;  

(5) Whether the eligible provider's program—  

(i) Is of sufficient intensity and quality, and based on the most rigorous research available so that participants achieve substantial learning gains; and  

(ii) Uses instructional practices that include the essential components of reading instruction;  

(6) Whether the eligible provider's activities, including whether reading, writing, speaking, mathematics, and English language acquisition instruction delivered by the eligible provider, are based on the best practices derived from the most rigorous research available, including scientifically valid research and effective educational practice;  

(7) Whether the eligible provider's activities effectively use technology, services and delivery systems, including distance education, in a manner sufficient to increase the amount and quality of learning, and how such technology, services, and systems lead to improved performance;  

(8) Whether the eligible provider's activities provide learning in context, including through integrated education and training, so that an individual acquires the skills needed to transition to and complete postsecondary education and training programs, obtain and advance in employment leading to economic self-sufficiency, and to exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship;  

(9) Whether the eligible provider's activities are delivered by instructors, counselors, and administrators who meet any minimum qualifications established by the State, where applicable, and who have access to high-quality professional development, including through electronic means;  

(10) Whether the eligible provider coordinates with other available education, training, and social service resources in the community, such as by establishing strong links with elementary schools and secondary schools, postsecondary educational institutions, institutions of higher education, Local WDBs, one-stop centers, job training programs, and social service agencies, business, industry, labor organizations, community-based organizations, nonprofit organizations, and intermediaries, in the development of career pathways;  

(11) Whether the eligible provider's activities offer the flexible schedules and coordination with Federal, State, and local support services (such as child care, transportation, mental health services, and career planning) that are necessary to enable individuals, including individuals with disabilities or other special needs, to attend and complete programs;  

(12) Whether the eligible provider maintains a high-quality information management system that has the capacity to report measurable participant outcomes  and to monitor program performance; and  

(13) Whether the local area in which the eligible provider is located has a demonstrated need for additional English language acquisition programs and civics education programs. 

In addition to the RFP application, eligible providers will have a rubric that shows how applications will be evaluated.  The proposal process is below.

1. Proposals were due to the Adult Education Section by 5:00 p.m. on March 1, 2024. Written proposals were pre-screened to verify the inclusion of all required components in the order specified in the RFP. Proposals not meeting all pre-screen requirements were not read. Applications that did not illustrate demonstrated effectiveness were not considered. Applicants not meeting the pre-screening requirement were notified, along with all declined applicants.
   1. Only applications from eligible providers of demonstrated effectiveness were forwarded for review, scoring, and consideration for funding. 

2. Written proposals were submitted to the Local Board for review by March 4, 2024. The Local Board reviewed each application in its respective area and provided feedback to the state on its alignment with the local plan by March 11, 2024. 
3. A review panel established by the Adult Education Section evaluated the written proposals. The panel was composed of individuals with expertise in adult education and literacy, WIOA partner agency representatives, and Adult Education Section personnel. Reviewers were trained and rated proposals.
4. The Adult Education Section considered the results of the local board’s review for alignment with the strategies and goals of the local plan and the extent to which the application addresses the required considerations in its scoring.
5. Declined applicants were notified by March 14, 2024, at 12:00 p.m., and had an opportunity to submit an appeal by March 21, 2024, at 12:00 p.m.
   1. If an applicant’s proposal is not approved, the applicant may send a Letter of Appeal to the Director for Adult Education Section by March 21, 2024, by 12:00 p.m. The letter must provide a thorough justification for the appeal. The Director of the Adult Education Section and the state leadership team will make the final determination regarding the appeal. A response will be e-mailed to the applicant within five calendar days of receiving the appeal letter. All appeal decisions will be final.
6. Awarded applicants may be provisionally awarded funds for a maximum of four (4) years. Provisional grantees will be reviewed six months and 12 months post-award. Based on the findings, the grantee may continue with a provisional award and receive guidance from the state office to improve program performance. Future funding may be affected if the program has not achieved satisfactory performance results.
7. The review panel will recommend proposals to receive awards and funding levels.

A formula method will be used to determine the amount of funding and consider the literacy rate and the core performance indicators as outlined in Title II of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) law. The state will identify, assess, and award grants using the RFP process of providers who have demonstrated effectiveness in providing adult education activities to eligible individuals. An eligible individual is an individual who has attained 16 years of age; who is not enrolled or required to be enrolled in secondary school under State law; and who is basic skills deficient; does not have a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent and has not achieved an equivalent level of education; or is an English language learner.

In addition, other factors that will be considered is the ability of the eligible providers to meet the literacy needs in the area may include, but not limited to, the ability to comply with WIOA and state expectations, the ability to provide services to special populations such as an individual with barriers to employment as defined in WIOA Section 3 (24), past performance of the entity in providing literacy instruction and meeting programmatic goals, overall program management, timely submission of financial and quarterly reports to the state office, and the overall qualification and expertise of the providers’ personnel. Again, the criteria used to evaluate demonstrated effectiveness and the scoring rubric have been made available as part of the RFP process. At the end of two years, the state will reevaluate the providers to determine whether to conduct a new Request for Proposal competition.

Currently, the adult education providers in the state are divided into five regions: Northeast, Southeast, Southwest, Northwest, and Central Regions. Although multiple providers may exist within an area, the state has reconfigured all 75 counties to better align with the ten local workforce development boards (LWDBs). The purpose of restructuring the state was to help align service delivery under WIOA and enhance the coordination and support of the overall economic development of the State.

Adult education/literacy providers are housed under a local education agency, such as school districts, community colleges, institutions of higher education, and literacy organizations. Other eligible providers have been and will continue to be considered using a direct and equitable process. Funding is awarded to local adult education/literacy providers through a competitive grant process based on literacy rate and the core performance indicators outlined in Title II of the WIOA law. Applications are competitive, open, and available to all eligible applicants. Grants/contracts are awarded for one year, with two one-year renewals based on performance and available funding.

No less than 95% of federal funds shall be expended for carrying out adult education and literacy activities, and the remaining amount, not to exceed 5%, shall be used for planning, administration (including carrying out the requirements of section 116), professional development, and the activities described in WIOA paragraphs (3) and (5) of section 232.