document resume ed 363 828 author sampson ...document resume ed 363 828 cg 026 011 author sampson,...
TRANSCRIPT
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 363 828 CG 026 011
AUTHOR Sampson, James P., Jr.; Norris, Debra S.TITLE The Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and
Staffing of Career Information Delivery Systems inthe United States: Technical Report No. 16.
INSTITUTION Florida State Univ., Tallahassee. Center for theStudy of Technology in Counseling and CareerDevelopment.
SPONS AGENCY National Occupational Information CoordinatingCommittee (DOL/ETA), Washington, DC.
PUB DATE Mar 93NOTE 81p.; For related documents, see CG 026 002-010.PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Career Counseling; *Career Development; *Career
Guidance; *Computer Uses in Education; *DeliverySystems; Financial Support; *InformationDissemination; *Organizational Climate
ABSTRACTThe purpose of this study was to collect, analyze,
and disseminate baseline data to aid computer-based careerinformation delivery system (CIDS) operators and state and federalpolicy makers in making more informed decisions about the financing,organizational structure, and staffing of CIDS.-CIDS arecomputer-based resources that provide information on occupations andrelated education and training opportunities. The study populationwas defined as the 45 state occupational information coordinatingcommittee (SOICC)-recognized CIDS, plus CIDS operating in California,Connecticut, and New York. Since Missouri has two separateSOICC-recognized CIDS, the total possible number of CIDS was 49.Forty-seven CIDS returned the CIDS Information Collection Form,yielding a final response rate of 96%. The results revealed that userfees provided between 47 and 51% of CIDS funding. The greatest changein funding involved the increase in user fees. In terms oforganizational structure, a diversity of agencies and organizationsserved on many CIDS governing and advisory boards. In terms of staffresponsibilities, it appears that less time is allocated to trainingin comparison with other staff duties. Seventeen data tables andother relevant forms are appended. (NB)
***********************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
***********************************************************************
The Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing
of Career Information Delivery Systems in the United States:
Technical Report No. 16
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOn.ce of Educationar Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERICI. Tnis document has been reproduced asreceived from the !person or oroanrzat.on
originating it;- Minor changes have been made to improve
reproduction Qualify
Pomts of vie e. or opinions stated m thisdocu-rnent do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or pohcy
by
James P. Sampson, Jr.Debra S. Norris
March 1993'PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."
Center for the Study of Technology in Counseling and Career Development
Department of Human Services and Studies215 Stone Building
The Florida State UniversityTallahassee, Florida 32306-3001
James P. Sampson, Jr. is Professor and Co-Director of the Center for the Study ofTechnology in Counseling and Career Development and Debra S. Norris is a graduate student in theDepartment of Human Services and Studies at Florida State University. Appreciation is expressedto Eleanor Dietrich, Valorie Hopkins, Carol Kososki, Roger Lambert, Chuck Mollerup, and Harvey011is for their review of an initial draft of the survey instrument, to Bob Loft for final preparation ofthe survey and collecting the data, and to Eleanor Dietrich, Janet Lenz, Harvey 011is, RobertReardon, and Sandra Sampson for their review of an initial draft of this report. Funding for thisresearch was provided by the National Occt.;:Aonal Information Coordinating Committee.
2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE
Table of Contents
Abstract 1
Statement of the Problem 3
Purpose of the Study 3
MethodPopulation 4instrumentation 4Procedures 5
ResultsFinancial Status 5Organizational Structure 6Responsibilities of ClDS Staff 7Sopplemental Data 7
Discussion 7
References 9
Tables and Figures 1 0
Aendix 53
3
List of Tables
PaceTable 1 Addresses of Individuals Who Completed the C1DS Form 11Table 2 Funding Sources, 1990-1993 14Table 3 Changes in Funding - Decreasing, Increasing, & Stable, 1991-1993 19Table 4 Additional Funding Breakdowns Relative to Total Funding 24Table 5 Total Funding, 1990-1993, as Compared with Estimated Need 25Table 6 Perceptions of the Reasons for Increase Occurring from 1990-1991 to 1991-1992 27Table 7 Perceptions of the Reasons for Decreases in Funding from 1990-1991 to 1991-1992 30Table 8 What Impact did the Decreases (1990-1991 to 1991-1992) have on the
C1DS operation? 31Table 9 Types of Assistance CIDS Need in Order to Cope with Financial Problems 33Table 10 Security of Funding for C1DS 36Table 11 Enabling Legislation 39Table 12 CIDS Organizational Structure (Administrative Agent for State CDS) 42Table 13 Governing Board Chairs 44Table 14 Advisory Board Chairs 45Table 15 CIDS Organizational Structure (Organizations Represented on Governingand Advisory Boards) 46Table 16 Percentage of Staff Responsibilities 48Table 17 Additional Comments 51
List of Figures
EasigFigure 1 Changes in Source Funding (Funds), 1991-1993 17Figure 2 Changes in Source Funding (States Reporting), 1991-1993 18Figure 3 Changes in Source Funding (Stability), 1991-1993 20Figure 4 Changes in Source Funding - Decreasing, 1991-1993 21Figure 5 Changes in Source Funding - Increasing, 1991-1993 22Figure 6 Changes in Source Funding - Stable, 1991-1993 23Figure 7 Total Funding 26Figure 8 Perceived Security of Funding for CIDS Operation During the Coming Two Years 41Figure 9 Total Administrative Agents for CIDS 43Figure 10 State CIDS Governing and Advisory Board 47Figure 11 Percentage of Staff Responsibilities 49Figure 12 Type of C1DS 50
4
1
The Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of Career Information Delivery Systemsin the United States: Technical Report No. 16
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to collect, analyze, and disseminate baseline data to aidcomputer-based career information delivery system (CIDS) operators and state and federal policymakers in making more informed decisions about the financing, organizational structure, andstaffing of CIDS. Lester and 011is (1988) defined CIDS as "computer-based resources that provideinformation on occupations and related education and training opportunities" (p. 205). A total of 47out of the 49 eligible C1DS returned the CIDS Information Collection Form, yielding a final responserate of 9E5%. Results are presented in 17 tables and 11 figures. The results are then discussed,including specific attention to implications for the future.
5
2
The Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of Career Information Delivery Systemsin the United States: Technical Report No. 16
Career Information Delivery Systems (CIDS) have evolved from a new technologicalinnovation in the 1970's to a key element in the delivery oi career information in the United Statesin the 1990's. McCormac (1988) noted that CIDS, "were developed to fulfill the needs studentsand adults have for increased and improved career guidance services" (p. 196). Lester and 01 lis(1988) defined CIDS as "computer-based resources that provide information on occupations andrelated education and training opportunities" (p. 205). Hopkins, Kinnison, Morgenthau, and 01 lis(1992) stated that CIDS
provide useful information for people who are exploring, planning, or making decisions aboutcareers. CIDS contain national, state, and local information about occupations, educationaland training institutions and programs, and related subjects. . . . Most of these systems arecomputer-based, but other media are also used to provide information. Tabloid newspapersand telephone hotlines, for expmple, can reach people in areas without access tocomputerized systems (p. 1). I
During 1990-91, over 6.9 million individuals used CIDS at over 18,282 sites in the United States,excluding telephone hotline contacts or the use of print or audio-visual media (ACSCI, 1992).
The evolution of CIDS has been recorded in the Annual Directory of the Association ofComputer-Based Systems of Career Information (ACSCI). Data on 50 CIDS (ACSCI, 1992) areprovided in the following categories:
CIDS name, address, and telephoneNames of staff membersNumber of FTE staffReporting periodAdministrative AgencyGoverning board chairAdvisory group chairDelivery systemDelivery mediumUser site categories (including number of sites and number of users)Other information products and servicesDevelopmental projectsFunding percentages
Using ACSC1 directory information as a foundation, Hopkins et al. (1992) integrated supplementaryACSCI survey data into a goneral status report on the nature and use of CIDS in the United States.The report included the following topics related to CIDS:
Overall functioningGeneral use of CIDSUser sitesUsersAccess (direct search, structured search, standardized tests)Databases (educational and occupational information)Delivery mediaTraining and support materials
1 Unless otherwise noted, within this study CIDS refer to comouter-based career informationdelivery systems.
6
3
Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CMS
Standards and guidelines
Statement of the Problem
As the labor market in the United States becomes less stable, adolescents and adults aremaking increased demands on Career Information Delivery Systems (C1DS) to provide informationnecessary to make career and employment decisions. However, during this time of increaseddemand for CIDS services, public sector funding for CIDS appears to be less stable. As a result, itis important to ensure that the financing, organizational structure, and staffing of C1DS areappropriate given the increasing demand for services.
C1DS operators, faced with impending change in funding sources and amounts, need ananalysis of baseline data that describes the current financial status of CIDS in the United States.CIDS operators also need data on administrative agents, governing boards, and advisory boards inorder to evaluate options for creating organizational structures that are cost-efficient, yet alloweffective input among stakeholders in order to maximize funding opportunities. Finally, CIDSoperators need data on staffing patterns, since personnel costs are a major element in C1DSbudgets. This analysis and baseline data will allow C1DS operators to make comparisons amongCIDS For example, a CIDS operator could evaluate funding, organization, and staffing within theirstate in comparison with all CIDS in general or CIDS with similar characteristics. While the ACSCIAnnual Directory data (ACSCI, 1992) and the CIDS Status Report (Hopkins, et al., 1992) providevaluable information, these data sources were not designed to provide specific details on thefinancing, organizational structure, and staffing of CIDS.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to collect, analyze, and disseminate baseline data to aid CIDSoperators and state and federal policy makers in making more informed decisions about thefinancing, organizational structure, and staffing of CIDS. The following specific questions wereaddressed:
1) What are the current C1DS funding sources and levels for 1990-1991, 1991-1992, and 1992-1993?
2) What changes have occurred in funding between 1990-1991 and 1992-1993?
3) What are the funding levels for CIDS research and development and CDS evaluation relative tototal CIDS funding?
4) What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the estimated need for C1DS funding relative to CIDSfunding for 1990-1991, 1991-1992, and 1992-1993?
5) What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the reasons for increases and decreases in CIDSfunding?
6) What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the impact of decreases in C:DS funding on C1DSoperation?
7) What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the type of assistance needed in order for C1DS to copewith financial problems?
8) What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the relative security of CIDS funding?
7
4
Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CIDS
9) What is the enabling legislation that provides the legal mandate for the financing and operation ofCIDS?
10) What administrative agents exist for CIDS?
11) What are the prevalence and nature of governing boards and advisory boards for C1DS?
12) What are the percentages of CIDS staff responsibilities allocated to management, clericalsupport, user services and marketing, training, information development, softwaredevelopment, and other?
13) What type of C1DS (sytems obtained, purchased, or leased from some other entity vs. systemsdeveloped within a state or municipality) are currently in use?
Method
PopulationThis analysis of financial status, organizational structure, and staffing was designed to
include the total population of CIDS operating in the United States as of June 1992. A total of 46states and territories were operating CIDS recognized by the appropriate state occupationalinformation coordinating committee (SOICC) in 1992 (NOICC, 1992).
California, Connecticut and New York have several large computerized CIDS, both publicand private, in operation, but the SOICC has not designated any as the official statewideC1DS. Seven states/territories did not have a computer-based state-wide system inoperation as of June 1992, including Guam, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, NorthernMariana Islands, Texas, West Virginia and the Virgin Islands (NOICC, 1992, p. 22).
For the purposes of this investigation, the population was defined as the 45 SOICC-recognizedCIDS, plus CIDS operating in California, Connecticut, and New York. Since Missouri has twoseparate SOICC-recognized CIDS (CHOICES and VIEW), the total possible number of CIDS was 49.California data was from the EUREKA system. New York data was from the New York CityMetro Guide system. A total of 48 out of the eligible 49 CIDS responded to the survey described inthe following section, resulting in a response rate of 98%. One state was subsequently removedfrom the study. The CIDS in the state of Michigan has recently experienced substantial change infinancing and organization. Given the previous budget and staffing of this CIDS, data fromMichigan was omitted from the analyses in order to avoid inappropriately skewing the results." Asa result, a total of 47 out of the 49 eligible CIDS were included, yielding a final response rate of96%. Since individuals completing the survey did not always respond to all of the items, theresponse rate for any given question was often less than 96%. Given the exploratory nature of thisstudy, response rates were judged adequate to provide valid and generalizable data.
InstrumentationGiven the unique nature of the questions being askez; in this investigation, a survey was
judged as the best approach for obtaining data. After basic research questions were identified, adraft of the survey was developed by the authors of this study. A panei of reviewers representingCIDS operators, the National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee (NOICC), SOICC's,and ACSCI, then reviewed and suggested revisions for the survey in order to ensure that theresearch questions were appropriately addressed. The revised survey was then approved by theContract Officer at NOICC for dissemination. In order to minimize the number of requests for
2 Future analyses of the financial status, organizational structure, and staffing of CIDS need toinclude Michigan as soon as the situation stabilizes.
5Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CIDS
information required of CIDS operators, the survey for this investigation was integrated as Part 11(pages 6 through 12) of the annual ACSCI survey entitled, "C1DS Information Collection Form." Acopy of the CIDS Information Collection Form may be found in the Appendix.
ProceduresA letter soliciting participation in the study from the ACSCI Clearinghouse Coordinator and
the CIDS Information Collection Form was mailed to the 49 eligible C1DS. An information copy ofthe form was also sent to SOICC directors to keep them informed regarding CIDS research. After aperiod of six weeks, the NOICC Contract Officer and the ACSC1 Clearinghouse Coordinatorcontacted CIDS by phone and requested completion of the form. All remaining outstanding surveyswere received by February 1993. A copy of the letter soliciting participation in the study may befound in the Appendix.
Results
The results of this study are organized in terms of the financial status, organizationalstructure, staffing of C1DS, and supplemental data. The order of the Tables and Figures followssequentially from Part II of the C1DS Information Collection Form. Numbers of states reporting,indicated at the end of most Tables and all Figures, vary according to information received for eachsection. Table 1 consists of the names, addresses and phone numbers of the individuals whocompleted the CIDS survey form.
Financial StatusWhat are the current CIDS fundina sources and levels for 1990-1991. 1991-1992, and
1992-1993? Table 2 delineates funds provided by specific sources for each state for 1990-1991,1991-1992, and 1992-1993. User fees consistently provide the largest proportion of CIDS funding(47% to 51%). The number of states reporting varies slightly per year as a result of incompletedata.
What chances have occurred in fundina between 1990-1991 and 1992-1993? Figure 1illustrates the total changes in source funding in dollar amounts for the three year period. Thenumber of states represented is smaller than those in Table 2 because three states did not providethe data necessary to show the breakdown by funding sources per year. Only states that providedall information for each year were able to be included. The greatest increases occur each year inUser Fees and State Legislative Appropriation and State Department of Labor/JTPA/EmploymentSecurity. Mild increases are shown in NOICC Basic Assistance Grants and State LegislativeAppropriations. A decrease occurred in the amount of funding provided through the StateDepartments of Education/Offices of Vocational Education, while Other Funding Sources vacillatearound a million dollars, appearing to increase slightly in 1992-1993.
Figure 2 reports the same results as Figure 1, except with a focus on the number of statesrather than on dollar amounts. The greatest inaveases were consistent with those noted in Figure 1.NOICC Basic Assistance Grants show stable representation over the three year period, while StateLegislative Appropriations and Other Funding Sources indicate an increase after the first year,followed by stability in the following two years. State Departments of Education/Offices ofVocational Education show a decrease after the first year, followed by a slight increase for 1992-1993.
Table 3 and Figure 3 describe the number of states represented in each area of fundingchanges, either decreasing, increasing or stable between 1990-1991 and 1992-1993. Theclassification of states into the various categories was determined by a calculation of 10 percent. Ifthe funding had changed by a 10 percent margin in either direction, it would be classified as eitherdecreasing or increasing. The number of states reporting dollar amounts differs from the number ofstates categorized as decreasing, increasing or stable, resulting from the way information was
9
6
Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CIDS
reported in the survey. For example, one state reported total amounts only. While it was notpossible to incorporate this data into the table, a calculation was possible to incorporate the datainto the specific category of decroasing, increasing or stable funding.
Figure 3 indicates the largest category of states being classified as having "stable" funding.Figures 4, 5 and 6 show the specific breakdowns in source funding for the categories of decreasing,increasing and stable. Figure 4 illustrates that the largest decrease (for states with decreasingfunding) of funds was experienced in user fees, dropping from about $400,000 to $150,000 from1991-1993. Figures 5 and 6 identify the increase of User Fees to be associated with statesclassified as either having increasing or stable funding from 1991-1993.
What are the funding levels for CIDS research and development and C1DS evaluation relativeto total CIDS fundina? Table 4 describes funding for research and development and funding forevaluating C1DS' effectiveness as compared with the total funding for each state during 1991-1992.Results indicate that 7 percent of total funding was allotted for research and development, while 1percent was allotted for evaluating CIDS' effectiveness.
What are CIDS operators' _perceptions of the estimated need for CIDS funding relative toCIDS fundina for 1990-1991. 1991-1992, and 1992-1993? Table 5 and Figure 7 show that totalfunding for states has increased slightly over a three year period and that estimated futuce fundingneeds exceed actual funding for 1992-1993.
What are CIDS operators' perceptions af the reasons for increases and decreases in CIDSfunding? Table 6 outlines statements given by C1DS operators as to their perceptions of whyincreases in funding occurred from 1990-91 to 1991-92. The majority of the reasons related tochanges in federal funding and in user bases. Table 7 describes CIDS operators' perceptions ofwhy decreases in funding occurred from 1990-91 to 1991-92. The most often stated reason was areduction in monies available by Carl Perkins legislation.
What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the impact of decreases in CIDS fundino on CIDSoperation? Table 8 indicates the perceived impact of decreases in funding on CIDS' operation, withthe greatest impact being in the areas of staffing and services provided.
What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the tvoe of assistance needed in order for CIDS tocope with financial problems? Table 9 identifies the type of assistance CIDS operators feel isnecessary to help CIDS cope with financial problems. The most commonly cited assistance was theneed for additional funding.
What are CIDS operators' perceptions of the relative security of C1DS funding? Table 10and Figure 8 show the relative security of in-state funding for CIDS' operation during the next twoyears. The number of states responding to each source is indicated by source in Table 10. Withthe exception of User Fees (increase expected), most states indicate an expectation for continuedfunding at the present level for all funding sources during the next two years.
What is the enabling legislation that provides the legal mandate for the financing andooeration of CIDS? Table 11 indicates state and federal enabling legislation. The Carl Perkins Actand the Job Training Partnership Act were the most common enabling legislation at the federallevel.
Oraanizatkinal StructureWhat administrative aaents exist for CIDS? Table 12 and Figur4 9 indicate specific
administrative agents for state CIDS, with SOICC's as the largest representative among states.
1 0
7Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CIDS
What are the prevalence and nature of governing boards and advisory boards for CIDS?Tables 13 and 14 provide a list of governing and advisory board chairs, respectively. Table 15 andFigure 10 portray organizations represented on both governing and advisory boards, with an "A"standing for Advisory Board and a "G" for Governing Board. SOICC and State Departments ofEducation or Offices of Vocational Education are the largest representatives on Governing Boards,while State Departments of Education or Offices of Vocational Education, State Colleges orUniversities, JTPA and CIDS Users constitute the largest representatives on Advisory Boards.Figure 10 identifies State Department of Labor/Economic or Employment Security as being thelargest representative for combined Governing and Advisory Boards, although many otherorganizations were often also represented.
Responsibilities of CIDS StaffWhat are the percentages of CIDS staff responsibilities allocated to management, clerical
support user services and marketing, training, information development, software development, andother? Table 16 and Figure 11 delineate percentages of total staff responsibilities per state, ascalculated in relation to total FTE's. The largest percentage of staff responsibilities is evenlydistributed (20% each) among management, user services/marketing and information development,with clerical support also being a common responsibility (18%).
Supplemental DataWhat type of C1DS (systems obtained, purchased, or leased from some other entity vs.
systems developed within a state or municipality) are currently in use? Figure 12 indicates thatmost of the states reporting have a CIDS system that was obtiained, purchased or leased with CIDSstaff primarily responsible for user services and development.'" Table 17 is a compilation of states'additional comments. Statements are represented in verbatim fashion.
Discussion
Data from this study indicate that user fees are the key variable in the financing of CIDS.Almost half of all CIDS funding is derived from user fees (Tables 1, 2, and 3). The greatest changein funding involves the increase in user fees (Figure 1). In states experiencing either decreasingfunding (Figure 4) or increasing funding (Figure 5), user fees are the dominant factor. Many C1DSoperators perceived that user fees would increase, or a least remain stable (Figure 8). The need foradditional CIDS funding (Table 5 and Figure 7), coupled with the public funding decreases that haveoccurred in some states (Table 7), will likely result in increased pressure on user fees to supplynen,3sary financial resources.
Increasing reliance on user fees in the financing of CIDS may or may not be in the bestinterests of the public. Determining the appropriateness of this increasing reliance on user fees,requires evaluating whether or not the accessibility to C1DS by the public has been compromised. Ifthe increase in user fees results from increases in the number of individuals and organizations usingCIDS, then public interest is likely served. lf, however, user fees are increased to provide necessaryfinancing, then CIDS use may decrease during times of limited public funding because the resourceis more expensive. This impact may be disproportionately felt among individuals with limitedincomes. Reducing access to occupational and educational information would not seem to be in thebest interest of the nation. Future data collection, analysis, and discussion among CIDS operatorsand policy makers will be needed to determine the appropriateness of increasing reliance on userfees.
Adequate funding for research, development, and evaluation, is necessary to ensure thatvalid information is effectively delivered to individuals involved in making career and educational
3 It is recognized that not all CIDS are computer-based and that other types of delivery media, suchas tabloid newspapers and telephone hotlines, are also used.
1 1
8
Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of C1DS
decisions. Enhanced research, development, and evaluation was identified by participants at arecent international teleconference as a key element in improving the design and use of computer-assisted career guidance systems (Sampson, Reardon, & Lenz, 1991). Allocating seven percent offunding for research and development and one j)ercent of funding for evaluation (Table 4) may notbe adequate in view of the needs that exist. Although specific funding percentages are likely tovary from state to state, some general exploration is needed to determine the average fundingnecessary to carry out appropriate research, development, and evaluation.
In terms of organizational structure, a diversity of agencies and organizations serve on manyCIDS governing and advisory boards (Table 15 and Figure 10). A potential problem may exist,however, in that eight states reported the absence of both a governing and an advisory board.Given the increasing competition among public agencies for limited public funds, it would appearthat having a minimum of an advisory board would enhance opportunities for communicating theimportance of providing quality occupational and educational information.
In terms of staff responsibilities, it appears that less time is allocated to trainina incomparison with other staff duties (Table 6 and Figure 11). One CIDS operator commented thatCIDS that fail seem to do a poor job of training, technical assistance, and customer service (Table9). The i:nernational teleconference noted above, identified training as the most important issue inimproving the use of computer-assisted career guidance systems (Sampson, Reardon, & Lenz,1991). CIDS operators and policy makers need to reexamine the allocation of staff responsibilitiesto ensure that an appropriate balance of tasks is maintained.
The results of this study provide baseline data concerning the financing, organizationalstructure, and staffing of CIDS. These data can be useful to CIDS operators and state and federalpolicy makers in two ways. First, CIDS operators and policy makers can use these data to furtherexplore current financing, organizational structure, and staffing issues, some of which are describedabove. Second, by collecting these types of data at periodic intervals, it will be possible to evaluatechanges that occur in the financing, organizational structure, and staffing of CIDS. By making moreinformed decisions, C1DS operators and policy makers help to ensure the effective provision ofoccupational and educational information to the public.
12
9Financial Status, Organizational Structure, and Staffing of CIDS
References
Association of Computer-Based Systems for Career Information: (1991). 1992 Directory of State-BasedCareer Information Delivery Systems. Eugene, OR: ACSCI Clearinghouse, Center for AdvancedTechnology in Education, University of Oregon.
Hopkins, V., Kinnison, J., Morgenthau, E., & 011is, H. (1992). Career information delivery systems:A summary status report (NOICC Occasional paper No. 4). Washington, D.C.: NationalOccupational Information Coordinating Committee.
Lester, J. N., & 011is, H. T. (1988). Future challenges to career information providers: A NOICCperspective. Journal of Career Development, 14, 205-215.
McCormac, M. E. (1988). The use of career information delivery systems in the United States.Journal of Career Development,14., 196-204.
National Occupational Information Coordinating Committee. (1992). Status of the NOICC/SOICCnetwork (Administrative Report No. 18). Washington, D.C.: Author.
Sampson, J. P., Jr., Reardon, R. C., & Lenz, J. G. (1991). Computer-assisted career guidancesystems: Improving the design and use of systems. Journal of Career Development, 17, 185-194.
13
TABLE 1
ADDRESSES OF INDIVIDUALS WHOCOMPLETED THE CIDS FORM
Janet SmithAlaska Career Information System801 West 10th Street, Suite 200Juneau, AK 99801-1894(907) 465-4685
Mary Louise SimmsAlabama(205) 242-2990
Tom OwensArkansas Employment Security Dept.SOICC SectionPO BOX 2951Little Rock, AR 22203(501) 682-3117
Hugo H. SoilASOICC/DBS1789 W. Jefferson Site 897JPhoenix, AZ 85007(602) 542-3871
Jerry LaureynsRegional DirectorNorth California(510) 235-3883
Colorado Career Information System3800 York St. - Unit BDenver, CO 80205(303) 764-3936
Yvonne HowellDCOICC Corrdinator500 C St., NWRoom 215Washington, DC 20001
Bruce Dacey2575 Summit Bridge Rd.Newark, DE 19702
Zelda RogersBureau of Career Development & Ede':ationalImprovementFlorida Education CenterTallahassee, FL 32399
Les JanisGeorgia Career Information SystemGeorgia State UniversityBox 1028, University PlazaAtlanta, GA 30303(404) 651-3100
14
Lincoln T. Higa615 Piikoi Street, Ste.100Honolulu, HI 96814(808) 586-8625
Penelope ShenkActing Executive DirectorIOWA SOICC200 East Grand AvenueDes Moines, IA 50309-1819(515) 242-4890
Chuck MollerupRoom 301, Len B. Jordan Building650 West State StreetBoise, ID 83720(208) 334-3705
Jan Staggs, Executive DirectorIllinois Occupational InformationCoordinating Committee
217 East Monroe Street, Ste 203Springfield, IL 62706(217) 785-0789
Linda S. Piper309 W. Washington St., Ste. 309Indianapolis, IN 46204(317) 233-3785
D. AngleKansas Careers2323 Anderson Avenue, Suite 248Manhattan, KS 66502-2912(913) 532-6540
Don C. SullivanKOICC275 East Main Street - 1 EastFrankfort, KY 40621-0001(502) 564-4258
Priscilla EngoliaP.O. Box 94094Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9094(504) 342-5151
Jasmin Duckett, MOICC Director1100 North Eutaw Street, Room 205Baltimore, MD 21201(410) 333-5478
11
Table 1, cont.
Denis FortierMOICCState House Station #71Augusta, ME 04333(207) 289-2331FAX: (207) 289-2334
William WeisgerberMichigan Department of EducationPO BOX 30009Lansing, MI 48909(517) 373-3373
Kay RaithelMissouri Choices
James H. Grogan, Ph.D.Missouri View Program15875 New Halls Ferry RoadFlorissant, MO 63031
Terry Hamm932 Capitol Square Building550 Cedar StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101(612) 296-1432
Liz Barnett301 West Pearl StreetJackson, MS 39203-3089(601) 949-2240 or 949-2002
Anne Wolfinger, DirectorMontana Career Information SystemMontana Higher Education Systems250 BroadwayHelena, MT 59620-3101(406) 444-0303
Nancy H. MacCormacPO BOX 27625Raleigh, -1C 27611(919) 733-6700
Dan MarrsBox 1537Bismark, ND 58502-1537(701) 224-2733
Fay G. Larson421 Nebraska HallUniversity of NebraskaBox 880552Lincoln NE 68588-0552(402) 472-2570
15
Laurence H. Seidel, DirectorNJOICCCN 056Trenton, NJ 08625(609) 292 2682
Charles LehmanNM- SOICCBox 1928Alberquerque, NM 87103(505) 841-8455
Valerie Hopkins1923 N. Carson Street, ft211Carson City, NV 89710(702) 687-4577
Marilyn ShipmanOhio Career Information System(614) 644-6771
Kelly BattlesODVTE1500 W. 7thStillwater, OK 74074(405) 743-5159
Cheryl BuhlOregon Career Information SystemUniversity of OregonEugene, OR 97403-1244(503) 346-3872
Michael J. NeillCareer Information System1177 Pearl Street, Suite 200Eugene, OR 97401(503) 346-3872 x. 4555
Robert WilliamsMarketing & Technical Assistance ManagerPennsylvania SOICC1224 Labor & Industry BuildingHamsburg, PA 17120
Josus Santiago RiosPO BOX 366212San Juan, PR00936-366212(809) 723-7110
Mildred T. NicholsRhode Island Occupational InformationCoordinating Committee
22 Hayes StreetProvidence, RI 02908-5025
12
Table 1, cont.
Angeleen HunterCOICCPO BOX 995Columbia, SC 29202(803) 737-2733
Melodee LaneLabor Market Information CenterSouth Dakota Department of LaborPO BOX 4730Aberdeen, SD 57402-4730(605) 622-2314
Dr. Walter A. Cameron, DirectorTAE Dept. University of Tennessee438 Claxton AdditionKnoxville, TN 37996-3400(615) 974-2574
Tammy Stewart140 E. 300 GP.O. BOX 11249Salt Lake City, UT 84147(801) 536-7861
Gale A. Watts, Project ManagerVirginia VIEWVirginia Tech205 W. Roanoke StreetBlacksburg, VA 24601-0527(703) 231-7571
Tom Douse, VOICC Directorc/o
Vermont Dept. of Employment and TrainingPO BOX 190Montpelier, VT 05601-0488(802) 828-4100
Marie Selstad & Tami Palmer1415 Harrison NW #201Olympia, WA 98502(206) 754-8222
Wisconsin Career Information SystemCenter on Education and Work1025 West Johnson Street, Room 964Madison, WI 53706(608) 263-2725
Rob BennettBox 3808University StationLaramie, WY 82071(307) 766-3531
1 6
13
TABLE 2Funding Sources, 1990-1991
14
UserFees
NOICCBasic
AssistanceGrant
StateLegislative
Appropriation
StateD.O.E. orOffice ofVocationalEducation
StateDepartment of
Labor/JTPAEmployment
Security
OtherFundingSources
TotalFunding
AK 222,123 15,000 21,788 258,911AL 120,000 200,000 320,000AR 115,824 115,324AZ 40,000 50,000 15,000 105,000CACOCTDC 14,661 14,661DEFL 330,647 162,979 666,700 1,160,326GA 246,320 185,000 431,320Hi 101,554 624,357 725,911IA 84,000 15,000 8,000 107,000ID 150,000 108,519 69,193 327,712IL 57,000 83,024 37,500 70,000 80,000 75,000 402,524IN 30,000 50,000 30,000 110,000KSKY 36,570 36,570LAMD 7,000 15,083 92,000 114,083ME 5,00G 170,000 175,000MN 269,785 4,900 274,685
MO-C 10,500 10,500MO-V 148,803 148,803
MSMTNC 30,000 13,000 43,000ND 14,800 2,300 17,100NE 95,000 14,636 103,000 212,636NJ 230,000 10,000 60,000 300,000
NM 75,000 75,000NV 118,000 76,388 22,434 216,822NYOHOK 49,858 49,858OR 521,880 5,000 6,120 533,000PAPR 22,856 22,856RI 66,000 66,000SC 252,404 128,137 237,410 617,951SD 70,851 70,851TN 120,000 120,000UT 70,000 70,000VAVT 15,000 15,000WA 292,487 . 2,500 294,987WI 704,961 704,961WY 20,000 25,000 45,000
TOTAL 3,883,868 870,542 1,203,125 1,124,216 262,193 969,908 8,313,852% of TOTAL 47 % 10% 14% 14% 3 % 12% 100%# of states 22 20 6 13 6 7
1 '7
TABLE 2, cont.Funding Sources, 1991-1992
15
UserFees
NOICCBasic
AssistanceGrant
StateLegislative
Appropriation
StateD.O.E. orOffice ofVocationalEducation
StateDepartment ofLabor/JTPAEmployment
Security
OtherFundingSources
TotalFunding
AK 217,841 20,000 13,000 250,841AL 120,000 150,000 270,000AR 117,389 117,389AZ 40,000 50,000 15,000 105,000CACOCTDC 15,862 15,862DEFL 212,864 176,322 .587,400 976,586GA 306,600 185,000 491,600HI 50,936 740,132 791,068IA 10,000 24,000 15,000 12,000 4,000 65,000ID 175,000 106,210 60,000 341,210IL 57,000 82,488 37,500 57,500 80,000 90,000 404,488!N 30,000 115,000 30,000 175,000KS 125,000 125,000KY 39,800 39,800LAw1D 56,000 130,000 186,00E-ME 5,000 160,000 165,000MN 247,170 2,000 249,170
MO-C 7,000 7,000MO-V 32,800 130,000 162,800
MS73,595- 2,100 10,000 7,000 5,685 98,380MT
NC 30,000 13,000 43,000ND 14,200 1,800 16,000NE 120,000 14,636 79,950
75,000214,586--335,000Nr- 250,000 10,000
NM 51,000 51,000NV 131,685 84,406 216,091NYOHOK 62,093 62,093OR 580,000 5,000 7,150 592,150PAPR 332,412 332,412PWRI 66,000 66,000SC 230,246 127,364 190,706 548,316SD 64,060 9,360 73,420TN 130,000 130,000UT 70,000 70,000VAVT . 35,000 35,000WA 320,793 14,422 335,215WI 749,359 749,359
WY 21,000 25,000 46,000A 4, 3 , 61 91.,77 1,301,431 933,772 349,000 91s ,395 :, 2,836
% of TOTAL 51 % 10% 15% 10% 4% 10% 100%# of states
..,.26 21 _ 7 11 7 10
18
TABLE 2, cont.Funding Sources, 1992-1993
16
UserFees
'NOICC. BasicAssistance
Grant Appropriation
StateLegislative
StateD.O.E. orOffice of
VocationalEducation
StateDepartment of
Labor/JTPAEmployment
Security
OtherFundingSources
TotalFunding
AK 224,250 20,000 17,500 261,750AL 120,000 136,000 56,100 312,100AR 12 ,889 125,889AZ 40,000 52,000 15,000 107,000CACOCTDC 18,000 18,000DEFL 250,000 178,022 603,300 1,031,322GA 326,600 145,800 472,400HI 23,289 800,208 823,497IA 18,000
255,09920,000
-17,704 60,00015,000 8,000 61,000
430,803IDIL 62,000 86,488 37,500 57,500 80,000 90,000 413,488IN 30,000 115,000 130,000 275,000KSKY 40,040 40,040LAMD 90,000 150,000 240,000ME 4,000 140,000 144,000MN 325,709 1,000 326,709
MO-CMO-V 49,883 130,000 179,883
MSMT 78,760 9,500 10,000 7,000 3,655 108,915NC 10,000 17,000 13,000 40,000ND 16,000 2,000 18,000NE 140,000 18,596 87,000 245,596NJ L96,000 10,000 90,000 396,000
NM 30,000 16,000 46,000NV 143,900 93,500 237,400NYOHOK 60,298 60,298OR 612,500 11,500 48,000 672,000PAPR 84,915 84,915RI 88,250 88,250SC 240,000 134,764 190,700 565,464SD 63,921 13,000 76,921TN- 150,000 150,000UT-- 62,000 62,000VAVT 79,000 79,400 158,400WA 350,000 - 10,000 360,000
1 803,758 803,758WY 22,000 25,000 47,000
TOTAL 4,654,834 991,981 1,318,706 966,522 536,100 1,015,655 9,483,798% of TOTAL 49-% 10% 14% 10% 6% 11% 100%# of states 26 20 7 12 8 10
19
5,00
0,00
0
4,50
0,00
0
4,00
0,00
0
3,50
0,00
0
3,00
0,00
0
FUN
DS
2,50
0,00
0
2,00
0,00
0
1,50
0, 0
00
1,00
0,00
0
500,
000 0
2i)
FIG
UR
E 1
CH
AN
GE
S IN
SO
UR
CE
FU
ND
ING
, (FU
ND
S), 1
991-
1993
Use
r Fe
esN
OIC
C B
asic
Ass
ista
nce
Gra
nt
Stat
e
Leg
isla
tive
App
ropr
iatio
n
Stat
e D
.O.E
. or
Off
ice
of V
oc'l
Edu
catio
n
FUN
DIN
G S
OU
RC
ES
N=
34
Stat
e D
.O.L
.,O
ther
Fun
ding
JTPA
,So
urce
s
Em
ploy
men
tSe
curi
ty
1990
-199
1
0 19
91-1
992
819
92-1
993
21
Stat
es r
epor
ting
25 20 15 10
5 0
FIG
UR
E 2
CH
AN
GE
S IN
SO
UR
CE
FU
ND
ING
, (ST
AT
ES
RE
POR
TIN
G),
199
1-19
93
Use
r Fe
esN
O1C
C B
asic
Stat
eSt
ate
D.O
.E. o
rSt
ate
Oth
er f
undi
ng
Ass
ista
nce
Leg
isla
tive
Off
ice
of V
oc'l
D.O
.L./J
TPA
sour
ces
Gra
ntA
ppro
pria
tion
Edu
catio
nE
mpl
oym
ent
Secu
rity
Fund
ing
Sour
ces
N=
34
MI
1990
-199
1
o19
91-1
992
Ett
1992
-199
3
2 3
19
TABLE 3
CHANGES IN FUNDING -DECREASING, INCREASING, & STABLE, 1991-1993
DECREASING FUNDING 3 States1991-1992 1992-1993
User Fees 407,412 150,915
VOICC Basic Assistance Grant 0 0
State Legislative Appropriation 160,000 140,000
State D.O.E. or Office of Voc'l Education 0 0
State D.O.L., JTPA, Employment Security 0 0
Other Funding Sources 0 0
TOTAL 567,412 290,915
INCREASING FUNDING 15 States1991-1992 1992-1993
User Fees 1,630,565 1,966,201
VOICC Basic Assistance Grant 325,008 399,300
State Legislative Appropriation 60,000 60,000
"State D.O.E. or Office of Voc'l Education '614,950 628,000
State D.O.L., JTPA, Employment Security 242,000 433,100
Other Funding Sources 14,635 133,055
TOTAL 2,887,158 3,619,656
STABLE FUNDING - 20 States1991-1992 1992-1993
User Fees 2,372,384 2,537,718
VOICC Basic Assistance Grant 584,869 592,681
State Legislative Appropriation 1,081,431 1,118,706
Slate D.O.E. or Office of Voc'l Education 318,822 338,522State D.O.L., JTPA, Employment Security 107,000 103,000
Other Funding Sources 901,760 882,600
TOTAL 5,366,266 5,573,227
N = 34
FUN
DS
450,
000
400,
000
350,
000
300,
000
_
250.
000
_
200,
000
150,
000
100,
000
50,0
00
0
FIG
UR
E 4
CH
AN
GE
S IN
SO
UR
CE
FU
ND
ING
- D
EC
RE
ASI
NG
, 199
1-19
93
Use
r Fe
esN
OIC
C B
asic
Stat
e L
egis
lativ
eSt
ate
D.O
.E. o
rSt
ate
D.O
.L.,
Oth
er F
undi
ng
Ass
ista
nce
App
ropr
iatio
nO
ffic
e of
Voc
lJT
PA,
Sour
ces
Gra
ntE
duca
tion
Em
ploy
men
tSe
curi
ty
FUN
DIN
G S
OU
RC
ES
N =
3
tgE
199
1-19
92
0 19
92-1
993
28
2,00
0,00
0
1,80
0,00
0
1,60
0,00
0
1,40
0,00
0
1,20
0,00
0
FUN
DS
1,00
0,00
0
800,
000
600,
000
400,
000
200,
000 0
FIG
UR
E 5
CH
AN
GE
S IN
SO
UR
CE
FU
ND
ING
- I
NC
RE
ASI
NG
, 199
1-19
93
Use
r Fe
es
2;)
NO
ICC
Bas
icSt
ate
Stat
e D
.O.E
. or
Stat
e D
.O.L
.,O
ther
Fun
din2
Ass
ists
.-...
Leg
isla
tive
Off
ice
of V
oc'l
JTPA
,So
urce
s
Gra
ntA
ppro
pria
tion
Edu
catio
nE
mpl
oym
ent
Secu
rity
FUN
DIN
G S
OU
RC
ES
N =
15
1991
-199
2
r=1
1992
-199
3
39
3,00
0,00
0
2,50
0,00
0
2,00
0,00
0
FU
ND
S1,
500,
000
1,00
0,00
0
500,
000 31
FIG
UR
E 6
CH
AN
GE
S IN
SO
UR
CE
FU
ND
ING
- S
TA
BL
E, 1
991-
1993
Use
r Fe
esN
OIC
C B
asic
Stat
eSt
ate
D.O
.E. o
rSt
ate
D.O
.L.,
Oth
er F
undi
ng
Ass
ista
nce
Leg
isla
tive
Off
ice
of V
oc'l
JTPA
,So
urce
s
Gra
ntA
ppro
pria
tion
Edu
catio
nE
mpl
oym
ent
Secu
rity
FUN
DIN
G S
OU
RC
ES
N =
20
1991
-199
2
0 19
92-1
993
32
TABLE 4Additional Funding Breakdowns Relative To Total k unding
991-92 funding forresearch &
development
Percentage of 1991-92
TotalFunding
funding forevaluating CIDS
effectiveness
% ofTotal
Funding
TotalFunding1991-92
AK 8,788 4% 250,841AL 10,000 4% 2,000 1% 270,000AR 45,000 38% 117,389AZ 25,000 24 ,0 999 1% 105,000
CACOCTDC 0 0% 1,000 6% 15,862
DEFLGA 20,000 4% 5,000 1% 491,600HI 0 0% 2,540 0% 791,068IA 10,000 15% 65,000ID 8,000 2% 3,000 1% 341,210IL 20,224 5% 4,045 1% 404,488IN 0 0% 500 0% 175,000KS 25,000 20% 0 0% 125,000KYLAMD 1,500 1% 0 0% 186,000
ME 0 0% 0 0% 165,000MHMN 11,000 4% 249,170
MO-C1% 500 05 162,800MO-V 1,000
MS 0 0% 0 0% 0
MTNCND 0 0% 4,000 25% 16,000NE 50,000 23% 500 0% 214,586NJ 0 0% 0 0% 335,000NM 0 0% 0 0% 51,000NV 0 0% 0 0% 216,091NYOHOK 62,093 100% 62,093ORPAPR 18,500 6% 332,412RI 0 0% 500 1% 66,000SC 0 0% 548,316SD 9,800 13% 3,300 4% 73,420TN 20,000 15% 5,000 4% 130,000UT 0 0% 0 0% 70,000VA 100,000 29% 30,000 9% 339,980VT 15,000 43% 0 0% 35,000WA 30,369 9% 0 0% 335,215WI 75,000 10% 5,000 I % 749,359WY
TOTAL 556,274 7% 77,884 1% 7,489,900= 34
3 3
24
25TABLE 5
Total Funding, 1990-1993, as Compared with Estimated Need1990-1991 1991-1992 1992-1993 NEED
AK 258,911 250,841 261,750 261,750AL 320,000 270,000 312,100 345,000AR 115,824 117,389 125,889 35,000AZCACO 0 0 0 200,000CTDC 14,661 15,862 18,000 20,000DEFLGAHI 725,911 791,068 823,497 823,497IA 107,000 65,000 61,000 165,000ID 327,712 341,210 430,803 475,000IL 402,524 404,488 413,488 404,488IN 110,000 175,000 275,000 175,000KSKY 36,570 39,800 40,040 55,000LAMD 114,083 186,000 240,000 240,000ME 175,000 165,000 144,000 190,000MN 274,685 249,170 326,709 350,000
MO-CMO-V . 148,803 162,800 179,883 179,883
MS 0 0 0 50,000MTNC 43,000 43,000 40,000 45,000ND 17,100 16,000 18,000 14,000NE 212,636 214,586 245,596 275,000NJ 300,000 335,000 396,000 400,000
NM 75,000 51,000 46,000 75,000NV 216,822 216,091 237,400 350,000NYOHOK 49,858 62,093 60,298 62,000ORPAPR 22,856 332,412 84,915 115,000RI 66,000 66,000 88,250 150,000SC 617,951 548,316 565,464 600,000SD 70,851 73,420 76,92! 80,000TN 120,000 130,000 150,000 250,000UT 70,000 70,000 62,000 100,000VA 422,900 339,980 330,000 380,000VT 15,000 35,000 158,400 100,000WA 294,987 335,215 360,000 330,000WI 704,961 749,359 803,758 800,000WY 45,000 46,000 47,000 75,000
TOTAL 6,496,606 6,897,100 7,422,161 8,170,618N = 34
34
AI
,,.,, .
'...$ ::: , ,' ',- ,,,
t,4,'",,4.-' ..,..' , > - , ,,,;..- 4,......-...,:.....;,....,,-,::44::::::,....4,4,,,mi,,......*,;;;;,..w.i. ..,.` ..I.A...14:...p.:%.,,..`,...J. Z:a..;,As.1-..'"..sg,-..C.4
a4 '..:: S, ).'S CP. i44,'" 44,C {1.ZW
MiMME11111
S40
WI' Wie
W 50
, SS' N
SS
I....±..i..,....... s .....,...,......,.......,,,,:......e.,,,,,,,,:kSS, ,,v, ..,,,, ..... >.4 xi> ...... ,,,,.. , ..`,5v.,.....,,,S....., 1.......J..............., :,...,,,,`,...M.',..;:.4' >X
INI 0 5 MP Ia gi 0 S 0 di
4.1 MP I Iiab I fa 5 I
V I a, 1
Nex
a
TABLE 6
PERCEPTIONS OF THE REASONS FOR INCREASE OCCURRINGFROM 1990-1991 TO 1991-1992'
CHANGES IN FEDERAL FUNDING
Carl Perkins FundingMinnesota
Congress appointed additional funds for NO1CC/SOICC activitiesIllinois
Congressional leaders awareness of CIDS & its impact on economyNorth Dakota
Funding from the Department of Defense for incorporation of ASVAB in computerized C1DSSouth Dakota
InflationArizonaMissouri View
RecessionMinnesota
State FundsMaryland
CHANGES IN STATE FUNDING
CHANGES IN FUNDING POLICY
User fees instituted or increasedMarylandNebraskaWisconsinWyoming
Increases were planned based on 3 year contractIndiana
COIN LeaseMissouri View
USER BASE
Increased number of system user sitesIdahoNebraskaWisconsinMissouri ViewOregon
37
27
TABLE 6, cont.
Increase of client market/usersNevadaTennessee
Increased/larger user baseNew JerseyWashington
Expansion of CIDS in user organizations/agenciesDistrict of Columbia
Increasing use by adult-serving agenciesOregon
Increased marketingColorado
Sound marketingMinnesota
MARKETING
STAFFING
New position (adjustments for collective bargaining)Hawaii
Increase in staff development activitiesKansas
Hard work by staff to produce a respected productMinnesota
C1DS SOFTWARE IMPROVEMENTS
Additional information programs developmentKentucky
Major effort to evaluate and acquire a commercial CIDS systemVermont
C1DS HARDWARE IMPROVEMENTS
Adding microcomputer version for MS-DOS Hard Disc DriveNebraska
Sales increase due to launching a new system (IBM version)Puerto Rico
38
28
TABLE 6, cont.
REQUESTS FOR MONEY
Requested and received funds for development of CIDS related study plansOklahoma
VENDOR PRICES
Local payments/user fees made to software vendorsUtah
Small school consolidationsMinnesota
CONSOLIDATIONS
\
. 9
29
30
TABLE 7
PERCEPTIONS OF THE REASONS FOR DECREASES IN FUNDINGFROM 1990-1991 TO 1991-1992
CHANGES IN FEDERAL FUNDING
Carl Perkins legislation reduced monies availableFloridaIllinoisNebraskaNew MexicoVirginia
Absence of congressional leaders' awareness of CIDS & its impact on economyNorth Dakota
Carl Perkins funding delayedAlaska
Lack of U.S. D.O.E. emphasis on counseling and guidanceNew Mexico
Reallocation of discretionary Perkins fundsMissouri View
CHANGES IN STATE GOVERNANCE
Transfer of CIDS from D.O.E. to ISOICC; state legislature chose not to provide state fundingIowa
CHANGES IN STATE FUNDING
No guidance appropriationsNebraskaSouth Carolina
State legislative cutsMaineSouth Carolina
State deficitMaryland
State D.O.E. felt higher priority needs elsewhereNew Mexico
State with limited fundsNew Mexico
TABLE 8
31
WHAT IMPACT DID THE DECREASE (1990-1991 TO 1991-1992)HAVE ON THE CIDS OPERATION?
STAFFING
No increase in staffNebraskaSouth Carolina
Decrease in staffNew MexicoFlorida
ISOICC staff had to absorb CMS work loadIowa
No raises for staffSouth Carolina
SERVICES PROVIDED
User services reducedIowa
Cutbacks in travelSouth Carolina
Resulted in fewer free print materials to assist schools in career development programsSouth Carolina
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
Additional product development/enhancements reducedIowaMarylandSouth Carolina
Change in user feesNorth Carolina
Started charging user's feesMissouri ViewVirginia
FEES FOR USERS
COPING STRATEGIES
Utilized carry-over funds in user fees to maintain level and quality of CIDS servicesIllinois
41
TABLE 8, cont.
FUNDING FOR USERS
Virtual elimination of Incentive Grants for new usersMaine
Minimal impactMaine
MINIMAL IMPACT
OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES
Change in operation proceduresNorth Carolina
USER SITES
Number of sites (annual renewals) decreasedFlorida
Several sites did not have money in their budgetsMissouri View
42
32
TABLE 9
33
TYPES OF ASSISTANCE C1DS NEED IN ORDER TO
COPE WITH FINANCIAL PROBLEMS
STATE SUPPORT AND GOVERNMENT FUNDING
State
Ability and support from state funding sourcesColoradoIndianaIowaVermont
Recognition and support of system by state legislation
ColoradoIowaNevada
Incentive/Special purpose grantsFloridaOregon
Federal
Ability and consistent support from federal funding sourcesAlabamaColoradoNew Mexico
Federal funds specifically for CIDS operationKansasNew Mexico
Special purpose grants to states to re-emphasize CIDS effortsMississippiNorth CarolinaOregon
Changes in JTPA and PerkinsIndiana
National control and administration of all related travel fundsVermont
More help with s6curing private funding grantsVirginia
43
TABLE 9, cont.
Other
More MoneyIllinoisKentuckyMissouri ViewNebraskaNevadaOklahomaRhode IslandWyoming
Sympathetic administrationAlaska
All kindsArizona
Broader definition of CIDSKansas
Additional staffNebraska
34
STABLE ECONOMY AND STABLE FUNDING
Stable economy/fundingGeorgiaMaineSouth Carolina
EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Vdlue of CIDS studiesAlaskaNevada
Need access to research and development fundsWisconsin
Continuing research and development projects to insure state of the art delivery systems.Nevada
CONSULTING RESOURCES
Information ana 'assistance with marketing on a professional basisMarylandNebraska
44
TABLE 9, cont.
35
FUNDING MODIFICATION
Reduced cost of vendor software programsMaine
PUBLICITY PACKAGES
Development of a publicity package to use to secure additional fundingDistrict of Columbia
Ancillary projects like NCDGMinnesota
NOICC, ACSCI and the National Career Development Institute can mount a massive PRcampaign to promote CIDS.
Rhode Island
National brochure to convince legislatives, school committees, and educational governingboards to fund CIDS.
Rhode Island
STATISTICS
Continued data collection and analysis of labor market and education statistics.Minnesota
TRAINING RESOURCES
Assistance in providing responsive customer service: training, technical assistance andcustomer service. CIDS that fail seem to do a poor job of this.
Idaho
MORE ENCOURAGEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT
More encouragement to develop information and products along with a requirement for aminimal staffing level of two full-time employees in each state.
Vermont
NO FINANCIAL PROBLEMS
CIDS should not have financial problems. If operated well, they can be self-supporting.Ongoing development could benefit with outside funding, but if approached correctly, manyefforts can be supported through special project grants at local and state levels.
Oregon
45
I
ALARAZCACOCTDCDE
INIININGAHI
I I
D D D :. \
:
. 0
X
111111U21=1111111E.M111IDILINKS
LAMDMEMN
X
MSMT
NENJ
NMNVNYOHOKORPAPR
SD
11111E111111INNIMINIII
VAVTWA
WY0 AL
0 OF OTAL12
40 o11
37%
e
D " D 0
: :
. : I
P li I 10 P ,
0
IAl
3IIKIIM
2083%
00%
I
4%
t I
AKALARAZCACOCTDr
x
DEFLGAHIIAIDILINKSKY
MNMO-CMO-
.x
x
=SIM=a1IMIMIIllral
ND
111111121NMNV1=21.OH
miLe;mitimmPA
IMILIMINIIRI
=ENNIOmougm.1111111EININI1111111111M
VA
IIIMITMEINmzammiimam=imam=0 A
xx
p1
,
x
:
x
x
IM.111MI=
x
x
x
x
xxx
1:111:1'D
IP 5
R V
o
x
x
x
x
x
=MIIIILINI
ti
.
ALARAZCACOCTDCDEFLGAHI
IDILINKSKYLAMDMEMN0-C
MO-V
10 b 5 ' III III II : I II II
. .
MSMTNC
NENJ
EMMIlli.
NMNVNY
OKOR
1111701111MPRRISCSDTNUT
IIIIMMIVT
MZOI=1111111161!
WY
e '-
:
I r r P P I 0
-,
00%
00 0
00%
TABLE 11
39
ENABLING LEGISLATION
STATE
Colorado Legislature reluctant education spenders; recent amendments hamstringingColorado education.
Colorado
Recent legislation requires a career plan for all students by 1994-95Indiana
Kentucky Revised StandardsKentucky
Mississippi Senate Bill No. 2735Mississippi
NJSA 34:1A - 76New Jersey
State budget, 1979, set up WCIS within University of WisconsinWisconsin
State legislative special education fundsNew Mexico
State Line Item 514Ohio
12th Hawaii Legislative Session, Act 193Hawaii
1992 Legislation requiring all high schools to have a computerized student advisementsystem providing career and educational information.
Florida
26 ME Revised Statutes Annotated, Section 1452Maine
4 9
40
TABLE 11, cont.
FEDERAL
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act of 1990, Title 4, Part C, Sections422 (a) and 451 (a).
ArkansasHawaiiIdahoNebraskaSouth CarolinaTennessee
Job Training Partnership Act of 1982, Sections 125 & 464ArkansasHawaiiIdahoSouth Carolina
NOICC enabling federal legislationAlabama
Several legislationsMissouri Choices
FIG
UR
E 8
PER
CE
IVE
D S
EC
UR
ITY
OF
FUN
DIN
G F
OR
CID
SO
PER
AT
ION
DU
RIN
G T
HE
CO
MIN
G T
WO
YE
AR
S
num
ber
of s
tate
s10
8 6
51
Use
r Fe
esN
OIC
C B
asic
Stat
eD
.O.E
. or
Stat
e D
.O.L
.,O
ther
Ass
ista
nce
Leg
isla
tion
Voc
'1JT
PA,
or
Gra
ntA
ppro
pria
t'nE
duca
tion
Em
ploy
men
tO
ffic
eSe
curi
ty
Fund
ing
Sour
ces N =
34
1111
Inc
reas
e E
xpec
ted
0 Pr
esen
t Lev
el E
xpec
ted
Smal
l Cut
Exp
ecte
d
gj B
ig C
ut E
xpec
ted
0 E
limin
atio
n E
xpec
ted 52
TABLE 12CIDS ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT FOR STATE CIDS
AKALARAZCACOCTDCDEFLGAHIIAIDILINKSKYLAMAMDMEMN
MO-CMO-V
MSMTNCNDNENHNJNMNVNYOHOK-ORPAPRRISCSI)INUTVAV 1
WAWI
-WVWY
101AL% 01 101"AL
= 41
42
SOICC
St. Dept ofLabor/
Economic orEmployment
Security
St. Dept ofEducation or
Office ofVocationalEducation
StateCollege
orUniversity Other
X X X
XX X
.-
X
X X'X
X.
X .
XXXX X X X ..X.X
XX
X
X X X X
X
X
XX
X
XXX
X
XX
X
XX X
XXX X
XX X
XX X X
_ XX
28 8 11 S 7
68% 20% 23% 12% 17%
53
Oth
er
Stat
e co
llege
or
univ
ersi
ty
Stat
e D
.O.E
. or
Voc
atio
nal
Edu
catio
n O
ffic
e
Stat
e D
.O.L
.. E
cono
mic
or
Em
ploy
men
t Sec
urity
SOIC
C
5 4
FIG
UR
E 9
TO
TA
L A
DM
INIS
TR
AT
IVE
AG
EN
TS
FOR
CID
S
05
1015
2025
30
N =
41
solc
c
0 St
ate
D.O
.L.,
Eco
nom
ic o
r E
mpl
oym
ent
Secu
rity
Stat
e D
.O.E
. or
Voc
atio
nal E
duca
tion
Off
ice
MA
Sta
te c
olle
ge o
r un
iver
sity
E]
Oth
er
5 5
TABLE 13
GOVERNING BOARD CHAIRS
Dr. Stephen B. Franks,Vocational Education DirectorState Department of EducationAlabama
Lonnie McNatt, DirectorArkansas Department of EducationVocational/Technical Educ. DivisionArkansas
Dr. Carlos ValenciaCalifornia State UniversityCalifornia
Dr. Smith, Co-ChairSuperintendent, DC Public SchoolsDistrict of Columbia
Maria Borten), Co-ChairDirector, Dept. of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia
Dr. Robert Watada, Administrator ofOETADLIR/Office of Employment and TrainingAdministrationHawaii
George Pellefier, AdministratorVocational RehabilitationIdaho
Chris Reynolds, 10ICC ChairpersonDept. of Commerce & Community AffairsIllinois
Steve Smith, ISOICC ChairIowa Dept. of Employment ServicesIowa
William Huston, SecretaryWorkforce Development CabinetKentucky
Charles A. Morrison, Chair/CommissionMaine Department of LaborMaine
Dr. Robert C. SchleigerRetired President of Chesapeake CollegeMaryland
Mr. Robert Larivee, DirectorSpecial Needs and Guidance ServicesMissouri Dept. of EducationMissouri
James P. Kiley, SuperintendentPershing County School DistrictNevada
Joel New, SOICC ChairNC Division of Employment and TrainingNorth Carolina
Roy Peters, DirectorOklahoma Dept. of Vocational &
Technical EducationOklahoma
Denise GudgerCounselor/AdministratorEugene School District 45Eugene, OR
Ramon Diaz Gomez, Governing BoardPresidentHouse RepresentativePuerto Rico
Robert E. David, SCOICC Executive BoardChairmanS.C. Employment Security CommissionSouth Carolina
Dee Esser, Executive Director, VO1CCVirginia Employment CommissionRichmond, VA
Wayne OlsenDivision of Vocational RehabiltationWisconsin
5 6
44
45
TABLE 14
ADVISORY BOARD CHAIRS
Judy Knight Mr. Marion Starr, Asst. DirectorDepartment of Labor, Employment Security Special Needs & Guidances ServicesAlaska Missouri Dept. of Education
MissouriBruce DaceyDe !ware Kay Raithel
Missouri ChoicesDr. Smith, Co-chair MissouriSuperintendent of Public SchoolsDistrict of Columbia Rosalie Wa'sh, Director
Student Gevelopment CenterMaria Borrero, Co-chair MontanaDirector, Dept. of Employment
Services Phillip A. BakerDistrict of Columbia Department of Labor
NebraskaMilton MartinGeorgia Department of Labor Tom VogelsongGeorgia Asbury Park Board of Education
New JerseyJoanne Swearingen, Educational SpecialistState Department of Education Robert WilliamsAnuenue Elementary School Marketing & Technical Assistance ManagerHawaii Pennsylvania SOICC
PennsylvaniaSteve Hawkes, CounselorSugar-Salem Junior-Senior High School Mildred T. NicholsIdaho RI Occupational Information Coordinating Committee
Rhode IslandDave Palya, Co-ChairpersonLockport High School Mr. Jim VinsonIllinois Tennessee State Department of Education
TennesseeDr. Jack Teal, Co-ChairpersonIllinois Central College Peter SchmidtIllinois Grays Harbor Community College
WashingtonLinda Piper, Executive DirectorINDOICC Wayne OlsenIndiana Division of Vocational
RehabilitationCarl Baldwin WisconsinMilitary Entrance Processing StationKentucky Mike Paris
Wyoming Occupational Coordinating CouncilJasmin Duckett WyomingMOICC DirectorMaryland
Marla Davenport, SupervisorTIESMinnesota
57
.01111111110111111111111H
IMM
IIIMM
EN
ION
.1111111111111110111111111111111111111111111111111111-
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
-101111111111111111111111111111110111111111111011111111
iiiii-
111111111101111111110111111111111111111101110.IM
AN
IIIIIIIININ
IMM
ININ
.111011110111111:N
UM
MIN
EM
EN
IIIIIIIIIIIIIMIH
NIIIIIIIN
.:
-1111111111111111110111010010111111111111
t-iiiiiiirniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiM
EM
EN
OiiiiiiiniiiiiiM
EM
EN
EM
IN..
-
:::iiiIIIIM
MiiiiiiiiM
INIM
INIM
EN
-.:11111111111111111
.1011110100111101111 MI
--I 18 M
INE
ME
ME
NI
I
OR
GA
NIZ
AT
ION
SR
EPR
ESE
NT
ED
59
Oth
er
CID
S C
lient
s
CID
S U
sers
Priv
ate
Scho
ols
Priv
ate
Bus
ines
s
Eco
nom
ic D
evel
opm
ent
JTPA
Stat
e C
olle
ge o
r U
nive
rsity
Stat
e D
.O.E
. or
Off
ice
of V
oc'l
Edu
catio
n
Stat
e D
.O.L
./Eco
nom
ic o
rE
mpl
oym
ent S
ecur
ity
Stat
e D
epar
tmen
t or
Off
ice
ofV
oc'l
Reh
abili
tatio
n
SOIC
C
No
Gov
erni
ng o
r A
dvis
ory
Boa
rdE
xist
s
FIG
UR
E 1
0
STA
TE
CID
S G
OV
ER
NIN
G A
ND
AD
VIS
OR
Y B
OA
RD
S
05
10
N =
45
1520
2530
NU
MB
ER
OF
CID
S R
EPO
RT
ING
3540
45 6 9
:
41 9 9
'
St
'
II
:.
9
II 5
0,
1 "o
:
AL 19
AR 28 o22 o Uft 1 . 5 o
12 % IIk 24 o
AZCA
46 o 14 o
10 %CO 60 % 10 o 20 %
CTDC 30 o 17 % 18 % 18 % 18 %
DE 23 % 2 o 18 o 2 o 33 %
L 9 o 19 o i.GA MEMEMMUMUMME 19 ° 20 o . 6 o 9 o
HIIAD
111111MINI
=MEMMitiMill
1 %14 o4 o
21 o 7 %
9 o.,. 20 o
19 o30 o IIMAMIllian.
8 %,
2713 % 1 ' .
6 o 9 o4 o
9 o
1 o
KSKYLA1 D
19 o
14 o40 o
iliaMilitaillii30 o 30 o
9 o
6 % 11 % 30 %
11 % ".
MNMO-CMO-V
19 o
15 %
25 % IIIKEMI14 %
11 % 20 o 11 %
".
MS 33 o 50 o 8 o 8 o
MT 20 o Minininikill 38 o 20 o
NDNE MIEFAINEEEEME
.
20 o
16 %
30 o 50 o
MEM 20 o
1\11 MEMIMINEILMMUIREEM 33 % 3 o
k
13 o18 %
=ffilMIIMEMEI
40 °altallEniaill.IMEMEMMICIMI
24 °
9 o ..
21%OKOR
A
PREMEMMIEJMSC
I
IT
20 o70 o
EMILMEIMEMillIRELIIM1111011111U24 o
MEM
4° .°
18 o30100 o
MUNE
13 % 20 o ".
7 %
IMREMEMMUM20 .°
MEEEMENEUME13 %40 o
MEM -' 7 %
".
33 %.
20 o 20 o20 oVA 19 % 0 o 14 o 30 o 1 %
iiiiiMMELEMMEMELEMMiliME41 o 8 %
19 o
, 1 'o 14 o
40 o
14 o3 % 3 o18% ". 16 %
14 %
WAWWY
13 o
MEMilliE111136 %
MMUS 20 ".MED
8 % 20 12 %
5,45
(< c
;K.., 5,, " %, , s, , ,
;:',//1
7145,
,A5 S5S55S55S
s:
55555555555555555.5555
Si
.
;Z.
tZ
5 0
0 tf)
51
TABLE 17
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
Although Eureka leases/licensing agreement with NCIS, we do about 90% of our ownprogramming and information development. The EUREKA CIS software is different from CISas developed in Oregon.
California
This is purely an enterprise operation, under a non-profit umbrella. Previously, COCIS wasoperated by state government entities. It failed there, spending more than it took in. Itenjoys no outside support. Hence, there is no large staff. Now the staff is minimal, but theoperation is not failing. It provides a largely public service (schools, higher ed) withoutpublic support.
Colorado
Our function is more than CIDS. Difficult to separate fundings (state versus federal for justthose functions). I'm not sure data submitted will reflect the true picture of what you'retrying to represent. Employees are full time but again their responsibilities are more thanCIDS.
Florida
Our CIDS is evolving from primarily a computer-based system to one which focusesprimarily on staff development.
Kansas
Type of CIDS assumes that all CIDS must be computer based. The delivery of careerinformation, if systematic, includes: computer based material, lectures, workshops, videomaterials and curriculum materials that make the use of career information easier for endusers within a variety of agency and programmatic settings.
Maine
We use both type of CIDS. We have our own in-state system that is supplemented byCOIN.
Missouri View
Vendor provides all services but works with SOICC to coordinate CIDS activities in thestate.
Mississippi
Type of CIDS: A system leased to local sites directly from developer. SOICC adds stateinformation at no charge.
North Dakota
The New Mexico CIDS has gone from full time "full support" staff to parttime "crisis" staffand is in serious jeopardy of being eliminated within two years. New Mexico SOICC hasbeen and will continue to devote considerable time and effort for fundraising.
New Mexico
TABLE 17, cont.
Type of CIDS: A state-based system in consortium with other state-based systems forongoing developments with state staff responsible for management, user services, deliverysystems, information analysis, and program development.
Oregon
During the 1991-1992 period we supported the research and acquisition efforts thatresulted in the selection of the CHOICES-CT CIDS software for the Employment and TrainingDepartment. We will also enter into an agreement that will allow us to act as theadministrators of a consortium of users within state government (i.e., schools andagencies). We plan to continue development and distribution of a free state developed CIDS
that will be offered as an alternative.Vermont
_
67
52
Ass
ocia
tion
of C
ompu
ter-
Bas
ed S
yste
ms
for
Car
eer
info
rmat
ion
AC
OtiS
OFF
nuM
FO
R s
TA
M L
AR
DS
AN
D T
RA
ININ
G T
O A
DV
AN
CE
CA
RE
ER
IN
FOR
MA
TIO
N D
EL
IVE
RY
SY
STE
MS
,:une 25. 1992
TO FR
OM
Szus
icr,
Stat
e C
IDS
Ope
rato
rsRobert Lofft, ACSCI Clearinghouse Coordinator
1992 CIDS Information Collection Torm
Earlier this year, NOICC published the CIDS Status Report,
which was
produced in cooperation with ACSCI.
This project has led to further
cooperation between
noIc
cand ACSC/. resulting in the combination of
their annual CIDS surveys into a single form. Some ofthe information
che enclosed form requests, the same as in previous years,
will
appear in the 1993 ACSCI Directory, to bemailed to all CIDS at no
charge.
Additionally, NOICC is developing a database on CIDS that
will be available to system operators. SOICCs, and researchers.
Part
of the form is simiiar to last year's ACSCI survey.
Part I/
has questions on the financial status of CIDS.
The data from Part II
will be summarized in a NOICC report by Dr. James P. Sampson,
Jr., of
the Clearinghouse for Computer-AssistedGuidance Systems at Florida
State University.
NOICC plans to have the report ready in time for
the 1992 ACSCI Annual Conference. December
2-4, in St. Louis.
The financial questions are a one-time effort toclarify the fiscal
envi,I onment in wnich CODS operate.
Those who prepared the survey
tried to minimize your response burden and
still obtain the
information required for a much-needed national profile of
CIDS
programs.
Your responses will help in the effort to showhow
valuable CODS are as national and state information resources.
In those states where the
ems
is not operated by the SOICC, a copy
of this letter and the form has been sent to the
SOICC.
You may wish
to discuss this data request with your
SOICC director.
Please mail your completed survey to the ACSCIClearinghouse by
July 11. Airy questions you may have are welcome;
call me at (503)
14;;-299$,. Office hours are 9 to 5. Pacific Time.
Thank you,
cc:
SOICCs
xee
yr: V
er.
arm
r., r
rya
.'e
rYr
MO
scl
rorl
'A. A
,Ir
aay
TA
' Cfr
Zg
Win
Mar
rYA
I
MIT
(.0
scot
uur,
mck
viln
PrI
g P
LtX
nPn
ALS
OclupecoctzE
(Yrr
yre
r to
wn
Sur
rnyc
nC
orkf
w ie
AD
ocre
ed T
win
any
(43
or*,
,-<
>"
NA
n.cA
n C
am r
e,no
tn 'o
wn
flMC
A.e
* C
am*
FA
xo,o
n'e
tr.m
ano
nrg
*O
at, H
1C
ow,n
kyrw
o,iN
gon
171?
Av.
Ste
elW
oo k
t411
:41.
4.-0
,Pa
YIr
qS0
Lre.
./eP
06:
n 04
711
4Arr
y d
Orv
altr
a1I1
eelb
5056
.7ric
tron
d C
A 0
4!01
.ou
cbo
mb
OR
WA
D-U
M(a
l C7
750
Co
MA
UIS
M 3
,440
6
68
CID
S In
form
atio
n C
olle
ctio
n Fo
rm
Nam
e of
Sys
tem
:
Mai
ling
Add
ress
Pack
age
Del
iver
y
Add
ress
(if
dif
fere
nt):
Nat
iona
l Occ
upat
iona
l Inf
orm
atio
n C
oord
inat
ing
Com
mitt
eean
d th
eA
ssoc
iatio
n of
Com
pute
r-B
ased
Sys
tem
s fo
r C
aree
r In
form
atio
n
Plea
se m
ail b
y Ju
ly 3
1 lo
:
AC
SCI
Cle
arin
ghou
se20
0 A
gate
Hal
lU
nive
rsity
of
Oeg
onE
ugen
e, O
R 9
7403 N
ine.
Dig
h Z
ip Zip
Tel
epho
ne:
)E
xt.
Fax
Num
ber
C)
Ext
.
Part
IC
IDS
Dat
a an
d D
eliv
ery
NameofhWividtml
CompleangPanlofthisSunTy:
Item
l: U
seoj
Com
mon
Dat
ain
01Sa
ndC
IDS
a D
ees
your
CD
DS
inte
rfac
ewith
you
rOIV
O Y
es0 No
Uso.how:
b.Uyes.whkhoftefollowMghemsofinfmmmiionareusedMbothqmwm0Pkasechmk:
ocu
rren
t(ba
sera
r)em
ploy
men
tsiz
eO
proj
atod
empl
oym
mts
ir.e
0 gr
owth
rat
e
Overgemmalopenings
Oimiusqlocatimu(s)ofacupalions
Osupplydam
0 re
late
d C
IP/e
d co
ies
and
title
s0
supp
ly/d
eman
d da
ta0 wage and
sala
ry d
ata
0 st
ate
licen
sure
info
rmat
ion
0 ot
her
c. C
an y
ou p
rovi
de e
xam
ples
of
how
you
r O
IS a
nd C
IDS
disp
lay
this
info
rmat
ion
from
a c
omm
onoc
cupa
tion?
0 Y
es0
Exa
mpl
e en
clos
ed0
No
BE
ST
CO
PY
69
Item
2: O
ccup
atio
nal C
odin
g St
ruct
ure
and
Inte
rfac
ea.
Wha
t cod
ing
syst
em(s
) is
(ar
e) u
sed
to p
rese
nt in
form
atio
n to
use
rs o
n th
e oc
cupa
tions
in y
our
syst
em?
0 SO
CU
Dar
0 O
ES
0 M
il0
°ow
:
b. W
hat c
ross
wal
ks d
o yo
u us
e fo
r in
form
atio
n de
velo
pmen
t pur
pose
s?
Syst
em c
ode
to C
OT
0 I'M
No
Syst
em c
ode
to S
OC
0 Y
es0
No
Syst
em c
ode
to O
ES
0 Y
es0
No
Syst
em c
ode
to G
OE
0 Y
es0
No
Syst
em c
ode
to O
P0
Yes
0 N
oSy
stem
cod
e to
Mil
0 Y
es0
No
0 O
ther
c.A
re th
ese
crce
swal
ks p
rodu
ced
by 0
you
r st
ate
or 0
the
syst
em d
evel
oper
?
d. D
oes
your
sys
tem
hav
e an
on-
Lin
e ca
pabi
lity
for
user
s to
ent
er a
n oc
cupa
tiona
l cod
e fr
oma
diff
eren
t tax
onom
y (e
.g.,
OE
S, D
OT
.
MO
S) a
nd id
entif
y th
e re
late
d oc
cupa
tion
in y
our
syst
em?
0 Y
es0
No
If s
o. p
leas
e de
scnb
e:
e.H
ave
you
obta
ined
cro
ssw
alk
file
s fr
om th
e N
atio
nal C
ross
wal
k Se
rvic
e C
ente
r?0
Yes
0 N
oIf
not
, wou
ld y
ou li
ke to
rec
eive
info
rmat
ion
abou
t its
ser
vice
s?0
Yes
0 N
o
I It
em 3
: Edu
catio
n an
d T
rain
ing
Info
rmat
ion
and
Lin
kage
's
a.W
hat t
ypes
of
educ
atio
n an
d tr
aini
ng f
iles
art a
vaila
ble
in y
our
syst
em:
0 Po
stse
cond
ary
prog
ram
s of
stu
dy0
Nat
iona
l0
Scho
ol s
ubje
cts
0 N
atio
nal
0 A
ppr
entic
eshi
p0
Nat
iona
l0
Mili
tary
/arm
ed s
ervi
ces
0 N
atio
nal
0 V
ccat
iora
l/tcc
hnic
al s
choo
ls0
Nat
iona
l0
Porp
riet
ary
scho
ols
0 N
atio
nal
0 Pu
blic
two-
year
col
lege
s0
Nat
iona
lo
Publ
ic f
oury
ear
colle
ges
0 N
atio
nal
0 G
radu
ate
scho
ols
0 N
atio
nal
0 St
ate
oSL
IM
0 St
ate
0 St
ate
0 St
ate
0 St
ate
oS:
lte0
Stat
e0
Stat
e
b. A
re th
e pr
ogra
ms
of s
tudy
link
ed to
occ
upat
ions
?0
Yes
0 N
o
If s
o. w
hat i
s th
e to
sis
for
esta
blis
hing
this
link
age?
c.A
re th
e pr
ogra
ms
of s
tudy
link
ed to
hoot
s?0
Ycs
0 N
o
If s
o. w
hat i
s th
e ba
sis
for
esta
blis
hing
this
link
age?
d. C
an y
ou p
rovi
de a
n ex
ampl
e of
thes
e lin
kage
s?0
Yes
0 E
xam
ple
encl
osed
0 N
o
2
70
Item
4: S
elec
tion
of O
ccup
atio
nsa_
On
wha
t bas
is a
re o
ccup
atio
ns s
elec
ted
for
incl
usio
n in
you
r C
MS?
b. A
rt th
e pr
oced
ures
for
sel
ectin
g th
e oc
cupa
tions
so
be in
clud
ed in
you
r sy
stem
pro
duce
d by
0 yo
ur s
tate
, 0 th
e sy
stem
dev
elop
er, o
r 0
both
?
c.If
you
pro
duce
you
r ow
n se
lect
ion
proc
edur
es, c
an y
ou p
rovi
de a
cop
y?0
Yes
0 C
opy
encl
osed
0 N
o
d. I
f yo
u ob
tain
you
r sy
stem
fro
m a
noth
er e
kvel
oper
. do
you
0 ad
d st
ate
occu
patio
ns o
r 0
deve
lop
a st
ate
file
of
ocei
mat
iens
?
Item
S: U
ser
Site
Inf
orm
atio
nA
Use
r Si
te is
def
med
as
a lo
catio
n w
here
you
r sy
stem
(st
ruct
ured
acc
ess
plus
info
cmat
ion
file
s) is
act
ually
in u
se. D
o no
t cou
nt a
sus
er s
ites
any
loca
tions
that
hav
e on
ly in
form
atio
n fi
les
for
refa
ence
pur
pose
s. I
n en
teri
ng th
e nu
mbe
r of
Iss
as f
or e
ach
site
cat
egor
y,us
e an
act
ual c
ount
or
an e
stim
ate
of th
e nu
mbe
r of
indi
vidu
als,
not
the
num
ber
of tr
ansa
ctio
ns, o
ver
a ye
ar's
tim
e- E
nter
the
figu
res
for
your
rum
( ye
as ja
m e
nded
(or
abo
ut to
end
). F
or s
choo
l site
s, if
the
num
ber
of in
divi
dual
use
rs is
not
kno
wn,
and
you
hav
e no
othe
rba
sis.
for
estim
atin
g us
age,
use
as
your
est
imat
e tw
o th
inis
of
the
num
ber
of s
tude
nts
enro
lled
at th
e sc
hool
s. O
ther
way
s to
est
imat
e th
enu
mbe
r of
use
rs in
clud
e (I
) re
port
s fr
om s
ite c
oced
inat
ors.
(2)
the
num
ber
of u
ser
hand
book
s di
stri
bute
d. a
nd (
3) s
ite m
otdt
orin
g.
Num
ber
of S
ites
Ele
men
tary
Sch
ools
Juni
or H
igh
or M
iddl
e Sc
hool
sSe
nior
ffi
gh S
choo
lsV
ocat
iona
l.Tec
hnie
sl I
nstit
utes
Prir
ate
Voc
atio
nal S
choo
ls2-
Yea
r Ju
nior
or
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
4.Y
ear
Col
lege
s sn
d U
nive
rsiti
es
Em
ploy
men
t & T
rain
ing
Age
ncie
s (J
TPA
)E
mpl
oym
ent S
ervi
ce O
ffic
esC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
taR
ehab
ilita
tion
Age
ncie
sC
ouns
elin
g A
genc
ies
Mili
tary
Bas
esPu
blic
Lib
rari
esPr
ivat
e B
usin
esse
s
Oth
ers
(ple
ase
list)
:
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
sdrn
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
cOm
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
Num
ber
of U
sers
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imm
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imae
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
0 A
ctua
l 0 E
stim
ate
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
e0
Act
ual 0
Est
imat
eT
OT
AL
S:
Item
6: K
inds
of
Del
iver
y M
edia
Che
ck th
e ap
popr
iate
box
es to
indi
cate
the
deliv
ery
med
ia y
ou u
se, a
nd e
nter
the
num
ber
of s
ites
at w
hich
the
med
ia a
re u
sed.
Site
sth
at h
ave
mor
e th
an o
ne f
orm
of
deliv
ery
med
ia a
re to
be
coun
ted
in e
ach
appr
opri
ate
cate
gory
. For
exa
mpl
a A
ach
ool t
hat h
as b
oth
mic
roco
mpu
ter
and
need
le-s
ort d
eliv
ery
med
ia w
ould
be
coun
ted
corm
in e
ach
cate
gory
. Thu
s, th
e nu
mbe
r of
site
s fo
r al
l cat
egor
ies
here
, if
tota
led,
may
exc
eed
the
actu
al to
tal n
umbe
r of
site
s in
dica
ted
in I
tem
5. U
se f
igur
es f
or th
e sa
me
time
peri
od a
s us
ed f
orIt
em 5
(the
fis
cal y
ear
just
end
ed o
r ab
out t
o en
d).
Del
iver
y M
edia
:N
umbe
r of
Site
s
0 M
anua
l (e.
g.. n
eedl
e-so
rt p
lus
book
s or
fic
he)
0 M
icro
com
puta
s (f
ull s
yste
m)
0 M
icro
com
pute
rs w
ith b
ooks
or
fich
e
Tun
e-sh
are4
com
pute
r
Prim
ary
Del
iver
y Sy
stem
:0
CIS
0 C
HO
ICE
S0
CO
IN0
DIS
CO
VE
R0
GIS
0 O
ther
:
3
71
Oth
er in
form
atio
n Pr
oduc
ts a
nd S
ervi
ces:
0 In
tera
ctiv
e vi
deo
Num
ber
of s
ites:
0 D
ial-
up h
otlin
eN
umbe
r of
use
rs:
0 N
ew S
iCtle
r fo
r si
tes
Num
ber
of c
opie
s, la
st L
ISL
IVFr
eque
ncy
of p
ublic
atio
n:0
Car
eer
tabl
oid
Num
ber
of c
opie
s. la
st:
Freq
uenc
y of
pub
licat
ion:
0 O
ther
(pl
ease
des
cnbe
l:
Doe
s yo
ur s
yste
m f
ollo
w th
e A
CSC
I St
anda
rds
for
Del
iver
y Sy
stem
s?0
Yes
0 N
o
Item
7: C
IDS
Tra
inin
g Su
ppor
ta.
Doe
s 0
your
sta
te o
r 0
syst
em d
evel
oper
or
0 bo
th p
rovi
de g
ener
al tr
aini
ng to
use
r si
te p
erso
nnel
?If
so,
do
you
follo
w th
e A
CSC
I St
anda
rds
for
Mar
ketin
g an
d U
ser
Serv
ices
?0
Yes
0 N
o
b. D
oes
0 yo
ur s
tate
or
0 sy
stem
dev
elop
er o
r 0
both
pro
vide
cus
tom
ized
trai
ning
for
spe
ciA
ized
pop
ulat
ions
or
prog
ram
s, s
uch
as d
ispl
aced
wor
kers
. Equ
ity p
rogr
ams.
.IT
PA p
rogr
ams,
and
reh
abili
tatio
n pr
ogra
ms?
If
so. p
leas
e lis
t
C. D
oes
0 yo
ur s
tate
or
0 sy
stem
dev
elop
er o
r 0
both
pro
duce
a s
tand
ard
set o
f tr
aini
ng m
ater
ials
? If
so.
can
you
pro
vide
a
copy
?0
Yes
0 C
opy
encl
osed
0 N
o
Item
8: S
yste
m S
uppo
rt M
ater
ials
a. D
oes
0 yo
ur s
tate
or
0 sy
stem
dev
elop
er o
r 0
both
pro
duce
a u
ser
man
ual f
or u
ser
site
per
sonn
el?
b. (
(you
r M
ite p
rodu
ces
a sy
stem
man
ual,
can
you
prov
ide
a co
py?
0 Y
es0
Cop
y en
clos
ed0
No
Item
9: E
valu
atio
n St
udie
sa.
Doe
s yo
ur c
ros
follo
w th
e A
CSC
I St
anda
rds
for
Eva
luat
ion?
0 Y
es0
No
b. H
ave
ther
e be
en a
ny e
valu
atio
n st
udie
s pr
oduc
ed f
or y
our
stat
e C
IDS
prog
ram
with
in th
e pa
st f
ive
year
s?0
Yes
0 N
o
c.If
"Y
es,"
can
you
pro
vide
a c
opy?
0 Y
es0
Cop
y en
clos
ed0
No
d. H
ow d
o yo
u co
llect
use
r fe
edba
ck?
Plea
se p
ovid
e a
copy
of
any
surv
ey f
orm
s yo
u ha
ve u
sed
for
this
pur
pose
.0
Cop
y en
clos
ed
al I
tem
10:
Dev
elop
men
tal P
roje
cts
a. D
oes
0 yo
ur s
tate
or
0 sy
stem
dev
elop
ers
or 0
bot
h ha
ve a
ny d
evel
opm
enta
l pro
ject
s un
derw
ay o
r pl
anne
d fo
r th
een
hanc
emen
t of
your
cur
rent
CID
S?
Item
13:
Sea
rch
Var
iabl
esW
hat i
tem
s m
e us
ed to
sea
rch
for
occu
patio
ns in
you
r C
IDS?
DoW
rase
d ch
arac
teri
stic
=W
orke
r fu
nctio
ns (
data
, peo
ple.
thin
gs)
0 Y
es0
No
Gen
eral
edu
catio
n de
velo
pmen
t (G
ED
) 0
Yes
0 N
oSp
ecif
ic v
ozat
iona
l pim
p:ra
tion
(SV
P)0
Yes
0 N
oA
pdtu
des
0 Y
es0
No
GO
E in
tere
sts
0 Y
es0
No
Tem
pera
men
ts0
Yes
0 N
oPh
ysic
al d
eman
ds a
nd a
ctiv
ities
0 Y
es0
No
Env
iron
men
tal c
ondi
tions
0 Y
es0
No
Oth
er c
hara
cter
istic
=E
duca
tion
0 Y
es0
No
Sala
ry/e
arni
ngs
0 Y
es0
No
Com
mun
ityty
pe0
Yes
0 N
oSc
hool
sub
ject
s0
Yes
0 N
oR
elat
ed m
ilita
ry tr
aini
ng0
Yes
0 N
oR
elat
ed a
ppre
ntic
eshi
p0
Yes
0 N
oC
aree
r cl
uste
rs0
Yes
0 N
oL
ifes
tyle
/wor
k sc
hedu
le0
Yes
0 N
oO
ther
DY
es 0
No
Stan
dard
ized
test
s:H
olla
nd S
DS
0 Y
es0
No
Kud
er I
nter
est
0 Y
es0
No
OV
IS0
Yes
0 N
oSt
rong
-Cam
pbel
l0
Yes
0 N
oA
SVA
B0
Yes
0 N
oD
AT
0 Y
es0
No
GA
TB
0 ye
s0
No
Oth
er:
0 Y
es0
No
Oth
er0
Yes
0 N
o
a It
em 1
4: O
ther
Inf
orm
atio
n Fi
les
Wha
t oth
er f
iles
(bes
ides
Occ
upat
ions
and
Edu
catio
n/T
rain
ing)
are
incl
uded
in y
our
CID
S?
b.If
you
r ga
t has
any
pro
ject
s in
dev
elop
men
t, pl
ease
pro
vide
a b
rief
des
crip
tion,
or
send
any
des
crip
tive
mat
eria
ls.
Em
ploy
ers
0 Y
es0
No
0 D
escr
iptiv
e m
ater
ials
enc
lose
dJo
b B
ank/
Job
Plac
emen
t0
Yes
LIN
o
Eco
nom
ic d
evel
opm
ent
0 Y
es0
No
II I
tem
II:
Occ
upat
iona
l Inf
orm
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
Plan
ners
0 Y
es0
No
a.D
oes
your
CID
S de
velo
p lo
cal o
ccup
atio
nal i
nfor
mat
ion?
0 Y
es0
No
Eib
lintr
ilPhy
0 Y
es0
No
h. D
oes
your
CID
S fo
llow
the
AC
SCI
Stan
dard
s fo
r In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent?
0 Y
es0
No
Em
ploy
er V
isit
Res
urnk
0 Y
es0
Yes
0 N
o0
No
Item
12:
Occ
upat
iona
l Inf
orm
atio
nFi
nanc
ial A
id0
Yes
0 N
o
Wha
t kin
ds o
f oc
cupa
tions
fde
s ar
e av
aila
ble
in y
our
syst
em?
Oth
er:
0 Y
es0
No
Oth
er:
0 Y
es0
No
0 D
escr
iptio
n (d
utie
s, d
efin
ition
, wor
k co
n. a
ds)
0 N
atio
nal
0 St
ate
Oth
er:
0 Y
es0
No
0 R
equi
rem
ents
(en
try.
lie,
int,
*its
)0
Nat
iona
l0
Sum
0 E
cono
mic
(ea
rnin
gs. e
mpl
oym
ent,
outlo
ok)
0 N
atio
nal
0 St
ate
724
5
73
PAR
T I
I
Intr
oduc
tion
As
the
labo
r m
arke
t in
thc
Uni
ted
Stat
es b
ecom
es le
ss s
tabl
e, a
dole
scen
ts a
nd a
dults
are
mak
ing
incr
ease
d de
man
ds o
n C
aree
r In
form
atio
n D
eliv
ery
Syst
ems
(CID
S) to
pro
vide
info
rmat
ion
nece
ssar
y fo
r m
akin
g ca
reer
and
em
ploy
men
t dec
isio
ns. H
owev
er, i
n th
is ti
me
ofin
crea
sed
dem
and
for
the
serv
ices
C1D
S of
fer,
pub
lic f
undi
ng f
or th
eir
oper
atio
n is
in d
ange
r of
decl
inin
g.
C1D
S op
erat
ors,
fac
ed w
ith im
pend
ing
chan
ge in
fun
ding
sou
rces
and
am
ount
s, n
eed
anan
alys
is o
f ba
selin
e da
ta th
at d
escr
ibes
the
curr
ent f
inan
cial
sta
tus
of C
IDS
in th
e U
nite
d St
ates
.C
IDS
oper
ator
s al
so n
eed
data
on
man
ager
ne.n
and
sta
ffin
g pa
ttern
s, s
ince
per
sonn
el c
osts
are
am
ajor
ele
men
t in
CID
S bu
dget
s. T
he a
naly
sis
aud
data
will
allo
w o
pera
tors
to m
ake
com
pari
sons
amon
g O
DS.
For
exa
mpl
e, a
CID
S op
erat
or c
ould
eva
luat
e ch
ange
s in
fun
ding
and
sta
ffm
gw
ithin
its
stat
e, in
corp
orat
ing
a ge
nera
l com
pari
son
with
all
CID
S an
d sp
ecif
ic c
ompa
riso
ns w
ithC
IDS
that
hav
e si
mila
r ch
arac
teri
stic
s.
Prel
imin
ary
fina
ncia
l sta
tus
and
staf
fing
dat
a w
ere
colle
cted
, but
not
ana
lyze
d, a
s pa
rt o
f la
stye
ar's
NO
ICC
/AC
SCI
annu
al d
ata
colle
ctio
n ef
fort
. The
goa
l of
this
par
t of
the
curr
ent s
urve
y is
to c
olle
ct, a
naly
ze, a
nd d
isse
min
ate
base
line
data
to h
elp
CID
S op
erat
ors
and
stat
ean
d fe
dera
lpo
licy
mak
ers
arri
ve a
t wel
l-in
form
ed d
ecis
ions
abo
ut th
e fi
nanc
ing
and
staf
fing
of
CID
S.
Fina
ncia
l Sta
tus,
Org
aniz
atio
nal S
truc
ture
, Sta
ff, a
nd C
IDS
Typ
e
Indi
vidu
al C
ompl
etin
g T
his
Form
:
Nam
e:
Add
ress
!
Phon
c(
DIR
EC
TIO
NS:
Ple
ase
fill
in th
e ap
prop
riat
e bl
ank
and/
or c
ircl
e th
e ap
prop
riat
e le
tter
for
each
item
. Whe
nci
rclin
g th
e le
tter
for
-Oth
er,"
ple
ase
wri
te in
the
info
rmat
ion
requ
este
d.
A. F
INA
NC
IAL
ST
AT
US
I. C
HA
NG
E tr
4 C
IDS
FUN
DIN
G S
OU
RC
ES:
A f
undi
ng s
ourc
e is
def
ined
as
anyo
rgan
izat
ion.
ent
ity, o
r gr
ay o
f in
divi
dual
s th
atco
nmbu
te f
unds
to th
e C
IDS
budg
et. I
t a c
ateg
ory
liste
d at
the
top
of th
e ne
xt p
age
is a
sou
rce
offu
ndin
g. in
dica
te th
e to
tal a
mou
nt in
dolla
rs f
or 1
999-
91. 1
9914
2. a
nd 1
992-
93 (
antic
ipat
ed f
undi
ng).
A f
undi
ng y
ear
is d
efin
ed a
s Ju
lyI
thro
ugh
June
30.
Inc
lude
tota
l
fund
ing
on th
e bo
ttom
line
. If
your
CID
S an
d SO
ICC
arc
com
bine
d, p
rovi
de th
e be
st e
StiM
ate
poss
ible
ofC
IDS
fund
ing.
74
Use
r fo
es
NO
ICC
Bas
ic A
ssis
tanc
e G
rant
NO
ICC
CID
S G
rant
Stat
e le
gisl
ativ
e ap
prop
riat
ion
Stat
e D
ept.
of E
d./ O
ffic
e of
Vac
. Ed.
Stal
e D
ept.
of L
abor
llT
PA /
ES
Oth
er (
iden
tify)
:
Oth
er (
iden
tify)
:
Oth
er (
iden
tify)
:
TO
TA
L F
UN
DIN
G:
1990
-91
1991
-92
1992
-93
2. F
or c
oMpa
riso
n pu
rpos
es, I
ndic
ate
the
tota
l am
ount
of
fund
ing
for
your
CID
S in
198
748.
July
I, 1
987
thro
ugh
June
30,
191
111:
3. W
hat a
mou
nt o
f fu
ndin
g w
as a
lloca
ted
in 1
991-
92 f
or r
esea
rch
and
deve
lopm
ent a
new
pro
gram
s ao
d pr
oduc
ts?
Tot
al r
esea
rch
and
deve
lopm
ent f
undi
ng:
$
4. W
hat a
mou
nt o
f fu
ndin
g w
as a
lloca
ted
in 1
991-
92 f
or e
valu
atin
g th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
of y
our
C1D
S?T
otal
C1D
S ev
alua
tios
fute
ding
:$
S. I
ran
incr
ease
in f
undi
ng o
ccur
red
from
1990
-91
to 1
991-
92, b
rief
ly s
tate
you
r pe
rcep
tions
a th
e re
ason
s fo
r th
e in
crea
se:
4. I
f a
decr
ease
in f
undi
ng o
ccur
red
from
199
0-91
to19
91-9
2, b
riefly
sta
teyo
ur p
eree
ptio
seof
the
reas
ons
tor
the
decr
ease
:
7. I
f a
decr
ease
in f
undi
ng o
ccur
red
from
199
0-91
to 1
991-
92 w
hat I
mpa
ct d
id th
e de
crea
se h
ave
os th
eop
erat
ios
of th
e C
1DS?
11. W
hat t
ypes
des
ista
nce
do C
IDS
aee
d I o
rder
to c
ope
with
flna
ncia
l pro
blem
s?
9. W
hat t
otal
fund
iag
keel
Ls
seed
ed fo
r th
e su
stai
ned
sad
effe
dive
per
form
ance
of
your
CID
S?T
otal
am
ount
of
fund
ing
seed
ed:
$
67
75B
ES
T C
OP
Y ii
::eV
gLtL
E
10. W
hat i
s th
e re
lativ
e se
curit
y of
in-s
tate
fund
ing
for
your
CID
S' o
pera
tion
durin
g th
e co
min
g tw
o ye
ars?
Circ
le th
e le
tter
for
each
sou
rce
that
app
lies
and
chec
k ,/
the
one
mos
t acc
urat
e re
spon
se te
gard
ing
the
secu
rity
of th
e fu
ndin
g:
a F
undi
ng p
rovi
ded
by u
ser
fees
. if a
ny: s
kip
to b
if n
one:
0 In
crea
se e
xpec
ted
0 P
rese
nt le
vel e
xpec
ted
0 S
mal
l cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Big
cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Elim
inat
ion
expe
cted
b F
undi
ng p
rovi
ded
by N
O1C
C B
asic
Ass
ista
nce
Gra
nt, i
f any
: ski
p to
c if
non
e:0
Incr
ease
exp
ecte
d 0
Pre
sent
leve
l exp
ecte
d 0
Sm
all c
ut e
xpec
ted
0 B
ig c
ut e
xpec
ted
0 E
limin
atio
n ex
pect
ed
c F
undi
ng p
rovi
ded
by s
tate
legi
slat
ive
appr
opria
tion,
if a
ny; s
kip
to d
if n
one:
0 In
crea
se e
xpec
ted
0 P
rese
nt le
vel e
xpec
ted
0 S
mal
l cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Big
cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Elim
inat
ion
expe
cted
d F
undi
ng p
rovi
ded
by s
tate
dep
artm
ent o
f edu
catio
n or
offi
ce o
f voc
atio
nal e
duca
tion:
ski
p to
e if
non
e:0
Incr
ease
exp
ecte
d 0
Pre
sent
leve
l exp
ecte
d 0
Sm
all c
ut e
xpec
ted
0 B
ig c
ut e
xpec
ted
e F
undi
ng p
rovi
ded
by s
tate
dep
artm
ent o
f lab
or,IT
PA
. or
empl
oym
ent
skip
to f
if no
m0
Incr
ease
exp
ecte
d 0
Pre
sent
leve
l exp
ecte
d 0
Sm
all c
ut e
xpec
ted
0 B
ig c
ut e
xpec
ted
f Oth
er in
-sta
te s
ourc
e of
fund
ing
(writ
e in
):o
10=
192
expe
cted
0 P
rese
nt le
vel e
xpec
ted
0 S
mal
l cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Big
cut
exp
ecte
d
g O
ther
in-s
tate
sou
rce
of fu
ndin
g (w
rite
in):
0 In
crea
se e
xpec
ted
0 P
rese
nt le
vel e
xpec
ted
0 S
mal
l cut
exp
ecte
d 0
Big
cut
exp
ecte
d
0 E
lbni
natio
n ex
pect
ed
0 E
limin
atio
n ex
pect
ed
0 E
limin
atio
n ex
pect
ed
0 E
limin
atio
n ex
pect
ed
11. E
nabl
ing
Legi
slat
ion:
Ena
blin
g le
gisl
atio
n is
def
med
as
fede
ral,
stat
e, a
nd lo
cal l
egis
latio
n th
at p
rovi
des
the
lega
l man
date
for
the
finan
cing
and
ope
ratio
n of
you
r C
IDS
. Lis
t all
of th
e le
gisl
atio
n th
at r
elat
es to
the
finan
cing
and
oper
atio
n of
you
r C
IDS
:
B. O
RG
AN
IZA
TIO
NA
L S
TR
UC
TU
RE
1.T
be A
dmin
istr
ativ
e A
genc
y or
Age
ncie
s fo
r Y
our
CID
S: A
rt a
dmin
istr
ativ
e ag
ency
is d
efile
d as
a g
over
nmen
tal
entit
y th
at
mon
itors
. eva
luat
es, a
nd p
rovi
des
dire
ctio
n fo
r th
e op
erat
ion
of y
our
CID
S. P
leas
e ci
rcle
the
appr
opria
tele
tter(
s):
aS
OIC
Cb
Sta
te D
epar
trre
nt o
f Lib
or, E
cono
mic
, cr
Em
ploy
men
t Sec
urity
cS
tate
Dep
artm
ent o
f Edu
catio
n or
Offi
ce o
f Voc
atio
nal E
duca
tion
dS
tate
Col
lege
or
Uni
vers
itye
Oth
er fi
dent
ifyy
2. G
over
ning
Boa
rd fo
r Y
our
CID
S. A
gov
erni
ng b
oard
is d
efin
ed a
s a
grov
p of
indi
vida
sre
pres
entin
g va
rious
con
stitu
enci
es
that
mak
e de
cisi
ons
and
set p
olic
y re
late
d to
the
oper
atio
n of
you
r C
IDS
.
0 A
gov
erni
ng b
oard
exi
sts.
Nam
e an
d Jo
b T
itle
of B
oard
Cha
ir
Cha
ir's
Age
ncy/
Com
pany
/Org
aniz
atio
n:
Cha
ir's
Add
resr
0 N
o go
veni
ng b
oard
exi
sts,
3. If
a g
over
ning
boa
rd e
xist
s, th
e or
gani
zatio
ns r
epre
seat
ed in
clud
e th
e fo
llow
ing
(circ
le th
e le
tter
for
thos
e th
at a
pply
):
aS
OIC
Cb
Sla
te D
epar
tmen
t or
Offi
ce o
f Reh
abili
tatio
n
cS
tate
Dep
artm
ent o
f Lab
or. E
cono
mic
. or
Tim
ploy
men
t Sec
urity
dS
tate
Dep
artm
ent o
f Edu
catio
n or
()f
ree
of V
ocat
iona
l Edu
catio
n
eS
tate
Col
lege
or
Uni
vers
ityf
Job
Tra
'nin
g P
artn
ersh
ip A
ctg
Eco
norr
w: D
evel
opm
ent
hP
rivat
e B
usin
ess
iP
rivat
e S
choo
lsj
CM
S u
sers
(or
gani
zatio
ns W
at u
se C
1DS
-sup
pone
d se
rvic
es)
IcC
IDS
clie
nts
(indi
vidu
als
who
hav
e w
ed a
CID
S)
1O
ther
(id
entif
y)m
Oth
er (
iden
ufy)
768
BE
ST C
M'
4. A
dvis
ory
Boa
rd fo
r Y
our
CM
S. A
n ad
viso
ry b
oard
is d
efin
ed a
s a
grou
p of
indi
vidu
als
repr
esen
ting
vario
us c
onst
ituen
cies
that
mak
e re
com
men
datio
ns a
bout
the
desi
gn a
nd o
pera
tion
of y
our
CID
S.
0 A
n ad
viso
ry b
oard
exi
sts.
Nam
e an
d Jo
b T
itle
of B
oard
Cha
in
Cha
ir's
Age
ncy/
Com
pany
aOrp
niza
tion:
Cha
ir's
Add
resr
0 N
o go
vern
ing
boar
d ex
ists
.
5. If
an
advi
sory
boa
rd e
xist
s, th
e or
gani
zatio
ns r
epre
sent
ed o
n th
e bo
ard
incl
ude
(circ
le th
e le
tter
for
all t
hree
that
app
ly):
aS
OIC
C
bS
tare
Dep
ortm
ent o
r O
ffice
of R
ehab
ilita
tion
cS
tate
Dep
attm
ent o
f Lab
or, E
cono
mic
, cc
Em
ploy
men
t Sec
urity
dS
tate
Dep
artm
ent o
f Edu
catio
n or
Offi
ce o
f Voc
atio
nal E
duca
tion
eS
tate
Col
lege
or
Uni
vers
ity
fJo
b T
rain
ing
Pxm
ersh
ip A
ct
gE
cono
mic
Dev
elop
men
t
hP
rivat
e B
usin
ess
iP
rivat
e S
choo
ls
CID
S u
sers
(or
gani
zatio
ns th
at u
se C
IDS
-sup
port
ed s
ervi
ces)
lcC
IDS
clie
nts
(indi
vidu
als
who
hav
e us
ed 2
CID
S)
IO
ther
(id
entif
y)
m O
ther
(id
entif
y)
C. T
ITL
E, F
TE
, AN
D R
ESP
ON
SIB
ILIT
IES
FOR
CID
S ST
AFF
A ti
tle is
def
ined
as
the
offic
ial e
mpl
oym
ent t
itle
of th
e in
cum
bent
. FIE
is d
efin
ed a
s F
ull T
ime
Equ
ival
ency
, e.g
., a
full-
time
staf
fm
embe
r w
ould
equ
al L
OR
E, a
hal
f-tim
e st
aff m
embe
r w
ould
equ
al 0
.5 F
TE
, and
a q
uart
er-t
ime
staf
f mem
ba w
ould
equ
al 0
.25
FM
.R
espo
nsib
ilitie
s ar
e de
fuse
d as
cat
egat
ies
of r
ecog
niza
ble
job
task
s.
Nam
e:
Pho
ne:
(
Toe
:
Fre:
Res
pons
ibili
tks.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fc
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FIE
.
% M
anag
emen
t
% C
leric
al S
uppo
d
%U
ser
Ser
vice
s/M
arke
ting
% T
rain
ing
%In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
8, S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
9
77
Nam
e:T
itle:
Pho
ne:
(
Res
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FT
E.
% M
anag
emen
t
% C
leric
al S
uppo
d
% U
ser
Sav
ices
iMar
ketin
g
% T
rain
ing
% In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
% S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
Nam
e:T
itle:
Pho
ne:
(
Res
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
thc
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FIE
.
% M
anag
emen
t
% C
leric
al S
uppo
rt
% U
ser
Ser
vice
s; M
arke
ting
% T
rain
ing
% In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
% S
oftw
are
Do
elop
me
nt
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
X N
ame:
Pho
ne:
()
FT
E.:
Rts
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
cem
ent:m
e fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FfE
.
Mm
agem
ent
% C
leric
al S
uppo
rt
% U
ser
Sav
ices
/Mar
keto
g
% T
rain
ing
% In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
% S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t
_% O
ther
(id
entif
y)%
Oth
er (
iden
tify) 78
10
Nev
em
(F
TE
:
Res
poos
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FIE
.
Man
agem
ent
Cle
sica
l Sup
port
Use
r S
ervi
ces/
Mar
ketin
g
Tra
inin
g%
Info
rmat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t
Sof
twar
e D
evel
opm
ent
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
Nam
e:T
itle:
Pho
ne:
(fl'
E:
Res
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FIE
.
Man
agem
ent
Cle
rical
Sup
port
% U
ser
S e
tvic
es/M
arke
ting
Tra
inin
g%
Info
rmat
ion
Dev
elop
men
t
% S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
Nam
e:
Pho
ne:
(F
TE
:
Res
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ility
, with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g 10
0% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FIE
.
% M
anag
emen
t%
Cle
rical
Sup
port
% U
ser
Ser
vice
s/M
arke
ting
% T
rain
ing
% In
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
% S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
11
79
Nam
e:T
itle:
Pho
ne:
(F
TE
:
Res
pons
ibili
ties.
Indi
cate
the
perc
enta
ge fo
r ea
ch r
espo
nsib
ilky.
with
the
tota
l equ
alin
g M
I% ir
resp
ectiv
e of
FT
E.
Man
agem
ent
% C
leric
al S
uppo
rt
% U
ser
Ser
vice
s/M
arke
ting
% T
rain
ing
% in
form
atio
n D
evel
opm
ent
%S
oftw
are
Dev
elop
men
t%
Oth
er (
iden
tify)
% O
ther
(id
entif
y)
D. T
YPE
OF
OD
S
Circ
le th
e le
uer
for
one
optio
n:
aA
sys
tem
obt
aine
d. p
urch
ased
. or
leas
ed fr
om s
ome
othe
r en
tity
(suc
h 25
a s
oftw
are
deve
lope
r), w
ithC
IDS
sta
ff pr
imar
ily
resp
onsi
ble
for
user
ser
vice
s an
d in
form
atio
n de
velo
pmen
t.
bA
sys
tem
dev
elop
ed w
ithin
a s
tate
or
mun
icip
ality
with
sta
ff re
spon
sibl
e fo
r co
mpu
ter
prog
ram
min
g, u
ser
serv
ices
, and
info
rnta
tion
deve
lopm
ent
Add
ition
al C
omm
ents
:
12
BE
ST C
iinL
1L81