On Friday, March 15, 2013 the OYIF solicitation was released to 36 communities across the country including some urban, rural and tribal communities. To support comprehensive understanding of the RFP, including the process of solicitation, the following FAQs have been compiled. Please note that some of these questions were taken from the Bidder’s Conference webinar that took place on April 11, 2013. To access the Bidder’s Conference webinar click here.

Section I: General Overview

1.      Is the Opportunity Youth Incentive Fund (OYIF) an open RFP or is the submission of proposals by invitation only?

The OYIF is an invitation only RFP. Communities invited to apply for funding from the OYIF have been identified through a vetting process approved by the OYIF Leadership Council (a collaborative of funders) and conducted by the Aspen Forum team in collaboration with Jobs for the Future.  The vetting process was designed to identify communities that best meet the selection criteria (which can be found by clicking here). Some communities were also invited because of existing capacity and/or due to specific interest from OYIF funders.

2.      How many implementation grants does the OYIF intend to make to communities? How many development grants?

The OYIF seeks to grant approximately 2-4 Implementation grants and approximately 12-16 Development grants.

3.      Will other communities be able to apply for the implementation grants in one year even if they did not get a development grant?

No. Only communities that received a 12-month Development grant will be eligible to apply for an Implementation grant towards the end of the 12 month Development period. All grantees that are awarded a 12-month Development grant will be eligible to apply for an Implementation grant. The Implementation grant timeline is four years (with a grant-making cycle of three years).

4.      What is the OYIF timeline?

5.      Can you share the PowerPoint slides from the Bidder’s Conference?

Yes. Please access the PowerPoint slides by clicking here.

Section II: Collaborative & Backbone Organization

6.      Is it required that the proposal come from the backbone Aspen solicited from?

The OYIF team identified a number of community-based backbone organizations through a nomination process that drew on recommendations from national and regional funders, intermediaries, and networks that have a focus on the opportunity youth population.  These backbone organizations were identified due to their cross-sector collaborative efforts and the likelihood that they are poised to meet the Fund’s selection criteria.

It is our expectation that each backbone organization identified in the solicitation cover letter is the appropriate entity to convene key stakeholders to develop and submit a proposal to the OYIF.  In some rare instances where the local backbone and the collaborative members agree that a different backbone should apply for OYIF support, the Aspen team will be willing to discuss a formal switch to a different backbone. This might be more likely after a Development year, while preparing for an Implementation grant.

7.      If a community applies for an Implementation grant but is deemed as not meeting the criteria by the review committee, will the application automatically be considered for a Development grant?

Communities that apply for Implementation grants but are deemed ineligible will be considered for a Development grant on a case-by-case basis. It is strongly suggested that each community carefully consider the evidence and criteria when deciding which type of grant to apply for.

8.      Must the backbone organization meet all of the criteria for a Development grant?

No. The evidence and criteria is intended to provide communities with a measure to assess their status as a backbone organization. It is important that an applicant meet as much of the criteria as possible when applying for a grant.

9.      If a community has a newly formed group that is less than 6 months old, what considerations should the group take into account when thinking about integrating their OY work into existing collaboratives in their community?

It is important to consider each element of the opportunity youth framework (e.g. collaborating for impact, building effective pathways, using data to guide decisions and assess impact, leveraging funding to support and sustain innovation, developing and supporting policies) when establishing partnerships and preparing to launch an OY-focused agenda. Success in this initiative is contingent upon meeting the measures identified in the evidence and criteria. To see the evidence and criteria click here.

10.  How can a collaborative mitigate the inherent risk of connecting political leaders to the work of the collaborative given the turnover of institutional leaders? What strategies should a collaborative consider to ensure the work continues beyond individual leaders or personalities?

While it is important to have high level leaders, power brokers and decision makers fully participating in the collaborative, it is essential that the work of the collaborative be grounded and live in the community so that sustainability occurs beyond the short term election cycle of government officials. This work should be connected to, and live in, community based organizations including education non-profits, alternative high school diploma programs, GED programs and other institutions that are fully integrated into the fabric of the local community. The hope is that the “civic infrastructure” represented by the backbone and the collaborative will outlive election cycles.

11.  Are there examples of how other collaboratives have developed their initiatives and will these models be shared with development grantees?

Yes.  There are examples of how others have developed their initiatives and this information is available on the Aspen Forum for Community Solutions website. Please select the article titled Collective Impact for Opportunity Youth; this article includes examples of other national efforts that have worked collaboratively across sectors to generate outcomes for opportunity youth. The OYIF grantee learning community will also include opportunities for all collaboratives to learn from each other.

Section III: Pathways & Programs

12.  Can students who are in high school but considered “at risk” be served via the Opportunity Youth Incentive Fund?

While the OYIF targets out of school and out of work populations, we will not be absolutist about this target population. If a collaborative is primarily focused on the OY population, but also working on the reengagement of those who are enrolled in, but at extremely high risk of dropping out of high school (i.e., two or more years off-track), it will not be a problem.  However, the “in school” population will not be a focus for Aspen and will not be included in the metrics we use for evaluation.

13.  How much engagement of local stakeholders will the asset mapping process require?

The asset mapping process will require the engagement of essential stakeholders from the local community. The visits will take place over 2 days and the interviews of the collaborative and community partners will be conducted over 2-3 hours. There may also be some necessary follow up with local stakeholders after the site visit has been completed.

14.  While the application focuses on scaling up programs and pathways that are working in the community, what role should innovation have in the application and execution of the plan?

Innovation is essential to the success of this initiative. We encourage and support innovation at every level of the collaborative. This especially includes innovative new pathway development based on the gaps/needs for opportunity youth.

Section IV: Data & Outcomes

15.  What are the specific data requirements for the RFP?

We are requesting that applicants provide two types of data for the RFP.  The first is data on the scoping of your opportunity youth population.  This includes both segments of the population – those with and those without a high school credential (high school diploma or GED).  It also includes any subpopulations – youth transitioning out of foster care, court-involved, immigrant, pregnant and/or parenting, etc.– that you have identified as a priority.  We recognize that getting a handle on the scope of your opportunity youth is challenging, especially because there is no single public data system responsible for tracking the population.  We are asking that you provide the best estimate of your opportunity youth population using available public databases.

The second type of data is on the effectiveness of the pathways and programs you identify in your community.  Examples of the types of evidence of effectiveness that we are looking for are included in the pathway tools - Building and Expanding Effective Programs and Pathways – found in the RFP in Appendix A for Implementation applicants and Appendix B for Development applicants.   We realize that programs and pathways serving opportunity youth often have limited data capacity and that gathering evidence of success may be a challenge.  We ask that you provide us with the best available evidence that your programs and pathways currently have in hand.

16.  Do we need baseline data for all the indicators in order to write a Development proposal?

No.  We are aware of the challenges in scoping your opportunity youth population and in providing evidence of the effectiveness of your pathways and programs.  We expect to see some gaps in data if you are applying for a Development grant.  What we are looking for is a thoughtful analysis of the data you do have or can access, your understanding of the gaps in your data, and your proposed approaches and strategies for addressing these gaps.

17.  What suggestions do you have for sources of data for scoping our opportunity youth population?

We have provided a tool, Guidelines for Data Analysis, found in Appendix D of the RFP, that provides resources to help scope your opportunity youth population.  This tool identifies a number of national, state, local and secondary data sources that you can use to help you estimate your opportunity youth population. For each data source, the tools provides a brief summary of the kinds of data you can access and, wherever possible, links to the actual data.

18.  Can you more clearly explain the expectations for common indicators?

As a national initiative with multiple sites, we have developed a set of common indicators (found in Appendix G) that all grantees will be expected to gather data on once selected, in order to inform the work as it unfolds on the ground and to track the progress of efforts across the sites.   The common indicators address grantees’ advances both in improving systems coordination and alignment and in developing pathways and programs.  The common indicators also address the progress of young people in these pathways and programs.  We will work with grantee sites to help them identify which pathways and young people they are tracking and how they will gather and share the data. 

Section V: Financing

19.  Can the local match be in-kind?

In very rare instances we will consider match funding that is in-kind; however, it is our expectation that the majority of match funds will be monetary in nature. We will review in-kind match requests on a case-by-case basis.

Please note that Development grants do not require a 1:1 match although securing a match for the Development period will strengthen applications for implementation the following year.  All Implementation grants require a 1:1 match and it is strongly suggested that the match be monetary (although some exceptions may be made on a case by case basis in rural communities). Implementation grantees are not required to have their entire match funding secured at the beginning of the OYIF grant, but should have a detailed plan with identified funding sources and clear strategies in place to raise the match.

20.  Can the local match be new fiscal resources from government vs. philanthropy?

While the OYIF is a system change initiative, the request for match funding is to support the work of the collaborative – particularly the backbone organization. To this end, match funding from the local philanthropic community is most likely to support the level of coordination necessary for the backbone organization to lead a successful collaborative. However, on a case by case basis government funding may count as local match resources to support this work. In general we are looking for government funding that supports collaborative approaches for driving OY outcomes (which is essentially government funding that supports the function of the backbone).

Section VI: Policy Conditions

21.  Is Aspen partnering with the Federal Interagency Forum on Disconnected Youth?

The federal government launched the Interagency Forum on Disconnected Youth to inform the Administration on actions to improve outcomes for disconnected youth across the federal agencies. The Aspen Opportunity Youth Incentive Fund is partnering with the Interagency Forum on Disconnected Youth. Details about the partnership will be available in the next 3-6 months.