WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 1979
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Office for Civil Rights
Office of the Secretary
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS GUIDELINES FOR ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATION AND DENIAL OF SERVICES ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, SEX AND HANDICAP
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 45-Public Welfare
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
Guidelines for Eliminating Discrimination and Denial of Services on the Basis of Race, Color, National Origin, Sex, and Handicap
AGENCY: Office for Civil Rights, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
ACTION: Final Guidelines for Vocational Education Programs.
SUMMARY: These guidelines explain the civil rights responsibilities of recipients of Federal funds offering or administering vocational education programs. They derive from and provide guidance supplementary to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the implementing departmental regulation (45 CFR Part 80), Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the implementing departmental regulation (45 CFR Part 86), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the implementing departmental regulation (45 CFR Part 84).
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1979.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Gerard, Office of Standards, Policy, and Research, Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office for Civil Rights, 330 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20201 (telephone 202-245-9177).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following Guidelines explain how civil rights laws and Department regulations apply to vocational education programs. They are issued as a result of injunctive orders entered by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in Adams v. Califano. They are also issued because the Department has found evidence of continuing unlawful discrimination in vocational education programs.
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE GUIDELINES
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare issued regulations implementing Title VI in 1965. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance. The Department issued regulations implementing Title IX in 1975. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicap in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. The Department issued regulations implementing Section 504 in 1977. These civil rights statutes and their implementing regulations apply to vocational education programs.
In 1973, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare was sued for its failure to enforce Title VI in a number of education areas, including vocational education (Adams v. Califano). As a result of this litigation, the Department was directed to enforce civil rights requirements in vocational education programs through compliance reviews, a survey of enrollments and related data, and the issuance of guidelines explaining the application of Title VI regulations to vocational education. The Guidelines that follow are issued to meet a requirement of the Adams court orders.
B. FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE GUIDELINES
The Guidelines are also adopted because it is apparent that many vocational education administrators engage in unlawfully discriminatory practices. They need additional guidance and support from the Department to meet their obligations under civil rights authorities.
Information provided by the Office of Education's Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education for 1976 and 1977 reveals that male and female students are concentrated in programs traditionally identified as intended for them:
Percent of total enrollment
|Occupational home economics||
|Consumer and homemaking||
Percent of total enrollment
|Trade and industrial||
In recent years vocational education administrators have addressed unlawful discrimination in their programs. Generally, they have taken advantage of the affirmative action provisions of the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976. Administrative procedures to implement these provisions are in place and are contributing to equal opportunity. Thus the above chart suggests that between 1976 and 1977, female participation increased in technical, trade and industrial, and vocational agriculture programs. There was also an increase in male participation in Consumer and Homemaking programs and Occupational Home Economics programs.
Current information on the enrollment of handicapped and minority students in specific vocational programs is not available. This deficiency will be corrected through the Office for Civil Rights Vocational Education Survey of 1979 and the Vocational Education Data System (VEDS) required by the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976. However, compliance reviews conducted by OCR investigative staff from 1973 to 1978 consistently found civil rights violations in vocational schools. For example:
1. Eligibility requirements such as residence within a geographic area or admissions tests deny vocational education opportunities on the basis of race, color, national origin and handicap;
2. Handicapped students are impermissibly assigned to separate annexes or branches; they are also denied equal vocational education opportunities as a result of inaccessible facilities and inadequate evaluation procedures;
3. Vocational schools established for students of one race, national origin or sex continue as essentially segregated facilities;
4. National origin minorities with limited proficiency in English are denied equal opportunity to participate in vocational programs;
5. Vocational education administrators often fail to adequately protect against discrimination in the placement of students with employers;
6. Faculty and staff are assigned to vocational programs on the basis of race, national origin, sex and handicap.
Reports from advocate groups have identified other possible civil rights violations. For example, the N.A.A.C.P.Legal Defense Fund (LDF) has alleged that State agencies engage in unlawful discrimination against urban areas in the allocation of Federal vocational education funds.
C. SCOPE OF GUIDELINES
The Guidelines primarily address the civil rights violations listed immediately above as found in compliance reviews. They do not identify every civil rights violation that may arise in a vocational education setting. The Guidelines derive from and supplement and must be read in conjunction with civil rights laws and Department regulations.
Section III of the Guidelines, which prohibits discrimination in the allocation of vocational education funds, derives in part from and must be read in conjunction with, the Vocational Education Act and Office of Education implementing regulations. These Guidelines, particularly Section III, have been reviewed by the Department's Office of Education and found consistent with its policies.
D. STATE AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES
Most comments on the Guidelines sought deletion or clarification of, or a change to, a stated paragraph or subparagraph. However, Section II, which records the responsibilities of State agency personnel, was questioned in its entirety as imposing a new burden more reasonably assigned to the Office for Civil Rights.
Section II contains two requirements. First, State agencies in performing any activity required under State or Federal law, must be certain that they do not "require, approve of, or engage in" any unlawful discrimination. For example, State agencies are often required to review or approve the site selected by or the building specifications approved by local school district officials to assure that the project is fiscally sound. The Guidelines provide that in such cases the State agency must also examine whether the site location will result in the denial of access to minority group persons and whether the building and programs will be inaccessible to handicapped persons. If it finds such violations the State agency cannot approve the project. The second requirement of Section II is generally addressed to the agency referred to in the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976 as the "State Board or agency .. . sole[ly] responsible for the administration or . . . supervision of the programs [conducted in the State] under the Act." These agencies are required by the Guidelines to monitor subrecipients for civil rights compliance through technical assistance, analyses of already compiled information and data, and periodic compliance reviews.
These are not new requirements. The first merely restates what has become axiomaticCa recipient cannot engage or participate in unlawful discrimination. The second requirementCmonitoring subrecipients for complianceCderives from the Department's Title VI regulation which provides in subparagraph 80.4(b):
Every application by a State or State agency to carry out a program involving continuing Federal financial assistance ! ! ! shall ! ! ! provide or be accompanied by provision for such methods of administration ! ! ! as are found by the responsible Department official to give reasonable assurance that the applicant and all recipients of Federal financial assistance under such program will comply with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to this regulation.
Thus the Department's Title VI regulation requires State agency recipients to adopt and obtain Department approval for methods and procedures through which subrecipients can be monitored for compliance with civil rights authorities.
It was suggested that it is "unrealistic" to expect closely aligned officialsCState agency and local personnelCto work at odds with each other. This is neither the intent nor the expected result of the final Guidelines. Many forms of impermissible discrimination are caused by misunderstandings or lack of information and guidance on the requirements of the law. State agency personnel should therefore be of assistance to and not in conflict with local personnel. Moreover, there is a need for additional conciliatory rather than adversarial compliance activity.
State agencies also argued that the Office for Civil Rights cannot and should not delegate its responsibilities for civil rights enforcement to recipients. Such a result is neither intended nor expected. The Guidelines contemplate adding, not substituting, resources for civil rights compliance activity. The Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education presently monitors State agencies for compliance with the Vocational Education Act. Under the Guidelines, BOAE and State agencies will engage in activities supplementary to those of the Office for Civil Rights. These Guidelines do not contemplate any reduction of OCR compliance and enforcement activity. And OCR will lead, assist and monitor BOAE and State agencies in their civil rights activities. This approach derives from the Department's commitment to bring all of its agencies and recipients to the critical task of obtaining compliance with civil rights laws and regulations. It is also supported by the United States Civil Rights Commission.
Vocational education is a critical and growing sector of the Nation's education system. It is offered in over 14,000 school districts and in community and junior colleges. It is also provided through more than 2,000 secondary and postsecondary vocational education centers (often known as Area Vocational Education Schools, or AVES), that have as their primary or sole objective the teaching of skills that lead to employment. The variations of programs and courses number in the thousands. They include, for example, "work study" for students needing part-time employment to support their vocational studies; "cooperative education" for students who receive credit for work at jobs related to their vocational field; and "apprentice training" for students affiliated with a labor union or another sponsor. Whatever the organization of vocational education, it is closely tied to the skill development needs of communities, States, and regions. Obtaining compliance with civil rights authorities in these diverse programs will require the participation and cooperation of all vocational education administrators and all agencies of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. These Guidelines are designed to encourage that cooperation and compliance activity. They are provided with the expectation that they will contribute to bringing an end to unlawful discrimination against persons seeking the skills necessary for gainful and meaningful employment.
PART 80C NONDISCRIMINATION
UNDER PROGRAMS RECEIVING
FEDERAL ASSISTANCE THROUGH
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
EDUCATION, AND WELFARE EFFEC-
TUATION OF TITLE Vl OF THE CIVIL
RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
1. In 45 CFR Part 80 Appendix B is added to read as follows:
APPENDIX BCGUIDELINES FOR ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATION AND DENIAL OF SERVICES ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, SEX, AND HANDICAP IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
I. SCOPE AND COVERAGE
A. APPLICATION OF GUIDELINES
These Guidelines apply to recipients of any Federal financial assistance from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare that offer or administer programs of vocational education or training. This includes State agency recipients.
B. DEFINITION OF RECIPIENT
The definition of "recipient" of Federal financial assistance is established by Department regulations implementing Title VI, Title IX, and Section 504 (45 CFR 80.13(i), 86.2(h), 84.3(f).
For the purposes of Title VI:
The term "recipient" means any State, political subdivision of any State, or instrumentality of any State or political subdivision, any public or private agency, institution, or organization, or other entity, or any individual, in any State, to whom Federal financial assistance is extended, directly or through another recipient, for any program, including any successor, assignee, or transferee thereof, but such term does not include any ultimate beneficiary [e.g., students] under any such program. (45 CFR 80.13(i)).
For the purpose of Title IX:
"Recipient" means any State or political subdivision thereof, or any instrumentality of a State or political subdivision thereof, any public or private agency, institution, or organization, or other entity, or any person to whom Federal financial assistance is extended directly or through another recipient and which operates an education program or activity which receives or benefits from such assistance, including any subunit, successor, assignee, or transferee thereof. (45 CFR 86.2(h)).
For the purposes of Section 504:
"Recipient" means any State or its political subdivision, any instrumentality of a State or its political subdivision, any public or private agency, institution, organization, or other entity, or any person to which Federal financial assistance is extended directly or through another recipient, including any successor, assignee, or transferee of a recipient, but excluding the ultimate beneficiary of the assistance. (45 CFR 84.3(f)).
C. EXAMPLES OF RECIPIENTS COVERED BY THESE GUIDELINES
The following education agencies, when they provide vocational education, are examples of recipients covered by these Guidelines:
1. The board of education of a public school district and its administrative agency.
2. The administrative board of a specialized vocational high school serving students from more than one school district.
3. The administrative board of a technical or vocation school that is used exclusively or principally for the provision of vocational education to persons who have completed or left high school (including persons seeking a certificate or an associate degree through a vocational program offered by the school) and who are available for study in preparation for entering the labor market.
4. The administrative board of a postsecondary institution, such as a technical institute, skill center, junior college, community college, or four year college that has a department or division that provides vocational education to students seeking immediate employment, a certificate or an associate degree.
5. The administrative board of a proprietary (private) vocational education school.
6. A State agency recipient itself operating a vocational education facility.
D. EXAMPLES OF SCHOOLS TO WHICH THESE GUIDELINES APPLY
The following are examples of the types of schools to which these Guidelines apply.
1. A junior high school, middle school, or those grades of a comprehensive high school that offers instruction to inform, orient, or prepare students for vocational education at the secondary level.
2. A vocational education facility operated by a State agency.
3. A comprehensive high school that has a department exclusively or principally used for providing vocational education; or that offers at least one vocational program to secondary level students who are available for study in preparation for entering the labor market; or that offers adult vocational education to persons who have completed or left high school and who are available for study in preparation for entering the labor market.
4. A comprehensive high school, offering the activities described above, that receives students on a contract basis from other school districts for the purpose of providing vocational education.
5. A specialized high school used exclusively or principally for the provision of vocational education, that enrolls students from one or more school districts for the purpose of providing vocational education.
6. A technical or vocational school that primarily provides vocational education to persons who have completed or left high school and who are available for study in preparation for entering the labor market, including students seeking an associate degree or certificate through a course of vocational instruction offered by the school.
7. A junior college, a community college, or four-year college that has a department or division that provides vocational education to students seeking immediate employment, an associate degree or a certificate through a course of vocational instruction offered by the school.
8. A proprietary school, licensed by the State, that offers vocational education.
NOTE.CSubsequent sections of these Guidelines may use the term secondary vocational education center in referring to the institutions described in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 above or the term postsecondary vocational education center in referring to institutions described in paragraphs 6 and 7 above or the term vocational education center in referring to any or all institutions described above.
II. RESPONSIBILITIES ASSIGNED ONLY TO STATE AGENCY RECIPIENTS
A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL STATE AGENCY RECIPIENTS
State agency recipients, in addition to complying with all other provisions of the Guidelines relevant to them, may not require, approve of, or engage in any discrimination or denial of services on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap in performing any of the following activities:
1. Establishment of criteria or formulas for distribution of Federal or State funds to vocational education programs in the State;
2. Establishment of requirements for admission to or requirements for the administration of vocational education programs;
3. Approval of action by local entities providing vocational education. (For example, a State agency must ensure compliance with Section IV of these Guidelines if and when it reviews a vocational education agency decision to create or change a geographic service area.);
4. Conducting its own programs. (For example, in employing its staff it may not discriminate on the basis of sex or handicap.)
B. STATE AGENCIES PERFORMING OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES
The State agency responsible for the administration of vocational education programs must adopt a compliance program to prevent, identify and remedy discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex or handicap by its subrecipients. (A "subrecipient," in this context, is a local agency or vocational education center that receives financial assistance through a State agency.) This compliance program must include:
1. Collecting and analyzing civil rights related data and information that subrecipients compile for their own purposes or that are submitted to State and Federal officials under existing authorities;
2. Conducting periodic compliance reviews of selected subrecipients (i.e., an investigation of a subrecipient to determine whether it engages in unlawful discrimination in any aspect of its program); upon finding unlawful discrimination, notifying the subrecipient of steps it must take to attain compliance and attempting to obtain voluntary compliance;
3. Providing technical assistance upon request to subrecipients. This includes assisting subrecipients identify unlawful discrimination and instructing them in remedies for and prevention of such discrimination;
4. Periodically reporting its activities and findings under the foregoing paragraphs, including findings of unlawful discrimination under paragraph 2, immediately above, to the Office for Civil Rights.
State agencies are not required to terminate or defer assistance to any subrecipient. Nor are they required to conduct hearings. The responsibilities of the Office for Civil Rights to collect and analyze data, to conduct compliance reviews, to investigate complaints and to provide technical assistance are not diminished or attenuated by the requirements of Section II of the Guidelines.
C. STATEMENT OF PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES
Within one year from the publication of these Guidelines in final form, each State agency recipient performing oversight responsibilities must submit to the Office for Civil Rights the methods of administration and related procedures it will follow to comply with the requirements described in paragraphs A and B immediately above. The Department will review each submission and will promptly either approve it, or return it to State officials for revision.
III. DISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND OTHER FUNDS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
A. AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES
Recipients that administer grants for vocational education must distribute Federal, State, or local vocational education funds so that no student or group of students is unlawfully denied an equal opportunity to benefit from vocational education on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap.
B. DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS
Recipients may not adopt a formula or other method for the allocation of Federal, State, or local vocational education funds that has the effect of discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. However, a recipient may adopt a formula or other method of allocation that uses as a factor race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap [or an index or proxy for race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap e.g., number of persons receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children or with limited English speaking ability] if the factor is included to compensate for past discrimination or to comply with those provisions of the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976 designed to assist specified protected groups.
C. EXAMPLE OF A PATTERN SUGGESTING UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATION
In each State it is likely that some local recipients will enroll greater proportions of minority students in vocational education than the State-wide proportion of minority students in vocational education. A funding formula or other method of allocation that results in such local recipients receiving per pupil allocations of Federal or State vocational education funds lower than the State-wide average per-pupil allocation will be presumed unlawfully discriminatory.
D. DISTRIBUTION THROUGH COMPETITIVE GRANTS OR CONTRACTS
Each State agency that establishes criteria for awarding competitive vocational education grants or contracts must establish and apply the criteria without regard to the race, color, national origin, sex or handicap of any or all of a recipient's students, except to compensate for past discrimination.
E. APPLICATION PROCESSES FOR COMPETITIVE OR DISCRETIONARY GRANTS
State agencies must disseminate information needed to satisfy the requirements of any application process for competitive or discretionary grants so that all recipients, including those having a high percentage of minority or handicapped students, are informed of and able to seek funds. State agencies that provide technical assistance for the completion of the application process must provide such assistance without discrimination against any one recipient or class of recipients.
F. ALTERATION OF FUND DISTRIBUTION TO PROVIDE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
If the Office for Civil Rights finds that a recipient's system for distributing vocational education funds unlawfully discriminates on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap, it will require the recipient to adopt an alternative nondiscriminatory method of distribution. The Office for Civil Rights may also require the recipient to compensate for the effects of its past unlawful discrimination in the distribution of funds.
IV. ACCESS AND ADMISSION OF STUDENTS TO VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
A. RECIPIENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Criteria controlling student eligibility for admission to vocational education schools, facilities and programs may not unlawfully discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. A recipient may not develop, impose, maintain, approve, or implement such discriminatory admissions criteria.
B. SITE SELECTION FOR VOCATIONAL SCHOOLS
State and local recipients may not select or approve a site for a vocational education facility for the purpose or with the effect of excluding, segregating, or otherwise discriminating against students on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Recipients must locate vocational education facilities at sites that are readily accessible to both nonminority and minority communities, and that do not tend to identify the facility or program as intended for nonminority or minority students.
C. ELIGIBILITY FOR ADMISSION TO VOCATIONAL
EDUCATION CENTERS BASED ON RESIDENCE
Recipients may not establish, approve or maintain geographic boundaries for a vocational education center service area or attendance zone, (hereinafter "service area"), that unlawfully exclude students on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The Office for Civil Rights will presume, subject to rebuttal, that any one or combination of the following circumstances indicates that the boundaries of a given service area are unlawfully constituted:
1. A school system or service area contiguous to the given service area, contains minority or nonminority students in substantially greater proportion than the given service area;
2. A substantial number of minority students who reside outside the given vocational education center service area, and who are not eligible for the center reside, nonetheless, as close to the center as a substantial number of non-minority students who are eligible for the center;
3. The over-all vocational education program of the given service area in comparison to the over-all vocational education program of a contiguous school system or service area enrolling a substantially greater proportion of minority students: (a) provides its students with a broader range of curricular offerings, facilities and equipment; or (b) provides its graduates greater opportunity for employment in jobs: (i) for which there is a demonstrated need in the community or region; (ii) that pay higher entry level salaries or wages; or (iii) that are generally acknowledged to offer greater prestige or status.
D. ADDITIONS AND RENOVATIONS TO EXISTING
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION FACILITIES
A recipient may not add to, modify, or renovate the physical plant of a vocational education facility in a manner that creates maintains, or increases student segregation on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap.
E. REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF SITE SELECTION
AND GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA REQUIREMENTS
If the conditions specified in paragraphs IV, A, B, C, or D, immediately above are found and not rebutted by proof of nondiscrimination, the Office for Civil rights will require the recipient(s) to submit a plan to remedy the discrimination. The following are examples of steps that may be included in the plan, where necessary to overcome the discrimination: (I) redrawing of the boundaries of the vocational education center's service area to include areas unlawfully excluded and/or to exclude areas unlawfully included; (2) provision of transportation to students residing in areas unlawfully excluded; (3) provision of additional programs and services to students who would have been eligible for attendance at the vocational education center but for the discriminatory service area or site selection; (4) reassignment of students; and (5) construction of new facilities or expansion of existing facilities.
F. ELIGIBILITY FOR ADMISSION TO SECONDARY VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTERS BASED ON NUMERICAL LIMITS IMPOSED ON SENDING SCHOOLS
A recipient may not adopt or maintain a system for admission to a secondary vocational education center or program that limits admission to a fixed number of students from each sending school included in the center's service area if such a system disproportionately excludes students from the center on the basis of race, sex, national origin or handicap. (Example: Assume 25 percent of a school district's high school students are black and that most of those black students are enrolled in one high school; the white students, 75 percent of the district's total enrollment, are generally enrolled in the five remaining high schools. This paragraph prohibits a system of admission to the secondary vocational education center that limits eligibility to a fixed and equal number of students from each of the district's six high schools.)
G. REMEDIES FOR VIOLATION OF ELIGIBILITY
BASED ON NUMERICAL LIMITS REQUIREMENTS
If the Office for Civil Rights finds a violation of paragraph F, above, the recipient must implement an alternative system of admissions that does not disproportionately exclude students on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap.
H. ELIGIBILITY FOR ADMISSION TO VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTERS, BRANCHES OR ANNEXES BASED UPON STUDENT OPTION
A vocational education center, branch or annex, open to all students in a service area and predominantly enrolling minority students or students of one race, national origin or sex, will be presumed unlawfully segregated if: 1) it was established by a recipient for members of one race, national origin or sex; or 2) it has since its construction been attended primarily by members of one race, national origin or sex; or 3) most of its program offerings have traditionally been selected predominantly by members of one race, national origin or sex.
I. REMEDIES FOR FACILITY SEGREGATION UNDER STUDENT OPTION PLANS
If the conditions specified in paragraph IV-H are found and not rebutted by proof of nondiscrimination, the Office for Civil Rights will require the recipient(s) to submit a plan to remedy the segregation. The following are examples of steps that may be included in the plan, where necessary to overcome the discrimination:
(1) elimination of program duplication in the segregated facility and other proximate vocational facilities; (2) relocation or "clustering" of programs or courses; 3) adding programs and courses that traditionally have been identified as intended for members of a particular race, national origin or sex to schools that have traditionally served members of the other sex or traditionally served persons of a different race or national origin; 4) merger of programs into one facility through school closings or new construction; 5) intensive outreach, recruitment and counseling; 6) providing free transportation to students whose enrollment would promote desegregation.
[Paragraph J omitted]
K. ELIGIBILITY BASED ON EVALUATION OF EACH
APPLICANT UNDER ADMISSIONS CRITERIA
Recipients may not judge candidates for admission to vocational education programs on the basis of criteria that have the effect of disproportionately excluding persons of a particular race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. However, if a recipient can demonstrate that such criteria have been validated as essential to participation in a given program and that alternative equally valid criteria that do not have such a disproportionate adverse effect are unavailable, the criteria will be judged nondiscriminatory. Examples of admissions criteria that must meet this test are past academic performance, record of disciplinary infractions, counselors' approval, teachers' recommendations, interest inventories, high school diploma and standardized tests, such as the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE).
An introductory, preliminary, or exploratory course may not be established as a prerequisite for admission to a program unless the course has been and is available without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, and handicap. However, a course that was formerly only available on a discriminatory basis may be made a prerequisite for admission to a program if the recipient can demonstrate that: (a) the course is essential to participation in the program; and (b) the course is presently available to those seeking enrollment for the first time and to those formerly excluded.
L. ELIGIBILITY OF NATIONAL ORIGIN MINORITY
PERSONS WITH LIMITED ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS
Recipients may not restrict an applicant's admission to vocational education programs because the applicant, as a member of a national origin minority with limited English language skills, cannot participate in and benefit from vocational instruction to the same extent as a student whose primary language is English. It is the responsibility of the recipient to identify such applicants and assess their ability to participate in vocational instruction.
Acceptable methods of identification include: (1) identification by administrative staff, teachers, or parents of secondary level students; (2) identification by the student in postsecondary or adult programs; and (3) appropriate diagnostic procedures, if necessary.
Recipients must take steps to open all vocational programs to these national origin minority students. A recipient must demonstrate that a concentration of students with limited English language skills in one or a few programs is not the result of discriminatory limitations upon the opportunities available to such students.
M. REMEDIAL ACTION IN BEHALF OF PERSONS
WITH LIMITED ENGLISH LANGUAGE SKILLS
If the Office for Civil Rights finds that a recipient has denied national origin minority persons admission to a vocational school or program because of their limited English language skills or has assigned students to vocational programs solely on the basis of their limited English language skills, the recipient will be required to submit a remedial plan that insures national origin minority students equal access to vocational education programs.
N. EQUAL ACCESS FOR HANDICAPPED STUDENTS
Recipients may not deny handicapped students access to vocational education programs or courses because of architectural or equipment barriers, or because of the need for related aids and services or auxiliary aids. If necessary, recipients must: (1) modify instructional equipment; (2) modify or adapt the manner in which the courses are offered; (3) house the program in facilities that are readily accessible to mobility impaired students or alter facilities to make them readily accessible to mobility impaired students; and (4) provide auxiliary aids that effectively make lectures and necessary materials available to postsecondary handicapped students; (5) provide related aids or services that assure secondary students an appropriate education.
Academic requirements that the recipient can demonstrate are essential to a program of instruction or to any directly related licensing requirement will not be regarded as discriminatory. However, where possible, a recipient must adjust those requirements to the needs of individual handicapped students.
Access to vocational programs or courses may not be denied handicapped students on the ground that employment opportunities in any occupation or profession may be more limited for handicapped persons than for non-handicapped persons.
O. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Prior to the beginning of each school year, recipients must advise students, parents, employees and the general public that all vocational opportunities will be offered without regard to race, color, national origin, sex or handicap. Announcement of this policy of non-discrimination may be made, for example, in local newspapers, recipient publications and/or other media that reach the general public, program beneficiaries, minorities (including national origin minorities with limited English language skills), women and handicapped persons. A brief summary of program offerings and admission criteria should be included in the announcement; also the name, address and telephone number of the person designated to coordinate Title IX and Section 504 compliance activity.
If a recipient's service area contains a community of national origin minority persons with limited English language skills, public notification materials must be disseminated to that community in its language and must state that recipients will take steps to assure that the lack of English language skills will not be a barrier to admission and participation in vocational education programs.
V. COUNSELING AND PREVOCATIONAL PROGRAMS
A. RECIPIENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Recipients must insure that their counseling materials and activities (including student program selection and career/employment selection), promotional, and recruitment efforts do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex or handicap.
B. COUNSELING AND PROSPECTS FOR SUCCESS
Recipients that operate vocational education programs must insure that counselors do not direct or urge any student to enroll in a particular career or program, or measure or predict a student's prospects for success in any career or program based upon the student's race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. Recipients may not counsel handicapped students toward more restrictive career objectives than nonhandicapped students with similar abilities and interests. If a vocational program disproportionately enrolls male or female students, minority or nonminority students, or handicapped students, recipients must take steps to insure that the disproportion does not result from unlawful discrimination in counseling activities.
C. STUDENT RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES
Recipients must conduct their student recruitment activities so as not to exclude or limit opportunities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. Where recruitment activities involve the presentation or portrayal of vocational and career opportunities, the curricula and programs described should cover a broad range of occupational opportunities and not be limited on the basis of the race, color, national origin, sex or handicap of the students or potential students to whom the presentation is made. Also, to the extent possible, recruiting teams should include persons of different races, national origins, sexes, and handicaps.
D. COUNSELING OF STUDENTS WITH LIMITED ENGLISH-SPEAKING ABILITY OR HEARING IMPAIRMENTS
Recipients must insure that counselors can effectively communicate with national origin minority students with limited English language skills and with students who have hearing impairments. This requirement may be satisfied by having interpreters available.
E. PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES
Recipients may not undertake promotional efforts (including activities of school officials, counselors, and vocational staff) in a manner that creates or perpetuates stereotypes or limitations based on race, color, national origin, sex or handicap. Examples of promotional efforts are career days, parents night, shop demonstrations, visitations by groups of prospective students and by representatives from business and industry. Materials that are part of promotional efforts may not create or perpetuate stereotypes through text or illustration. To the extent possible they should portray males or females, minorities or handicapped persons in programs and occupations in which these groups traditionally have not been represented. If a recipient's service area contains a community of national origin minority persons with limited English language skills, promotional literature must be distributed to that community in its language.
VI. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN THE VOCATIONAL
EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL SETTING
A. ACCOMMODATIONS FOR HANDICAPPED STUDENTS
Recipients must place secondary level handicapped students in the regular educational environment of any vocational education program to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the student unless it can be demonstrated that the education of the handicapped person in the regular environment with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. Handicapped students may be placed in a program only after the recipient satisfies the provisions of the Department's Regulation, 45 CFR Part 84, relating to evaluation, placement, and procedural safeguards. If a separate class or facility is identifiable as being for handicapped persons, the facility, the programs, and the services must be comparable to the facilities, programs, and services offered to nonhandicapped students.
B. STUDENT FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
Recipients may not award financial assistance in the form of loans, grants, scholarships, special funds, subsidies, compensation for work, or prizes to vocational education students on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap, except to overcome the effects of past discrimination. Recipients may administer sex restricted financial assistance where the assistance and restriction are established by will, trust, bequest, or any similar legal instrument, if the overall effect of all financial assistance awarded does not discriminate on the basis of sex. Materials and information used to notify students of opportunities for financial assistance may not contain language or examples that would lead applicants to believe the assistance is provided on a discriminatory basis. If a recipient's service area contains a community of national origin minority persons with limited English language skills, such information must be disseminated to that community in its language.
C. HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL POSTSECONDARY VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTERS
Recipients must extend housing opportunities without discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. This obligation extends to recipients that provide on-campus housing and/or that have agreements with providers of off-campus housing. In particular, a recipient postsecondary vocational education program that provides on-campus or off-campus housing to Its non-handicapped students must provide, at the same cost and under the same conditions, comparable convenient and accessible housing to handicapped students.
D. COMPARABLE FACILITIES
Recipients must provide changing rooms, showers, and other facilities for students of one sex that are comparable to those provided to students of the other sex. This may be accomplished by alternating use of the same facilities or by providing separate, comparable facilities.
Such facilities must be adapted or modified to the extent necessary to make the vocational education program readily accessible to handicapped persons.
VII. WORK STUDY, COOPERATIVE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION, JOB PLACEMENT, AND APPRENTICE TRAINING
A. RESPONSIBILITIES IN COOPERATIVE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS, WORK-STUDY PROGRAMS, AND JOB PLACEMENT
A recipient must insure that: (a) it does not discriminate against its students on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap in making available opportunities in cooperative education, work study and job placement programs; and (b) students participating in cooperative education, work study and job placement programs are not discriminated against by employers or prospective employers on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap in recruitment, hiring, placement, assignment to work tasks, hours of employment, levels of responsibility, and in pay.
If a recipient enters into a written agreement for the referral or assignment of students to an employer, the agreement must contain an assurance from the employer that students will be accepted and assigned to jobs and otherwise treated without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap.
Recipients may not honor any employer's request for students who are free of handicaps or for students of a particular race, color, national origin, or sex. In the event an employer or prospective employer is or has been subject to court action involving discrimination in employment, school officials should rely on the court's findings if the decision resolves the issue of whether the employer has engaged in unlawful discrimination.
B. APPRENTICE TRAINING PROGRAMS
A recipient may not enter into any agreement for the provision or support of apprentice training for students or union members with any labor union or other sponsor that discriminates against its members or applicants for membership on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. If a recipient enters into a written agreement with a labor union or other sponsor providing for apprentice training, the agreement must contain an assurance from the union or other sponsor: (1) that it does not engage in such discrimination against its membership or applicants for membership; and (2) that apprentice training will be offered and conducted for its membership free of such discrimination.
VIII. EMPLOYMENT OF FACULTY AND STAFF
A. EMPLOYMENT GENERALLY
Recipients may not engage in any employment practice that discriminates against any employee or applicant for employment on the basis of sex or handicap. Recipients may not engage in any employment practice that discriminates on the basis of race, color, or national origin if such discrimination tends to result in segregation, exclusion or other discrimination against students.
Recipients may not limit their recruitment for employees to schools, communities, or companies disproportionately composed of persons of a particular race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap except for the purpose of overcoming the effects of past discrimination. Every source of faculty must be notified that the recipient does not discriminate in employment on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap.
C. PATTERNS OF DISCRIMINATION
Whenever the Office for Civil Rights finds that in light of the representation of protected groups in the relevant labor market there is a significant underrepresentation or overrepresentation of protected group persons on the staff of a vocational education school or program, it will presume that the disproportion results from unlawful discrimination. This presumption can be overcome by proof that qualified persons of the particular race, color, national origin, or sex, or that qualified handicapped persons are not in fact available in the relevant labor market.
D. SALARY POLICIES
Recipients must establish and maintain faculty salary scales and policy based upon the conditions and responsibilities of employment, without regard to race, color, national origin, sex or handicap.
E. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR HANDICAPPED APPLICANTS
Recipients must provide equal employment opportunities for teaching and administrative positions to handicapped applicants who can perform the essential functions of the position in question. Recipients must make reasonable accommodation for the physical or mental limitations of handicapped applicants who are otherwise qualified unless recipients can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship.
F. THE EFFECTS OF PAST DISCRIMINATION
Recipients must take steps to overcome the effects of past discrimination in the recruitment, hiring, and assignment of faculty. Such steps may include the recruitment or reassignment of qualified persons of a particular race, national origin, or sex, or who are handicapped.
G. STAFF OF STATE ADVISORY COUNCILS OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
State Advisory Councils of Vocational Education are recipients of Federal financial assistance and therefore must comply with Section VIII of the Guidelines.
H. EMPLOYMENT AT STATE OPERATED VOCATION-
AL EDUCATION CENTERS THROUGH STATE
Where recruitment and hiring of staff for State operated vocational education centers is conducted by a State civil service employment authority, the State education agency operating the program must insure that recruitment and hiring of staff for the vocational education center is conducted in accordance with the requirements of these Guidelines.
IX. PROPRIETARY VOCATIONAL EDUCATION SCHOOLS
A. RECIPIENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Proprietary vocational education schools that are recipients of Federal financial assistance through Federal student assistance programs or otherwise are subject to all of the requirements of the Department's regulations and these Guidelines.
B. ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY
Enforcement of the provisions of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is the responsibility of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. However, authority to enforce Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for proprietary vocational education schools has been delegated to the Veterans Administration.
When the Office for Civil Rights receives a Title VI complaint alleging discrimination by a proprietary vocational education school it will forward the complaint to the Veterans Administration and cite the applicable requirements of the Department's regulations and these Guidelines. The complainant will be notified of such action.
PART 84-NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAP IN PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES RECEIVING OF BENEFITTING FROM FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
2. In 45 CFR Part 84 Appendix B is added to read as follows:
APPENDIX B-GUIDELINES FOR ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATION AND DENIAL OF SERVICES ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, SEX, AND HANDICAP IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
NOTE.-For the text of these guidelines, see 45 CFR Part 80, Appendix B.
PART 86-NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF SEX IN EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES RECEIVING OR BENEFITTING FROM FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
3. In 45 CFR Part 86 Appendix A is added to read as follows:
APPENDIX A-GUIDELINES FOR ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATION AND DENIAL OF SERVICES ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, NATIONAL ORIGIN, SEX, AND HANDICAP IN VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS
NOTE.-For the text of these guidelines, see 45 CFR Part 80, Appendix B.
DAVID S. TATEL
Director, Office for Civil Rights,
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
March 15, 1979.
COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Over 130 comments and recommendations were received by the Office for Civil Rights in response to the December 19, 1978 publication of proposed Guidelines. (43 FR 59105) Many identified deficiencies that resulted in significant changes to the Guidelines. Each comment was carefully considered before a response was prepared. The following comments and responses are adopted by the Department as a part of the Guidelines.
1. Comment: Commenters stated that the Supplementary Information section was unfairly critical of vocational educational education administrators, relied too heavily on outdated and suspect data, and ignored the advances achieved under the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976.
Response: The objections have merit and changes have been made. The Supplementary Information section has been revised to include current data, to delete outdated and suspect data, to place greater emphasis on OCR investigations and compliance reviews and to acknowledge that vocational education administrators have responded to antidiscrimination measures of the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976.
SECTION I-SCOPE AND COVERAGE
2. Comment: Commenters recommended that paragraph I-A state with clarity that the Guidelines apply to all recipients of financial assistance from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and not merely to recipients of Federal vocational education funds.
Response: The recommendation is accepted and paragraph I-A has been modified.
3. Comment: One commenter suggested that OCR establish a single definition of "recipient" in its Title VI, Title IX and Section 504 regulations to the extent permitted by the underlying legislation.
Response: A single definition of "recipient" would be helpful. However, the change proposed is beyond the scope of the Guidelines project.
4. Comment: Commenters requested that the Guidelines state the responsibilities of recipients under the Age Discrimination Act of 1975.
Response: Regulations under the Age Discrimination Act have not yet been issued. The Guidelines will ultimately include coverage of age discrimination.
5. Comment: A commenter recommended that paragraph I-C include as an education agency providing vocational education, "the State Board of Vocational Education and/or a State board or body providing vocational education."
Response: Paragraph I-A states that State agency recipients are covered by the Guidelines. Paragraph I-C provides examples of recipients covered by the Guidelines and lists, at I-C(6), "a State agency ... operating a vocational education facility."
6. Comment: Commenters requested that paragraph I(D)(6) and (7) be amended to include "certificate programs."
Response: The suggested change has been adopted.
7. Comment: Commenters requested that paragraph I-D list as recipients vocational rehabilitation centers and residential centers.
Response: Paragraph I-D provides examples of covered schools. The Guidelines also apply to vocational rehabilitation centers and residential vocational education centers.
8. Comment: One commenter requested a definition of the term "sub-recipient."
Response: The term "subrecipient" is defined in paragraph II-B.
SECTION II-RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE AGENCIES
9. Comment: Commenters found paragraph II-B incomplete and vague.
Response: This objection has merit. The paragraph has substantially revised to clarify State agency responsibilities. Definitions of "technical assistance" and of "compliance review" have been added (paragraph (B)(2) and (3)). The Guidelines now state that the Department, not the State agency, has the responsibility and authority to make formal fact findings and terminate and defer Federal funds.
While these additions to the final Guidelines answer several of the specific questions raised by the commenters much more needs to be done. Within 90 days, the Office for Civil Rights and the Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education will issue memoranda that provide the additional detail necessary for successful State agency compliance activity.
10. Comment: Commenters argued that paragraph II-B imposes new requirements on State agency recipients.
Response: State agencies, as well as other recipients of Federal financial assistance, are prohibited from conducting their programs through subrecipients or contractors that discriminate. See for example, 45 CFR Sections 80.3(b), 84.4(b)(4), 86.32(b),(d). The Title VI regulations clearly include a State agency obligation to adopt "methods of administration" for monitoring subrecipients for civil rights compliance. However, this requirement has not been enforced against State education agencies. The Department believes that this must be corrected. To be effective, civil rights compliance activity cannot be the exclusive province of Federal civil rights agencies; it must include Department program agencies (in this case the Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education) and State agencies.
11. Comment: Commenters argued that the requirements imposed on State agencies by paragraph II-B are unduly burdensome and costly.
Response: Subparagraph B(1) has been revised to insure that no significant additional data collection or record keeping requirement is imposed on recipients. In addition, the requirement that State agencies investigate complaints has been deleted. Civil rights enforcement, however, must be recognized as important enough to merit the allocation of necessary funds. Federal, State, and local funds and resources available for vocational education must be used for civil rights compliance activities in vocational education programs. The obligations imposed are therefore not unreasonably burdensome.
12. Comment: Commenters stated that OCR, through paragraph II-B, is assigning or delegating its enforcement responsibilities to the States.
Response: The Guidelines contemplate a cooperative effort among OCR, The Bureau of Occupational and Adult Education, and State agencies. Their purpose is to aid, not substitute, resources for civil rights compliance activity. The Guidelines now clearly state what was always intended: The Office for Civil Rights will not decrease its compliance activity in vocational education programs.
13. Comment: Commenters stated that proposed paragraph II-D, which attempted to establish a clear division between State and local responsibilities, was confusing and inconsistent with other sections of the Guidelines. They asked that the paragraph be deleted. It was also suggested that the heading of Section II and the first sentence of paragraph II-A should state that the enumerated requirements are only one aspect of a State agency's responsibilities under the Guidelines.
Response: The suggested changes are adopted as consistent with the intent of the Guidelines.
SECTION III-DISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE AND OTHER FUNDS FOR VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
14. Comment: Commenters argued that protected group persons must be provided "equal opportunity" not merely "opportunity" (paragraph III-A).
Response: This suggestion is accepted. The opportunity for vocational training must be equal for all students without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, or handicap. The provision of unequal facilities, for example, cannot be excused because it is a less than total denial of opportunity.
15. Comment: Commenters questioned whether the purpose of proposed paragraph III-B was to prohibit discrimination in the development of a formula (input standard) or in the allocation of funds (output standard). The policy statement in proposed paragraph III-B controlled factors in the formula while the example cited in the paragraph was based on fund allocations.
Response: The Office for Civil Rights may review a formula's components. However, its primary inquiry will be whether the formula has a discriminatory effect on the allocation of funds. Accordingly, the first sentence in paragraph III-B has been rewritten to delete the reference to "factors."
16. Comment: Commenters suggested rephrasing paragraph III-B to permit the use of factors that remedy the effects of past discrimination. Others suggested that the Department uphold the use of indicia that enable the State to identify communities entitled to priority under the Vocational Education Act. For example, a State vocational education distribution formula may refer to the number of persons residing in a school district receiving aid to families with dependent children or with limited English speaking ability. The purpose of such a reference is to identify areas either economically depressed or with high concentrations of low-income people.
Response: The suggestions are accepted. Judicial precedent requires recipients to undertake affirmative or remedial action when directed by Congress or in response to a finding of past discrimination. In addition, the adoption of the recommended language confirms that a recipient's use of data on AFDC or LESA populations to comply with the Vocational Education Act is consistent with civil rights authorities.
17. Comment: Commenters asked for an explanation of the second sentence in proposed paragraph III-B: "State agencies must apply formula provisions under the Vocational Education Amendments of 1976 in a manner consistent with civil rights authorities." They believe that the statement suggests an inconsistency between civil rights authorities and the targeting provisions of the Vocational Education Act.
Response: The sentence does suggest a tension between the provisions of the Vocational Education Act and civil rights authorities. In fact, they are complementary. Paragraph III-B, as revised, contains the essential language prohibiting discrimination on the application of a formula . The challenged sentence has therefore been deleted.
18. Comment: Commenters questioned whether the example used in proposed paragraph III-B (now in III-C) is intended to require equal per-pupil allocations of funds.
Response: Section 106(a)(5)(B)(ii) of the Vocational Education Act prohibits the adoption of a formula seeking equal per-pupil allocations of funds. Rather it requires priority funding for subrecipients serving the greatest concentrations of low income families, for subrecipients least able to pay, and for subrecipients serving the greatest concentrations of students whose education imposes higher than average costs (e.g., handicapped students, students from low-income families, and students from families in which English is not the dominant language). These statutory priorities should result in greater expenditures for communities with concentrations of minority group persons. For this reason the gauge of unlawful discrimination contained in the GuidelinesCa finding of lower allocations for communities containing concentrations of, minority personsC will generally indicate a high probability of noncompliance.
In addition to an analysis of allocations State-wide, OCR may examine individual districts with substantial numbers of minority students to determine if such districts receive lower per-pupil allocations than the Statewide average.
19. Comment: A funding formula will be presumed unlawfully discriminatory if the circumstances recorded in paragraph III-B (now paragraph III-C) are present. Commenters asked for examples of evidence that will rebut the presumption.
Response: Two examples of persuasive rebuttal evidence derive from the Vocational Education Act. First, under Section 106(a)(5)(A)(ii) a State must give priority to funding applications that propose programs new to a service area and that are designed to meet emerging or projected manpower needs and job opportunities. These priorities are not directly related to economic need. Therefore the application of these priorities may in some circumstances be used by a State agency to rebut the presumption of discrimination arising from an inadequate allocation of funds to recipients enrolling a disproportionately high percentage of minorities. Secondly, Section 106(a)(4) requires the distribution of Federal vocational education funds on the basis of annual applications. An eligible recipient that fails to submit an application is prohibited from receiving Federal funds. A similar requirement may control the allocation of State funds under the provisions of a state law. For this reason, the failure of urban or other recipients to apply for funds must be considered before a finding of compliance or noncompliance can be made.
These are only examples of rebuttal evidence that will be considered. Each case must be decided on the basis of a careful analysis of all evidence believed relevant by the recipient and by the Office for Civil Rights.
20. Comment: Commenters asked whether the presumption of paragraph III-C be applied to each type of vocational education program or to combined State allocations; whether Federal and State funds will be examined separately or in combination; whether both operating costs and capital expenditures will be examined; whether the distribution formula will be judged on an annual basis or over a period of years.
Response: Section 106(a)(5) of the Vocational Education Act requires the States to base the distribution of Federal funds on economic, social, and dem ographic factors relating to the need for vocational education. The Commissioner of Education has ruled in 42 F.R. 53865 (Question #1) that the State's funding formula under section 106(a)(5) must be applied to each of the following Vocational Education Act programs: basic grant (section 120), guidance and counseling (section 134), special programs for the disadvantaged (section 140), and consumer and homemaking programs (section 150). To insure consistency with Office of Education directives under the Vocational Education Act, the Guidelines' requirements may be applied to each of the programs set out above.
The statutory factors listed in section 106(a)(5) of the Vocational Education Act apply to the distribution of Federal vocational education funds. A State may elect to distribute State funds under the same or a different formula. In any event, OCR may separately consider State and Federal allocations to determine whether each is consistent with civil rights authorities.
The distribution formula governs the allocation of all grants to subrecipients under Sections 120, 134, 140, and 150, including those for operating costs and capital expenditures. OCR may therefore examine both operating costs and capital expenditures.
States are required to describe the formula for the distribution of Federal funds in their five year plans (45 CFR 104.182(d)). In applying the gauge of unlawful discrimination to State formulas, OCR may consider expenditures for a single year, or for such other period it finds relevant to whether unlawful discrimination has occurred.
21. Comment. A commenter asked whether paragraph III-B ( now III-B and III-C) applies to local as well as State agencies. Others asked whether the gauge of compliance, now recorded in paragraph III-C, applies to local agencies.
Response: Paragraph III-B has been revised to clarify that it applies to all recipients that allocate Federal, State, or local funds among other recipients or schools. Thus, the paragraph applies to local agencies that employ a formula or "other method of allocation" to distribute funds among administrative subdistricts.
The gauge of compliance, recorded in paragraph III-C, refers to a potential misallocation of State and Federal funds. Although this gauge must prove in practice to be a convenient and informative measure, it will tentatively also be used to evaluate allocations of local funds.
22. Comment: State agencies argued they could not control the allocation of local funds.
Response: A State agency is not expected to provide protection against an improper allocation of local funds unless it has authority to review or approve local allocations.
23. Comment: Commenters argued that OCR lacks authority to monitor State vocational education funds. They argued that paragraph III-B should only control the allocation of Federal funds.
Response: The Department has an obligation to provide protection against unlawful discrimination in any and all facets of a program funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. A recipient of Federal funds may not unlawfully discriminate in the allocation or use of such funds or in the allocation or use of any other funds under its control. Of course, as one commenter notes, if the Department finds it necessary to proceed against any recipient, it may only attempt to defer or terminate HEW Federal funds.
24. Comment: Commenters suggested that the phrase "available through Federal funds" (paragraph III-C now III-D), improperly suggests that civil rights authorities apply only to competitive grants or contracts paid for with Federal funds under the Vocational Education Act. They argued that the phrase be deleted.
Response: The suggestion is accepted. A State agency receiving Federal funds may not discriminate in the allocation or distribution of any funds under its control.
25. Comment: Commenters thought the example, now recorded in paragraph III-C, should not be referred to in the paragraph relating to competitive grants and contracts.
Response: The example cannot be meaningfully applied to competitive grants and contracts. The reference has therefore been deleted.
26. Comment: Commenters suggested that paragraph III-E (now III-F) state that in appropriate circumstances a State may be required to remedy the effects of a prior unlawfully discriminatory distribution of funds.
Response: The Comment is accepted. It is well established that a recipient must remedy past unlawful discrimination and provide protection against like discrimination in the future.
27. Comment: Commenters questioned whether paragraph III-E (now III-F) affects the Commissioner of Education's authority to approve or direct a change in the State's method of fund distribution.
Response. If a State system for distributing Federal vocational education funds violates civil rights authorities, the Office of Education and the Office for Civil Rights will jointly seek corrective action.
SECTION IV C ACCESS AND ADMISSION OF STUDENTS
28. Comment: Commenters stated that the proposed Guidelines prohibited only future unlawful discrimination. They suggested a prohibition against recipients maintaining unlawfully discriminatory practices.
Response: This suggestion is accepted. Recipients must eliminate the effects of past discrimination and ensure nondiscrimination in the future.
29. Comment: Commenters suggested that paragraph IV-B be amended to require that sites be accessible to handicapped persons.
Response: The requirement of program accessibility for mobility impaired persons is contained in paragraph IV-N.
30. Comment: Commenters argued that new sites should be equally accessible rather than readily accessible to minority students.
Response: It is generally impossible to find or judge sites equally accessible to minority and nonminority communities. Recipients should attempt to locate facilities in perfectly neutral sites: but no change in the Guidelines is required or appropriate.
31. Comment: Recipient commenters stated that they often do not have authority to select sites for new facilities.
Response: Recipients that do not have authority to select, review, or approve sites have no obligations under this provision.
32. Comment: Commenters objected to paragraph IV-C on the ground that it conflicts with State statutes that limit certain programs offered by a district to students residing within that district.
Response: State laws that limit the admission of students to programs on the basis of residence within a district may be cited by recipients as proof of nondiscrimination. The adequacy or accuracy of that claim will depend upon all of the facts and will vary from State to State and from case to case.
33. Comment: Commenters suggested that student reassignment is an additional remedy for site selection and geographic service area violations (proposed paragraph IV-D, now paragraph IV-E).
Response: This suggestion is accepted. For example, if high school vocational education programs are unlawfully segregated because of a geographic zone boundary, the segregation may be remedied through student reassignments.
34. Comment: Commenters thought the geographic zoning requirements for secondary vocational schools (paragraph IV-C) should be the same for postsecondary institutions (proposed paragraph IV-E).
Response: Geographic service area or attendance zone boundaries for vocational education centers are generally used at the secondary level. However, paragraph IV-C and IV-E apply to postsecondary institutions that limit admission on the basis of student residence. The separate paragraph for postsecondary institutions has therefore been deleted.
35. Comment: Generally, students may not attend an Area Vocational Education School (AVES) unless they reside within one of the school districts participating in the consortium. Commenters objected that paragraph IV-C will result in an unfair requirement that students from nonparticipating districts be admitted to the area school.
Response: In the event the circumstances listed in paragraph IV-C arise in a comparison between a consortium and a school district adjacent to a consortium, a recipient(s) may rebut the resulting presumption of unlawful discrimination through proof that compelling reasons justified the inclusion and exclusion of contiguous districts. For example, recipients may demonstrate that an excluded district failed to approve a bond issue needed for the construction of a facility and that all districts included in the consortium approved such a bond issue.
It will not be sufficient for the consortium to prove that all participating districts have approximately the same tax base and that they joined together for that reason. Rather a consortium must prove that an excluded district received a genuine invitation to participate on terms comparable to those offered any other district, and that the offer was declined by the governing authority of the district. If a recipient fails to prove that the planning and formation stages were nondiscriminatory, it will be required to give the excluded district an opportunity to participate in the consortium. Of course, the newly included district may be required to contribute financially and otherwise on the basis of an equitable formula and arrangement.
36. Comment: Consortia ask whether paragraph IV-F bars an equal allocation of a facility's student capacity among participating school districts if that allocation results in the disproportionate exclusion of minority group students. Comment No. 35 addresses an issue illustrated by the exclusion of a city school system from an essentially suburban consortium. The issue in this comment, is illustrated by a consortium of a majority black city school system and four majority white suburban districts that equally share a vocational education facility with a capacity of 500 students. Inequality results from this agreement if the city system's student enrollment is substantially greater than its suburban partners. Thus if each participant in this five district consortium is allocated 100 student spaces in the vocational education center, each suburban district may have only 1,000 students competing for 100 spaces while the city system may have 2,000 students competing for 100 spaces. Students in the city system do not have equal opportunity for admission to the vocational education center.
Response: This provision (IV-F) applies to both separate school districts and consortia. However, a consortium may allocate available spaces in the manner described in this comment if it proves that compelling reasons similar to those discussed in comment 35 above, justify the allocation.
37. Comment: Commenters asked whether paragraph IV-C may result in a requirement that a school district admit to its vocational education facilities students who reside in an entirely separate school district.
Response: Paragraph IV-C and IV-F apply primarily to discrimination within a school district and to consortia as discussed in comments 35 and 36. A legally constituted separate school district providing vocational education only to students residing within its borders is not required by paragraph IV-C to admit nonresident students. However, in the event a State establishes a vocational education district composed of several school districts, the boundaries of the vocational education district are subject to review under paragraph IV-C.
38. Comment: Commenters objected that paragraph IV-H was unreasonable and unrealistic in presuming that segregated facilities, courses and programs resulted from recipient practices rather than student choice. Others urged that the paragraph contain an additional specific presumption of unlawful discrimination if a school were established for members of one race, sex or national origin and continues to be so attended. Such commenters asked for a rule holding that the only permissible remedy for segregation in such a school is relocation of courses and programs to other schools.
Response: Both comments have some merit and have led to a rewriting of the paragraph. Vocational education administrators are quite correct in arguing that specific vocational courses and programs are generally elected by, not required of, students. Consequently, segregation may result from parental, community and peer group influences that are beyond their control. This fact is generally recognized by Section IV of the Guidelines: each paragraph identifies a method or factor controlling student eligibility other than student choice and attempts to provide protection against the unlawful exclusion of students based upon that factor. Thus, a student's ineligibility based upon residence (paragraph IV-C) or because the facility was located too far from his or her home (paragraph IV-B) or because he or she scored too low on an admissions test (paragraph IV-K) is addressed by the Guidelines. Proposed paragraph IV-H departed from this theme. Rather than identify a specific device that resulted in the exclusion of students despite their desire to enroll, the paragraph proposed a presumption of unlawful discrimination whenever a facility or course was segregated. This was unreasonable, and the general presumption has been deleted.
However, the other commenters are also correct in stating that the Guidelines fail to identify another factor or device that can interfere with a student's choice. A recipient may have constructed a facility for members of one race or sex and may not have taken meaningful action to remedy the segregation. In such cases, it is unreasonable to state that the school continues to be segregated as a result of student choice. The analogy to racial segregation in elementary and secondary public schools is perfect: by the late 1960's Federal courts were consistently holding that school officials were not adequately desegregating their dual race systems when, after 100 years of enforced segregation, they merely opened the doors of the white schools and announced that black students could apply for admission. Paragraph IV-H has accordingly been rewritten to hold that if a facility was established for minorities, or for one race, national origin or sex and it continues to be essentially segregated despite open enrollment, additional steps to desegregate the facility are necessary. However, the suggestion that a specific remedy should be required of a school established as a segregated facility is not accepted. The efficacy of any proposed remedy will vary from case to case.
39. Comment: Commenters stated that there should not be a violation of paragraph IV-H if a protected group is represented in a facility in proportion to its representation in the service area.
Response: This comment is accepted. Evidence that members of a protected group attend a facility in proportion to their representation in the service area will be accepted as evidence of that group's nondiscriminatory enrollment in the facility. However, the boundaries of the service area must satisfy the requirements of paragraph IV-C.
40. Comment: Commenters suggested that in paragraph IV-H underrepresentation, not nonparticipation, should be the standard; that discrimination based on national origin was improperly omitted from paragraphs IV-F and IV-H.
Response: These suggestions merely urge consistency among several provisions and identify inadvertent errors. The suggested changes have been made.
41. Comment: Commenters urged that handicapped persons be protected by paragraph IV-H.
Response: A vocational education center, branch or annex enrolling only handicapped students is often permissible under the Department's Section 504 regulation (e.g. a school for autistic children). Each secondary level student must be individually evaluated and then assigned to a program responsive to his or her individual needs. For this reason the presumption recognized in paragraph IV-H cannot routinely protect handicapped persons. Nevertheless, under the requirements of paragraph IV-N and VI-A, secondary level handicapped students may be placed in segregated annexes, branches or centers only if their individual education plan state that they cannot be trained in a regular program with "supplementary aids and services."
42. Comment: Commenters suggested that the proposed validation standard of paragraph IV-K would permit recipients to use criteria that disproportionately exclude minorities or handicapped persons merely by demonstrating that the students admitted were more likely to succeed in the program. This would allow recipients, for example, to exclude protected persons from the attractive trade and technical programs through evidence that a "C" average student is less likely to excel in a program than an "A" average student. The commenters suggested that screening criteria to be permissible, must be "essential to participation" in a program.
Response: This suggestion is accepted. One of the principal objectives of the Vocational Education Act is to provide protected group persons the training they need to obtain employment. Screening criteria or standards that have the effect of disproportionately excluding such persons from vocational education programs must therefore be validated as essential to satisfactory completion of course requirements. The use of criteria like grade point average, to justify priority admission of students with exceptional attainments or scores may disproportionately exclude protected group persons. If such disproportionate exclusion occurs the criteria or standards must be validated as essential to participation in a program before they may be used by a recipient.
43. Comment: Commenters sought to expand paragraphs IV-L and IV-M. They argued that recipients should be required to provide native language programs, English language instruction and other diverse methods of instruction where there are high concentrations of persons with limited English language skills.
Response: The changes proposed are beyond the scope of the Guidelines project. The requirements of the Guidelines are consistent with established Office for Civil Rights secondary school policy.
44. Comment: Commenters objected to the failure of paragraph IV-D, (I) and (M) (now E, I, and M) to include deadlines for the submission of acceptable remedial plans.
Response: The Office for Civil Rights will establish time periods for the submission of remedial plans on a case by case basis.
45. Comment: Commenters thought the public notification paragraph, IV-O, fails to ensure adequate notice of vocational education opportunities. Others thought the proposed provision was too burdensome; they found the requirement of notice to limited English proficiency persons particularly objectionable.
Response: The requirement that recipients announce a policy of nondiscrimination has several components: 1) the notice must be continuing; 2) it must be designed to reach a recipient's beneficiaries and employees, and potential beneficiaries and employees, particularly members of protected groups; 3) it must state the policy of nondiscrimination; 4) it must include the name, telephone number, and address of a person who can provide additional information on the policy of nondiscrimination. The proposed provision for notification was deficient with respect to requirement number 4; the final Guidelines have been revised accordingly.
The Department agrees with the commenters who found too onerous the requirement of notice of "all program offerings and admissions criteria." It has been substantially revised. Also, notice to national origin minorities with limited English speaking ability is now required only if a service area contains a "community" of such persons.
46. Comment: Commenters asked whether affirmative action programs were permissible or required.
Response: Appropriate remedial action (sometimes referred to as "affirmative action") must be undertaken to overcome the effects of past discrimination. Also, certain voluntary affirmative action measures are permissible under the Department's Title VI, Title IX, and Section 504 regulations, when a recipient finds such measures useful or necessary to correct societal discrimination or patterns of segregation and nonparticipation. the Secretary and the President have issued statements urging recipients to adopt and continue voluntary affirmative action programs in admissions, recruitment, counselling, and employment.
47. Comment: A commenter asked whether children attending private racially discriminatory academies may also attend Federally assisted vocational schools.
Response: On April 26, 1976, the Office for Civil Rights announced that "children enrolled in a non-public school cannot participate in the public school program if the non-public school engaged in discriminatory practices prohibited by Title VI. Even though the non-public school is not a recipient, any discriminatory practices by it would ... directly affect the Federally assisted program." 41 F.R. 35553 (August 23, 1976).
SECTION V - COUNSELING AND
48. Comment: Commenters recommended that recipients be required to provide inservice training for counselors on the needs of minorities, the handicapped, and students stereotyped on the basis of sex.
Response: Inservice training is an approved method for instructing professional staff on the forms of discrimination experienced by students. However, recipients may obtain compliance through other methods.
49. Comment: Proposed paragraph V-B provided that disproportionate enrollments based on sex must be examined to verify that they do not result from discrimination in counseling. Commenters asked that disproportionate enrollments based on race or national origin lead to a similar examination of counseling practices.
Response: The suggestion is accepted and paragraph V-B has been revised.
50. Comment: Commenters urged that paragraph V-E endorse affirmative promotional and outreach activities.
Response: The recommendation is accepted. Voluntary affirmative action in promotional and counseling activities is endorsed through comment number 46.
51. Comment: Commenters found "unrealistic" the prohibition against counseling handicapped students toward limited career objectives (paragraph V-B).
Response: This provision allows a recipient to advise handicapped students of the difficulties they may encounter in fields not traditionally opened to them. However, the provision requires that recipients do more than merely state that such obstacles exist. The recipient must provide students with information on available vocational opportunities, on the responsibilities of an employer under Section 504, and on available remedies in the event of discrimination. Information or materials that may assist recipients in meeting this responsibility are available from the Office for Civil Rights, Office of Program and Review and Assistance.
SECTION VI - EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN THE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONAL SETTING
52. Comment: Commenters recommended several changes to this section: A) "Mainstreaming" handicapped students should not be a priority; B) Sex restricted financial assistance, even subject to the conditions specified in paragraph VI-B, should be impermissible; C) Additional detail should be provided in paragraph VI-C to provide protection against unlawful discrimination; D) A new section should be added to announce recipient obligations to national origin minority persons with limited English speaking ability.
Response: The primary purpose of Section VI of the Guidelines is to record several provisions of the Department's Title IX and Section 504 regulations that deserve emphasis in light of the findings in OCR compliance reviews and complaint investigations. Proposed changed "A" and "B" are inconsistent with the Department's regulations and therefore beyond the scope of the Guidelines project; suggestion "C" is meddlesome in that it seeks to regulate recipients aimlessly; proposed change "D" seeks a provision already included in another section of the Guidelines.
SECTION VII - WORK STUDY, COOPERATIVE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION,
JOB PLACEMENT, AND APPRENTICE TRAINING
53. Comment: Commenters argued that the requirements of Section VII are too burdensome. They believe that Congress never intended recipients to monitor employees and unions for discrimination.
Response: Vocational education administrators misperceive the nature of Section VII requirements. Under the Department's civil rights regulations recipients are prohibited from engaging in any service, activity, or program in a discriminatory manner. Work study, cooperative education, and job placement are recipient programs or activities and for this reason may not be marred by unlawful discrimination. There is evidence, for example, that school officials are honoring requests from employers for persons of a particular race or sex or for persons free of handicaps. This is unlawful discrimination by both the recipient and the employer. Moreover, the Congress is not mindless; it does not enact idle legislation. It would not appropriate more than a half billion dollars annually under the Vocational Education Act for both nondiscriminatory job training programs and discriminatory job placement programs.
54. Comment: Commenters suggested that the Guidelines require recipients to obtain an assurance of nondiscrimination from employers that participate in cooperative education, work study, and job placement programs. Others suggested that paragraph VII-A should require school officials to collect, review, and maintain data reflecting the race, sex, national origin, and handicap of students participating in these programs.
Response: The addition of a written assurance to existing written agreements (e.g., cooperative vocational education agreements) is a reasonable and useful measure. This requirement has been added to the Guidelines. To date, OCR investigators have not been frustrated by inadequate recipient records, and the data collection suggestion is therefore not accepted.
55. Comment: Commenters urged that paragraph VII be rewritten to allow potential employers to discriminate on the basis of handicap if the handicap prevents a person from performing the job. One commenter stated, for example, that a roofing company need not hire an individual with no legs as a roofer since the job requires an ability to climb a ladder carrying 90 pounds of materials.
Response: Employers may not discriminate on the basis of handicap against otherwise qualified handicapped persons. Prospective employers are permitted to make preemployment
inquiries into an applicant's ability to perform job-related functions. Note, however, that employers are required to "reasonably accommodate" the special needs of a handicapped employee or applicant for employment if it does not result in an "undue hardship" for the employer. In the example provided by the commenter, a small roofing concern would probably be unduly burdened by the accommodation necessary for this handicapped person. However, in contrast, a major university will not experience "undue hardship" if it provides a reader for a blind applicant for employment. See paragraph VIII-E of the Guidelines. Additional information on the principles of "undue hardship" and "reasonable accommodation" can be obtained from the Office for Civil Rights, Office of Program Review and Assistance.
56. Comment: Commenters objected to the phrasing in paragraph VII-A suggesting that a recipient must control an employer's policies and practices.
Response: A recipient cannot control the policies or practices of an employer. However, a recipient must determine whether an employer discriminates and if necessary divorce itselfC its programs and activitiesC from the discriminating employer.
57. Comment: Commenters asked whether recipients are prohibited from entering work study and cooperative education agreements with employers that have remedied their discriminatory policies and practices.
Response: Recipients are free to enter into agreements with such employers.
58. Comment: A commenter argued that prospective employers in cooperative placement activities should not be covered by these Guidelines because they are "ultimate beneficiaries" under 45 CFR ' 84.3(f).
Response: The requirements of the Guidelines apply to recipients of Federal funds, not to prospective employers. Recipients must take measures to free their programs and activities of employers who unlawfully discriminate. It is unnecessary, therefore, to determine whether prospective employers are "ultimate beneficiaries."
59. Comment: Commenters asked whether the requirement of nondiscrimination in apprentice training applies only to programs sponsored by unions.
Response: Paragraph VII-B applies to registered and non-registered apprentice training programs whether sponsored by a union, an individual employer, a group of employees, an employer-employee committee, or a governmental agency. The text of paragraph VII-B has therefore been revised to cover a "labor union or other sponsor." Also, all sponsors of apprentice programs are subject to the Department of Labor Guidelines for Nondiscrimination in All Apprenticeship Programs (29 CFR Part 30).
SECTION VIII C EMPLOYMENT OF FACULTY AND STAFF
60. Comment: Commenters argued that the Department's Title VI employment jurisdiction extends only to employees who work directly with students. They state that the Department has no authority to act on complaints of employment discrimination against "administrators or applicants for employment."
Response: The Guidelines have been revised to reflect the Department's current interpretation of its authority. If and when it is revised or modified, the new policy will be announced and will supersede the Guidelines.
61. Comment: Commenters stated that the Department has no authority to accept or resolve employment discrimination complaints under Title IX.
Response: The Guidelines reflect the Department's current interpretation of its authority. Several cases raising this issue are now pending in the courts of appeal. If and when this litigation results in controlling holdings that the Department has no employment jurisdiction under Title IX, the Department's regulations and these Guidelines will be revised.
62. Comment: Commenters suggested that under a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Trageser v. Libbie Rehabilitation Center,CF.2dC(4th Cir. 1978), the Department has no authority to accept or resolve employment discrimination complaints under Section 504.
Response: The Guidelines reflect the Department's current interpretation of its authority. If and when it must be revised to conform to controlling judicial decisions, the new policy will be announced and will supersede the Guidelines.
63. Comment: Commenters stated that the definition of a "qualified handicapped" person under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Guidelines is at odds with the Department of Labor's definition under Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Response: The Department of HEW is presently reviewing with the Department of Labor the inconsistencies between their definitions. The Guidelines reflect the Department's current view. If and when it is revised or modified, the Department's regulation and these Guidelines will be revised.
64. Comment: Commenters objected to paragraph VIII-F on the ground that it establishes requirements inconsistent with Bakke.
Response: The Guidelines require remedial action to overcome the effects of past discrimination. Bakke permits, among other activities, such "affirmative action."
65. Comment: Commenters objected to paragraph VIII-C as "presuming guilt" before an investigation is conducted.
Response: Although alternative language was considered, no change has been made in the Guidelines. It is not the intention nor the effect of the Guidelines to make baseless presumptions or findings. Rather, statistical patterns result in inferences that additional evidence may rebut. The Office for Civil Rights will not find unlawful discrimination solely on the basis of statistical data or without affording a recipient an opportunity for rebuttal.
66. Comment: Commenters urged that the Guidelines require recipients to maintain and submit data on its employment practices.
Response: This suggestion was rejected. Records maintained and submitted by recipients under other authorities have satisfied the needs of OCR investigators.
67. Comment: Commenters asked whether this section applies to State agencies.
Response: All recipients of Federal financial assistance from the Department, as specified in Section I, are covered by Section VIII. This also explains the requirement of paragraph II-A(4).
68. Comment: Commenters stated that paragraph VIII-C should recognize that a recipient may rebut a presumption of unlawful employment discrimination through evidence that qualified persons of a protected group were not available to the individual school district nor to the vocational education center.
Response: Rebuttal evidence may include proof that: (1) Members of a protected group were recruited without success; or (2) Identified persons of a protected group were offered employment opportunities that were declined.
SECTION IX C PROPRIETY VOCATIONAL EDUCATION SCHOOLS
69. Comment: A commenter argued that a tuition grant or loan to a student in attendance at a proprietary school is not Federal financial assistance to the proprietary school. Rather it is compensation paid for a direct serviceCa "procurement contract." It is argued that proprietary schools are therefore not subject to the Department's regulations or these Guidelines.
Response: The Department has long defined the term "recipient" under Title VI, Title IX and Section 504 to include proprietary (i.e., other than public or nonprofit) educational institutions that receive tuition from students participating in Federal tuition grant programs. It is beyond the scope of the Guidelines project to reconsider established Department policy.
DAVID S. TATEL,
Office for Civil Rights.
March 15, 1979.
[FR Doc. 79-8561 Filed 3-20-79; 8:45 am]
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1998 621-687/93333
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 44, NO. 56-WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 1979