Justification of Nonsubstantive change request

Justification for Non substantive Change Request

EDA Good Jobs Challenge Collection

The changes and justifications that EDA would like to make are as follows:

• We would like to allow grantees to list all training providers in one go, without having to click “add training provider” separately before adding each provider. This will help save people time and make it overall easier to respond.

• We would like to remove a question about the job prep survey because we ask the same question three times. It is duplicative.

• We would like to separate a question, about how many people acquired new skills, into two parts— (1) how many people and (2) which new skills. Currently one question asks two questions and forces users to choose which question to answer. We inadvertently lumped the two questions together without knowing how this would confuse people and prevent us from getting the data we need.

• Regarding the definitions for the “earn and learn” model, we would like to remove three categories (transitional jobs, cooperatives, and practicums) and replace them with one category, “other.” The other will allow users to write in one of the eliminated categories or any other category that may apply. We do not need the information requested and wish to eliminate redundancy.

• Regarding questions about total costs, we ask about five or six times and in different sections. This is duplicative and has caused users confusion since they are not sure where or what to report. We would like to add clarifying language about what we mean by “total program costs,” and we would like to remove some of the same questions for vagueness and redundancy.