EXHIBIT A 

Monitor's 4/5/04 Recommendations re: Application Processes

As discussed at the February 2004 Hispanic Settlement Agreement monthly implementation meeting, the move toward requiring on-line applications through AVUE raises potential problems for applicants without access to computers and/or those who are not familiar with on-line application processes. 
This is of particular concern given the need to increase the qualified Hispanic applicant pool. Numerous studies have addressed the "digital divide" between Caucasians and various racial and ethnic groups. For example, a November 1999 fact sheet prepared by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration indicates that: 
Hispanic households are still roughly half as likely to own a computer as White households and nearly 2.5 times less likely to use the Internet. In fact, Hispanics are less likely to have access from any location (home, school, work, or library) than Whites are from home. 
Given the potential barriers created by on-line application processes , the Hispanic Settlement Agreement Monitor makes the following recommendations:

1. The RO, each forest supervisor office (SO), and each District office (except those without electricity or other technical capacity for computers), will have a computer terminal available to the public for reviewing on-line information on outreach and vacancy announcements and for submitting on-line applications.

2. The RO, as well as each SO and District Office, will have a person available who is knowledgeable about the on-line vacancy announcement and application processes, to assist members of the public in using the on-line system. 

3. Region 5 will establish a bilingual toll-free phone hotline (Spanish-English at a minimum) with information for applicants including the following:
· Where computer terminals are available free of charge either at the forest service or at other locations such as public libraries, community colleges, etc.
· Addresses and hours of availability for that computer terminal access.
· How to obtain hard copies of information on outreach and vacancy announcements and how to obtain and submit a paper application
· Step-by-step instructions on how to use the on-line application process
· Contact information for the individual designated at each office location to assist applicants with the on-line process.

4. A pamphlet or other written handout will be available for distribution at each R5 office with the information identified in item 3 above that pertains to the particular geographic location.

5. IT, Public Affairs, Civil Rights, and other appropriate departments will work together to ensure that these supplementary systems are in place no later than May 30th to assist those without access to or familiarity with on-line application processes. 

National Telecommunications and Information Administration
U.S. Department of Commerce - 1401 Constitution Ave. N.W Washington, D.C. 20230 - (202) 482-7002

FACT SHEET: Hispanics Falling Back in Information Age
FALLING THROUGH THE NET: DEFINING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE, November 1999
This report on the telecommunications and information technology gap in America provides comprehensive data on the level of access by Americans to telephones, computers, and the Internet. It includes valuable information about where Americans are gaining access, what they are doing with their online connections, and provides trendline information since 1984.
According to the report, the number of Americans accessing the Internet has grown rapidly in the last year; yet, in the midst of this general expansion, the "digital divide" between information "haves" and "have nots" still continues to widen.
Overview:
Race or ethnic origin are significant determinants in whether a household is connected. While Hispanic households are far more likely to own computers and have Internet access this year over last, they still lag behind the national average in access to new technologies. 
Hispanic households also continue to lag behind the national average in telephone penetration. The difference is most pronounced in rural areas. This year, however, Hispanic households earning more than $75,000 are almost as likely to own phones as comparable White households.
Highlights:
· Hispanic households were over twice as likely to own computers at the end of 1998 as they were in 1994. 
· Nevertheless, Hispanic households are still roughly half as likely to own a computer as White households and nearly 2.5 times less likely to use the Internet. In fact, Hispanics are less likely to have access from any location (home, school, work, or library) than Whites are from home. 
· The gap in access to new technologies between White and Hispanic households has grown significantly. Between 1997 and 1998, the White/Hispanic gap for Internet access widened by 37.6% (approximately 5 percentage points). 
· For computer ownership, the gap between White and Hispanic Households continues to widen: from 1994 to 1998 the White/Hispanic gap increased 42.6%. Even at the highest level of incomes ($75,000+), Hispanic households are losing ground: between 1994 and 1998, the gap rose 4.9 percentage points. 
Significant Findings:
In an information rich society, Hispanics are at a significant disadvantage because they experience lower levels of computer and Internet connectivity. On the other hand, they are using public access points, such as K-12 schools, for Internet access. Thus, policymakers must continue to promote policies to expand the number of community access centers and to reduce the price of new technologies.

EXHIBIT B

Examples of The Region's Failure To Respond or To Provide Timely Responses To Requests

· In several fall 03 monthly RHWGX conference calls with Vicki Jackson, RHWGX members addressed the fact that merit promotion and demo positions were not advertised for the same length of time. The Region agreed to send out a directive that the time period should be consistent for both types of announcements. This issue was repeatedly raised and it took many months for this email to be sent. The Region's explanation was that other priorities prevented the direction from being issued.

· In October 2003, I sent a number of written requests to the RO with specific November deadlines for responses. I got no response at all and followed up with a December 2nd email expressing my concern that I had received no response. I finally received a response to my October request at the December 18th implementation meeting. 

· In early October 2003 I recommend that the Region track Hispanic applicants who had qualified but were not selected, since this could be a valuable recruitment source. I got no response to this recommendation until December 18th when the Region rejected that recommendation, and referred me to legal counsel, whom I contacted. In February 2004, I contacted counsel again, requesting legal authority to support the agency's position on this issue. To date, I have not received a response to that request..

· During several fall 03 RHWGX conference calls, RHWGX members raised concerns about the inconsistent format of the staffing logs and the need for uniformity. The Region agreed to create a uniform format and then declined to do so because it decided that it would be more efficient to provide the information through an automated SF-52 tracking system. The SF-52 tracking system still is not operational. 

· The RO agreed in a November 03 meeting concerning Apprenticeship selections to send a follow up letter to the units about the applicant pool and selections. To date, the letter has not been sent, although I have raised this issue at numerous implementation meetings. 

· Upon learning in January 2004 that RSNO data had been destroyed, I asked that the RO send an email or other directive instructing all relevant personnel not to shred, discard or otherwise destroy RSNO or other information needed for recordkeeping. I requested a copy of the information sent out. I then raised this issue at the February and March monthly implementation meetings. To date, I have seen any information to the field on this matter. 

· I submitted a request for information on the impact of competitive sourcing in early February. On February 19th, the Region gave me a letter saying that remaining response would be provided by February 27th. I did not receive any further information until the March 25th implementation meeting and information on vacancies retained is still not available. 

EXHIBIT C
Monitor questions for inclusion in the letter to Forest Supervisors on 2003 Apprentice selection, with the available RSNO data.
1. Review the enclosed RSNO data on all applicants, eligible applicants, and selected applicants and indicate whether, to your knowledge, the numbers are accurate.

2. Describe the outreach and recruitment done by your forest and identify who handled the outreach and recruitment.

3. Identify the fire personnel who made the recommendations for the apprentice hires.

4. Indicate who, if anyone, reviewed the recommendations to see if the diversity of the selectees furthered the goal of the Hispanic Settlement Agreement " to increase Hispanic representation in the Region 5 workforce to a percentage equivalent to the percentage of Hispanics in the Applicable Labor Pool in the Relevant Geographic Area." If the selections did not further that goal, what, if any, discussions took place? Was the FCRO involved in the Apprentice selection process?

5. If your forest recruited Hispanics who were not found eligible, did you try to determine why the applicant was not eligible?

6. If eligible Hispanics were in the applicant pool and were not selected, why not?

7. If you had eligible Hispanic applicants that you did not hire, did anyone on your forest advise those applicants to apply to forests in other areas?

8. If offers were made and a Hispanic applicant was not ultimately hired, do you know why not? (For example: Did the applicant decline the offer? go to a different forest?) 

9. If a Hispanic applicant declined an offer, did you try to find out why?

10. Please provide the correct RSNO figures on Hispanics and total apprentices actually hired at your forest. 

11. If any Hispanic hired in this Apprenticeship group has since left your forest, provide the employee's name and reason for leaving, if known.