Upward bound applications rejected for formatting issues

[swamp]

www.centredaily.com/news/nation-world/article149461809.html

Thoughts? 

[Green Eyed Lady]

Horseshit. Why don't we make it as tough as we can to make these kids get an education and turn into self-supporting adults?  Sometimes, I think we'd rather have people living off government programs. You have people here who actually want to make a better life and you turn them down because they didn't double-space.

Ok...I get that there is only so much money to disperse. I get that you can't fund everyone. I get that you have to have some rules in place to determine who gets the money and who doesn't.  It would be better to base that on need and chances of success than turning it down before even looking at it because it wasn't double-spaced.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I read that DeVos issued a directive that no further applications would be turned down because of formatting issues, but said the ones that had already been turned down for those reasons would not be reviewed. If she knows it was the wrong thing to do and she doesn't go back to the beginning to correct it, she's lost any credibility she may have had.

[swamp]

This story made me really angry. Kids from lower income/non educated families often have a hard time adjusting to college expectations and culture.  Intellectually, they can do the work, but they need some assistance with the life skills/social component. Upward Bound seems to be one of those government programs that actually works.

Why are we making it harder for these kids?  

[swamp]

May 11, 2017 8:29:35 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I read that DeVos issued a directive that no further applications would be turned down because of formatting issues, but said the ones that had already been turned down for those reasons would not be reviewed. If she knows it was the wrong thing to do and she doesn't go back to the beginning to correct it, she's lost any credibility she may have had.

I didn't think she had any credibility, this further reinforces my opinion that she has no business where she is.

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 8:32:32 GMT -5 swamp said:

This story made me really angry. Kids from lower income/non educated families often have a hard time adjusting to college expectations and culture.  Intellectually, they can do the work, but they need some assistance with the life skills/social component. Upward Bound seems to be one of those government programs that actually works.

Why are we making it harder for these kids?  

I don't know. It makes no sense. We scream and scream for less government programs and then refuse to help those people headed for having to use them.  

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 8:33:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 11, 2017 8:29:35 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I read that DeVos issued a directive that no further applications would be turned down because of formatting issues, but said the ones that had already been turned down for those reasons would not be reviewed. If she knows it was the wrong thing to do and she doesn't go back to the beginning to correct it, she's lost any credibility she may have had.

I didn't think she had any credibility, this further reinforces my opinion that she has no business where she is.

Regardless of personal opinion about Ms. DeVos...she evidently knows this was wrong. She can't say "starting now, it's wrong".  She has to go back to the beginning and make it right for everyone. At least she has to if she's doing her job.   If it's wrong now, it was wrong then. This seems so simple to me, but I guess that's why I'm not in the field. How can you tell someone that what you did was wrong and you know it but you aren't going to fix it?

[Green Eyed Lady]

We don't always have the ability to help someone with what they need to succeed in life. This is a case where we do. It just pisses me off. 

[swamp]

May 11, 2017 8:37:29 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Wait wait wait...  I think we can actually blame Obama for this one. 



From the OP Link:

The department this time received 1,592 grant applications for the five-year grants and accepted 1,222 for review. Seventy-seven of those were rejected for violating what the agency said were formatting guidelines established under the Obama administration.



The denials caught college administrators off guard.



"Most of them involved people who had put 1½ spaces instead of double-spacing between the lines," said Kimberly Jones, a spokeswoman for the Council for Opportunity in Education, which provides guidance in administering the grants. "It was such a high volume of folks who contacted us, we realized something a little out of the ordinary was going on."



Jones said the number rejected this time for formatting errors was many times higher than in previous years.

I don't give a crap whose fault it is.  It's wrong!!!  

But, I am interested to know if the applications submitted during Obama's term were rejected under the "Obama guidelines," or if they were just guidelines.   And is the new administration rejecting applications based on the previous administrations guidelines?   The article was not very clear about that.  

[Green Eyed Lady]

While the rules of formatting may have been set by the Obama administration, it doesn't appear that nearly as many applications were rejected because of them. I can't believe that all of a sudden, people stopped formatting correctly.  I have to believe that the applications weren't rejected on the basis of improper formatting only. 

[billisonboard]

The problem is that ultimately programs like this hurt the less capable offspring of those currently well positioned in our society by developing the abilities of highly capable members of the unwashed masses to compete with them in the job market.

[swamp]

Interesting. Wondering when were the decisions made?

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 8:51:05 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

May 11, 2017 8:40:43 GMT -5 swamp said:

I don't give a crap whose fault it is.  It's wrong!!!  

But, I am interested to know if the applications submitted during Obama's term were rejected under the "Obama guidelines," or if they were just guidelines.   And is the new administration rejecting applications based on the previous administrations guidelines?   The article was not very clear about that.  

Don't get mad at me... I didn't make the stupid rule.   But I think you're barking up the wrong tree with DeVos.   She was confirmed in February and issued the reversal of the guidelines last month.   I hardly think they managed to reject all of those applications in one month.   Especially with a program that has a 5 year cycle.   The article you linked referenced applications received in FY 2015.  

Good grief,  be mad at the stupid rule... but don't be mad at or blame someone who had nothing to do with it and is actively trying to fix it. 

I would agree with you if she goes back and reviews the ones that were rejected for formatting issues only.  Every single one of the 70 something that were rejected need to be reviewed.  She knows now what was done and she has issued a directive that it not happen again.  That tells me she knows it was wrong.  She needs to fix it from the beginning and she's doing a great job on this.  If not, she's to blame.  She's in charge.

Anytime someone new is appointed the head of anything, they have to go back and fix stuff from the previous person in charge.  It's part of the process.  She needs to do it even if she wasn't responsible at the time.

Ah well.  Just another 70 or so kids who had a chance...

[Green Eyed Lady]

I admit I'm not looking at this objectively. I could be totally off base here.   It just makes me angry. Plus? I don't understand one bit of how this works. I just don't like to see a situation where we can actually do something to help and then refuse to do it because of spacing.

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 9:22:45 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

May 11, 2017 9:13:32 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I would agree with you if she goes back and reviews the ones that were rejected for formatting issues only.  Every single one of the 70 something that were rejected need to be reviewed.  She knows now what was done and she has issued a directive that it not happen again.  That tells me she knows it was wrong.  She needs to fix it from the beginning and she's doing a great job on this.  If not, she's to blame.  She's in charge.

Anytime someone new is appointed the head of anything, they have to go back and fix stuff from the previous person in charge.  It's part of the process.  She needs to do it even if she wasn't responsible at the time.

Ah well.  Just another 70 or so kids who had a chance...

But the program is closed and the grants awarded for this cycle.   How do you 'go back and fix that'?   

I don't know.  Is this offered every year?  Every couple of years?  I'm not clear on this.

[Rob Base 2.0]

May 11, 2017 8:33:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 11, 2017 8:29:35 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

I read that DeVos issued a directive that no further applications would be turned down because of formatting issues, but said the ones that had already been turned down for those reasons would not be reviewed. If she knows it was the wrong thing to do and she doesn't go back to the beginning to correct it, she's lost any credibility she may have had.

I didn't think she had any credibility, this further reinforces my opinion that she has no business where she is.

You did read the part that these were standards left over from the Obama admin didn't you?

[Rob Base 2.0]

Anyway, this seems beyond stupid to worry about formatting and a small typo or 2. It should be the content / merit that counts unless it was written on toilet paper and crayon or something stupid.

Oh my gosh , they used 1.5 space and not double space. (Sarcasm)

[billisonboard]

May 11, 2017 9:22:45 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

...
But the program is closed and the grants awarded for this cycle.   How do you 'go back and fix that'?   

With creative, out of the box thinking. If there is no money left specifically in that program, find a few dollars and a few there. Sweet talk the review panel back together. Just get it done because it should be done.

[swamp]

May 11, 2017 9:31:25 GMT -5 Rob Base 2.0 said:

May 11, 2017 8:33:24 GMT -5 swamp said:

I didn't think she had any credibility, this further reinforces my opinion that she has no business where she is.

You did read the part that these were standards left over from the Obama admin didn't you?

Yes. And then I read the part where she basically responded, "too bad, so sad, can't fix it."

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 9:31:32 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Yes it is offered continually.   I'm a little fuzzy on the timing,  but it looks like from the OP link that it's on an every 5 year cycle.  

I guess if the program can't be reopened, which I find difficult to understand, then those 70+ people who were turned down should be first on the list for the next cycle.  What should be done is to find a way to reopen it, get those 70+ people the review they deserve and take care of them.  I wouldn't accept this can't be done when an error was committed.  However, I get that they WERE in violation of the rules, so I guess this is a leg to stand on.  It may be legally right, but it's not morally right.

[buystoys]

May 11, 2017 9:21:03 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Why is nobody angry at our alleged institutions of higher learning that somehow missed the formatting requirements that I managed to find in less than 5 min of googling? 

Aren't these the same institutions that will reject student papers if not formatted in whatever the flavor of the day is (MLA, APA, etc).   Seems a bit ironic if you ask me. 

I know that my online classes gave very specific instructions for formatting, version of program to be used (Word 10 only, saved as docx), and the many screams from other students who did not follow directions and had work rejected.  I kinda expect the colleges to follow formatting instructions.

Having said that, I would like to see the rejected applications reviewed, but I suspect timing is an issue.  I know that applications for tuition assistance have deadlines so they can be included in overall budgets.  With an application deadline of late January, these funds probably needed to be included in the budget that got passed recently.    Just a guess on my part.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

May 11, 2017 9:44:26 GMT -5 buystoys said:

May 11, 2017 9:21:03 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Why is nobody angry at our alleged institutions of higher learning that somehow missed the formatting requirements that I managed to find in less than 5 min of googling? 

Aren't these the same institutions that will reject student papers if not formatted in whatever the flavor of the day is (MLA, APA, etc).   Seems a bit ironic if you ask me. 

I know that my online classes gave very specific instructions for formatting, version of program to be used (Word 10 only, saved as docx), and the many screams from other students who did not follow directions and had work rejected.  I kinda expect the colleges to follow formatting instructions.

Having said that, I would like to see the rejected applications reviewed, but I suspect timing is an issue.  I know that applications for tuition assistance have deadlines so they can be included in overall budgets.  With an application deadline of late January, these funds probably needed to be included in the budget that got passed recently.    Just a guess on my part.

I was just about to come here.  I think that this is a horrible thing to happen to the kids, but I can't imagine that someone at a university would ignore the fact that there are very specific rules for submitting a grant and you MUST comply by those rules.  If you haven't written a grant, someone on campus very likely has and knows the hoops you need to jump through, why wouldn't you reach out for help in order to be as successful as you can?  Why would you not have printed out the submission instructions and followed them to the letter?  One of the first thing I did when I started writing a paper (after we decided which journal to submit it to) was to print out the 'submission instructions for authors' page, to make sure that I was using the correct margins, font, spacing and how they wanted their references.

Those people who have to review these grant applications review hundreds of them, and the rules make them such that they are the easiest on the grant reviewers.  Imagine that you are sitting on a stack of 20 x 200 page grants that you need to review.  How fast do you think that you are going to be able to get through these, if someone decides that they will use more difficult to read fonts?  My boss was a grant reviewer for federal grants, and he'd read until he came into work bleary eyed the next morning (because he could not do this at work, and he'd be reading grants until 2 am).  I used to help him, on occasion when he got in the weeds and it really is a thankless job. 

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

I'm wondering if it's a case of not knowing the requirements changed and reusing previous submissions with updates to content. It's not a valid excuse in my book, but it would at least explain why so many got it wrong.


Entirely possible, but most people got it right.  But if you were submitting the same thing year after year, wouldn't you double check something so important to so many kids?  I know I would.  Having a grant 86'ed due to a technicality is the last thing that anyone would want to happen.

[ArchietheDragon]

Not exactly related, but I got this email today about the naming protocols of reports we are submitting on a project we are working on.    The world really is a Dilbert cartoon..... 


Sorry, Xxxxx, but I must reject the reports you’ve sent me. All your reports MUST come through Berlin, your prime on the project. Also, please use the file naming protocol listed below for all reports:



FOR THE WORKFORCE REPORT:



HB-BERLIN WT WE 10-22-2016 (HP)



FOR THE CERTIFIED PAYROLL REPORT:



HB-BERLIN CP WE 10-22-2016 (HP)



Xxx-Xxxx

Xxx-Xxx Xxxxxxxxxx

Diversity Compliance Officer

[alabamagal]

OK, I agree it is a stupid rule.  Seems pretty silly to reject applications for this.

The applications were submitted by colleges and universities.  They should learn to follow the rules.  

Also, it is hard to tell from the article, but it may not even be that "poor students are suffering" because of these rejections.  Most government programs have a certain amount of funds to give out.  They take applications, issue grants to some and reject a bunch of others.  So if the full amount of grant money was given out, the same number of poor kids should be being helped.

My DS just had his real estate appraisers application rejected because he did not follow the rules.  Apparently he never learned the difference between a check and a cashiers check/money order, so he sent in a personal check (it was $100 or so).  Now he has to resubmit and pay $25 extra.  Tough cookies, follow the rules.

[Lizard Queen]

May 11, 2017 11:36:22 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

I'm wondering if it's a case of not knowing the requirements changed and reusing previous submissions with updates to content. It's not a valid excuse in my book, but it would at least explain why so many got it wrong.


Entirely possible, but most people got it right.  But if you were submitting the same thing year after year, wouldn't you double check something so important to so many kids?  I know I would.  Having a grant 86'ed due to a technicality is the last thing that anyone would want to happen.

Actually, if you're submitting the same thing year after year, you'd probably be less likely to check mundane things like formatting. Since it worked last time, must be fine this time.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

May 11, 2017 13:40:27 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

OK, I agree it is a stupid rule.  Seems pretty silly to reject applications for this.

The applications were submitted by colleges and universities.  They should learn to follow the rules.  

Also, it is hard to tell from the article, but it may not even be that "poor students are suffering" because of these rejections.  Most government programs have a certain amount of funds to give out.  They take applications, issue grants to some and reject a bunch of others.  So if the full amount of grant money was given out, the same number of poor kids should be being helped.

My DS just had his real estate appraisers application rejected because he did not follow the rules.  Apparently he never learned the difference between a check and a cashiers check/money order, so he sent in a personal check (it was $100 or so).  Now he has to resubmit and pay $25 extra.  Tough cookies, follow the rules.

But it really isn't a stupid rule when YOU are the person needing to read the grants.  With limited grant funds, it makes sense to do a first cut to those who followed the rules.  

[ArchietheDragon]

May 11, 2017 13:30:39 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Not exactly related, but I got this email today about the naming protocols of reports we are submitting on a project we are working on.    The world really is a Dilbert cartoon..... 


Sorry, Xxxxx, but I must reject the reports you’ve sent me. All your reports MUST come through Berlin, your prime on the project. Also, please use the file naming protocol listed below for all reports:



FOR THE WORKFORCE REPORT:



HB-BERLIN WT WE 10-22-2016 (HP)



FOR THE CERTIFIED PAYROLL REPORT:



HB-BERLIN CP WE 10-22-2016 (HP)



Xxx-Xxxx

Xxx-Xxx Xxxxxxxxxx

Diversity Compliance Officer

Another email from the diversity officer:

Please, please, please MAKE ABSOLUTELY SURE you’re using the 2 digits for the month and day and 4 digits for the year. I will not accept any file that’s not name correctly.

[Green Eyed Lady]

May 11, 2017 11:45:10 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

The tone of the people involved in this article is just odd to me.   www.chronicle.com/article/Dozens-of-Colleges-Upward/239895

"I should have seen it," said Darylen Cote, who directs the federal TRIO college-access programs at Presque Isle, of which Upward Bound is one. "Maybe I should have sat there with a ruler."





Still, Ms. Cote said denying the opportunity for needy students to receive academic advising, go on college visits, and receive advice on how to save for college seems like a harsh punishment for her mistake. The university has run Upward Bound programs since 1980. Even if the department just blacked out the infographics and ignored them as part of the application, she said she thinks the grants would score well under the department’s formula.

It's like they suddenly realized oh.. this is important and a there is a lot at stake.   I'm not sure why there wasn't that level of urgency as they were writing the grants. 

I see what you are saying.  My opinion is colored by the fact that I think any formatting rules suck - in high school, college - anywhere.  I think content is much more important than presentation.  I think the same way about food.  I want it to taste good first - I don't care what it looks like.  Evidently, I am in the minority!

Usually, I'm a stickler for rules.  I just think this is a missed opportunity.

[thyme4change]

I'm wondering if the initial sorting of applications is somehow non-human. Maybe key information is pulled out or something and that makes it possible to use less dollars to fund the administration of the program, and more dollars to help people. ?